Universal carrier rework thread

it's 1000% pedantic.

it's a 28% increase on 14%, but it might be more useful to break it down into something else. Instead of 1 of 7 shots penetrating, it's 1 in 6. 10/10 sensational posting

Not really, because % chance to pen directly translates to EHP.
That 4% increase in pen chance lowers its EHP by roughly 30%.

Well then, good that ost meta vs UKF isn't sniper, but a KV-8 disguised as 251.

I dont know if you noticed, but its possible to build both a sniper and a 251. Weird!

The answer to me seems obvious. Tone down OKW's starting resources, give Volks snares from the start.

This whole "OKW wipes the floor with any infantry build but a single ultralight snaps its spine" design is a proven failure. The OKW/SOV early game in particular is abominable for both sides.

I'd rather see the cost of volks increased if they get fausts. Seems like they always have a ton of infantry very fast in the early game considering they don't have to build any tech buildings and have cheap infantry. Why they aren't like 280 is beyond me, since they can definitely compete with vanilla riflemen and have a way better vet1.

I'd rather see the cost of volks increased if they get fausts. Seems like they always have a ton of infantry very fast in the early game considering they don't have to build any tech buildings and have cheap infantry. Why they aren't like 280 is beyond me, since they can definitely compete with vanilla riflemen and have a way better vet1.

Try actually looking at the stats. Vanilla Volks either tie or lose vs Vanilla Rifles at all ranges. And Rifles have vastly superior veterancy bonuses in terms of combat effectiveness.

Statistically Volks aren't that strong, but there are many in-game factors for Volks performing very well.

1) Sandbags, which Rifles don't get by default
2) Sturms dominate at the ranges in which Rifles are strong vs Volks
3) OKW starts with 100 extra mp in exchange for 15 less fuel, but combined with the Sturms vs RE dynamic - USF is behind by at least 1 combat-effective squad from the start. I often win engagements against 1 Volks squad only to be forced back by the next Volks that comes along. Volks aren't statistically superior, you're just getting outnumbered.
4) STGs and flame nades hit the field way earlier than Riflemen upgrades.
5) Riflemen design - Riflemen are extremely back-loaded in terms of their combat bonuses. Vet 3 Rifles are easily a match for Vet 3 Volks with STGs, and absolutely shred them when double BARed.

Basically you're using an infantry unit that only gains a lot of strength in the mid-late game to fight the most front-loaded faction. That's why it often feels frustrating for the USF player, and I definitely know how that feels.

However, the pricing of the two units is definitely in line with their statistical performance, so my suggestion would be to remove the starting MP bonus for OKW in exchange for a smaller fuel handicap.

3) OKW starts with 100 extra mp in exchange for 15 less fuel

We have already established that this is a pure bullshit and starting fuel is there only to time tech, otherwise soviets would get 200 more menpower at start when their starting fuel was set from 50 to 20.
Oh, and soviets never had less menpower when they had that 50 fuel at start.

All factions have different starting fuel, because all factions have different tech structures and costs and different supposed timing as well as some are supposed to get tech structure right away while others aren't or are supposed to be able to get other upgrade instead.

So stop repeating that bullshit.

We have already established that this is a pure bullshit and starting fuel is there only to time tech, otherwise soviets would get 200 more menpower at start when their starting fuel was set from 50 to 20.
Oh, and soviets never had less menpower when they had that 50 fuel at start.

So stop repeating that bullshit.

It is true that they have 15 fewer FU and 100 more MP though.

I wonder what the consequences of standardising their starting resources would be?

You'd have a weaker early game, but all the vehicles would hit 15 FU faster. The Flak HT would hit at 75 FU (about the same time as an Ostheer light vehicle) and the Luchs would hit a hair sooner than the Stuart.

I think it might be an improvement to the balance of the various matchups.

It is true that they have 15 fewer FU and 100 more MP though.

Yes, but
1)Not because fuel
2)Every faction has different starting fuel.

I wonder what the consequences of standardising their starting resources would be?

100mp less at start, since starting mp is 500 minus starting unit.

You'd have a weaker early game, but all the vehicles would hit 15 FU faster. The Flak HT would hit at 75 FU (about the same time as an Ostheer light vehicle) and the Luchs would hit a hair sooner than the Stuart.

No, doesn't work that way, because for the 3rd time, they did NOT got mp as any kind of compensation for fuel. They got fuel changed, because their whole tech structure was altered.
You know, just like soviets, who did NOT got 200 mp more for giving up 30 fuel.

I think it might be an improvement to the balance of the various matchups.

No, it wouldn't, because it doesn't work how you think it does.
Starting fuel is completely independent from starting menpower, because that starting fuel dictates tech pace and is set separately to menpower, which OKW, Ost and UKF start with more then others, because reasons.

No, it wouldn't, because it doesn't work how you think it does.
Starting fuel is completely independent from starting menpower, because that starting fuel dictates tech pace and is set separately to menpower, which OKW, Ost and UKF start with more then others, because reasons.

I didn't say they were connected.

I said I think OKW having 15 more FU and 100 less MP at the start could improve its matchups with other factions.

I didn't say they were connected.

I said I think OKW having 15 more FU and 100 less MP at the start could improve its matchups with other factions.

Most certainly wouldn't improve matchup. Only being able to match instead of outproduce the enemy in exchange for faster snares, STGs and lava nades would not be good.

I think the starting manpower and fuel for OKW is somewhat balanced. It is alright. I do not think change is necessary. It is good as it is currently. Nothing too strong nor too weak.

Back on topic, what if the UC wasp just got a big armor buff? IMO it should have more armor than it does currently, enough that it can frontally engage mgs with some security like its supposed to (that's really the only thing it's good at at all). Right now, the vickers is just a much better option the vast majority of the time and with even less armor the wasp will be even worse than it is currently.

We have already established that this is a pure bullshit and starting fuel is there only to time tech, otherwise soviets would get 200 more menpower at start when their starting fuel was set from 50 to 20.
Oh, and soviets never had less menpower when they had that 50 fuel at start.

All factions have different starting fuel, because all factions have different tech structures and costs and different supposed timing as well as some are supposed to get tech structure right away while others aren't or are supposed to be able to get other upgrade instead.

So stop repeating that bullshit.

You completely misunderstood the point, as usual. It means "A is their advantage, B is their disadvantage". But of course everything that isn't "Axis needs more nerfs" is bullshit to you.

By "we have established this", you mean you and Tactical Imouto. Because in your world (in which you don't even play this game), starting fuel is somehow totally irrelevant to teching. If OKW started with a pioneer-strength unit and 360mp, both Allied and Axis players would get equal map control. OKW would no longer be able to deny their opponent fuel, and would hence be seriously behind in terms of teching, by virtue of starting with only 5 fuel. Its current tech timings would not be kept - hence reducing or deleting many of the windows of opportunity that currently exist.

For the last time Katitof, "we" have already established that the 5 fuel is the current starting point because having early game strength AND having 20 fuel would mean OKW hits tech timings too fast. They are tied together, and your line of thinking that you should nerf one without adjusting the other is pure bullshit.

For the benefit of people actually interested in civilised discussion, my point was as follows:

a) OKW currently relies on its early game power to deny enemy resources or to secure more map control for itself, so that it can overcome its fuel disadvantage and tech equally or even at a faster pace.

b) The problem is that the early game strength is often able to create cripplingly unequal situations, which outweighs the fuel deficit.

c) We should reduce OKW early game strength, but ensure that OKW teching isn't affected too drastically by late teching, which would completely obliterate the windows of opportunity available to Luchs/Flak HT play.

I would not mind that fuel change is if they had proper changes to certain gameplay elements.

Raketenwerfer removed with Pak40 instead. Cuz annoying for allies early and for axis late.

AT guns and now Firenade becomes available after 1 Base built.

Pzfaust available early instead.

Make MG34 do something, its pretty lackluster.

Replace useless Infrared Halftrack for something viable. Who needs an idle recon unit anyway.


The reason why they require early aggression is also due to the fact that they do not have any means to produce more of it. Nerf fuel and give the possibility to get caches.

This would intend to nerf their overall early strength and gains of map control and even make the timing of vehicles come later. These following changes would also help increase the flow of play. Making it enjoyable for actually, both sides.

Just by only nerfing their fuel and early map controls which will completely affect OKW negatively overall. I do agree on the fact of nerfing but help also improve certain broken and unbalanced elements too would help also.

I’d like to see its DPS peak at the middle of its max range,and decrease at close and max range to incentivize you to move it closer & require more micro not to get snared.

I have to saw, WASPs are UP and lackluster, they are a big upgrade but they fail to get the most important job, killing garrisoned MGs.
The UC is just a bad platform to carry a flamer gun IMO. The range is a good way to help WASP not being trash maybe? Buff its range but not sight. Other squad spots the MG, get the wasp spray flames and back off real fast and let the flames do the job. OMG its a hard topic.

Back on topic, what if the UC wasp just got a big armor buff? IMO it should have more armor than it does currently, enough that it can frontally engage mgs with some security like its supposed to (that's really the only thing it's good at at all). Right now, the vickers is just a much better option the vast majority of the time and with even less armor the wasp will be even worse than it is currently.

I love this, a T0 UC with less armor could be returned to their old armor via the two upgrades. Actually I'm prone to add that WASP upgrade must be buffed with a bit of more armor (or HP) than the Vickers one. (In this whay Vickers UC will be a kind of squishy long rage enemy MP bleeder, and WASP UC will be capable of survive and flee from a single AT shot supported with enemy inf.