does it not need to set up first ? and has the same sight range?
Neither of these things matter that much. There are plenty of ways to get vision on the opposing MG (UKF's sniper and nondoctrinal Recon planes provide enough vision for this), and "Setting up" is something all MGs already have to do, why does it matter if it has to set up if once it does it can fire upon an opposing MG with no way for that opposing MG to retaliate?
Don't get me wrong. If you do think that every faction should work completely without a commander, I'm totally with you. I argued as I did because I took the more realistic aopproach that factions will not be reworked to that extend. If you don't rework them to that extend you have to include commanders to get it somehow balanced by promoting a handful of commanders to automatic picks (because they fill the blank spots of the faction). In an ideal game you would rework factions totally - as you suggested - yeah, then you are absolutely right, commanders should be just the icing of the cake which you can balance individually.
Looking at the current debatte at UKF where dev team already rejected the proposal to give UKF a real artillery piece beside reworked mortar pit (-> land matress) I'm quite pessimistic that it will happen ever.
Factions at least need the majorly important units/functions as standard, and shouldn't need to have a doctrine to access those, at least. Doctrines are perfectly fine providing interesting and esoteric options, but they really should not be necessary for a faction to have the basics.
A faction lacking these units (And likely a couple others I'm forgetting) leave a faction inherently broken against some strategies.
Imagine if a faction didn't have a Tank Destroyer/AT gun at all, unless they got one from a doctrine? If the enemy was expected to build any meaningful number of tanks, or if they went a doctrine with heavy vehicles, how could that first faction be expected to cope without being forced into their "TD" doctrine? Asymmetrical balance is great, but there are some things that a faction in CoH2 simply requires to function correctly.
Instead of a regular mortar, perhaps the UKF could instead get a nondoctrinal mortar HT of some sort, if the team doesn't want them having a "standard" mortar nondoctrinally? Ideally they'd have a 2-inch mortar mounted in the Universal Carrier, but that simply doesn't exist as a model, to my knowledge.
An alternate (And I think potentially interesting) option might be a new three-man "Forward Observer" squad, that could perhaps set up like the USF major with an antenna, and could direct mortar-like fire, and smoke, from the UKF base howitzers, in a mortar-ranged circle around the squad. This has a couple of inherent issues though, regarding damage/consistency with other usage of the UKF howitzers, and the fact that this "team weapon" can't be stolen by the enemy, unlike every other team weapon.
Sturm is imo a overkill when it comes to its role as anti building/infantry unit. Its effectively like killing a mouse with a sledgehammer. Its clunky snd absolutely unnecessary. If okw could field brummbär i would take that over sturm anyday.
As much as I'd love the Brummbar as OKW, I think it would probably be too strong for them... and people/the balans team are loathe to make OKW and OST even MORE similar to one another.
Conscripts are presently one of the best line infantry squads in the game, I think it's beyond the time of using them as an argument for other units being overtuned.
Ostensibly all factions SHOULD indeed be balanced to be perfectly usable, and without glaring weaknesses, sans-commanders. Commanders should only provide additional augments, not patch holes/provide core units a faction /needs/.
If commanders weren't gained through Microtransactions this would not be necessary, and factions could be balanced with use of a commander in mind, but the fact you don't have all options without paying money means either that Lelic need to hand out every commander to every player (and have another round of balancing/shuffling of units within them), or they need to provide every faction with a solid core foundation.
The issue with the former, even if Lelic were to hand out all commanders, is that leaving certain (arguably vital) units/upgrades in commanders means that those commanders will be vastly overused... as they simply have to be.
There is this little thing I like to do called thinking:
My thought goes like this: Sturm is slow and clunky to use but has great AOE and can easily nuke anything into oblivion if properly handled. Great veterancy amplifies the usage.
See?
A simple thought. Nothing fancy. No huge brainstorms or mental gymnastics. Just a simple mathematical equation waiting to be equated.
In even simpler terms:
UP - agility and price
OP - Cannon (+ vet)
Therefore, balanced. A nice bowl of OP and UP things. Not broken, not useless.
This is practically the definition of mental gymnastics. "An unit is balanced because it has vaguely defined 'UP' and 'OP' qualities that 'balance out'"
I'm not arguing that the Sturmtiger is over or underpowered, but this kind of "logic" is pretty ludicrous. An unit being overpowered in some areas and underpowered in others doesn't mean it's necessarily balanced.
See, it's easy. Do that for other units and you'll see that the game is quite well balanced.
Want to include the "what the unit is going against?" argument? You'll find that it's even more balanced than the crybabies on this forum cry and weep.
The real problem stems from the notion that this game has some deep and profound philosophy. The variables are complex as fuck but everything can be boiled down to a statistical analysis of win-rates of the general public (all of it, not just the "pros" which constitute a small percentage and have a vastly different approach to the game).
So, what, Live VSL and Ostruppen, along with old Fallschirmjager, the T-70, and UKF as a faction (Among many other examples) are or were balanced?
What are you even talking about with this "notion that this game has some deep and profound philosophy" rubbish? The balance team are making strides to ensure that all factions and units are viable (read: Balanced), what "Deep and profound philosophy" is required, exactly?
EDIT: "(devs) not very meaningful in terms of balance".... I agree to some extent, but it's still their game. If they wanted they could have made axis weapons do 100 dmg and Ally only 1 dmg. Nobody would buy the game, so they didn't do that obviously. Don't try to find meaning where there is none. It's a game with a plethora of variables. A final solution exists, and it's symmetrical.
You'd seriously argue that in a case in which all axis units did a hundred times the damage of allied ones that the Allied factions weren't underpowered, because it's "Relic's game"? The designer's intent or "vision" is completely irrelevant when talking about an unit or faction being under or overpowered.
Asymmetry and balance do not go hand in hand in the traditional sense. In less obnoxious terms:
Variables be crazy, we can all go fuck ourselves and take a big large dump on our visions of this game. Not our game to design.
An asymmetrical game is exceedingly hard to balance, and in some cases impossible to, but this does not translate to it being a completely wasted effort to attempt to balance it as well as possible. A game being asymmetrical does not mean that "balance" is something you can entirely ignore.
It is the Balance Team's "Game to design" in some sense, as they literally have Relic's blessing to produce balance patches to tweak how the game plays, and players of a game (i.e, the people who paid for it) are entirely at liberty to comment on balance.
The vast majority of big-budget AA-AAA developers are primarily motivated by profit, and to this end are interested in making a game/franchise appealing to purchase (Which in terms of a multiplayer game entails ensuring that it is balanced as best as possible)
Edit2: "pros" are useful in a fact that they can point you in the right direction. Since ther3 is no scale to call something OP or UP (as opposed to what?), the "pros" will always abuse units they FEEL are most useful. So in terms of the everyday balance, they are useful in that way.
Pros will abuse the units that ARE the most useful, not merely the ones they "feel" are the most useful. The units that win games for them. This often translates to that unit being overpowered, or the alternate options available being underpowered. This is precisely why the way pros play a game is often looked at by developers, because they know how to abuse broken mechanics/units/factions.
Well of course there aren't. This is an arcade game based on WW2. Sturmtiger was like that. It's not a product of somebodies imagination. It's a slow moving hulk that shoots nukes that wipe everything in the radius. AVRE shoots nukes as well, and it has better agility but lower Area of Effect and lower damage. The developers decided to include it and as such all the people calling it OP or UP need to cope with it. Unless you'll go develop your own game, with blackjack and hookers and no sturmtiger, then fine, but as long as it fits in the devs vision of the game, there isn't really anything that can be done. Same as how whereaboos call Calliope OP only based on it's survivability, neglecting price, timing and population. Or allyboos call USF Armour UP (mostly steam forum). Or whatever people complain these days behind the safety net of internet anonymity.
What does "OP" and "UP" even mean to you, beyond the actual definition of "Overpowered" or "Underpowered", because there are certainly over and undertuned units/factions within the game. Being "in the devs vision" isnt really very meaningful in terms of balance.
I mean, you've played Amilly Fields, right? Crossroads? Bayeux? Nexus? Crossing??!
We're not going to see another map like Stalingrad or the original Angoville maybe ever again in the official pool. I would argue it's a slow decline from the likes Wrecked Train and Beaux Lowlands but, I guess this is a thread about abandoned vehicles.
All of those maps do contain multiple important sightblockers, though.
Stalingrad in particular was a terrible series of corridors that made for very unenjoyable gameplay for most factions/types of units.
Because Relic made a mess of the Sturmtiger's design (although it should've never been added in the first place) and now we're stuck with it because there's no way to change core functions like animations.
No chance of it being changed into some sort of utility suppression cannon, or even flame spreader rather than an all or nothing squad obliterator, then? Wouldn't take any extra animation work, just changing the properties of the shells (And consequently allowing them to be reloaded and fired much faster). The AVRE could well become somewhat similar.
Or is the Balans team resigning themselves to it remaining pretty much as-is?
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
