Profile of Doomlord52

What the tournament?! Liar! In the 2x2 Masters Cup tournament, the USF showed the worst results. No one chose the USF mortar.

Firstly, the 2v2 Masters Cup was in late July, 2019; that's before the major "September 2019 balance update" which changed a lot of things, as well as several other minor patches. The WCS tournament ran between October 19th and November 17th, which places it after the most recent balance patch (October 8th). Since then, patches have only been to maps, not units/factions.

Secondly, the 2v2 Masters Cup doesn't have any detailed stats (that I'm aware of), unlike WCS, which has detailed breakdowns. Those stats show that the USF mortar was, in fact, built 10 times (in 10 games) out of a total of 49 games played.

By comparison, the OST mortar was built 8 times (in 8 games) out of 40 games, and the Sov 81mm mortar was built 6 times (in 5 games), and the 120mm was built once, out of 50 games.

That puts the USF mortar at 20.4% build rate, the OST mortar at 20%, and the Sov mortars at 14% - meaning the USF mortar was the most popular mortar.

How exactly did you say. Axis fans always know how to play against mg42. But they themselves constantly cry and scold Jackson in tears, calling it OP.

It's best not to look at the game as "axis fans" vs. "allies fans"; the vast majority of good/top-tier players play both sides frequently. You'll notice that of those top-tier players, none (or at least, none that I know of) would suggest that the MG42 is OP - they'd say it's actually pretty balanced. While it does a ton of suppression (which it needs to, to keep infantry from closing on Grens, which are awful at close), it does very little damage.

Meanwhile, while its not universally agreed upon, the M36 has received far more complaints from all levels of play - as is evident by the nearly weekly threads about it gaining 100+ replies.

No problem, buddy, what do you think of Sander's concept?

The actual suggestion:

- Puma to T2, no BP3 requirement. Total cost (T1 included) would be 120 fuel, which is now similar to OKW. Should be fine timing wise. Puma now has stock smoke;
- Panzer Tactician replaced with Stuka Smoke Drop to reduce synergy of light vehicles with the Puma;
- Osttruppen Reserves replaced with the Sd.Kfz.251 Mobile Observation Post package as it fits well with the mobile defense theme, as it'd allow you to spot enemy build-ups or assaults early;
- Command Panzer IV replaced with a version of Hold The Line! to further prevent the old Puma into CP4 synergy (beyond the tech requirements for the CP4 already in place) and to give the commander a more unique ability. I considered adding the Panzer 4 ausf.J (in line with the western reinforcements theme) but P4J + Puma would probably instantly make it a top meta pick.

I don't think this would fit too well, honestly; out side of specifically the puma change.

#1 keep counterattack tactics, it's a good inexpensive ability (no change in the suggestion).

#2 The Puma changes are good, as it gives OST a good LV counter.

#3 is a decent change, but I'd rather see Panzer-Tac fixed rather than simply replaced (i.e. making it a directional targeted ability, similar to USF sherman smoke).

#4 The HT Mobile Obs post just doesn't offer all that much utility compared to the alternative Flamer upgrade. You're essentially locking up a 251 as well as a commander ability slot in exchange for the opportunity to spend muni on an LOS ability that's essentially a copy of PF's flare. Except nearly 2x more expensive, and also not attached to one of the best infantry doc-locked units. The cloaking is also somewhat pointless, as the detection radius is huge (20m, iirc), so when it is used, it's placed behind shot blockers.

#5 I think that the final ability, "Hold the Line", would be quite underused. At 250 muni (if it's a copy+paste from UKF), the often muni-starved OST player simply isn't going to be able to afford it all that often, and even then, the UKF 'original version' of this ability isn't used that much, either.


If the intention is to keep the doc (mostly) limited to low command point abilities, I'd replace the #4 HT Mobile Obs with either an MHT or Riegel AT mines, and #5 "Hold the Line" with either an offensive off-map ability (Stuka Dive/Frag, etc.) or a much less expensive 'buff' ability (Tactical movement, Valiant Assault, FTFL etc.)

@Sander: I voted for "other idea".
Some months ago you posted a really cool concept to rework Mobile Defense.

I read the wrong suggestion.
Show Spoiler

Yeah, command P4 would be fine if it was 0 CP to make it a proper alternative to the Ostwind as first tank.

Even then, the Command p4 could use some adjustments to its cannon to make it better against infantry/soft targets. Right now it has a chance to take out a single model with a direct hit, but that's basically it - compared to something like an Ostwind which deals fairly significant AoE damage.

If we want to use a historical information as a basis, the short barrel 75mm on the P4 fired essentially an identical HE shell to the M8A1 'Scott', so perhaps giving the P4 the Scott's AoE and pen values (AoE goes up, Pen goes down) could be an interesting change (keep everything else the same).

Command p4 changes might a bit off-topic, although still related to the MobiDefense doc.

UKF are already gimped by being unable to wire off until tech up, removing sandbags from them would render maps that have no cover especially on important areas an immediate veto for a faction that revolves around cover.

As I suggested on the last page: what about moving UKF Engineers to T0, keeping emplacements behind T1/T2, and keeping the heavy engineer upgrade behind T1 as well? Then UKF IS' could lose sandbags and not be at a disadvantage (and allow for more diverse openings). This would also allow for the removal of UC self repair.

Voted 'other'. It needs a slight range increase (to 45) and a projectile speed increase. Right now the unit has very little range, and demands high levels of micro to use, on top of it being slow, turret-less, and expensive. Compared to the KV2, Scott, and even 105-sherman, it has a pretty excessive micro-tax.

The slow rotation speed is fine, as it makes it vulnerable to flanking, and also means positioning is somewhat important.

if the projectile speed gets increased, then how are you supposed to dodge the shots if it gets fired in the faster cone angle? A brumm always forces a retreat immediately if it hits.

Same way OST and OKW (to a lesser extend) dodge 2x M8-Scotts - by staying out of the area and forcing it back with AT.