Profile of achpawel

My eyes are open, they just don't see a good argument, just a dude in denial.

Just remember that the post started with the idea that CEs are too weak and should be buffed!!!

what you preffer does not dictate balance. the numbers themselves do. pios do more. pios cost more.
tell me, objectivly, if combat engies had increased line of sight, would they be better, worse or the same as they are now (no other changes, just increased sight). if CE could build bunkers, would they be better or worse? like i said, no "well buit" just yes or no.

Sandabags - they were given to pios because grens didn't get them. Ostheer got punished because cons and UKF infantry can build sandbags but grens can't. As a sort of comforting gift pioneers got this ability just to make sure it is more difficult for ost players to build them. Now you are saying that because grens can't get sandbags, their engineers should be more expensive!

Same with sight - there was a problem with mgs - they got nerfed because they were able to block most maps too easily. Pios were supposed to help them early game to make it possible for ost to survive and not get their mgs overrun as grens weren't able to capture or hold territory on their own. Instead of buffing grens or mgs they decided pios will have more vision to spot for them. Again, you want to punish the whole faction for those abilities they got instead of proper buffs somewhere else (for example, UKF mgs from tier 0 just got better vision and they don't need a spotter).

pios were given the ability to build sandbags years after not having them, for nothing (no accosiated nerf, just gifted the sandbags) thats not a nerf to the faction, thats a buff to teh faction. and regardless of how you think sandbags should be allocated, pios have them and it is part of their kit which is included in their cost.

No, it shouldn't. I'll give you an example of cons. They cost 240mp. They can build sandbags, they can oorah, they can throw flame nades, they can throw at nades, they can build tripwire mines expecially deadly to 4 men squads, they can merge allowing support weapons and e.g. engineers stay longer on the field, they can finally become 7 men and get a discount when reinforcing per model after they are 7. I'm not even trying to enumerate all the goodies they can get through doctrines.

Grens at the same time can only build a bunker (150mp - nonsense), have a nade, have a snare, can be upgraded with mgs.

If my maths is ok that is 8 very useful abilities to just 4 (one completely ridiculous - bunker). It probably means cons should be 60 manpower more expensive than grens using Your logic.

except it is part of their kit and thus part of the discussion with them. its something they can do and CE cannot. cons being able to merge is a conscript discussion and a trait that gets brought up when discussing cons as bunkers are for the units that can build them. you cant just decide what is and isnt relevant, thats not how this works. (i assume you mean reinforce and not heal, because outside a few commanders soviet do need to retreat to base to heal)

I wish balancing units was as simple as you say - unfortunately it isn't. I hope my example with cons shows on what kind of cherrypicking adventure you are. How can you suggest pios should be more expensive because of their abilities and at the same time not see so many Soviet units that get a lot of cool bonuses and abilities that are completely not reflected in their price!?

and i like how you are trying to discount bunkers as a faction feature but arguing against soviet russia being able to field a squad slight cheaper than its superior counterpart...

Because it would be enough if grens OR engineers build them - you can't spam them like soviet mines.

they DO MORE so theY COST MORE. you pay more, you get more. i dont know how you are not understanding this.
im even more confused as to how soviet have always had cheaper cons but now its destabilizing the late game, 6 years in. 30mp does not go that far. its a con and a half.

I explained it alread many times - lategame capping and repair advantage! Because you can just spam them to sidecap or recover vehicles for very little manpower. It was very visible in the last tournament. Soviets are the last army where you can say that if you get more you pay more. Remeber that their engineer capabilities to repair stuff, detect mines, lay mines are the same.

OKW has base repairs that is approximately cost equivalent even to CEs (15 fuel for 70 MP) and has a base repair of 9, compared to 11,x of the CEs if I recall correctly. This functionality is the second pio squad that OKW usually does not buy and frees the actual Sturmpioneers for front line duty. These repairs are static, but also do not bleed and they are easy to micro, especially in team games since they do not take up any coordination or micro with your partner.

Thx for the info but I'm really aware of it. Even with this extra repair option it doesn't mean CEs should be that cheap. It doesn't bleed you, but it can't cap and you must retreat your vehicle and give up battlefield presence. Often it is impossible to retreat when you have a crippled engine. Generally comparing OKW and Sov in this respect is difficult as they are totally different. I'd say that ostheer pio should be simply cheaper or CEs more expensive. To me, their battlefield/repair performance is absolutely similar and there shouldn't be 30mp discrepancy in the cost.

So you'll have more very weak, unvetted squads that can't vet up due to being decimated in mid/late game by vet2/3 squads with weapon upgrades.

Also, if its so good, please provide replays proving it.

You know allied unit is perfectly fine, when even snek doesn't find it "problematic".

They can fight exclusively within first 3 minutes of the game, the moment other infantries get to vet1 or weapon ugprade, its just roflstomp.

If you don't agree with it, provide a replay that shows otherwise.

For now, we have a replay proving you are completely wrong to the point where your further attempts to paint them as too strong only paints a picture of you being a noob beyond recovery.

Provide a replay or stop embarrassing yourself if you want anyone to take anything you say seriously in the future, otherwise you'll become 2nd thekingsown.

I hope you're not writing about yourself.

You keep repeating combat stats, which just doesn't make any sense.

There are a lot of replies from the last tournament when axis lose when their tanks get damaged and, especially OKW, can't repair it in time because they need to rebuild their engineer unit (300mp) and Soviets can buy 2 for 340 at the same time.

I'm not emabrassing myself. On the contrary, I feel that seasoned forum members embarass themselves by simply trying not to see the fact that 170 for an engineer squad is simply a bit of a balance problem. Instead, they try to prove that CEs have poor combat stats.

The retreat function is ok, I think not being able to move backwards and having no gun shield is a bad combination.

True. It can get you killed if you linger on a tiny bit too long before retreat. With rak one needs to retreat slightly earlier than you would with infantry units. But now thanks to increased range it should be less of an issue.

I like your 5 man AT gun suggestion.

Thanks. I'd implement it asap as ZiS is just too potent and Pak gets decrewed too easily compared to other ATs, especially in relation to its price and in connection with 4 men ost inf squads.