They are balanced but they're balanced in a pretty dumb way, IMO. Their high vet performance is crazy bonkers, but it's mitigated by their high cost and the (pretty severe) difficulty of keeping them alive for long enough to get there.
I think they would make much more sense thematically if they came out strong, but did not gain much from veterancy. After all, these guys are already supposed to be elite. What are they learning in this battle that the hadn't learned in the hundred battles they'd already fought? MP cost would have to be reduced and survivability increased to make this work, but I think it'd feel much more fair for everyone involved.
I agree. The whole design around them is flawed. They come late came already, but start off pretty mediocre until they get their vet. Why?
Might as well rename them uberlate soldatens. One of the reasons why rifles and volks are so good is because they scale consistently in the game. Obers go from near useless to OP as hell. There needs to be a middle ground for them.
Consistency is better for the balance. |
|
Ost just needs better vet. The infantry themselves aren't too bad, but they don't scale very well late game.
Grens hold up for a bit, even better with the LMG upgrade, but after rifles and sections hit vet2/3, they become completely useless.
PGrens are just way too expensive, but they can at least deal with vetted rifles and sections.
Solution: give grenadiers better vet bonuses. That's all. |
|
I think the Panzer IV could use -5 fuel reduction but that literally almost translates to nothing.
People are crying over trivial things. There isn't much of a difference when it's only 15 fuel.
That's like literally the cost of allies having to upgrade bars/zooks. |
|
The mechanized and recon commanders just need some slight tweaking tbh. I don't think it should be changed to be an alternate heavy cavalry commander. |
you have vet 3 rifleman no need to go for rangers imo..but i think rangers have 4 weapon slots so 4xbar would be better than thompson imo....also they are not as good as power house close range as shocks but axis dont have any lethal close range counter so yeah thompson maybe then
x4 bars.. is like 240 munitions just on 1 squad. |
Bazookas can be better in Axis hands against Allied armor than they are in Allied hands against Axis armor. Especially in games where IS-2s or Pershings don't exist.
But at the same time, Panzerschrecks are far more powerful in Allied hands than they are in Axis hands.
Uh, no. Panzershrecks are hands down better vs everything compared to bazookas. Anyone saying otherwise is just ignorant.
Bazookas reload 2 seconds (30%) faster than a Panzershreck while losing 50% damage and penetration. Sure, if the Bazooka fired twice as fast than it currently does, it would be worth it, but having only 2 seconds of difference while losing half the damage and penetration values isn't even worth the trade off. |
Since there seem to be allot of different topics running, at the same time, in this thread will try to address them one by one.
Topic 1 name:
Imo if the Soviet army is to have a cannon fodder unit, that unit should be to cheap buy and to reinforce and should have the name "Penal battalion" and not "conscripts".
"Conscript" is a good name for a mainline infantry and Penal battalion a better name for a cannon fodder unit both thematically and historically.
Penal battalion may have consisted by trained men including demoted officers but they where used in frontal assault so their training did not help them allot and sustained heavy losses....
The first Penal battalion saw action in Stalingrad 1942 and lost 630 men more than 2/3 of its strength in just 3 days.
This is just my opinion feel free to disagree with me...
You're right, but Relic knows basically nothing about actual history lol. It makes no sense for Volksgrenadiers to be better than Grenadiers when Volks squads were made from wounded veterans, elderly and teenagers historically. |
|
Because...
Lelic. |
That's a good catch.
I actually tested it myself with 3 Pershings:
- 1 Vet0 Pershing inside the Aura
- 1 Vet3 Pershing inside the Aura
- 1 Vet3 Pershing outside the Aura
If my intuition is correct, it seems that the Aura bonuses override the the veterancy bonuses. Thus, Both in-Aura units fired at the same speed, while the out-of-aura Vet3 Pershing fired faster than either in-Aura unit. None of the stats (aim time, reload etc) have a min-max variance. Thus, I believe you're onto something.
I think you should report it at the bugs section 
Yep, that's what I got from my testing too. I wonder if this also overrides any other tanks or infantry vet bonuses or if this is just a Pershing thing. |
its intented, someone explained it a while ago. it would totally be broken to have a pershing shooting 80% faster with more range and sight.
Right... must be intended for a Vet0 Pershing to shoot faster than a Vet3 Pershing. Logic. This community is lulzy.'
After testing it, I think I finally know what's going on. I think the combined arms ability is setting (not adding) reload speed to a flat -30%. This seems to override the -50% reload speed the Pershing gets at vet3.
So you lose about -20% reload speed when using combined arms with the Vet3 Pershing. |
Varuna
Aprofis
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
Heartless Jäger 
