Profile of distrofio

Gunna suggest it again but TDs shouldn't be entirely rng nor should the completely invalidate armour. Reduce pen and add deflection damage. Then pen matters but volume of fire also matters. High armour works as does now against low tier units but effectively changes the damage negation of a bounce to a damage reduction against dedicated counters. This ensures both high armour units and TDs remain both viable and able to do their job instead of the current case of one being useless due to the other doing its job.

Exactly this, i agree with this too.

Recently i learned that KT had a hull welding issues, so after a couple of bounces frontal hull welds would break under pressure. Deflection damage could be really useful to balance lategame TDs vs a high armor heavy.

Now i need to ask. wich is the golden number for a deflection damage to be consistent, yet useful to allied TDs. For simplicity if a KT goes down with 10 pen shots, now with deflection damage, it should be something like 5 pen/10 deflect? or 5 pen/7 deflect (one is 50% dmg the other is 70%)

Also, do deflection damage cause critical failures? Like main gun damage or anything similar

Actually you're wrong, Katy scatter is quite bad on FoW but werfer will delete squads if you're close enough

All you need to do is park it behind a shot blocker for easy wipes

What you say sounds more like a shotgun rather a rocket artillery. Shot blockers cant be built on demand so its worth saying that a well hidden pwerfer hitting at point blank distance is a skill shot/play. That is also double the risk a katy has facing infantry and wiping them at even farer distance (and having multiple volleys, making a retaliation prohibitive)

I understand vippers perspective, so i might elaborate myself.

There is no point of making the building of OST T4 the source of the infantry buffs when all the other tech related upgrades to infantry are bounded to the Battle Phases, see grens and ostruppen lmg, as examples.
Therefore the point is to softly buff OST with simply moving the bonuses to BP3 rather than building T4 itself, mostly because the building demands a Pio squad in base and takes a lot of time on the most important OST timestamp, middlegame.

I sincerely dont know if it can be modded or implemented because putting those bonuses to a building sounded pretty complicated.

I agree with vipper that makes no harm at all on putting the infantry bonuses on the BP rather the building

I had this idea a while back that compares conscripts with riflemen and IS.
It is true that SU came up first to CoH2 and later on western front forces were added, therefore some designs were simply copied or heritaged. We all see that IS and Rifles have the same side tech upgrade logic. But on conscripts it feels odd, i mean they are not as strong in early game as the other two mainlines, therefore charging conscripts a pricey tag for their upgrades is extra unfair and unfun when the SU design premise is versatility and durability.

I though what if conscripts upgrades were bounded to T1 and T2 buildings rather than the side techs. T1-T2 prices keep being the same, so its an overall buff to conscripts in terms of resources but its a change in how SU players adapt with the tech tree.

So my first suggestion is simply bind T1 to molos and T2 to AT grenades. Pretty straightfordward.

I might consider opening another thread but T3 - 7man cons its too unconvenient compared to simply going T4, i am not completely sure but if 7 man cons upgrades were to be bound to T1-T2-T3 altogether instead of T4 the tech tree promotes the player to play with higher variety of early units that will pump upgrades into the mainline infantry. This kind of design should be worth discussing, at least from an ideal start and bring it down to a more realistic and balance implementation.

Anyways i hope you can share your thoughs about it and maybe correct me if im wrong or suggest an even better idea.

As far as I'm aware after Churchill nerfs it's now 20pop a tank. Croc is 24 and KT is 26

Considering how hard the KT bitchslaps all other heavy tanks (church and now nerfed IS-2 included) I don't think any change is in order.

Current FF+croc combo is already identical to KT+JP in popcap (both are 40). Guess who wins that match up...

I didn't know that jp4 could pen heavies as easily as FF or launch tulip rockets. Also croc is doctrinal and has triple de AI than KT. Lastly okw has a design far different than UKF, the closest match would be OST and Panthers are not as durable as a stock churchill so bad idea to compare factions to begin with