Profile of JPA32

what a bunch of #¤&#. Thx for tailoring to the elite 1% balance team.Thank you very much.

I can't help but read this in the most sarcastic self depreciating voice. I really hope that's what you were going for.

Either way, it's a great OKW buff that they desperately needed.

Hey everyone. We're aware of current issues with last week's balance patch and are working to address them. We had hoped to get this out today, but need more time to address everything. I plan to update everyone when it's ready to go live. Thanks for your patience.

Will this upcoming patch also address the Map editor (Worldbuilder) crashing over 100 different various problems such as using the Ruler or adding building damage, or refreshing spawned splats? This makes creating and editing maps very frustrating if impossible.

Also will a fix come to the fact that Custom Games cannot be spectated? This and the formerly mentioned Worldbuilder problem have been happening since the 64 bit update and there hasn't been any word that these have even been acknowledged on Relic's side of things let alone are being worked on.

I'm sorry you've been thrown straight into the fire here post 64bit and balance patch updates back to back. We know it's not your fault and we appreciate the continued communication.

I imagine for OKW the changes are going to be to Spec Ops to modify Radio Silence (Potentially to the ambush camouflage idea?) and Breakthrough for teamgame players since it's just objectively the only real choice most of the time. Other than that most OKW doctrines are in a pretty good spot and provide unique and interesting dynamics.

As for USF the only real doctrine that's objectively outclassed right now is Rifle Company since it only provides low impact and/or redundant things that other doctrines provide. Mechanized (even post-nerf), Armor, Airbourne, Urban Assault, Tac Support, Recon Support all have their own merits and are all worth using and provide significant upsides. Infantry Company is the premier team game doctrine I believe (I could be wrong I don't play teamgames but that's my assumption) so I guess that just leaves Heavy Cavalry as a bit underwhelming now? Rangers can be gotten in Urban Assault with a better toolset around them. RFD is good but can't carry on it's own, and the Pershing is so-so, Smoke is abundant in the USF arsenal and combined arms is very expensive.

Do Sweepers have a new icon for the unit card with sweepers or is that just an additional weapon icon being placed above the equipped weapon blocked by the bottom of the unit card?

Also am I dumb? I don't understand the second picture. AP Incendiary rounds icon?

Can't wait for patch!

4 things

1. You're massively understating the value of the concept of so-called "low density units" they do not stop existing just because something else is built later that is on the field that is bigger than them. They can still provide value in other facets of the game or even against the bigger threat if they aren't the primary source of value. The problem comes in building the wrong answer to a unit, or not building an answer at all either in response or pre-emptively which you can use your gamesense to figure out what it is you should build to counter what. You're not going to build a tank destroyer to counter an infantry blob right?

2. Your idea of no pop cap would result in games with infinitely too many units fielded by both teams resulting in the aforementioned problem of "stick tank in, poke, repair for 5 minutes" because there would be too much shit to actually break through and make a push in the late game. Without an early game mistake every game would turn into the equivalent of 4's on 1's maps. No one wants to play that. That would be awful and ruin the game because if you don't keep up with your opponent to a point where you can comfortably defend against anything, he will run you over with his numerically superior number of units which isn't particularly skillful nor interesting as opposed to the concept of using a limited number of units and jumping on advantages created via the way you've used your units to outplay your opponent.

3. There is opportunity cost in waiting for Heavies. Sometimes the cost is too great because you're actively not using your resources now to win and you're weakening your overall position in the grand scheme of the game and in the short term by letting go of applied pressure in a winning situation. If your opponent realizes you haven't built a tank yet because you're saving for a heavy, he will build a tank destroyer +ATGun and now you've suddenly lost your advantage for no particular reason because you subscribe to the fallacious notion of "unit density" instead of "I want to win the game".

4. I understand what you're trying to say, but the fact of the matter is that you're not quite grasping some important concepts that go into how you build your army instead relying on a very small conceptual subset of information that might be true in a vacuum, but not in practice. You should really heed the words of not just myself, but basically everyone else here trying to explain why what you want to do just won't work properly. We're not trying to be mean or shut you down for no reason, it's just that your idea is too narrow in scope to function correctly and would fundamentally break how units and the game work for what ultimately wouldn't be an improvement in anyway.