Wehrmacht problems.

All of those reduce the effectiveness of indirect fire at clearing out anti-tank positions.

Those changes could well be improvements to teamgames, but they won't make medium tanks more effective in them.

That's why I didn't say nerfing only Arty would solve the problem.

The dozer is "upgrade" is not interesting and after the patch it will cost fuel and manpower not MU.

The majority of Allie medium do not need buff or upgrades, they are cost efficient. The main reason that they do not see action is that Td/infatry spam is better/safer choice.

The dozer upgrade on itself is an interesting change, I didn't say anything about its actual cost or efficiency. I just pointed that such upgrades are the way to go to make medium relevant on the late game.
On the other hand, TDs aren't the main reason why you stop building mediums, TDs are a part of the reason but, and this is my opinion, not the main factor.
From my game experience and cast I've been watching, TDs alone can't kill medium (unless bad play such over-extension), there is always a combination of various factors and the most critical one being the engine damage dealt by an infantry squad around the corner.
My opinion is that medium tanks suffer much more from damage engine than any other tanks which is exactly what make them so unreliable late game since they need to close the distance and take risks to achieve their goals in case of offensive.

Now imagine such individual upgrade only available for medium tanks that would change the damage engine trigger to 50% from 70% (example), that would give an interesting opening for mediums to fight TDs and infantry since they're less likely going to be rooted by the 2nd and finished off by the 1st.

The dozer upgrade on itself is an interesting change, I didn't say anything about its actual cost or efficiency. I just pointed that such upgrades are the way to go to make medium relevant on the late game.

You actually brought up the the cost:
"A good example is the sherman dozer blades, that's an interesting upgrade that make sherman more appealing on which the player need to sink munition and force the opponent to adapt."

On the other hand, TDs aren't the main reason why you stop building mediums, TDs are a part of the reason but, and this is my opinion, not the main factor.
From my game experience and cast I've been watching, TDs alone can't kill medium (unless bad play such over-extension), there is always a combination of various factors and the most critical one being the engine damage dealt by an infantry squad around the corner.
My opinion is that medium tanks suffer much more from damage engine than any other tanks which is exactly what make them so unreliable late game since they need to close the distance and take risks to achieve their goals in case of offensive.

Now imagine such individual upgrade only available for medium tanks that would change the damage engine trigger to 50% from 70% (example), that would give an interesting opening for mediums to fight TDs and infantry since they're less likely going to be rooted by the 2nd and finished off by the 1st.

I can imagine it and can see medium being used to crush infatry and the ATGs (especially the RW) circle strafed to death.

You actually brought up the the cost:
"A good example is the sherman dozer blades, that's an interesting upgrade that make sherman more appealing on which the player need to sink munition and force the opponent to adapt."

blabla semantic war. Ok you won, don't care.

I can imagine it and can see medium being used to crush infatry and the ATGs (especially the RW) circle strafed to death.

Suddenly TDs are disappearing from your scenarios. Anyway, that's an idea subject to improvement such as the upgrade being tied up to T4 or all tiers build or whatever to make it balanced.

.. there is always a combination of various factors and the most critical one being the engine damage dealt by an infantry squad around the corner.
My opinion is that medium tanks suffer much more from damage engine than any other tanks which is exactly what make them so unreliable late game since they need to close the distance and take risks to achieve their goals in case of offensive.

Spot on. Since addition of AT satchel charges for penals the situation worsened for ost since ost got nothing in return. An engine crit for ost is a lost tank. Giving those satchels to penals and US meant extreme blow to tank play. Especially when you are forced to regain map control. There were mines, cons/infantry snares, at guns, button, ptrs and they added satchels which generate tremendous amounts of damage. To deal with the issue they could probably add crit repairs for ost pioneers, which, at least in theory should help a bit.

Spot on. Since addition of AT satchel charges for penals the situation worsened for ost since ost got nothing in return.

The AT satchel is fine, it's wicked easy to avoid. It's much shorter range than all other snares.

If you think the AT satchel is too much damage what is your opinion on the teller 1-hit killing just about every allied light? Ost got "nothing in return" because they already had better early AT than the soviets, by a lot.

Before ptrs penals all the soviets had early on was the ZiS. Ost gets shrecks, pak40, tellers, soviets got nothing if you teched t1.

Spot on. Since addition of AT satchel charges for penals the situation worsened for ost since ost got nothing in return. An engine crit for ost is a lost tank. Giving those satchels to penals and US meant extreme blow to tank play. Especially when you are forced to regain map control. There were mines, cons/infantry snares, at guns, button, ptrs and they added satchels which generate tremendous amounts of damage. To deal with the issue they could probably add crit repairs for ost pioneers, which, at least in theory should help a bit.

Well I didn't really had satchel in mind but why not.

The AT satchel is fine, it's wicked easy to avoid. It's much shorter range than all other snares.

If you think the AT satchel is too much damage what is your opinion on the teller 1-hit killing just about every allied light? Ost got "nothing in return" because they already had better early AT than the soviets, by a lot.

Before ptrs penals all the soviets had early on was the ZiS. Ost gets shrecks, pak40, tellers, soviets got nothing if you teched t1.

It's personal but I prefer soviet mines.

When it come to sachels - on certain maps and in certain situaltions it's relatively easy ambush a tank with a satchel. Still, the my point is that with so many AT solutions ost vehicles became much easier to kill. While buffing other factions (to counter OKW, which was perfectly valid to do) ost was left neglected.

It's personal but I prefer soviet mines.

When it come to sachels - on certain maps and in certain situaltions it's relatively easy ambush a tank with a satchel. Still, the my point is that with so many AT solutions ost vehicles became much easier to kill. While buffing other factions (to counter OKW, which was perfectly valid to do) ost was left neglected.

They should have nerfed okw and not buffed the rest. Okw was special it had/has the lowest micro input requierment with highest reward off any faction. The low recources did very little to hold them back. A shreck blob and 2 obers where enough to stall for autowin kt. Wich should have never been non doc. This would have saved the game from so many balancing problems.

They should have nerfed okw and not buffed the rest. Okw was special it had/has the lowest micro input requierment with highest reward off any faction. The low recources did very little to hold them back. A shreck blob and 2 obers where enough to stall for autowin kt. Wich should have never been non doc. This would have saved the game from so many balancing problems.

Well, Yes and no I'd concentrate more on non stat factors determining the gameplay. For example, give ost vehicles stock smoke - looking at how many abilities other factions got not needing commanders, it should be tested. Instead of smoke, respective commanders should, for instance, get the ability to build 5 man pioneer squads to support armor better on the battlefied buffing their repair speed. Such changes might affect the gameplay more than some people expect. Generally, concentrating only on stats creates power creep and it's always difficult to balance. Another idea could include grens building sandbags and their abitity to lay soviet-style mines (it could be some infantry commander related ability). Such changes would open new tactical possibilities and make the game more fun to play. They wouldn't, however, create power creep on a game that is generally pretty well balance thanks to the hard work of all brave modding people over the years

give ost vehicles stock smoke

It's a no from me dawg.

If it's like Sherman smoke, I'm actually OK with that.

I'm sure he meant panzer tactician though, in which case nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

It's personal but I prefer soviet mines.

When it come to sachels - on certain maps and in certain situaltions it's relatively easy ambush a tank with a satchel. Still, the my point is that with so many AT solutions ost vehicles became much easier to kill. While buffing other factions (to counter OKW, which was perfectly valid to do) ost was left neglected.

I too prefer mines that get wasted randomly half the time on single infantrymen and do 1/4 of a tank's health over mines that detonate reliably on vehicles only and bring tanks within an inch of their lives and 1 hit light vehicles.

If you're getting satcheled around corners all the time stop running your tanks right around corners, or do better recon and have better map awareness.

It seems you're a new player. So I suggest to play another faction. Ost is the most difficult faction to learn. Especially since you're a 1v1 player. Ost has been underpowered in 1v1 for years. Even when they're not underpowered it's still harder to play as Ost. I suggest OKW or USF for beginners. These two factions are more forgiving.

For Ost 1v1, its nice to have the 7% extra faust range, combined with a doc that gives your inf sprint. This makes it way easier to snare those allies vehicles that are trying to wipe your squads, which at least keeps them repairing a bit and hopefully you can finish with a pak at some point, or simply just survive until P4.

For Ost 1v1, its nice to have the 7% extra faust range, combined with a doc that gives your inf sprint. This makes it way easier to snare those allies vehicles that are trying to wipe your squads, which at least keeps them repairing a bit and hopefully you can finish with a pak at some point, or simply just survive until P4.

And you can just camouflage and faust out of camo too lol. Not the easiest thing for newer players to set up though.

For Ost 1v1, its nice to have the 7% extra faust range, combined with a doc that gives your inf sprint. This makes it way easier to snare those allies vehicles that are trying to wipe your squads, which at least keeps them repairing a bit and hopefully you can finish with a pak at some point, or simply just survive until P4.

I guess it's still much more complicated that what other factions have to do.

If you snare the vehicle they will repair relatively quickly and ost just very often loses munitions (and it's very munition starved anyway). To destroy the crippled US vehicle you must have a pak nerby, possibly no shot blockers, and if the allied vehicle is supported you still may not finish it off due to their infantry being more potent and killing your pak (because it's very difficult to move swiftly the pak, mg42 and 'grens in cover' combo). Allies have some cheesy ways of avoidin the vehicle doom: they have crit repairs, crew may hop off requiring you to attack ground, they may smoke shot pak with phoporous rounds etc. When it's the other way around, allies have more tools to eliminate a crippled vehicle including the relatively newly introduced satchels (instead of following with at they can throw a satchel which reduces hp greatly, there are new heavier bazookas, all this plus one at shot from Jackson/su85/firefly and the job's done).

To sum up, allies have both more tools to finish off a crippled ost vehicle and more tools to save their own damaged vehicles.

That's why not only the armour/penetration/hp should be analysed but also factors such as imho rpair speeds and abilities to cripple vehicles (compare the fact that there are quite a bunch of potent dual role AI and AT squads allies have while ost has squishy panzershreck panzergrens - they can be either AI or AT not both while guards, penals, infatry sections, paras, rangers etc are often more powerful fulfilling both roles (imo panzergrens should get satchels when equipped with shrecks to make the situation more even).

Even when they're not underpowered it's still harder to play as Ost.

Seriously? Your bias continues to surprise me. This is literal nonsense

Seriously? Your bias continues to surprise me. This is literal nonsense

So the game is PERFECTLY balanced in your opinion? Since even when balanced EVERY faction requires the same amount of skill? It seems your bias is showing. YOU are literal nonsense. You think the current ostwind is balanced while 99% of the community knows it's a joke. Even most allied players acknowledge that. You don't have any credibility.

So the game is PERFECTLY balanced in your opinion? Since even when balanced EVERY faction requires the same amount of skill? It seems your bias is showing. YOU are literal nonsense. You think the current ostwind is balanced while 99% of the community knows it's a joke. Even most allied players acknowledge that. You don't have any credibility.

Even HelpingHans says ost is easiest faction to play... it might not be best in top tier, but its anything but hard to play with durable armor and cheap long range infantry.

I guess it's still much more complicated that what other factions have to do.

If you snare the vehicle they will repair relatively quickly and ost just very often loses munitions (and it's very munition starved anyway). To destroy the crippled US vehicle you must have a pak nerby, possibly no shot blockers, and if the allied vehicle is supported you still may not finish it off due to their infantry being more potent and killing your pak (because it's very difficult to move swiftly the pak, mg42 and 'grens in cover' combo). Allies have some cheesy ways of avoidin the vehicle doom: they have crit repairs, crew may hop off requiring you to attack ground, they may smoke shot pak with phoporous rounds etc. When it's the other way around, allies have more tools to eliminate a crippled vehicle including the relatively newly introduced satchels (instead of following with at they can throw a satchel which reduces hp greatly, there are new heavier bazookas, all this plus one at shot from Jackson/su85/firefly and the job's done).

To sum up, allies have both more tools to finish off a crippled ost vehicle and more tools to save their own damaged vehicles.

That's why not only the armour/penetration/hp should be analysed but also factors such as imho rpair speeds and abilities to cripple vehicles (compare the fact that there are quite a bunch of potent dual role AI and AT squads allies have while ost has squishy panzershreck panzergrens - they can be either AI or AT not both while guards, penals, infatry sections, paras, rangers etc are often more powerful fulfilling both roles (imo panzergrens should get satchels when equipped with shrecks to make the situation more even).

Ptrs zooks etc are weaker in term of alpha damage potential. That is why they are on sturdier squads and do a bit more vs inf. The shreck esp in larger numbersare a major threat to allied armour able to losse half hp in blink of an eye. Volks shreck blob was the best example of this. And thay had only one shreck each.