What's OP? What's UP?

UP = People using the stage office.
OP = People using the balance forum.

Ontopic: Throwing my 2 cents

OP: "Skillplanes"
OT: Assault Rifles with long range performance (BAR/IR STG44)
UT/UP: Fire up!, Forward Observation post, Defensive commanders, Emergency Repair/Panzer commander, USF support weapon drop costing mp instead of muni, etc.

I won't comment on balance as to not incur the wrath of our all mighty and knowing Katitof for being a Comp Stomper or whatever, but just a suggestion.

Instead of removing the pit and replacing it with a mobile mortar team, how about just go with Planet Smasher's Artillery Pit idea (link in my signature) since that way it will keep the Brits unique at the same time while still giving them mobile indirect fire doctrinally without it costing fuel.

Also, perhaps if the raketen was to be replaced with let's say a Pak 38/40, how about the MG34 be buffed a wee bit and it's T1 requirement be removed since I hardly think that a T0 Pak 38/40 would be acceptable, and also maybe increase it's price to compensate.

That's all.

snip

PPSH upgrade needs a cost increase or a damage nerf, currently over preforming way to much for the unit. OP

Shocks could use a little buff in some way UT

The list is pretty impressive and I agree with almost all of it, I would however add a few things.

Skfz 250 (No vet, no weapons, no armor, and also not cheap, Very UP)

Sturm Officer (In my experience this is the least build Axis unit, because it can force your whole army to retreat, his abilities give buffs to enemy squads, and he has no vet, UP)

Volks MP40 (Its dps is too low for an upgrade that turns the squad into a close range only squad, UP)

Sturmtiger (Needs a rework, it used to be insane, but now its pretty bad. I think giving it double the range and increasing its scatter a lot could work, it would be like a one round railway strike, UP)

OKW emergency repair on the Elite Armor doctrine (literally a worse version of allied comander abilities, repairs critical damage and a tiny bit of health, but makes the vehicle totally vulnerable, UP)

OKW Panzer Commander (He calls in an overpriced and underwhelming artillary strike while costing more munitions than an MG and at the cost of AI, very UP)

120mm mortor (Its survivability is too high and at close range it wipes squades very easily, OT)

Soveit mini AT gun (I dont even remember its name its so bad, Definition of UP)

hahaha i like how everything okw is underpowered joke

hahaha i like how everything okw is underpowered joke

Gee its almost as if the faction is underpreforming. Also he said that the flak halftrack was potentialy OP, so maybe read carefully next time.

Pretty good list, but some of the 'OP' things aren't that OP (or even OT).
My own notes and additions:

Soviets
Show Spoiler


USF
Show Spoiler


UKF
Show Spoiler



OST
Show Spoiler


OKW
Show Spoiler

This Thread is very funny. :-D

OKW emergency repair on the Elite Armor doctrine (literally a worse version of allied comander abilities, repairs critical damage and a tiny bit of health, but makes the vehicle totally vulnerable, UP)

Plus i think it only works in friendly territory.

Plus i think it only works in friendly territory.

It works everywhere.

I won't comment on balance as to not incur the wrath of our all mighty and knowing Katitof for being a Comp Stomper or whatever, but just a suggestion.

Instead of removing the pit and replacing it with a mobile mortar team, how about just go with Planet Smasher's Artillery Pit idea (link in my signature) since that way it will keep the Brits unique at the same time while still giving them mobile indirect fire doctrinally without it costing fuel.

Also, perhaps if the raketen was to be replaced with let's say a Pak 38/40, how about the MG34 be buffed a wee bit and it's T1 requirement be removed since I hardly think that a T0 Pak 38/40 would be acceptable, and also maybe increase it's price to compensate.

That's all.

======================
- I think you are right! Soviets, USF and OKW ought to have 76mm AT guns at T0,
replacing Raketen and also giving all those faction a T0 MG of MG42 power. Of course,
with the Raketen replaced with a PAK 38/40, the price would increase say, to that of Zis-3
(which would now be in T0)(and insta-nuke the 222 and the HT)

Apologies. I rant and do sarcasm as vocabulary.
My point is not that USF and UKF need medium AT at T0, but that your request is unreasonnable.
"How would you like it if..." is what I'm trying to say here.

You have Panzerfausts and Raketen. UKF have nothing. Sov have nothing (at T0)(AT 'nades?).
USF have vet 1 AT RifleGrenades. Buffed infantry with improved MG at T0? I think not.

It works thus: T0 MG with 4 men w Bolt Action grenades, bunkers or 5-6x men squads with
auto rifles and no MG.

OKW have STG44 (auto) and no MG. Same as Americans. Same as Penal Soviets.
How would you feel if UKF gained 5x men at start with 5x M1 Garand at start (+ their MG)
(Also gaining medium AT gun). Not reasonable?

Then why do you ask for it?
(I know, I know, you think only Germany ought to have no weaknesses)
(5x men squads, auto weapons, early free 'nades, medium AT, improved MG) All at T0.
(And 'fausts!)

===========
Also on UKF/USF weapon rack double upgrades :

For a 150 manpower, 50 fuel, 120 munition upgrade... They also don't have super
PanzerGrenadiers and OberSoldaten that liquefy allied troops.

Also note that each Bren, each BAR is substantially weaker than LMG42s.
Would also require removing Manpower/Fuel 120 muni cost of upgrade. Making tanks
come that much sooner (Remember those are SIDE-grades not free like German's).

How about we remove weapon racks, double firepower of Bren/BAR/M1919A6 but limit it to 1.
Remove fuel/manpower cost of grenades, weapon upgrades, lowering cost of all allied troops
to 245 (and making Gren 5x man, and cost 245) and making volkgrenadiers cost 245, making
penals 5x man and costing 250 (but giving them DP28 upgrade and changing their satchel to
a regular grenade, and giving them and US and UKF free AT grenades (ie: Panzerfaust)

Then changing Soviet sniper to 1 man, 82 health, semi auto sniper rifle w explosive
bullets that stun entire blobs of infantry, and much higher vetting with vastly improved
stealth.

... If all infantry and all snipers (and then all tanks, mortars, AT guns and all tech
being the same and costing the same and...)

Would you be happy?

Seriously. I want to know.

Why should 708 manpower, 70 fuel, 170 munition squads be weaker than 240 manp, 60 muni squads?

A.Soldiers also said UKF Infantry should lose Trenches (but Gren retain MG bunkers)
Would you like pioneers being moved to T2, and MG bunkers delayed until then?

If Assymetric balance is not working for people, isn't it time to move to Symmetric balance?
(aka: All-stats mirror factions).

Should all factions have 5x men squads with auto weapons, Snare, Medium AT at T0, Excellent MG
at T0 ie: No weaknesses, and all strenght, for everyone?

It works thus: T0 MG with 4 men w Bolt Action grenades, bunkers or 5-6x men squads with
auto rifles and no MG.

OKW have STG44 (auto) and no MG. Same as Americans. Same as Penal Soviets.

Just clarify these weapon you mention are different.

Relic started classifying weapon as bolt action, smgs, carbine (semi auto), LMG and assault rifles (although they did no use the name).

Later on certain patches moved away from this classification.

The ST44 is not the same as M1 Garand or SVT.

Just clarify these weapon you mention are different.

Relic started classifying weapon as bolt action, smgs, carbine (semi auto), LMG and assault rifles (although they did no use the name).

Later on certain patches moved away from this classification.

The ST44 is not the same as M1 Garand or SVT.

============
In my head, I classify as such :
- Bolt Rifles
- SMG
- SAR (Semi auto Rifles) : 2/3 Rifle, 1/3 SMG
- AR (STG44) : 2/3 SMG, 1/3 Rifle
- LMGs
============

Balancing is very complicated. All these people bitching that balance would be fixed by
reducing USF/UKF upgrade to 1 (for weaker than Gren LMG42 yet still costing the same for
less return) 60 muni LMG42 > 60 muni BAR/Bren.
Then fuel / manpower cost / weapon rack upgrade ought to be removed, and bar/bren buffed.
But that would make earlier allied vehicles, making Germans howl.

Everything affects everything.
I prefer assymetric balance, but if we can't agree on anything, ever,
isn't it time for mirror stats balance?

============
In my head, I classify as such :
- Bolt Rifles
- SMG
- SAR (Semi auto Rifles) : 2/3 Rifle, 1/3 SMG
- AR (STG44) : 2/3 SMG, 1/3 Rifle
- LMGs
============

If you are going to use your own classification I would suggest you clarify that.

Even in your classification STG44 (AR) are the same M1, SVT (SAR).

Balancing is very complicated. All these people bitching that balance would be fixed by
reducing USF/UKF upgrade to 1 (for weaker than Gren LMG42 yet still costing the same for
less return) 60 muni LMG42 > 60 muni BAR/Bren.
Then fuel / manpower cost / weapon rack upgrade ought to be removed, and bar/bren buffed.
But that would make earlier allied vehicles, making Germans howl.

Everything affects everything.
I prefer assymetric balance, but if we can't agree on anything, ever,
isn't it time for mirror stats balance?

I think you are missing the point of a Forum. The Forum is there so people can offer their opinion, ideas, suggestions. Disagreements will exist.

People in forum acting as if only their own opinion matters is another thing.

======================
- I think you are right! Soviets, USF and OKW ought to have 76mm AT guns at T0,
replacing Raketen and also giving all those faction a T0 MG of MG42 power. Of course,
with the Raketen replaced with a PAK 38/40, the price would increase say, to that of Zis-3
(which would now be in T0)(and insta-nuke the 222 and the HT)

Apologies. I rant and do sarcasm as vocabulary.
My point is not that USF and UKF need medium AT at T0, but that your request is unreasonnable.
"How would you like it if..." is what I'm trying to say here.

You have Panzerfausts and Raketen. UKF have nothing. Sov have nothing (at T0)(AT 'nades?).
USF have vet 1 AT RifleGrenades. Buffed infantry with improved MG at T0? I think not.

It works thus: T0 MG with 4 men w Bolt Action grenades, bunkers or 5-6x men squads with
auto rifles and no MG.

OKW have STG44 (auto) and no MG. Same as Americans. Same as Penal Soviets.
How would you feel if UKF gained 5x men at start with 5x M1 Garand at start (+ their MG)
(Also gaining medium AT gun). Not reasonable?

Then why do you ask for it?
(I know, I know, you think only Germany ought to have no weaknesses)
(5x men squads, auto weapons, early free 'nades, medium AT, improved MG) All at T0.
(And 'fausts!)

===========
Also on UKF/USF weapon rack double upgrades :

For a 150 manpower, 50 fuel, 120 munition upgrade... They also don't have super
PanzerGrenadiers and OberSoldaten that liquefy allied troops.

Also note that each Bren, each BAR is substantially weaker than LMG42s.
Would also require removing Manpower/Fuel 120 muni cost of upgrade. Making tanks
come that much sooner (Remember those are SIDE-grades not free like German's).

How about we remove weapon racks, double firepower of Bren/BAR/M1919A6 but limit it to 1.
Remove fuel/manpower cost of grenades, weapon upgrades, lowering cost of all allied troops
to 245 (and making Gren 5x man, and cost 245) and making volkgrenadiers cost 245, making
penals 5x man and costing 250 (but giving them DP28 upgrade and changing their satchel to
a regular grenade, and giving them and US and UKF free AT grenades (ie: Panzerfaust)

Then changing Soviet sniper to 1 man, 82 health, semi auto sniper rifle w explosive
bullets that stun entire blobs of infantry, and much higher vetting with vastly improved
stealth.

... If all infantry and all snipers (and then all tanks, mortars, AT guns and all tech
being the same and costing the same and...)

Would you be happy?

Seriously. I want to know.

Why should 708 manpower, 70 fuel, 170 munition squads be weaker than 240 manp, 60 muni squads?

A.Soldiers also said UKF Infantry should lose Trenches (but Gren retain MG bunkers)
Would you like pioneers being moved to T2, and MG bunkers delayed until then?

If Assymetric balance is not working for people, isn't it time to move to Symmetric balance?
(aka: All-stats mirror factions).

Should all factions have 5x men squads with auto weapons, Snare, Medium AT at T0, Excellent MG
at T0 ie: No weaknesses, and all strenght, for everyone?

What the fuck are you talking about lol, where do I say the Brits should lose making trenches?

Except for my suggestion about the British rework of Anvil and Hammer being more prominent in the player's choice of how he plays the British, either with no choice of of a sub-doctrine being a sort of mix and a jack of all trades but master of none, or specializing further into either defense or offense, you can't even quote me on half the other shit you're talking about.

So just because I have an avatar of a German soldier with an MG34 does not mean I'm an Axis fanboy, why would I have the link to Planet Smasher's Artillery Pit in my signature if I was an Axis fanboy lol.

Also, I have nothing (since you said "you" (as in me) have panzerfausts and the raketen), OKW is not "my" Army, I just don't think it should be left in the dirt like it is right now and I see no point in a T0 AT gun to be honest, and the only unit with Sturmgewehrs are the Sturmpioneers so your argument about OKW should not have a T0 MG because they have the Sturmgewehr armed Sturmpioneers only applies in a game where a person gets more than 1 Sturmpioneer squad as the Volksgrenadiers are still the OKW's mainline bolt actioned armed infantry units that you usually have around 3 of, so applying your logic of an Army having bolt action armed infantry squads (like everyone else except for the USF) is hypocritical in this case.

And I never stated that Symmetrical balance would have to be implemented as to have all of the Armies be mirrors of each other, but I think that balancing them symmetrically while keeping them unique and not just skins is possible and like I said in another topic, if I'm given enough time and resources I'm willing to do it myself to prove my theory, but for now being a lone modder with life, work and college on his hands I cannot do this on my own and I will not devote my limited free time to making something which many people doubt and even if it works you all will spit on it just out of spite that a person labeled as a comp stomper did the impossible instead of just bickering endlessly on these forums.

I'd add Luches to UT list (it's mostly balanced but maybe build time is a smidge too long). I think the prevalence of Battlegroup openings in 1v1 speaks for itself.

SdKfz 250 - just meh unit. Low armor, no weapon, no vet, nothing. A SdKfz250 with a faced forward MG like in CoH1 would be nice and maybe cooldown for abilities etc on friendly units in a aura would be nice

SdKfz 250 - just meh unit. Low armor, no weapon, no vet, nothing. A SdKfz250 with a faced forward MG like in CoH1 would be nice and maybe cooldown for abilities etc on friendly units in a aura would be nice

SdKfz 250 is more then a meh unit its just straight awful. One of those units that has been ignored for way to long.

A small aura would be cool for the 250, an accuracy on the move buff for infantry? Make it assault supporty?

I'd add Luches to UT list (it's mostly balanced but maybe build time is a smidge too long). I think the prevalence of Battlegroup openings in 1v1 speaks for itself.

Not just Pz2 Luch, all light vehicles were nerfed in their AI capability, the Stuart, T70 as well.
Mostly overly so.

I'd be for all of their regaining their strong AI of old.

Would that be okay with you?