Profile of Tiger Baron

Evening out the power spikes is a good idea. That means nerfing USFs early game, yes but it also means buffs to their late game. A meatsheild upgrade for the Sherman seems like a pretty good option, all things considered.

It's the most logical way to go, if you ask me and a lot more other people.

However the 76mm Sherman is not really a meatshield tank, it's armor is only a bit improved around the turret I believe but that's about it, a Jumbo Sherman would be the actual meatshield.

A 76mm Sherman would actually just mean the USF would rely less on meatshields, since their tanks main workhorse medium tanks would be better able to take on heavier enemy Armor meaning that the USF would rely less on the class cannon that is the Jackson.

So you will have 2 options presented to you, have 2 specialized tanks, those being the Jumbo and Jackson, or have 1 jack of all trades tank that doesn't excel at anything but can still prove to be useful with good micro and if you have about 2 or 3 of them.

Use Jackson. Low armour? Then use its range and not run it into point blank range of a Panzer4.

And stop talking about 76mm like it's not even in the game. M4C, M10 and Easy Eight are all 76mm guns. Should I say OKW got their Hotchkiss stolen from them while ignoring Walking Stuka?
Lastly, the fact that a previous game had stuff is no reason to have it in this one. Axis is not unfair just because it no longer has Jagdpanther. Even sequels aren't the same game.


Not relevant given that this is the past.

Then why should USF have meatshields if they can kick ass without them? If anything, this justifies them NOT having meatshields because they can kick ass at any stage of the game.

USF does not "need" more meatshield tanks. If a faction is prominent with glass cannons they should not have doctrinal meatshield units as well, certianly not non-doc. Which the OP is complaining about, so in his eyes it solves shit all.
You cannot compare with other factions because they operate on their own design, however similar it could be. UKF and Soviets having their heavy tanks is not relevant to USF.

If you want UKF and Soviet style meatshield gameplay then play those factions. You'd say the EXACT same thing if I made a BS demand like Pershing getting Elefant's range or no KT heavy tank limit (which Churchill and KV-1 does not have, mind you).

Don't what what the hell you're talking about now. A 76mm gun isn't going to turn a Sherman into a meatshield tank. If you're really talking about Jumbo, then you're off topic. Make your own thread on it?

I also know what's going to happen even if you get what you want. It's a balance nightmare just to test out, because you got another tank that's AT role in T4, and either too good and no one will get vanilla Sherman, or too terrible and it's a pointless feature. And even after that, you just have the question of what's the point of two Sherman versions in T4 sharing with a tank destroyer, so people would just advocate the vanilla Sherman get deleted. Presto, you got feature/power creep.

So you want Relic to entirely revamp USF infantry- again- just to make them perform more similar to other factions, and just so as to justify adding another unit- and in the case with that's not actually created, into the game. As non-doctrinal. To do what Jackson already does but with the armour of a KV-1.

Yeah, that's not going to happen.

You already lost the argument when you said the Churchill VII has 110mm of Armor.

The USF should not stay an Army with OP infantry and shitty tanks, you not agreeing with that is an entirely different matter. The balance of power should be distributed all around and players should not be limited because of Relic' shortsightedness.

I am not going to further argue with a historical illiterate and balance know it all.

This discussion is over.

So make even more further changes to other units, just so one change would make more sense?

You're confusing armour and armament. The latter you have not one, but four options. USF doesn't need a fifth just because someone wants to stick to Shermans.

In terms of armour, I believe the COH2 Churchill variant is about 110mm think, a smidge above the Jumbo's 4in. KV-1 has 90mm. If we're going to make them scale, then Jumbo would have to perform with the damage soak of Churchill. Which means hideous imbalance given what USF has. You're better off letting them make King Tigers.

I don't even know what the hell you're talking about.

Back when the USF was the Allied underdog it had shit everything, no terminator vet 3 for Rifles, no mortar, no nothing, they were an extremely micro intensive Army with shit almost everything.

And their tanks are still shit, this time around however they have superior infantry and support compared to everyone else.

And before the Pershing, talks of the Jumbo and up-armored 76mm Shermans were still going on.

And I still support the idea of having an upgrade to upgun the Shermans and getting a Jumbo in the game via a commander for the USF, the USF just needs more meatshield tanks in order to protect their Jacksons which are very fragile glass cannons on tracks, and the Pershing doesn't really fit that role, but a Jumbo would.

As far as the Churchill goes, I am not sure where you got your information, but the Churchill variant in the game, the Mark VII had 175mms of armor, that's more than the Tiger tank, you can read more about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_tank#Tanks

Of course there is info on that outside of Wikipedia but I'm just too lazy to go get it.

The Churchill Mark VII was the most heavily armored Allied tank of the entire war I believe.

Anyhow, both Soviets and UKF have their meatshield variants of tanks already in the game, Brits have the Churchill, and the Soviets have their KVs so I don't see the problem of nerfing the USF infantry and giving their tank force a bit of a buff in order to balance things out.

I removed all T0 MGs to allow an infantry focus game for at least minute or two. Personally I do not like T0 weapon teams. The kubal and bren are fine seeing the will die in the first sign of AT.

It is possible to make the trench into a mortar pit but I did not want the two overlap. So adopting the short range mortar allows enough difference between the two. Though the short range mortar may need a price reduction because 260 is quite alot. Perhaps 220 or even 200 since they do have less range.

Yes I noticed that and agree with it.

I'm only pushing for the MG34 to be Tier 0 due to the British and Wehrmacht both having T0 MGs, I'm fine with no one having T0 MGs/team weapons.

Wait did you add the 2-inch mortar to the British or something because I think I've missed that then.

I just hate having static in-direct fire units which both sides cry against, that's all.

I almost always need in-direct fire but the fact that the mortar pit is going to cost me pop cap and manpower after the fighting has went far from it forces me to not build it, and I certainly use the Bofors less than in-direct fire, I often times capture mortars left on the battlefield instead of building the pit.

Seeing as you removed the MG34 from the OKW's HQ I see no reason to remove the requirement which I would have suggested, it's for testing purposes, I wanted to see if it would be truly as OP as people claim it would be if it was in the live game, so far I have no such luck of being OP with a Tier 0 MG in my mod.

The other suggestion I wanted to make was that of replacing the mortar pit with a mobile mortar squad while transforming the pit itself into a garrisonable emplacement, something which Svanh and Planet Smasher already did, I used their work to base off my own mod and for now it's working out great if I'm honest.

Axis no longer have a cause to whine about long range OP mortars that gain vet in like, half a minute, Brits have a mobile mortar and they are still unique, everybody is happy and satisfied.

Cheers.