Profile of achpawel

There is also sth not yet mentioned affecting the balance of the comet a lot. Many players don't realise it but it is an important factor.

What I mean is the skill level of the comet user. A good player will utilise the tank's extra abilities (extra speed, powerful offensive smoke, extra range, etc.) to their advantage. They will use the full potential of the unit realising it is just overperforming. On the other hand, an average/poor player will only use its main combat stats (armour, speed, penetration, etc) and won't be able to realise how powerful those extra abilities can be. Such players will often claim the unit is underperforming as they just can't use it.

All the above seem to have been affecting balance much imo. For example, USF was supposed to have really weak tanks but they were supposed to self-repair, be cheaper, etc. They got buffed and still players keep claiming that sherman is much worse than p4 not realising how much gamechanging a free crew, stock smoke and radio net can be.

Same here. There are people who keep repeating that cromwell or comet are weak while axis tanks are better. They don't realise, for example, that having a single quite potent stock mg without the need to invest 50 munitions into a pintle may actually be better. They keep forgetting about the price of more armoured/better tanks. Same people keep repeating that a doctrine smoke is get out of jail card while they get stock smoke in different variants themselves. Just really hard to comment. Just l2p. And finally start playing opposing factions. You will never get better with Ur favourite faction if U don't get to the similar level with opposing factions. There is a ceiling you will never break, no matter how much you debalance the game trying to boost Ur favourite faction. You will always hit the ceiling of the lack of knowledge on opposing factions on a given level.

I'd implement all the changes asap

Plus:
1. the recrew with 2 men for ost.
2. ZiS barrage moved to vet one.
3. Panther main gun gets a tad better ai performance.

Maybe give stug 60 range instead of nerfing comet (though it really deserves a tiny nerf - grenade should be more expensive (35 instead of 20 if I remember the current price correctly), war speed should probably cost munitions paid by sappers when "adding" it to a tank (20 would probably be enough)). Better to increase/add the price than get rid of a cool feature I guess. Oh, rear armour of course! (Together with church and ISU)

Its true ukf have many odd abilities on units such the aec and grenades from turrets. But they are also very limited in snares or mobile mortar with stock units. So imo there not broken but weird nonetheless.

Rng is a big part of this game. Its not like at guns hit halftracks 100%. If the 251 becomes invunerable to small arms it needs to be delayed. And the 251 bbq will have far less time to burn.

Agree with all the above. Maybe just not really with limited snares. They got a snare sniper and Aec to snare. Then they got the engies which are actually a very potent combat squad. They can also equip piats on any unit. So it's not too bad.

All in all, my tourney observation suggests that UKF is probably the strongest atm and generally it is easier to win as allies in 1v1 due to the fact that you can simply make more mistakes with them. My idea to slightly buff halftrack armour is a step to making the balance more equal. Not a big change tbh.

T70 aec stuarts are all a tier higher in terms of cost/timing and preformance. That they can deal with halftracks is intended. However its not like they 2 shot halftracks as atguns and bigger tanks do.

True. Yet they have many abilities and that is why I mentioned them - as an argument showing that halftrack abilities are not making this unit that special. But there are more, even less balanced abilities, on many allied (especially UKF) potent units, such as phosphorous smoke non doc, grenades from the turret of a tank destroying AT guns, crews, etc.

Okay i get that halftracks should be somewhat simaler.
The 251 just comes to early, and the flametrack is to dangerous for it to be imune to small arms fire. Not even counting the mines doctrinal smoke etc.

Well, I don't think so. A player should basically shoot it the exact number of AT shots that the unit was balanced around. Small arms shouldn't add their damage imo (unless, of course, we allow that for allied half trucks, too) I would rather halftracks were more sturdy to promote light vehicle play.

Another argument for it would be the fact that, for example, Soviets have ptrs which are very effective against them anyway (Guards get their ptrs for free!). Also allied infantry (UKF, USF) can equip bazookas, piats on any squad so that is also not a problem to just equip them with it.

It would even out the infantry engagements a bit, too. Allies would have to equip some units with hand held ATs losing some of their AI capacity - an intended and important game design tradeoff. Now they can safely just ignore the need to purchase hand held AT or snares at that stage of the game. It leads to infantry engagements imbalance. Of course these are small details but they add up.

Finally, there are mgs which deal with halftrucks pretty well and they probably should.