Profile of SlaYoU

5men squad with Lmg42 upgrade = having little obers squads after 4 minutes. Now maybe it is what you want but I hope not relic balance team.

You know you can change a squad from 4 men to 5 and at the same time balance the dps output of it, right ? Noone wants obers as mainline infantry, just a decent squad that can survive and hold fights for longer than 10 secs, and doesn't suffer as much dps dropoff for each model lost. If by design, Wehrmacht is supposed to have a hard early game, like katitof tries to explain (ways of the katitof are hard to decypher, between all the bullshit he spreads -try playing some 1v1 as WM, ty, or even better, try playing just a bit-), then the lategame HAS TO BE good enough to make up for it. Right now, it is not the case.

That's the exact same concept as a carry in Moba games: you start rather weak, then scaling and time flowing makes you better in the long term, i could live with that. But right now, WM lategame is hardly better than anything the 3 (!) allies faction have. Okay USF is probably worse, but the faction reaches its peak so much earlier that it doesn't mean anything if they are say 10-15% worst in the lategame. It's all about the snowball effect that is provided by a ridiculous early - early to mid dominance. Oddly enough, the only allies faction that provides somewhat balanced games with WM is brits, who struggle early game too. Coincidence ? I hardly believe so.

That is a problem why?
The faction is designed to rely on MG42 from get go. Grenspam strats are dead, because they were never intended to be a thing.


Grens don't bleed more or less then any other mainline inf because of rec acc and their own firepower, unless you insist to fight in close range with rifles all the time.
Ost struggled vs early light vehicles, which was fixed by band aid 222 buff to boarderline op cost effectiveness in relation to any other light in game.



Wrong, the 4 men squads have nothing to do with them being elite or not, its to support army design of combined arms, you can NOT rely on grens alone, you need supporting units, either support weapons or command bunker/251 for map presence.

Grens never were supposed to be superior to any other infantry squad, so your elite argument desn't apply, they are supposed to be equal to cons and surpass them with weapon upgrades. Vs brits and UKF you have to use support units, just like UKF needs to do to support tommies.

And Wehrmacht has no trouble in 1v1s, right ? Cf the last post where i uploaded replays (and i know you remember it well, since you went poof as soon as i asked you some replays to back your points). And CF the ESL post that sums it quite nicely. Whatever.

Grens are not a reliable mainline infantry, that is a fact. And every time someones gets an idea to make the unit / faction viable again, you step in and spam your garbage.

USF is a nightmare early to mid game. Sovs and maxim are in a much better state than WM has ever been. Only UKF is a decent matchup for the faction. Otherwise you have to fight a downhill battle for 40 mins to actually have a chance to get back in the game after a (faction dependant) horrid start. If that's your view on Wehrmacht balance, then you have no say on it.

I don't think that you can really say that one is greater than the other. Changes to EU4 are sometime so subtle as to be invisible; at other times they are very obvious. Commanders certainly do change the game significantly; they certainly change the meta regularly.



Yes, as I said. But for that issue, let's look at another example: Civilization 5. Civ 5 shipped without significant elements - like religion - that had been major components of Civ 4, only to later add them as DLC. People do claim that some things in EU4 DLC should have been in the base game, but that's a much more tendentious argument than is the case with Civ. In Civ, you could see that previously existing components had been removed, and the base game as sold felt much more shallow than its predecessor.

Another example is Tropico 5 and 5 which, like Civ, dropped significant elements of the predecessor only to add them back in via DLC.

Either way, Paradox enjoys a very loyal, even fanatical fan base, that will reliably buy both DLC and new editions of games. And both regard this as a win-win; the fans know that they are effectively hiring Paradox to keep working on a particular sort of play that they like, and Paradox have the security of an audience they can have confidence in, and don't have to go chasing after the Next Big Thing.

None of this is a bad thing. A subscription model for games is just as reasonable as it was for magazines before the decline of print media. And yet, this is even better than a subscription model because you don't have to commit to a periodic contract, and you don't get completely cut out if you can't or don't want to buy the latest addition... and on top of that, you get the stuff for free just for entertaining yourself.

What the hell is there to complain about?



Because you're complaining about getting Free Stuff just for playing a game you enjoy. I mean where else do you get that? Do you get free petrol just for driving?

Besides which, the point I was responding to was the claim that Relic's DLC policy is uniquely bad and uniquely unpopular. This is very far from true.

Wise words. A lot wiser than everything i could type yesterday once i got on tilt. Thank you.

Whaaa whaaa whaaa moar free stuff plz, that guy is being mean to me since he tells the truth !

You're just greedy, you want all the stuff, with minimum effort. Nothing to add there. Oh and btw, you'd be surprised of how old i am. For all i know, we are agreeing to disagree on the matter. You want to exploit, fine. I'm done with you.

What's next ? Customer is always right ? You're wrong.

I just checked in a live game, it works, but in my custom game they did not. Maybe they screwed a bit with mods, since i play on my own.