Profile of Grumpy

so every other faction in the game has a form or weapon upgrade for their stock units. wheather it be upgrade behind a teck or weapon rack.
.........
what u al think

I used to think cons sucked until I started using them a lot. Now I don't mind them so much, particularly with the 7th man. I don't think they could improve them a lot without badly altering balance. They're really cheap to reinforce. This really helps late game in 4v4's when artillery starts firing.

I do think the doctrinal weapon upgrades should lock out the 7th man. I think Mobilize Reserves is fine as is, and am glad the balance team set it up the way they did.

The only improvements that I would ask for are:
1) Move part (maybe 10%) of the RA from Vet 3 to Vet 1. This would help them when other infantry is getting their weapon upgrades and get their RA down to about 1.0.
2) Allow them to pick up 1 weapon (of any type) and still Mobilize Reserves. Any weapon that they pick up should have about 60-75% of its normal accuracy.
3) It seems like it takes a long time to throw a molotov. I may just be imagining this but they seem worse in terms of time and range than other infantry. It could be that rifle grenades just have longer range so they start right away while cons have to move. In either case, it seems like it could use some improvement.

... Which would you rather have, a medicore MG that can barely scrap by as an MG, or fighting against MG spam which you have little hope of countering. And when I say little hope of countering, I mean OKW. .

This question is probably why the balance team didn't do more with the maxim. On the other hand, that same matchup on Crossing isn't fun for Soviet versus Ost. It gets really frustrating using Oorah to try to get past the MG42's firing cone, only to have one model not make it and the squad get suppressed, then have to retreat as the Pio closes.

As for your comments on the LEIG, it probably would do better against Soviets if it had a mortar AOE profile. Normally I find them to be garbage unless I get two, so now I always double them up. I play a lot of Soviets and find that double LEIG's make it hard to keep maxims on the field, and trying to keep them longer often results in getting them wiped.

I do think fear of Maxim spam is a bit overdone. Late game they bleed too much and the abundance of yellow cover means they get grenaded a lot. I normally get two but might or might not replace them if I lose them.

I subscribe to the belief that CoH2 should take inspiration from how things work in real life, and use this to influence balance, but not dictate it outright. It also should not totally contrast real life. Or maybe you'd like Lee Enfields to penetrate a Tiger; reductio ad absurdium etc. This is the problem I see with IS2 having a ton of range.

Anyhow if you re-read my final PG it does pertain to balance and offers my suggestion for both King and IS2.

Sorry, but too much of the game is very different than real life, and it would be extremely difficult to rebalance at this point. For example:

The Pack howie, M8 Scott, and SU-76 had operational firing ranges that were about 70-80& of a LEFH. Would you really want their barrage to have 120 range? Their shells only hit about 1/4 as hard so either their damage would go down or the LEFH would go up. Then would would you do to the ML20?

Open top TD's like the M10 and M36 were highly vulnerable to infantry small arms, grenades, and mortars. Would you want to have to return to base every time a mortar hit your M36 and pick up a new captain, gunner, and loader? I bet the real-life M10 never crushed a single Wehr soldier.

Hull-down was used for tanks only, and wouldn't have increased range, it would have simply decreased target size and anything mounted in the hull wouldn't be able to shoot. It basically turned a tank into a pillbox.

The game is fun as-is. If you want something that is more like a simulation then try Steel Division, which is a lot more accurate but not as much fun.

I haven't tried the new KT yet so don't really have an opinion. I watched replays of a couple of games that I was in where people were complaining about 2-hit wipes by KT's. Nothing really seemed that bad when I watched the replays. Other vehicles like the ISU are also pretty good at getting 2-hit wipes.

this is why we should make more hard rules about posting in balance section, at least post stats/replay or test or math to back up ur argument or even i can say "up is down"

90% of the time hte thread start like this "ahahha i can't play this game anymore X unit is OPOPOPOPie whyyyyyyyyy" now change OP for UP if u want to buff something

I agree, except that I think it should be a replay. Also, if the unit is that OP, the the person who starts the thread should have to use the actual unit in a game against equally skilled opponents and then post the replay. It would prevent most BS threads.

Comp stomps wouldn't count. For example, I've used the JT HE barrage in a comp stomp and got over a hundred kills. Against real players I've never got more than about 1/3 of that and sometimes it doesn't work well at all (like trees blocking the shells when the trees don't block normal shells).

BTW, all that changed on the maxim was a couple of suppression values. It still doesn't suppress very well and I'd still rate it as the worst MG.

Cheers to the mod team and Relic. As I have said before, reading thru 1000's of posts is a lot of work. On top of all of the real work that had to be done. That is a huge sacrifice for the community!

Does anyone have a count on the number of posts about balance since this started?

There's only been a couple of new threads. Most of the posts about balance are continuations of previous threads with the usual suspects Ullumulu/Vipper/Stug/Blackstorm/Distro/Shadowlink versus pvtgooner/Kaitoff/and a couple others

It doesn't feel like the patch changed balance much, other than eliminating some cheese and toning down some of the abusive units.