Can commanders who received engineering structures (bunkers, tank traps) get a barbed wire field? Please.
The one that slows units? It seems it causes a lot of unwanted side effects, I'm afraid. Same reason Deep Mud/Snow doesn't exist on maps anymore.
I think it's unlikely that's coming back, unless there's some way to make infantry path around it unless specifically instructed to go through it (And if it didn't affect retreating infantry).
G43 on Grens still suck balls honestly. Especially with new buffed PPSH for cons.
I mean, balance team either need to just keep G43 only on PGs because they are good on them and give grens different upgrade instead of G43 or stop being afraid of making G43 strong combat wise on grens.
Its funny to see how vet3 G43 grens are loosing to 1 bar vet3 rifles and almost losing to bolstered tommies (without guns), while vet 3 PPSH cons are able to beat vet 2 Obersts.
I think part of it is that the G43 upgrade, while being geared mostly for close-range, is still a fairly "universal" upgrade, in that the squad still has effectiveness at all ranges. Riflemen already have that same design, and due to being more expensive, will pretty much strictly be better than G43 Grens.
In comparison; the PPSH upgrade is strictly a close-range package (and Obers are a long-range focused squad), so PPSH cons being able to beat a "better" squad by taking advantage of their preferred range is fairly logical.
I agree that Gren G43s kind of just need scrapping, and a different design for that upgrade be considered. Honestly; a suggestion someone made that they could become a Light Infantry squad with a single JLI G43 (Or a weaker version, with a lower crit HP%) is possibly worth considering, though I don't know the balance implications of having both a Light Infantry squad and a Sniper. (I'd argue that all factions should have both, or one or the other nondoctrinally, however.)
Why has all non linear teching been removed. Ost and Sov now essentially have linear tech. All the risk of USF non-linear teching has been removed. Only OKW and Brit has somewhat of non-liner teching but for the british it's just essentially the same thing as doctrine choice. WHy????
Non-Linear Teching is not ideal, sadly. Linear Teching is a better fit for game balance, as things are currently designed.
Ideally all factions might have a teching system similar to what UKF are "meant" to have, choosing between a couple of "paths" while teching up... but there aren't really enough units per faction to make locking some out with non-linear tech choices viable.
For example: If path "A" for a faction contains the MG, AT gun, and Mortar, path "B" needs to have viable alternatives for these vital units along its path. You simply can't be without some tools and expect to be able to cope.
SOV could probably do it, if some of their doctrinal units were nondoctrinal, the DsHK, M-42, and 120mm.
As it stands, comparatively Linear Teching really is the best choice.
Jagdtiger with HEAT Shells and Panzer Commander in the same doctorine?
Vipper, are you wishing for a commander that could almost one-shot most Allies tanks? That's proper OP man. There are only combos of OP abilities stringed together. Love it, it's completely OP!
To be fair, in this proposed version of "Elite Armored" it seems that HEAT shells are just a pen-improving passive. In such a case, even if the Jagdtiger got them, it'd really not make any difference to the unit.
(I don't think it can even use Panzer Commanders anyway).
That said: I don't see Elite Armoured as needing either HEAT shells being changed in this way, nor do I see why it needs the Jagdtiger. The current HEAT shells in conjunction with the Panther or Jagdpanzer provide fantastic AT power already, albeit at a munitions premium.
I would like to see the Sturmtiger either changed to be less of a meme, or replaced with something else in the doctrine, but I can't really see the wisdom in giving that commander more AT power than it already has... it's already incredibly heavily geared in that direction as it is.
(Also, unless they're the OSTheer Opel Blitz', I'd rather have the 221/223 than the Fuersturm Blitz, though I would like to see the 221/223 improved/reworked a bit... it's currently not quite what it could/should be)
Tiger is the most terrible tank in game. But thats what they always do to good units - make supposed to be good units terrible and make trash units overpowered. Thats why all anti infantry tanks are worse at killing infantry than regular tanks - great example for that is the KV8 and Ostwind
Neither the KV-8 nor the Ostwind are bad at tackling infantry targets. The Ostwind chews infantry to pieces, and the KV-8 does fantastic HP damage to squads.
Can you refresh my mind on how this plays a role on the topic of "balance".
Not gonna lie, I'm really curious.
Well, you see; Soviet have to press "Reinforce" up to five times to have their mainline infantry at full strength, whereas Ostheer generally only need to press it three times. Soviet players therefore spend approximately 66.6667% more time reinforcing than their Ostheer counterparts (Possibly slightly less, as Combat Engineers also only require three "Reinforce" presses, It may be worth analysing recent tournaments to see precisely how many extra "Reinforcement" presses the average OSTheer player is saving relative to their SOV counterparts). 66.6667% is quite a large increase, so I surmise that this is the cause of much of the potential winrate disparity between OST and SOV, SOV simply do not have as much time to micro as OSTheer.
However, Osttruppen also require up to five "Reinforce" presses, which leads me to believe that Osttruppen are inherently a more balanced mainline infantry unit for OSTheer.
In conclusion: I agree with OP, we badly need a "Reinforce All" button to help improve balance between OSTheer and SOV, and bridge the massive micro gap between the two factions.
From my experience in playing this series since 2006 I can tell you one thing.
It doesn't matter how powerful a defensive unit or thing is, if it's static it's already dead.
Mobility is the name of the game, if you don't have that then it's easily going to get nuked by an offmap once found out, that or rushed which will end with the same result.
I'd argue that things such as the Urban Defence FHQ break that mold a little, due to being extremely quick (instantaneously) to construct, and having an inordinate amount of survivability relative to its utility.
Infantry does not suddenly lose ability to build them and unless you're playing top level 1v1(which clearly non of us does), you'll have more then enough time to build and fortify all you need.
Not during the early game, or the early-midgame, when you are constantly under attrition. This is also the stage in which MGs are most effective, which is what the thread is about. The original post is talking about attacking into MGs being difficult without the benefit of green cover sandbags, good luck building sandbags when an MG is already covering an area.
If we're talking wood-league play then the nerf didn't even do anything at all, even in the early game. The delayed sandbag speed hardly matters when players can't micro/strategise to begin with, not that bad players even really know how to use sandbags to begin with.
If you have so little downtime to not be able to build sandbags, explain to me, how do UKF sim cities are being made? Are they paradropped? There clearly is 30-60 seconds to build them, you'll find these 20 for a sandbag.
They don't generally get made vs competent opponents. Are UKF sim cities a big thing in 1v1 nowadays?
You're making excuses about a change that changed EXCLSUSIVELY early game, because you CAN and you WILL build sandbags when you're decapping and recapturing opponents point/taking back yours, so again, stop making up excuses.
It didn't "EXCLSUSIVELY"[sic] change the early game. If you're recapturing territory entirely un-opposed, then sure; you can build sandbags. You aren't capturing all territory unopposed though, and slower sandbagging means you are more likely to be interrupted, as I already stated. You will have an overall reduced number of sandbags throughout the game, in general.
You're also assuming you're exclusively capturing fully enemy-held territory, decapped territory being captured still leaves you with dead time.
I probably should have refrained from putting this in the balance section since this is an issue that faces all factions more or less, and it's rather just an annoying mechanic kind of like how sandbags were.
I've been doing some thinking and I appreciate how AT guns got a received accuracy nerf so they could be punished more readily when out of position. In light of this, I think adding a received accuracy penalty when MGs are not set up/on the move would be a sufficient change, since it punishes players for being caught out of position.
MGs have a large issue of being comparatively weak as the game drags on, though. The prevalence of yellow cover, and the massively increased DPS of infantry units (And, of course, the existence of vehicles, rocket artillery in particular) means that they're much less viable from midgame onwards.
Giving them further RA penalties, or anything of that sort, is just going to exacerbate that problem.
It changes absolutely nothing post early game, where you would be building sandbags while capping points.
Except Sandbags don't evaporate, they stay around until they're destroyed. If you aren't able to build as many sandbags in the early game, then you will have fewer in the mid-lategame, especially as after the early game you are going to be actively fighting over positions, leaving your units less time to be away from the action building sandbags.
The increased time to build also makes smaller openings less viable in which to build new sandbags, you are more likely to be interrupted before you finish simply due to taking longer. To say the increased time to build changes "Absolutely nothing" post early-game is outright false.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
