DP guards provide tons of firepower. They are not LMG paras, but they still do tons of damage. AFAIK their dps is slightly better to mg34 Obers. In 2v2 I generally prefer lmg guards more to PPsH one, if I have spare munies and MP ofc.
My issues also go into how toxic this community, the community that patches the game, and some of the in game players, is.
I'd say that behavior moderation is quite loose. But some people are simply tired of bad, in their opinion, suggestions, mixed with a constant balance whine
1) So rephrase the weakness of USF in this regard. In 1v1s where USF players select a non calliope doctrine, they will not have a rocket artillery barrage if they need it.
SPECIFICALLY arranged teams give you the option of taking soviets as a teammate which does remove this weakness. The weakness being not having the ability to support troops with a rocket barrage.
3) The stats on each unit do not change, but the strategies and tactics do and some units are weaker when utilizing certain strategies then others.
1) USF have Scott which is better then rocket arty in 1v1. Rocket arty is not required in 1v1, unlike teamgames, while having a howitzer on wheels actually comes in handy to deal constant manpower bleed to the enemy.
3) actually good point and is why Brits are borderline op with sections spam in 2v2 early game especially vs OKW, medium armor starts loose value the higher the player count, same with some infantry like cav rifles, ostruppen, assgrens etc. BUT the game will rarely be balanced based on teamgames, cause reasons, regardless how much bigger teamgames player base is compared to 1v1.
I actually think that it might be a good idea for ISU and Ele to receive similar mechanic that JT has with its upgrade. Slow (perhaps a little bit faster then current JT, but still) in combat faster out of it. This promotes rotation and more careful positioning, makes dealing with it easier.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like JT is 'bad' because of the self spotting ele, which is completely broken combo on its own and should have a fate similar to OKW tiger with Panzer Commander
I already suggested improve stock damage of SU-76 to 160 when T4 is built. But lock SU-85 and katy further away in terms of timing and resources. Current pen and 160 damage is more than enough to fight against P4. While it still fragile "3 shots to die" thing. Good against mediums and lower, very bad choice against top-tier guys.Without AI it also could be easily counter by infantry and ATG. While smoke shot instead of HE barrage give few utility.
Problem of SU-76 is timing. T3 tier for soviets is barrier on the road to T4. While this position there is, no any chances to make SU-76 playable.
160 is way too much, especially with 60 range, perhaps if locked behind ability (+1/3 damage and 1/4 pen), but even this sounds way too drastic.
We already had this. Bad idea. Endless barrages of multiple su-76. Katies for poors. While potent to kill tanks. When su-76 got AI potent it become spammable. You can't counter them by ATG or infantry.
Back when this was a thing barrage was a different ability. Now it does more health damage, but has far less wiping potential. Perhaps the CD should not be equal to Zis', but sufficient enough to maintain utility (e.g. 2x longer then zis').
Patch notes:
Few words about AT and why it is considered crap:
Pen and accuracy change patch notes
Before the pen nerf SU-76 had 100% to pen OST P4 frontal armor at long range, now it is 88% which is like 9 shots out of 10. VS P4J it is pretty much on a edge of uselessness with 3 shots out of 4 (77%) penned before and now it is almoust 2 out of 3 (68%). And keep in mind that it is not 4 shots kill like zis, but 6 (!).
So we have 280mp 75 Fuel unit with barrage CD 3X longer then Zis' with unreliable pen and low damage model. Perhaps the answer is not to buff it to being outright toxic, so people could tell horrible stories on forums of su76 hordes cheesing everything on its way, but at least be viable, for example like JP4. JP4 is not a must have unit, but it has its merits, unlike SU76. Because you'd better build another Zis gun then this abomination.
JP4 is good for hunting allied tank destroyers. It gets camo and health with vet, has decent initial sight. Don't get why it has such a bad reputation. Also there are very few units that JP4 can't deal with reliably, since, only brits gets chunky bois. And since allied heavies fallen out of meta it became more attractive then before. Although it is a little bit expensive. Perhaps its armor and sight are to blame. Still a niche pick, especially if you are able to build a panther, but I quite like it in 2v2s
I've addressed that already, go read my post again, but this time last longer then just 1st sentence.
You are either extremely confused or don't pay any attention to what is being said, because you keep repeating points that were already covered and debunked.
Sorry, forgot that it is ill-advised to answer you. Won't make this mistake again
When you need doctrine to survive, base army does not work.
We've been there already, lets not go back.
there are penals and lots of doctrines with pretty strong (some may say over performing) elite infantry. Also last time I checked con reinforcement were 20 mp on base squad. If you don't like concept of doctrines you should play other RTS' then I agree that it is a shame that if you want to win you are almoust forced to pick certain doctrines with soviets, but con balance is not what you want to upset, especially without looking at grenadier's performance more closely.
About the t70 situation, people should look at t34-76 and how favorably it trades with its counterpart p4. Just to be clear doctrinal logic does not apply here, since only 3 doctrines have t34-85 with only 2 of them being playable.
think about it. why would u choose a ML20 with temp. debuff on verhicles..when u have better options in the commander loadout which are even better? why would u choose a static arty when your teammates have acces to mobile arty which cant be countert per click and you fill a role as 70 range wiper or other stuff? why would u go a ML20 and dont let your teammates choose much better option than this static stuff? u can do it...bit after the 5. ML20 gets destroyed and your teammates say: let me go arty...i have a mobile one...you can go other nice meme stuff...u go this way...becasue its much more efffective.
In teamgames its all about composition and play with the own strongness...not the weakness.
Even If I want to go ML20 it is a stupid decision, thus detrimental to the victory, because of recon + stuka on meta commanders. Keep in mind that there are a lot of SU doctrines with ML20.
Also the reason behind not picking ISU is the same why people don't pick ele with scope, recon and stuka - it is boring and cheesy.
I agree that it is a shame that if you want to win you are almoust forced to pick certain doctrines with soviets, but con balance is not what you want to upset, especially without looking at grenadier's performance more closely. 
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
