Profile of Mr.Smith

*semi-necro*

I' been abusing the hell out of this ability for the past few days testing Treadbreaker in automatch, for science. Out of the 10-ish times I tried the ability on good targets:
- I managed to make the ability fire 8 times out of 10
- I managed to successfully immobilize my targets 5-6 times out of 10 (accounting for misses, targets zooming out behind shotblockers etc)
- Even if the first shot misses, the second shot will slow the target for 5 seconds (i.e., I was wrong in my previous post on this thread)

The process I follow to make the ability work is:
1. Wait for the AEC to line the turret on the enemy target (and maybe fire)
2. Press "Stop"
3. Issue a move order
4. Immediately press "Stop" (again)
5. Activate the ability
6. Stand still, as you wait for both shots to fire
7. In the meantime, observe the ability tooltip. If it stays green-lit for too long, it means that the ability bugged. Press "Stop". Rinse & repeat.
(This also works for Smoke Shells etc 95% of the time, all the time)

It sounds complicated, but once you practice it for 4-5 times, it becomes automatic.

How about giving Soviets a unit that is both efficient manpower-wise and fuel-wise?

This is also a valid option. However, this might lead us to a new meta where we see nothing than T-34's spammed, 222-style. Especially given that T-34's can somewhat hurt both infantry and tanks (just inefficiently, currently). It might be fun for a while, but it will get stale and unfun pretty fast.

Also, this option might leave very little breathing space for T-34/85's. Ideally what we should aim for is more variety, not a meta inversion.

The whole idea with manipulating the price like that is to give Soviets a good way to spend their resources if they end up floating fuel. On a higher level:
- Axis will want to have to cut Soviets off the fuel, unless they want to be swarmed with T-34s
- Soviets will be able to spam armoured vehicles and still have MP remaining to buy supporting troops/weapons (in a similar way to the pre-rework float of OKW)
- The Soviet player will also have to make a strategic decision. Do I buy T-34's now, and potentially hurt my fuel reserves, or do I buy a different unit and put off T-34's for later?

Slight buff to MG. That's it.

This is an interesting idea, but let's think it through a bit.

First of all, I forgot to mention that:
- The DPS of T-34 MGs (Hull, Turret) is inferior to other medium tanks
- The T-34 cannot be upgraded with Pintle MGs (which can rotate almost instantly)

Having said that, DPS from MGs is inferior in many ways because:
- When moving, MGs suffer from both a moving accuracy penalty AND a burst length penalty (i.e., the T-34 will fire a short burst that will do jack-diddy to enemy troops)
- MG range is 35. This is equal to Panzerschreck range. At that point in the game when the T-34 comes out, I don't think it will end well for the T-34.
- Now, if you choose to suppress the Volks while dpsing them with the T-34 MG, guess what? Suppressed troops receive reduced accuracy bonuses (thus, your bullets won't hit them).
- If you choose to be running around like a maniac, the T-34 lacks pintle MGs which have easier time locking onto infantry.

I am aware that Miragefla proposed an MG DPS buff to T-34/76 for his mod. However, I am also aware that Volks Shrecks do not exist in his mod. Thus, in Miragefla's mod, the T-34 should have an easier time kiting infantry.

TL;DR:
- Problem: T34-76 is extremely MP-inefficient, given its late arrival.
- Meta-Problem: Soviets can't trade efficiently MP-wise in extreme-late game. Unless they pick one of the few valid late-game doctrines
- Meta-Solution: Give soviets a unit that is efficient MP-wise. But make it inefficient FU-wise, so that it can't be spammed too much.

- Let's assume that T34-76 currently performs like a 250 MP / 80 FU unit (debatable)
- Alter the cost of T34-76 and make it cost something like 210 MP / 100 FU (again, subject to debate)


This one doesn't need a very long introduction.

1. T-34 is currently UP

This is because of:
1. Its late arrival and
2. Its inefficiency MP-wise:
- When compared to other medium tanks that come earlier, and
- Especially when compared to late-game machinery of other factions (Allies and Axis), which are de-facto MP-efficient.

AI performance:
- Terrible scatter (horizontal and vertical).
- Slower reload speed.
- Inferior MG DPS (Turret, Hull) to other medium tanks.
- Unable to upgrade pintle MGs.

AT performance:
- Slower moving speed than peers (with Blitzkrieg factored in).
- 50% moving accuracy penalty (like most Axis tanks).
- Gun with the lowest penetration.
- Slower reload speed.

In short, T-34 is plain terrible in all fronts. Even more-so its late arrival. I don't think that its true performance has been really taken into account when pricing the unit.

2. (ignoring teching) T-34 should probably cost around 250 MP / 80 FU

If you compare the T-34 to other medium, generalist tanks:
- Generalist medium tank (Panzer 4, Sherman, Cromwell) MP-to-fuel ratio is around 3:1
- By the time T-34 becomes available, we have Panthers, Comets, etc (MP-to-fuel ratio is 2.8:1)
- The MP-to-fuel ratio for T-34 is 3.75:1

The 250 MP / 80 FU value I picked is arbitrary, but I based it on the following observations:
- Most people will agree that 80 FU is a good price for T-34 (you get what you paid for)
- Most generalist tanks' MP-to-Fuel ratio is 3:1
- T-34's can be still be used to drive over infantry, even if their guns suck (AKA the M10 effect).

3. What would happen if we priced T-34's at 210MP / 100 FU?

(This price is completely arbitrary; The lower bound is that the T-34 should not cost less MP than the T-70. I am open to suggestions though.)

The procedure behind picking the price is the following:
- Find the right MP/FU cost for T-34's (e.g., 250 MP, 80 FU)
- Convert some of the MP cost to FU, using whatever conversion ratio is considered the standard for late-game.

If we gave T-34's a decent price, Soviet players might eventually start building them without shooting themselves in the foot.

However, that's not good enough:
- T-34's become available too late in the game. The opposition already has better MP-efficient tanks on the field.
- Moreover, even a cost-efficient T-34 will not be able to keep up with doctrinal (sometimes no-tech) options that are more micro-efficient. Thus, pricing T-34s appropriately will not deliver Soviets from doctrinal dependencies.
- Finally, what is the reward to the Soviet player for teching all the way to T4? The Katyusha and the SU-85 are both great, but they are severely outclassed by their counterparts.

Idea: what if we made T-34's very MP efficient, at the cost of making them fuel inefficient?
- Soviet infantry (even Maxims) just doesn't scale into the late game.
- Soviets will require some unit that is efficient to recoup some of the MP bleed that is unavoidable. Let's give that role to T-34's.
- In order to prevent spam cheese, let's make T-34's cost more fuel, so that only players with good fuel control can exercise that option.
- Bonus: It gives Soviets a stronger incentive to capture fuel for themselves rather than to solely deny it to OST/OKW.

4. Why offset some of the MP cost to FU cost?

Currently, if you find yourself floating fuel late-game as Soviets, odds are you will never be able to use that fuel.

By attaching a Fuel-to-MP conversion gimmick to T-34, the Soviet player will almost always have something to build on all occasions.
1. Low on manpower? Throw a T-34 into the mix.
2. Low on fuel? Go for a support gun, engineers, infantry (whatever is needed)
3. Resource situation is ok? Buy/save for a specialist unit.

Options 2 & 3 basically mean "Play Soviets as you currently play Soviets" (because most people aren't building T-34's anyway). Option 1 adds a new avenue that will probably help us see more of that tank.

Besides, all late-game capable factions do the same to some degree (for their late-game units):
- OST: Panthers
- UKF: Comet (ever noticed that Churchill-based builds tend to sag a bit?)
- OKW: P4, Panthers, Heavies (KT, Command Panther, JT, etc)

5. FAQ (Why not...)

Q. Why not move T-34 back to T3. Wouldn't that solve the problem with the T-34?
A. In that case we would get to see:
- There would be an overlap between T-34's and T-70's, and most likely the T-34 would phase-out the T-70.
- T-34's will be rushed. This might, or might not create balance issues.
- T-34's would still not be built in the late game. For the same reason nobody builds T-34's in the late-game.
- It still doesn't answer the following question: "Why would somebody ever tech to T4, if you only get the Katyusha and the SU-85?". Thus, trapping the Soviets into the current doctrinal dependencies.

Q. Why not move T-34/76 to T3 and add T-34/85. Wouldn't that solve both the T-34/76 issue and the T4 issue?
A. Perhaps it would. However:
- It would not give Soviets something truly special for teching to T4 (just a shoddier version of OST T4).
- What do we do with those 3 doctrines whose main selling point was the T-34/85?

Q. Why not fix (X, Y, Z) about T-34, but not touch its price?
A. Reread section 4 carefully. Soviets simply lack fuel-sink options that other factions get from their T4. There is no point in having units in T4 that are extremely fuel-efficient, since there is no more teching to be done. You can't use that fuel!

6. Caveats (Soviet Industry, Lend Lease, etc)

If 210/100 T-34's become too spam-y, we have the following options.
- Bundle T-34's into pairs (420 MP, 200 FU for 2 T-34's) or triplets.

This suggestion might favour resource conversion doctrines too much (Lend Lease, Soviet Industry). Maybe propose a way to limit these gains?

I don't think that either change will reduce maxim/emplacement spam.

Maxim Spam? Feels like band-aid.
- There's simply no other alternative for Soviets. Thus, it will be slightly-less efficient Maxim spam.

Emplacement Spam? Feels like smokescreen.
- Sure, one of the abilities was nerfed, but that was the least potent one to begin with.
- Standfast & Repair Assembly untouched. (the real culprits in 4v4s)
- Counterbarrage is still there. (the big culprit in 1v1)

Shock Troop's RG-42 Grenade now damages buildings and does full damage to units inside buildings.

That's good news! The game's crappiest grenade by a huge margin will now be the game's crappiest grenade by a smaller margin.

Fixed an issue with the comet tank projectiles.

Uh oh! Comet projectiles were working just fine ever since the last major patch (was a ninjafix). I hope it doesn't break anything.