That viewpoint is simplistic to the point of being outright wrong. The Volksblob wasn't removed because it was underpriced, it was removed because it was a bad design.
So is a unit that requires its autofire to be manually aimed. It's not a case of buffing it or nerfing it: it's making the unit not require a disproportinate amount of babysitting compared to similar units.
If a unit is meant to be manually targeted, it typically gets a long cooldown so it doesn't demand constant attention. The ZiS's barrage ability is a good example.
A unit that requires manual targeting but has the fire rate of an autofire unit in a strategy game where attention is divided amongst multiple units is really bad game design.
It's so easy to fix, and it baffles me why people are defending it.
Volks got nerfs, because of bad Preisleistungsverhältnis, that is the meaning of it. Bad designs are allowed, but they need micro tools or handy-caps. e.g. PnzGrens with Panzerschreck. Expensive and overprices grenade in comparion.
Brummbär isn't good designed, it was when it had more range and more armor. The bad design of it was, that it wasn't changes with StuG E as doc-vehicle. Then the balance-team killed the unit, destroyed the tank-play and overbuffed alliis AT-guns. Having same same pen, more or same crew but fighting versus stock-units with less range. That is bad design. Overall OKW and Brits are bad designed as a hole fraction.
So giving Brummbär same cool-down as Zis? OK, that is a buff. That is also a good target of Preisleistungsverhältnis. Simply compare the Price/effect and the counters. There isn't much germans have doesn't need more micro than enemeys stuff.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
