Eastern Front Armies Revamp

Yeah not a fan of engi repair xp and penal debuff either.

Personal opinion:

-The elefant HE barrage doesnt make any sense, things need to keep being somewhat realistic after all it is a TD not and AI. Why not make the elefant and brummbar the weaker/smaller versions of the feared jagdtiger and the sturmtiger? I think you should be looking to make the brummbar easier to use instead of needing to use attack ground to be effective, this can be pretty hard to do/know about for new players and in relation to the elefant, lowering its movement speed and/or rear armor should do the trick.

-The katyusha incendiary creeping barrage also doesnt make sense, why not just give it a regular creeping barrage with double the rockets when it reaches vet 2/3?

-Dont know about demos, no one wants a demo to "secure flanks", for that you can plant regular mines and maybe put one hmg there and not worry about having to keep an eye of the flank (so much). Dont know what to do with demos to be honest, some suggestions would be nice to give some inspiration.

-M-42 stealth is great but garrison buildings is a no go.
Speaking of stealth, why not make all at guns that can steath not move while doing so? This would fix que abuse of sneaking at guns to capture points.

-Although partisans arent ridiculous anymore they are now not worth it at all, maybe buff them in some way? or else no one will use the commander/unit.

-Forward headquarters are still frustrating, why not restrict the player to only deploy one at a time? There is no need for one player to make every building a FHQ...

-Still think that the t3/t4/bf3/bf4 system you guys are experimenting with is a mess and confusing. Why not just make the bf3 and bf4 give certain buffs to pios (key unit), for example "bf4 gives pios +50% repair rate" (then adjust the veterancy on pios accordingly), and unlock t3/t4. And to make t4 more desirable (and other factions tiers too!) remove the call in meta and place those tanks in tiers for instance "want a elefant? you need t4, want a m4c sherman? you need t4" and so on (again adjust the prices of teching accordingly). This way you would fix the cheese that are call in tanks like you kinda did with partisans.

-Give vet to removing mines and getting mine kills is a great idea because it needs skill (know where to place the mine) and one can lose muni if the enemy finds the mine, this way engineers can earn xp outside combat.

I am not against the repair XP for engineers but imo it should be combined with minesweepers.

EFA engineers that upgrade with minesweepers lose 25% of their DPS so they vet very slow.

I would even go a bit further and change the vet bonuses so that engineers vet bonuses become more combat engineers and that most bonuses related to repair speed/construction speed are tied to the minesweepers.

That would make to clear path for engineer type units ether fighting units or repair units.

By doing what you describe, you're tying down an engineer (that could be spending that time planting/sweeping mines) and a tank, that could be bleeding your opponent, for a potential +60% repair speed bonus at Vet2.

Not to mention whatever unit is damaging the tank. It's good to see people try and think how something might get exploited, but the cost/benefit ratio to do so in this case seems ludicrously high. Vipper's suggesting of tying it to the minesweeper upgrade has potential merit as well.

I was just recently wondering if this mechanic could be implemented, so I'm interested to see it play out.

As for Ost heavy tanks call-in reduction being tied to T3, that seems like a very minor improvement over the current situation. We might see some T3 units, but if you have a Tiger commander then T4 will probably continue to be forgotten. That's only speaking academically though. I'd have to play to see for sure.

Being able to gain EXP from repairing is against what veterancy is suppose meant to be, a way to reward people who use tactics, strategy, and skill to earn it. There should be no reward to repair a vehicle as there's no risk or thought as it really does take quite a bit not to lose a tank unless it's a light vehicle that can be two shotted. Losing any squad and it's vet should be punishing and I understand you want to try and give the player who lost their engineers a chance to earn back again. However, CoH2 is all about unit preservation and wiping a vetted up engineer unit should be rewarding against a player who has any armor force in not just manpower lost but the veterancy associated with that engineer unit.

The stream of XP you gain from repairing vehicles is small. Getting a fresh engineer back to Vet2 (which is the only vet that matters for engineers), will require you to spend about 3-4 minutes repairing tanks with that squad, or something. (Repairing tanks with multiple engineer squads means that each squad will, individually, spend less time repairing = less XP).

You can't use repairs alone to get back to Vet2. However, those XP points will sure help you in the longrun.

Rewarding aggressive play with engineer XP will achieve the following:
- You're going to reward players that play aggressively trying to break pak-walls (given that pak-walls cannot finish off tanks)
- You're going to incentivise the defender to have flanker tanks nearby to potentially pursue wounded tanks.

As for Ost heavy tanks call-in reduction being tied to T3, that seems like a very minor improvement over the current situation. We might see some T3 units, but if you have a Tiger commander then T4 will probably continue to be forgotten. That's only speaking academically though. I'd have to play to see for sure.

It's tied to BP3 not T3. Researching BP3 (to get your Tiger) means that:
- You're 100MP/25FU away from T4
- You're 140MP/40FU from T3

Note that Stugs can no longer assist you that well vs heavy armour, and you're crutching on the Tiger entirely for that.

After some more extensive 1vs1 testing here is a list of problematic units.

Su76:
Before the barrage nerfs it was completely obvious that the unit was batshit op, but after the nerfs the true problem emerged. The unit itself is just too accurate. Out of 20 shots at max range maybe 1 or 2 misses against a p4. Paired with the high rate of fire the penetration nerfs don't matter. Even if every second shot bounces you can deal massive damage thanks to accuracy and rof. I would never build a su85 considering the low armor of the Tiger and the low cost of the su76. On top of that, the su76 has a good barrage. All in all the only weakness is the 400? HP pool. So it gets two shotted by the new Panther and Tiger.
The stug in comparison looks like complete garbage. It has lower range, is less accurate and slower. More health doesn't mean anything if you can kite all day with the su76.
What I suggest:
I really like the support oriented approach for the su76. It should have decent at and decent ai for cheap.
With that in mind, I think you could rebuff the barrage, but make it so, that it requires planning. First, it should not instantly activate and second, there should be a punish by driving up to the su76 and shooting it. The barrage can be powerful, but only if it's punishable. So introduce a setup and tear down time for the barrage ability. Maybe 2-3 secs for setup and 1-2 for tear down. Of course, the values should be tested but I think you get a general Idea.
Then it's time to nerf the far accuracy, and maybe even the penetration could go down a bit as well. Every 3-5 shot should bounce on the p4 so closing in would be rewarded. (same approach as the stug).
Finally to address the annoying two shoot potential late game I would change the vet 2? reload buff with a +40HP buff, so it survives two panther/tiger shots but still gets down to 3 pak/stug shots. And maybe add some barrage cooldown/shots fired buff.
After this changes, there would be a clear role for the su76 and the su85 and not much overlapping. Su85 would be pure hard AT perfect for countering heavy armor with good damage and accuracy, and the su76 would be a mixture of light AT, and a mobile Howitzer, perfect for killing light vehicles and holding mediums at bay.

Penals:
Penals are still problematic thanks to their vet. If you loose a grenadier squad later on you have almost no chance of revetting it. Penals at vet 3 just walk up to anything and annihilate it. Also Mg dont stand a chance once one or two vet 3 Penals attack it. The nerf to moving dps was a good first step, but in the light of buffed conscripts, far dps should go down a bit, so grens have more of a chance at long range. (It shouldn't be something drastic, only a few percent)
Another problem is the availability of the targeted satchel charge without buying Ptrs. Before this change, Penals had a clear weakness, Vehicles. Right now this weakness is more or less gone. With the pathing as it is, one single mistake can cost you your vehicle. This makes light vehicles extremely frustrating. More than once my 222 got stuck in a hedge, wall etc. Also you cant be aggressive with a 250 against penals, onc satchel and its gone.
I would suggest locking the targeted satchel behind the Ptrs upgrade so you have to sacrifice firepower to get some AT. After all, that was the designed weakness of T1. Or at least lock it behind the AT nade upgrade.

Repair Vet
I dont think this is the right approach. To damage a vehicle should be rewarding for you and punishing for your opponent. Not giving him a chance to vet up his pios, so that future mistakes he makes (in letting his vehicles get damaged) are less punishing by decreasing the time he needs repairing.
What I suggest:
For a start, just decrease the vet requirements. And then start to split the boni over vet 1 and 2. Same as the PG received accuracy split. If that's not enough make the sweeper activatable, like the sturmpio one, so they have more dps and more chance to vet up.

Thats it for now, hope it was somewhat understandable

After some more extensive 1vs1 testing here is a list of problematic units.

Su76:
Before the barrage nerfs it was completely obvious that the unit was batshit op, but after the nerfs the true problem emerged. The unit itself is just too accurate. Out of 20 shots at max range maybe 1 or 2 misses against a p4. Paired with the high rate of fire the penetration nerfs don't matter. Even if every second shot bounces you can deal massive damage thanks to accuracy and rof. I would never build a su85 considering the low armor of the Tiger and the low cost of the su76. On top of that, the su76 has a good barrage. All in all the only weakness is the 400? HP pool. So it gets two shotted by the new Panther and Tiger.
The stug in comparison looks like complete garbage. It has lower range, is less accurate and slower. More health doesn't mean anything if you can kite all day with the su76.

The SU76 may very well be batshit OP atm. That's probably not because of its accuracy though; it has the same accuracy as the Stug.

The SU76 deals reduced damage compared to the Stug (120 vs 160), and has fewer hitpoints, but it does have increased range and better mobility.

If the SU76 continues to be OP, we'll just nerf its penetration further. Having the SU76 occasionally bounce vs a P4 from time to time at max range, is probably not going to be the end of the world. However, making SU76 bounce more often vs Tigers etc is the way to go.

In the late-game, the SU76 has two jobs and two jobs only; countering medium tanks, and harassing infantry with the barrage. Live-version SU76 has garbage accuracy, which meant it would never be able to compete vs medium tanks, if we lowered penetration.

What I suggest:
I really like the support oriented approach for the su76. It should have decent at and decent ai for cheap.
With that in mind, I think you could rebuff the barrage, but make it so, that it requires planning. First, it should not instantly activate and second, there should be a punish by driving up to the su76 and shooting it. The barrage can be powerful, but only if it's punishable. So introduce a setup and tear down time for the barrage ability. Maybe 2-3 secs for setup and 1-2 for tear down. Of course, the values should be tested but I think you get a general Idea.


Then it's time to nerf the far accuracy, and maybe even the penetration could go down a bit as well. Every 3-5 shot should bounce on the p4 so closing in would be rewarded. (same approach as the stug).
Finally to address the annoying two shoot potential late game I would change the vet 2? reload buff with a +40HP buff, so it survives two panther/tiger shots but still gets down to 3 pak/stug shots. And maybe add some barrage cooldown/shots fired buff.
After this changes, there would be a clear role for the su76 and the su85 and not much overlapping. Su85 would be pure hard AT perfect for countering heavy armor with good damage and accuracy, and the su76 would be a mixture of light AT, and a mobile Howitzer, perfect for killing light vehicles and holding mediums at bay.

We can probably increase the reload time between shots in the barrage. That way, if the SU76 really wants to unload its gun, it should remain stationary for longer time.

About survivability, it depends greatly on what Panther's role should be. With the current direction, SU76 gives a hazing to T3 builds to "incentivise" OST to lay off the T3 spam and build Panthers. Then, it's the turn of the Soviet player to lay off the SU76 spam and build an actual tank destroyer. Panthers (with their long reload time) being able to two-shot SU76's should be enough of an incentive for the Soviet player to stop spamming SU76's.

At the same time, the SU76 should be decent vs medium tanks, otherwise people would probably altogether skip the unit.

Penals:
Penals are still problematic thanks to their vet. If you loose a grenadier squad later on you have almost no chance of revetting it. Penals at vet 3 just walk up to anything and annihilate it. Also Mg dont stand a chance once one or two vet 3 Penals attack it. The nerf to moving dps was a good first step, but in the light of buffed conscripts, far dps should go down a bit, so grens have more of a chance at long range. (It shouldn't be something drastic, only a few percent)
Another problem is the availability of the targeted satchel charge without buying Ptrs. Before this change, Penals had a clear weakness, Vehicles. Right now this weakness is more or less gone. With the pathing as it is, one single mistake can cost you your vehicle. This makes light vehicles extremely frustrating. More than once my 222 got stuck in a hedge, wall etc. Also you cant be aggressive with a 250 against penals, onc satchel and its gone.
I would suggest locking the targeted satchel behind the Ptrs upgrade so you have to sacrifice firepower to get some AT. After all, that was the designed weakness of T1. Or at least lock it behind the AT nade upgrade.

Let's see what the moving DPS nerf does first. At the moment, we're still wondering whether people will ever buy Penals, when they could simply invest in Conscripts instead.

Stug-e's aren't that far out of the meta and with these changes would easily make its way back in.

Wouldn't you say that locking Tiger behind tech would already solve the issue of Stug-E -> Tiger meta? The Stug-E is vulnerable enough to vehicles that you can easily counter it with a Stuart/T-70 nowadays.

The SU76 may very well be batshit OP atm. That's probably not because of its accuracy though; it has the same accuracy as the Stug.

...

Having the same accuracy but 20% more range means that is actually 20% more accurate...

The chance to hit of all 60+ range TDs need to go down weather that mean lowering accuracy or size or both.

Imo TD should have around 90% chance to score a "natural" hit at range 60+ vs a Supper heavy and around 50-60 vs a medium tank.

Having the same accuracy but 20% more range means that is actually 20% more accurate...

The chance to hit of all 60+ range TDs need to go down weather that mean lowering accuracy or size or both.

Imo TD should have around 90% chance to score a "natural" hit at range 60+ vs a Supper heavy and around 50-60 vs a medium tank.

Technically, the SU76 is 8.3% more accurate than the Stug at range 50. The difference in accuracy becomes narrower in different ranges.

Technically, the SU76 is 8.3% more accurate than the Stug at range 50. The difference in accuracy becomes narrower in different ranges.

So it actually more accurate than the Stug as I pointed out (even if number was off).

What is more important thou is the fact that TDs (+60) are too accurate at long ranges especially vs medium tanks that are outranged by x150%.

Tds should have lower accuracy than ATG that can not relocate fast and keep the distance.

So it actually more accurate than the Stug as I pointed out.

What is more important thou is the fact that TDs (+60) are too accurate at long ranges especially vs medium tanks that are outranged by x150%.

Tds should have lower accuracy than ATG that can not relocate fast and keep the distance.

SU-76 more accurate than stug (8% Karl! 8%!), but stug have more hp, don't die from ballistic weapons and AP rounds from mg-42, have TWP and MG on top and deals more damage per shot (30% higher than SU-76! 160 vs 120).
If TD will be missed every 2-nd shot on max range, that for what it have so high range, and what role of it have - free experience for mediums? Because if suggest, that in middle range TD will be 100% accurate that will be means only one thing - dead TD. Mediums more faster and maneurabel that any TD. On middle range TD don't have any chances on win against medium.
And don't forget, to shoot at max range, you must have vision, that means you have some spotter nearby to your target.

SU-76 more accurate than stug (8% Karl! 8%!), but stug have more hp, don't die from ballistic weapons and AP rounds from mg-42, have TWP and MG on top and deals more damage per shot (30% higher than SU-76! 160 vs 120).

Try reading before responding pls. I did not claim that SU-76 is better than the Stug in this mod simply because I have not tested enough. A claim was made that Su-76 and Stug have the same accuracy and I simply pointed out that that was not true. And it is not simply more accurate, it also has 60 range, which means that stug outranges most medium tanks by 25% while Su-76 outranges them by 50% .t

The stug has the exact same damage most vehicles have. Its the Su-76 that has lower damage than most vehicles and that is counter weight by the fact that it fire fast and get bonus damage as a veterancy bonus.

If TD will be missed every 2-nd shot on max range, that for what it have so high range, and what role of it have - free experience for mediums? Because if suggest, that in middle range TD will be 100% accurate that will be means only one thing - dead TD. Mediums more faster and maneurabel that any TD. On middle range TD don't have any chances on win against medium.
And don't forget, to shoot at max range, you must have vision, that means you have some spotter nearby to your target.

You need to understand the difference or "natural" hit with a hit. The chances a TD scoring a "natural" hit might be around 50% but it will still be able to score a hit vs vehicle via collision especially if the vehicle is moving straight up to the TD.

If one has not vision the unit will not fire so the changes to accuracy will have no impact at all.

The main issue behind SU76 might just be its vet2; in addition to increased damage, the SU76 also gains +30% accuracy, which means it becomes impossible to miss anymore.

The SU76 may very well be batshit OP atm. That's probably not because of its accuracy though; it has the same accuracy as the Stug.

The SU76 deals reduced damage compared to the Stug (120 vs 160), and has fewer hitpoints, but it does have increased range and better mobility.

If the SU76 continues to be OP, we'll just nerf its penetration further. Having the SU76 occasionally bounce vs a P4 from time to time at max range, is probably not going to be the end of the world. However, making SU76 bounce more often vs Tigers etc is the way to go.

In the late-game, the SU76 has two jobs and two jobs only; countering medium tanks, and harassing infantry with the barrage. Live-version SU76 has garbage accuracy, which meant it would never be able to compete vs medium tanks, if we lowered penetration.

We can probably increase the reload time between shots in the barrage. That way, if the SU76 really wants to unload its gun, it should remain stationary for longer time.

About survivability, it depends greatly on what Panther's role should be. With the current direction, SU76 gives a hazing to T3 builds to "incentivise" OST to lay off the T3 spam and build Panthers. Then, it's the turn of the Soviet player to lay off the SU76 spam and build an actual tank destroyer. Panthers (with their long reload time) being able to two-shot SU76's should be enough of an incentive for the Soviet player to stop spamming SU76's.

At the same time, the SU76 should be decent vs medium tanks, otherwise people would probably altogether skip the unit.

I did not know, that the accuracy of the Stug and the Su76 was the same, it probably feels so different because of the greater range of the su76. So I stand corrected here, but I still think its a bit too high, so both Stug and SU76 acc should go down. I just tested the SU76 out of curiosity against the p4 at max range, and out of the 40 shots I counted not a single one missed nor bounced. Considering the damage buff at vet 2 and the rate of which it gets vet, the SU76 is scary as hell. 3 Penetrating hits against the tiger and already vet 1, 3 more and vet 2. At least the Stug has to close in, to get this amazing accuracy, Su76 can just stay at range and snipe everything. If you lower the accuracy about 20% and the stugs about 10% I think it would be still worthwhile building considering the amazing price timing and utility.
Another matchup I tested was Stug and Su76 against IS 2 and Tiger. While the Stug has no chance at all, even at close range almost half of the shots bounce Su76 snipes the Tiger easily. Yes, there are bounces but way too few to ever consider buying a Su85 to deal with it. Also as mentioned before the veterancy gain is just broken, Tiger is not even on half health then the Su reaches vet 2. So either Tiger armour should go up (which might create problems elsewhere) or SU pen should go down significantly.

On the barrage, I don't think increasing the reload between shots in the barrage solves the problem. I might have been not so clear in my last post, so I try again. The problem is, if you barrage at close range, the shots from the barrage come out immediately because the gun doesn't need to be raised. Also, you can end the barrage at any time and start firing immediately at a tank. At max range, the barrage is already delayed, because the gun needs to get in position. This delay should be consistent at all ranges and should apply at the end of the barrage as well.

After some thinking about Survivability, I can agree with you. Considering the price of the Su76, Panther and Tiger should incentives Sowjets to bring a real TD.

I'm glad that the SU76 isn't the same as the Stug on various levels; I'm totally against the homogenisation of armies that seems to be what certain wants.

I did not know, that the accuracy of the Stug and the Su76 was the same, it probably feels so different because of the greater range of the su76. So I stand corrected here, but I still think its a bit too high, so both Stug and SU76 acc should go down. I just tested the SU76 out of curiosity against the p4 at max range, and out of the 40 shots I counted not a single one missed nor bounced. Considering the damage buff at vet 2 and the rate of which it gets vet, the SU76 is scary as hell. 3 Penetrating hits against the tiger and already vet 1, 3 more and vet 2. At least the Stug has to close in, to get this amazing accuracy, Su76 can just stay at range and snipe everything. If you lower the accuracy about 20% and the stugs about 10% I think it would be still worthwhile building considering the amazing price timing and utility.
Another matchup I tested was Stug and Su76 against IS 2 and Tiger. While the Stug has no chance at all, even at close range almost half of the shots bounce Su76 snipes the Tiger easily. Yes, there are bounces but way too few to ever consider buying a Su85 to deal with it. Also as mentioned before the veterancy gain is just broken, Tiger is not even on half health then the Su reaches vet 2. So either Tiger armour should go up (which might create problems elsewhere) or SU pen should go down significantly.

On the barrage, I don't think increasing the reload between shots in the barrage solves the problem. I might have been not so clear in my last post, so I try again. The problem is, if you barrage at close range, the shots from the barrage come out immediately because the gun doesn't need to be raised. Also, you can end the barrage at any time and start firing immediately at a tank. At max range, the barrage is already delayed, because the gun needs to get in position. This delay should be consistent at all ranges and should apply at the end of the barrage as well.

After some thinking about Survivability, I can agree with you. Considering the price of the Su76, Panther and Tiger should incentives Sowjets to bring a real TD.

You are right.

Basically, the SU76 has something like 50% less XP needed to attain a veterancy level compared to the Stug.

For penetration, we'll have to see what a Stug-like penetration curve would look like.

I Haven't looked at the scatter profile differences between SU76 and Stug. The scatter profile might also have something to do with SU76 accuracy.

I'll try to see if something can be done about the barrage at close ranges. In the worst case, we can just increase the min range of the barrage. Playing with projectiles is a bit tricky.

I agree what you did with the KV-1, but can be done with the T-34-76?
- Added a hull down animation to the Т-34-76 vet1 ability.
- Vet 1 to "Defense Mode" from "Capture Point". Defense mode halts all movement of the tank in exchange for -0.8 recieved damage and lowers reload speed by 0.85 (with a delay of 5 seconds).

I think that the T-34-76 need this ability in place from "Capture point" to "Defense Mode".
In this moment already there is a technique which captures points this Is The T-70.

One more visual thing, Force Reload on MGs should be unclickable then not set up. Same as Incendiary Rounds.
Also adding it to clip based weapon systems like the Ostwind would be a good Idea.

Wouldn't you say that locking Tiger behind tech would already solve the issue of Stug-E -> Tiger meta? The Stug-E is vulnerable enough to vehicles that you can easily counter it with a Stuart/T-70 nowadays.

well first off how do you expect to counter a stug-e with a t70 or Stuart when both have less than half pen of the front armor? Players will just take the savings from not teching and put that into a pak or shrecked up pgs.

While I don't think stug-e into tiger would be good, it would still be possible. (since cost wise it would still be about the same as making a teching choice to t4 for a brumbar or panther, both of which only do half of what a tiger does.)

At that point it becomes an okw ostwind type situation. Get a stug-e or two and then support it with a bunch of paks and/or shrecked up pgs till you can afford whatever the next best unit to get is.

If you make it so it has the same cost penalty as all the other call-in tanks it doesn't get the chance to be the next no brain meta. Such a strat would still be possible but the player would have risks just like a teching player would (still reduced ones).

If after that the stug-e is considered bad then you can buff stats later but all tank call-ins should have the same penalty. You can make all the light vehicles callins exempt since they are not a problem and in most cases you would just make them worse than they already are. (although I'm not sure about the puma, but it has little ai so not that worried)

I agree what you did with the KV-1, but can be done with the T-34-76?
- Added a hull down animation to the Т-34-76 vet1 ability.
- Vet 1 to "Defense Mode" from "Capture Point". Defense mode halts all movement of the tank in exchange for -0.8 recieved damage and lowers reload speed by 0.85 (with a delay of 5 seconds).

I think that the T-34-76 need this ability in place from "Capture point" to "Defense Mode".
In this moment already there is a technique which captures points this Is The T-70.

I think such ability for medium T-34-76 will be bad. It's medium not heavy tank. I'll prefer some kind of ability that better fit to it's role as medium tank. Maybe engine repair (will be good work after Ram, but add critical vulnerabality to crew while repairng) or something that increase speed or maneurable.