Maybe turn it in a Soviet self-propelled gun like our ideas for the Sturmtiger?
Siege mode becomes Artillery mode, gives a far greater range but instead of auto fire you have a barrage ability of a few shells like you suggested.
That would make it a unique vehicle and at the same time have a specific role to fill that no other unit can.
Trying to model the unit after ISU-152 is step in the wrong direction imo.
In addition the unit was far inferior in real life and there is little need of reason for the unit to compete with ISU-152 in game.
Imo if one removes the penalties, lower the CP to 12-10 and the price to 600-650/180-200 the unit might offer an alternative as early "mini" Super heavy, less powerful but more accessible.
The indirect fire support unit is the other option that could also work for Dozer (even brumbar).
Urban Defense Units KV-2
Apart from fact that this unit is not good for the commander as I have explained the changes made to unit are also in the wrong direction.
KV-2
In reality the KV-2 was more of self propelled gun providing indirect fire and although the gun of the same caliber as the ISU it was the M-10 and not ML-20 and was inferior. The unit become obsolete as soon 75mm gun become available to the German and it was a far less successful design than the ISU-152.
In game the unit has several difference from ISU-152. The idea of modeling the KV-2's after ISU-152 is problematic for a number of reason.
Comments:
Bugs:
The unit still gets a red icon over it while switching modes indicating a penalty although those have been removed.
(?)The uni does not have an option to attack vehicles in siege mode only to attack ground.
The idea of giving the same AOE profile as the ISU-152 is bad for number of reason. ISU HE munition have very low penetration and the chance to do AOE damage to tank is very low. KV-2 with an AOE 6 combined with the lower scatter be able do AOE damage to tanks far more often.
In addition KV-2 get 120!!! deflection damage when ISU-152 get half that, the value is simply way to high.
Further more KV-2 can fire behind shot blockers, has lower reload and has a turret that allow to better track enemy targets.
Finally KV-2 has increased range with veterancy to 80 which even longer than the Elephant.
When comparing the 2 units ISU is more difficult to use since it requires open space and can be flanked (although its rear armor is a bit high at 155) while KV-2 is easier to use and much harder to flank with 180!!! rear armor and a turret.
If one really wanted to follow the ISU-152 solution one would give the unit two types of munition maybe general purpose munition for tank mode and HE for siege mode.
The idea behind the vision penalty was that the commander would go into the tank to help with reload and thus the animation. Although the 0 vision in siege mod is wrong one could make use of the idea and animation with either making the penalty smaller (20?) or having the commander as an upgrade or vet bonus.
Replacing the vet 1 bonus is a good idea but "inspiration" is badly designed ability that promotes blobbing and allow PTRS Penal to protect the Tank very effectively. CD increases PTRS DPS vs Vehicles allot and sprint allow easier use of satchel charges.
The damage reduction at vet 3 is simply over the TOP, I am not sure why some many units are given that ability. Having a deadly 300/180 armor unit with effectively 1300 HP makes little sense.
Suggestions:
The unit in siege mode has a minimum range of 25 that is apparent to users especially since they cannot manually target enemy unit and can only fire on the ground. Maybe reduce that minimum range to 15? and/or give some indicator of that limitation.
Lower the rear armor value of the unit 180 is simply way to high for the unit
If the unit need more armor or HP that should come via veterancy since mobility should not included as vet bonus for this unit.
If the unit need addition firepower that again should come with veterancy.
Instead of trying to replicated the ISU-152 and creating another Soviet super heavy, reduce CP and price to lower level even than IS-2 and balance the unit accordingly.
Alternatively redesign the unit so that once is siege mod can fire a 3 shell barrage or give switchable munition to the unit similar to the Sherman (maybe for tank and siege mode).
...
Ml-20 fires poopoo shells that dont even hit near the initial targeting circle
Again this is incorrect Ml-20 shell are superior to LeFH and the accuracy is the same.
Ml-20 will destroy an LeFH with 2 direct hits, while the LeFH need 3 direct hits.
Use sandbags to protect you artillery pieces from enemy on map weapons and repair them when they take damage. If you want you artillery to fire more accurately to not fire into the Fog of War but recon the area you want to bomb.
Your post just made it seem like the ML-20 is straight up better than the LeFH because of better damage and AOE. While in reality this is mostly compensated by the LeFH firing more shells per barrage.
Not if you read it combined with the quoted text and values provides. Then it comes apparent that I am responding to claim that Lefh is more accurate to ML20, when actually the two units have the same "accuracy" (scatter) and are equal in that department, while the Ml-20 is actually more "accurate" due to higher AOE.
Yeah but LoopDloop has right. It's a big diffrent when all your models need to be behind a cover to move in camouflage or to have only 1 model behind a cover. That's a huge diffrence in a gameplay. Ambush Camouflage and Stormtroopers are in diffrent commanders so i don't see argument about overlaping so relevant.
I agree with the rest said about stormtroopers.
Btw shouldn;t the 5th model upgrade shouldn't include a stormtroopers?
There is a difference but point is that St.T need to bring something extra to the table like the anti cashes capability. Can we move on?
i know i know,but thing is they can't fight on their own,290 mp for support who is gonna lose every 1x1 fight and even more they don't prioritize damaged models,their only strength is sight,but do you really need it for 290 mp?they just weak choice and this is why at gcs2 tournament they been picked.....no one picked them lol
and yes bars are useless for them and very useful for you opponent because they just start dropping it from first died model
Judging a unit by its DPS is simply wrong and part of problem with balance approach.
Bars actually have great synergy with pathfinder regardless if they are carried by them or another unit because they spread damage to models allowing the critical kill to work more often.
Not sure if this the right place for this sort of debates thou.
...The main problem to me with Lefh is it's accuracy compared to the counterparts like Soviet stationary. Soviet Artillery pieces are so damn inaccurate its hilarious...
A simply case of the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.
ML-20 and LeFH have the same scatter values.
ML-20 does more damage and has slightly better AOE.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
