Profile of Pip

I like your changes, they're generally pretty obvious improvements, particularly in the case of splitting the Pack Howitzer and Paratrooper abilities.

If you're removing Raid Tactics, instead of replacing that ability with the Pack Howtizer (This is arguably a nerf to the commander, outright losing an ability) I would instead bundle the Pathfinder and Greyhound abilities, and turn them both into CP0 buildables rather than callins (Though delay the Greyhound until a certain tech level is reached), and then provide Recon with some other ability to /actually/ replace Raid Tactics.

Incidentally, perhaps the Greyhound could be reworked into an AEC/Puma type vehicle, rather than what it currently exists as? Such a vehicle doesn't currently exist in the USF arsenal (Except arguably through some of the Stuart's abilities). Alternatively, it could be reworked into more of a "supportive" vehicle as follows:

The Greyhound could provide the benefits of the Pathfinder beacons, but on a mobile platform, allowing Paras to reinforce around the vehicle as though it was a halftrack (Though they'd still paradrop in). Perhaps it could be allowed to "Dig in" like the 250 HT to provide paths/paras with a mobile strongpoint?

I still despise the M83 cluster mines, but I won't advocate for changes there.




(How do "Reserve" Paratroopers differ from "Regular" Paratroopers, anyway? I know the Recon and Airborne Paras have different weapon upgrades, but you make it sound like there's some other difference between the squads)

A very important point indeed.

The average reaction time to visual stimulus is 250ms.

Add the server lag and you have almost a second, depending on your distance from the server.

Not taking into account PC lag, which varies depending on your monitor refresh rate and PC hardware.

200-250ms is for single-stimulus reactions, to my knowledge, so for most purposes in a game like CoH2 the average reaction time will be a little slower than that.

Yeah that's all well and good, but if the unit only needs a slight adjustment then changing it that much seems like an unnecessary risk. Just get rid of the damage reduction in exchange for health and see where it's at

Oh, sure, I'm mostly just theorising in case its decided the unit might want more in-depth changes. The HP/DR readjustment is probably enough.

Yeah I am too? You were the one who felt the need to explain it

You being snarky gave me the impression I was being misunderstood.

That would be by far the largest and most expensive unit with shared veterancy. Would be quite a change, though I do find it interesting

Its ostensibly a "support" unit, so despite the cost/size, I don't think its too unreasonable to consider it for Shared Vet... especially if any changes did reduce its lethality.

There's a difference between infantry getting more elite and logically becoming more accurate and harder to hit (becoming better at using cover, etc.) or a tank crew decreasing their reload time, and a tank suddenly being able to survive 5 shots instead of 4 or getting more armor. 99% of infantry does not get a health increase with veterancy, Grens being the sole exception.

We didn't invent most of the tank durability buffs, they are mostly leftovers from Relic (at least they gave the German tanks visual clues), and the new direction is that invisible modifiers are something that should be avoided as much as possible unless it's deemed absolutely necessary to balance the unit because they are not communicated clearly with the player. Which is not the case with the KV-1.

Would it be possible to have some of the "Dig in" sandbags appear on the KV1's track guards/front glacis upon reaching veterancy? If you DID ever decide to have it become more durable with veterancy, this would be a pretty good indicator of that occurring.