Yes some HMG have 7 pop so I guess that the site I checked was wrong, stock mortars still have a pop 6.
Funny that you call it "my logic" because you posted a similar thing, that power level of unit is not enough to decide the pop and that unit with different role should not be compared.
Feel free clarify what factor decide Pop, in your opinion because so far you have not explained.
I said nothing about power level and how it tied to population. My comment was about how ridiculous to compare mainline to support weapon and saying "this" is more "valuable" then this.
I'm not a member of the balance team, so I could only guess, but the main theme with changes is how spammable particular unit should be and control of the lategame composition. Increasing\reducing pop by 1 is not a big deal, unless you start building more then 1 of that unit. And no, unit's value doesn't seem to be decided by cherrypicked stat and comparing it to other units from its class.
All this "debating" looks like JP4 holywar part 2.
Unit have roles and pop is related to that role. A mainline infatry is more useful than a support weapon that it takes up more Pop.
Once the pop of role/category is decided units are balanced according to power level thus an elite infatry has more Pop than mainline infatry although both are infantries.
Support weapons are an integral part of most builds, you can't just put an arbitrary comparison between those, because value is mostly decided situationally. Ofc if your opponent has no armor, AT gun would be infinitely less valuable then a squad of mainline, but what if he does? Same with indirect vs mainline against aggressive opponent compared to a campy HMG spamming dude. The list goes on.
The issue with the 120 lies with 1v1 and the size of the maps.
Most people who have dismissed the issue in this thread are either a team player, a casual observer or no longer playing, a soviet fanboy just taking the piss, or someone who doesn't even play sov or axis and therefore has no business commenting at all.
you kind of want go balls to the wall full aggression vs 2x 120mm, possibly full g43 mass offensive mode with no HMGs or no more then a 1. The fact that x2 120mm is not that popular at high levels should be an indicator that strat has major weaknesses. It is kind of cancer, but that's a lot of popcap invested, which is not capping, flanking, doing recon etc.
Both are related to unit performance within its own faction. They can be changed seperately to finetune balance. Which was done for the Firefly, because UKF is a more population cost heavy faction than USF.
Isn't population used as one of means to discourage/nerf spamming?
You're the type to say "p4 needs to shoot smoke too like m4 sherman" not taking into account that USF doesn't have a MG42 and USF is not super defensive. That's why USF has always been strong against OH, cuz smoke is good against defensive factions. That's why OKW is tough as USF cuz OKW is aggressive too
I'd say every medium can be compared to each other in terms of cost/performance within factional context, like P4H/P4J and m4a3/t34-76/cromwell. Same with any type of armor, except maybe a panther in context of TDs, because it is unique enough to make comparison iffy, yet the core role is the same. Even kv1 can be compared to t34-85, because the result of your comparison could be a deciding factor in what commander you pick, yet one is a "heavy tank" the other is a medium tank.
So why not ST and AVRE then? They both are heavy tanks with huge AOE, big killing radius and huge damage in the center, both stun vehicles in the blast radius (ST stuns radius is much bigger tho). Basically 2 oneshot long reload heavy tanks with enough differences to be unique by its own.
BTW I don't think AVRE is better then ST, even after the nerf.
Assymetrical design
They aren't the same units, not in the same faction, and not fighting the same enemies.
Plz, everybody stop comparing two units from either team as if they are the same.
ST has a commander upgrade that increases range. Does AVRE have it? Then why do you want one change to apply to both? They are different
why not tho? Imo the units are very similar. The only difference in opposition is that AVRE faces panthers with occasional shreks (not a good counter tho) and ST faces 60 range high pen tank destroyers. Imo this is like comparing p4 to m4 sherman. They face different enemies, they have different stats, but they are both generalist medium tanks.
if the range nerf on the Sturmtiger is going to stay then the AVRE should also get a 5 range nerf otherwise the Sturmtiger has no advantage over the AVRE
it is a more tanky and with veterancy (at vet 2) becomes way more tanky. ST also does dmg up to 14 range, while AVRE only up to 8
Old stats: (prices were nerfed for both, AVRE armor is 260 now, ST range is 35 at all vets + no sight vet bonus)
I didn't thought about that team game combo. A possible solution would be to give WC51 a CP requirement and taking back the crew nerf. That would make CP0 Cav Rifles possible and remove the team game exploit.
If the team game combo was the problem, why was it nerfed in such a way? Before nerf it could capture points by disembarking. Repairs were cheap. Now repairs cost 20mun and the unit can't capture points. Seems the nerf did a lot more than the removal of one exploit.
I highly doubt that jeep was nerfed because of one specific teamgame combo.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
