|
I like how the "Relief Infantry" functions since it is rather unique. Changing into regular, spawning Ostruppen will not make that interesting.
I like the concept behind "Relief Infantry" and I believe it should stay that way.
I mean it is not popular since many people decide that its it not worth the investment. Do not get me wrong but it is quite useful.
At least it gives Osteehr an opportunity to survive better against indirect fire through some compensation! |
I'd do it one step at a time not to overbuff it. Just holster and say 60 minu instead of 70. Play and see. IMO it could be enough.
It would make pople build more sturmpios and imagine 3 of them plus a rocketwerfer. We can't forget they can lay mines, repair, build stuff.
Yeah, it should be 60 ammo instead. No reason for to be higher than it needs to be, like all other standard issue AT handeld weaponry ranging only from 50-60ammo.
60 ammo for the package is justified! |
Holster the Shrek would be cool. No fucking way you should combine that with a ROF buff though.
You are right about removing the ROF increase.
I forgot to mention the option. 4/ That it has 1 Pzshrek but give an increase ROF. No holster.
That is what I meant to mention tough! Not meant to mix up with the option menitoned with holstering. |
I think tieing the Shreks to t2 is a good choice. Making the tier redundant is bad design and osts tech design is SUPPOSED ATO BE about each thing (building or tech) giving you things. Pgrens available earlier is a good change, but there should be some balancing factor for that. Otherwise it's just as much of a no Brainer as ptrs penals as far as "great AI unit and easy AT if you need it" that's not how Ost was designed and each tier should be valuable. Adjust the cost of the tier if needed but it should be built for AT imo.
Thank you for agreeing. |
I would personally prefer Ostheer didn't have nondoc AT weapons if they skip T2. The previous dynamic worked fairly well and I don't think introducing this skip is to the benefit of the faction design.
PGrens in T0 are cool, but Panzerschrecks in T0 undermines the balance on which T2 was priced. Either that balance needs to be restored or T2 needs to be repriced to reflect it's new, reduced value.
Failing that, I'd like to see some action taken to better balance teching T2 against skipping T2. The current dynamic heavily rewards skipping T2. T2 becoming off-meta would be a great shame given how good a tier design it is.
Pzshrek upgrade should become available either when T2 is built or when Battle Phase 2 is researched.
In that way, you must build the base at some point!
Maybe that is a balanced solution. Locking upgrade behind tech or base! |
|
It is not 400 MP and 50 fuel.
It is 200MP and 30 fuel The Scout Car. It is somewhat worth it. Considering also its timing.
Even then if not for the Scout Car. The Pak40 is worth it! |
I don't think the Ostwind's price is even relevant.
The problem is you no longer need to build T2 if you're not using the Ostheer lights. Panzergrenadiers have your anti-light AT duties covered.
Previously, if you chose not to build a 222/251, you'd save yourself 200 MP 30 FU.
Now, if you choose not to build a 222, you save yourself 400 MP 50 FU.
Opening up this T2 skipping route hugely increases the opportunity cost of Ostheer's T2 units.
I mean that is a choice.
You can not simply force a price increase when the player risked not using light vehicles to take advantage of territorial control. Even, then not using T2 is a risk also.
It should risk rewarded and risk unrewarded. If player decides skipping T2.
Increasing price would mean otherwise! |
Great point. While we're at it, let's also give Wehrmacht a fifth man upgrade that they can get at around minute 5.
Fair and square!
5 man Wehr is simply not a good idea. Maybe something different from UKF but not the same. |
|
People demanding nerfs when it is clearly not OP.
Nerfing as their only solution rather than seeking improvements!
No wonder it has been shifting the game most of the time!
The only question one should ask themselves, is.
Is it (the unit in question) viable or not?
Simple question, applicable, judging better the units capabilities in game.
Nerfing is definitely not the solution to all the problems! Just adjustments & improvements. |
|
Why do guys think the price should be increased?
I mean I think the price is fine/justified. I mean there is already TDs and AT weaponry by the time it arrives. I do not really see why it should be made more expensive when its main focus is Infantry and not Tanks.
I think Centaur should be made cheaper to the way Ostwind currently is in order to make more usage of it. I do not see why it should be 100 fuel now that it is on par with Centaur.
Making it expensive for both I think is a bad resolution.
Both Centaur and Ostwind, should be 90 fuel.
If you dont have AT, then that is clearly the players fault if you cant counter it because you went inf only.
Why make it higher than the price of T34 which can clearly do the role against both inf and tanks. There are even TDs, even doctrinal that costs 80 and 90 fuel. The USF Doc Wolverine and the UKF Achillies both costing 80 fuel.
Why increase their price, makes no sense really!
IDEAL RESOLUTION
for both UKF Centaur and WEHR Ostwind
Both set to 90 fuel. It is fair and sqaure. Bingo!
Improve both UKF and WEHR gameplay!
We are all happy then.
No reason to make it 100 fuel when it has only 1 capability, infantry mainly. Can be countered. It does not counter mediums at all!
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
