Profile of Doomlord52

Great work SneakEye, Osinyagov, and Tobis.

This is probably the most useful guide on the site, since vet numbers aren't in the game's UI (for some reason). Nice to see it updated to the current version of the game.

I'm not sure, but i think OKW can't get a 250, or scopes.

Of course not, I'm just comparing the utility each gives. Scopes are in a lot of very popular docs, and can be put on pretty much anything. Meanwhile this gives the same (or less) utility, but is a dedicated unit - so it has an MP/Fuel/Pop cost.

A bunch of math for UKF Infantry Section changes
I'm using 'far' distances for this, and also vet 0 when possible. I think I've got the formulas correct, but I may be off by a bit.

In the September changes. the enfield accuracy changes were +12% across the board, to cancel out the -12% damage decrease. The damage was lowered so that their first "salvo" couldn't insta-wipe a model (16x5 = 80hp). This is a pretty big "nerf", but it's hard to quantify in terms of DPS.

RA when out of cover increased by 12%, but stayed the same when in cover, due to the 0.89 RA cover mult, so that made them essentially take 12% more damage when out of cover.

Summary:
IS' can no longer insta-wipe a model in their first salvo
IS' take 12% more damage out of cover

The October changes reduced their price by 10mp (~3%), and increased their cover accuracy vet 3 bonus from 20% to 25%.
Summary:
IS' cost ~3% less
IS' deal ~4% more damage when in cover at vet 3

This patch (Jan 2020) increases the Enfield's accuracy from 0.36 to 0.5 when moving. It also decreases the target size when out of cover from 0.9 to 0.85, while keeping the in-cover bonus at 0.8. I assume this means the in-cover RA mult has gone from 0.89 to 0.94, but it's mentioned in the notes (otherwise, the cover RA is now .756).

Summary:
IS' deal +42.8% damage when moving
IS' take -5.5% damage when out of cover


numbers
.935 aim time far
.94 aim time far
.49 cooldown far
1.3 wind down

3.665 sec avg per shot = 0.272 shots/sec x 14dmg x .598 acc far = 2.284 dps @ far (stationary)
2.284dps x .35 moving = 0.7994 (old)
2.284dps x .5 moving = 1.142 (new)
1.142 / 0.7994 = 1.428x more damage = 42.8% increase when moving

General thoughts:
These notes seem like a fraction of what's needed. They're a step in the right direction (and that's always appreciated), but they will in no way address the stale meta that's evolved in the game (60 range TDs, OKW Mech > Med, OST weakness, Sov domination). If this is a "part 1" patch, then that's fine, but I really hope there's more to come; we're missing changes to address the core issues in the current game.


For USF, the current state of the M36 has been heavily criticized for months, if not longer, and there's nothing to address either it, nor its counters. Similarly, the changes to the Scott/Pak Howie made them RNG-wiping machines (I guess that's better than consistent wiping machines); they're still annoying to deal with, but now they;re also annoying to use (due to the RNG).

OKW's tech' situation is still pretty btale, with Mech massively outshining Med in pretty much every way, especially with the LeiG flame nerfs (that was one major reason to go med). Copying USF's "vehicle unlock" system might be a good idea, whereby the med truck's healing/FRP becomes free, but you need to pay to gain access to the Flak-HT and IRHT.

OST is still going to get demolished in most situations, thanks to Grens generally under-performing (or just being squishy) especially in the late-game. Additionally, UKF has gained some close-range squads as well as non-doc off-map smoke, which means they'll also have a better time against OST. T4 is also still in a really bad place, where it's much more viable to go for T3 and call-ins.

Sov changes seem decent, but as we saw at WCS, they're very powerful. I'm not entirely sure on the changes to 7-man-cons, but it could be a step in the right direction. Adjustments to the T70 are absolutely needed, since it's such a dominant unit. Additionally, as it's been pointed out before, Sov really doesn't have a weakness currently. Their infantry is exceptional, especially with upgrades, and their vehicles have incredible price/performance, which only goes up with excellent call-in heavies. The IS2 armor nerf might help this a bit, but it won't fix the core issue. If Sov's infantry is this good, it needs to be possible to inflict serious MP bleed - but its not (especially against cons) due to the reinforce costs and very fast vet gain. Similarly, due to their cost, massing tanks is also incredibly viable, since they're (mostly) good against both tanks and infantry.

UKF is still going to be pretty gimmicky, but at this point I'm not sure what can be done.

As I said, I (mostly) like what's being done here, but I think that a lot more is needed. Hopefully we'll get more changes in a future version of the patch, or other patches in the near future (spring balance patch?). Either way, I still appreciate the work the balance team is doing.


Thoughts on current notes:

General

On-map arty
Why are we lowering on-map arty pop to 13? I don't feel like this was needed, especially in team games.

Heavy tanks
Generally a good change, but I don't think "requires all buildings" is the right idea - at least not if OST doesn't need it.
I would have also liked to have seen the ranges standardized to 45, with their range vet bonuses removed, just for consistency.


UKF

Infantry sections

These changes are designed to make them less difficult to use in the open and on the move, while keeping their overall power level in a non-oppressive state.

Then why are these only buffs? If you want to keep the overall strength the same, and also increase out-of-cover strength, then in-cover strength needs to go down. Otherwise the overall strength goes up. Late game double-bren blobs are still quite oppressive, and these changes will only increase that.

Assault officer
This looks pretty interesting, and could fill a pretty important role. It'll be interesting to see how effective this is, though, since it's limited to one.

UC-Wasp Upgrade
This change is a bit risky. Increasing the armor vs. MGs makes sense, but it'll also make it more resistant to grens/volks/etc. Early game T0 vehicles should be pretty vulnerable, even if you invest in upgrades.

British Medic Squad
Is this a mobile healing squad, or an HQ upgrade like the Sov medics? If it's the former, that's going to be overpowered just due to utility, let alone if the heal rate is high (or AoE based). If it's the later, it's a good addition, but the price is too low (30mp isn't equal to 60 muni for OST, for example).

HQ Glider
So for 450mp, you get: 3x Medics, a free FRP, a squad of commandos, AND the ability to reinforce? That's WAY too much.

All other UKF changes seem good.


Sov

Cons
The major problem (IMO) was the near zero MP bleed you could inflict, and their general survivability - not their in cover DPS.

All other Sov changes seem good.


USF

Grenade Package unlock
Not sure if this was needed, but it could work, I suppose.

All other USF changes seem good.


OKW

Sturmtiger
The main issue with this thing is that it never hits anything once there's craters on the map (i.e. late-game... when it becomes available). The changes are nice, but I don't think they'll drag this unit up from being the worst unit in the game.

JT
Not sure why a price reduction was needed - especially a 5% fuel cost reduction.

Falls
Faust is finally removed - I think these will finally be in a good place. Hopefully we can all move on now.

All other OKW changes seem good.


OST

Not much here... but I guess the changes are fine.

All said, I think it's close to being one of the most interesting vehicle matchup dynamics as is, and the puma doesn't really need buffs.

Buffing Puma is a big no. Puma is already super strong as it is. We shouldn't look at Puma vs Jackson but more Puma vs AEC/Stuart/T70/Cromwell/Sherman/T34 etc. And in that role the Puma is awesome in the right hands.

The 0.5 -> 0.6 moving accuracy mult buff on the puma wouldn't really be that big of a game-changer, it's a slight adjustment to improve the puma's ability to deter a much heavier TD. If the USF player wanted, their M36 could still easily push off the Puma (unless it was turret-locked), and in any case, 2x M36s would completely ignore this change.

More importantly, the moving acc. buff would only help when chasing, since that's when the stat actually comes into play. When the puma is stationary, it would behave exactly the same, which is more likely to happen when it's being used defensively.

As for the concerns regarding the Puma vs. other LVs, I agree this could be a problem. This could be compensated for by a small price increase on the puma, or by doing a more drastic stat change, regarding far accuracy in combination with the moving accuracy mult. If we lowered it's far accuracy but increased its moving accuracy mult, the change should be much less noticeable against the smaller LVs, but still have an impact against the larger M36.

That said, I haven't done the math to figure out what those numbers would be.

Also I don’t think anyone suggested buffing the Puma, just nerfing the Jackson armour.

I was suggesting buffing the puma, slightly. Moving accuracy mult from 0.5 to 0.6, in combination with lowering the M36 front armor to 110 from 130.

Yes, it's a minor change, but it's should have a noticeable impact.

I think his point is pretty clear, jackson being on the top of the food chain be able to be bullied by some of the lowest steps to turn the pyramid into a cycle. It keeps lategames fluent instead of "mass wathever the lategame unit you have" logic.

This is pretty much the intention, yea.