Profile of Esxile

So, what could be done to solve this?
As I noted above, one faction should not have micro intensive infantry AND tanks. Shift the micro between different unit types. Micro intensive mainline, but easy support and normal tanks. Faction two needs a lot of focus on the support units, but has forgiving tanks. Faction three has an easy mainline etc etc.
This will need some specific balancing for certain time frames where e.g. only infantry is present, but it should alleviate the problem with overloading one faction with micromanagement.

This issue was addressed long time ago with Relic acknowledging Axis factions were in essence easier to play but Allied having an higher celling resulting in having ELO matches quite balanced but high level tournament favoring Allied. I remember there was a post from Relic dedicated to this matter and a couple of patches aimed to correct it.

That was long time ago because then the modding team took the decision to change that to where we are today. Now we have what the OP describes where Grenadiers have late game equal survivability than 5men squads while being less exposed to damage and having superior support tools and tanks around them.

Your previous post listed also other units, my initial response was mostly referring to those.
OKW does lack early AT though. That was the whole reason why the Schreck got more accessible. The Puma needs to be optional due to OKW's tech system. A usable ATG is also a must for any faction, you can see what issues a lack of penetration causes for USF already. If an ATG cannot deal with even mediums reliably, there is barely any reason to buy it in the first place.


If a unit is doctrinal or not does not matter. Your argumentation was that OKW as a faction has to work without the KT, meaning that building the KT on top will make the build OP. That works for basically all units that are not in the standard build order, including doctrinal ones.

The cost opportunity point is very simple, you can basically boil it down to this: The KT has weaknesses, that you would not have if you'd build something else with your resources instead. Your KT is slow, can be flanked/overrun, not respond to a shifting front line, you cannot rush with it etc. It needs heavy support by the rest of your army, focusing you in one single spot.
Other tanks for example are able to operate more on their own, can be dived to kill artillery etc. That's your cost opportunity, and sometimes the best counter to heavies is not even TDs, but artillery to bleed out all infantry and keep the tanks barely supported. That's the cost opportunity you have. Not even mentioning that I have seen many opponents throw their game because they stalled too long for their heavy.

Obviously all of this is heavily map dependent. On some maps you'll get more benefits, on some others rather the weaknesses.


I said it is noticable, so what is the point?
I assume the reason for the nerf was, that previously TDs were penning 300 armor heavies like the Tiger with close to 100% chance. Basically, a vet3 TD evaporated all meaning of Axis armor. I assume the KT was not really taken into consideration, or deemed to be okay.

You're right having the raketen being not efficient vs medium would be bad for design. But raketen that aren't effectively countered by infantry is also bad for design. The problem with the raketen is its price and usability when associated with heavies and super heavies.
Then I don't understand your comment on OKW not having AT at every stage of the game, the raketen is the only T0 atgun available whenever and whatever you tech. SPshreck just made OKW T2 irrelevant since how you can easily keep at bay light and medium just with the raketen/SPshrek and pfaust until the p4j hit the field.

KT weakness is usually offset by allies and the fact that late game both side have losses. Obviously if you're the only one bleeding and playing badly the KT will not be anymore your free out of hell card. But in the case, and its the majority of situations, you and your opponent are suffering heavy losses and then come the moment to replace them with new units then the KT is simply superior to anything else. Because you don't really need to assess your opponent forces, out of the gate your KT is going to be superior to whatever your opponent would also build or call-in to replace its own losses. So yes maybe in the case your opponent still have a ML20 or Priest/Sexton maybe the KT isn't going to be the best choice but you can still make it so. And any other situation will be KT > all.

This is why I say you can't balance OKW without the KT, if the KT exists and is stock then it means its should be part of any regular build order. As much as the HMG42 or Jacksons.
Because the HMG42 is part of Ostheer their infantry is only 4men squad supposely inferior to other mainline infantry.
Because the Jackson is part of USF late game then USF has shitty other AT and no late game meatshield tank.
Why would it be different for OKW and the KT? Why would OKW be on par with other factions without it if it exist and is superior to anything else?

All of these units are pretty in line with their cost. It's not like you'd get the P4J for the price of the Ostheer P4 or a Sherman. It also costs more population, so you can fit less units. That's balancing done right, I guess.
The faction definitely has some problems, such as MP inefficiencies unless you manage to transition to Obers, which in turn removes your snares, as well as their split tech system which at least for the first 20 minutes if not the whole game leaves you without proper healing or sub-par repair abilities.

Cost =! balance but I didn't say they weren't balanced, I said that the raketen costing 270mp and having free 5men squad + free retreat button + free vet1 camo + having no problem dealing with medium tanks is a problem when associated with said tanks and ultimately the KT, because its dirt cheap and resilient , even if said tanks are with their correct price tag.

What make the KT invincible and OKW a problematic faction as a whole isn't only the KT itself, its also the fact that OKW has to be "balanced" without it which mean the faction doesn't suffer if you don't use it. Now you have faction that can definitively win without the KT having it as a the cherry on top of the cake. That's make a really big cherry able to reverse the game by its mere presence.

In few words, what is balance without the KT becomes inbalanced with the KT simply because it is a force multiplier for anything around it for a resonable cost since its cost has to be reasonable to be balance.

It was statwise balanced before because TDs were actually countering it as they must. It is not today because of the huge amount of RNG their pen nerf brought in the game for the sake of few people enjoying their 1 unit's army.

KT was once balanced but balance hasn't been the modding team's objective for a long time now. We're stuck with it and the last hope is the release of coh3 to get something else and pray Relic devs have more brain on this next iteration of the game than they had on coh2.

Remember that Jackson were nerfed because they had 40 sight range. But the KT is the special snowflake of the modding team's cake.