Profile of achpawel

This would just create confusion. Units like the panther, puma, Soviet mini AT gun, and some other are primarily geared to AT, but do have some AI firepower. It would become rather unintuative if the UI gets changed like this.

Agree completely here too. But there is a solution here too. With those units I would give them sitchable ammo just like sherman but with different stats. Panther could be more tank oriented (rather powerful AT round capability, but to shoot at infantry it could get some really weak HE round). I'd prefer those units to have an ammo change button rather than stance button. Would again look much better to people not used to the fact that large guns explosions kill much less than you would expect.

Hi,
would it be possible to make TDs and AT guns start with attack vehicles as their default stance? I would prefer them to be automatically switched to attack vehicles mode after they are built or recrewed. I wouldn't like them to have any signature over them then (this would be their natural mode). They could get the signature above them if they were in the infantry killing mode (I understand this could be more difficult to code).

In my opinion, such changes would make the game more intuitive, especially for new players. It seems quite a shock to
them to learn that those big guns can't hit a fly but shoot like crazy at every target in their range dealing zero damage.

I understand that the subject might have been discussed before but can’t find any old thread here.

They aren't, and have never been. Double ATG is so good at fighting off medium tanks that I consider it one of the main reasons players go straight for a heavy instead, now that heavies are viable. It's so easy to make a small mistake and lose a medium to double ATGs, so players choose the reliability of heavy durability instead. The target size buff is meant to make mediums better against ATGs as well as TDs, so messing with the TD accuracy (which would also make them worse against all other vehicles and buildings) is not a solution for the intended goal here.

My 5 cents. It is because some at guns are too cheap and number of at solutions too easily accesible. Originally, after you invested too much in the at departament, you would get run over by infantry. Building 2 at guns would make you super vulnerable to infantry rushes. It can still be done to ostheer once they buy 2 320mp 4crew members paks (that is 640 manpower and fragile crews). Unfortunately, Soviet ZiS can effectively fend off infantry on its own and has 6 men crew making it harder to decrew it. Thus, players don't risk much if they build it as it can help them deal with its counters. US at gun is just 270 plus they can equip bazookas on everything, even without tech they have some bazookas option. Double raks also don't make you that manpower poor and now they got extra crewmember. There are penals with satchels and guards with free at rifles. Hoorah at grenade cons, and snares everywhere. On top of that there are tank destroyers. Such density of at solutions that don't cripple your anti infantry capabilities much, means that mediums will always be easily killed. The solution would be to make sure at guns are at least 320 manpower and ZiS with all its abilities should be even more expensive or just have crew reduced to 5 plus anty infantry barrage moved to vet 1. Players building at guns should always feel it in the infantry combat department. On top of that those cheap squads should have some reduced bazooka capabilities to make players actually use those elite squads for AT duties again making sure they can't have the best of both worlds at the same time.

I simply believe you're wrong, since your arguments are running in circle and you have not shown evidence of your, quite outrageous, claim.

It is not outrageous - it is very simple. Not every balance thread should be about dps. Not many people are used to that. There is a lot of evidence to prove what I'm writing about.

You are a naked man on the streets, screaming the sky is falling and are greatly surprised why no one else agrees with you.

I feel quite comfortably dressed tbh And I don't really feel that NO ONE ELSE agrees with me. I think that if you are not in "let's buff the allies club" this is what might happen.

and there is the root of the problem. To you.

No to me - to many players who stopped choosing ostheer to play with as they are completely trash in comparison to, for example, Soviets. The cheapest in game engineer is one of those things that tip the balance.