Profile of Doomlord52

Going to go with "noooo" to most of this, but also with some additions.

Engineer vet
(Gameplay)
Currently engineer units that upgrade to sweepers have a minimal chance to gain vet, a core concept in COH2. The American and Brit armies can upgrade weapons to relieve this problem, but the Soviets and Wehr cannot. This will bring all engineer units in line with OKW.
-Engineer units can backpack their minesweepers

This could work, but honestly, I'd remove switching on all engies. When you pick minesweeper, it's a trade, not a straight upgrade. However, I'd adjust it so that vet can be gained from sweeping and repairing.

JagdTiger
(Balance)
The JT has an unfair effect on team games where it becomes a near impossibility to trade with efficiently. It also nullifies non-turreted assault guns too effectively.
-Range reduced to 80 (to normalize with 17pdr)
-Call-in changed to one time (to encourage good use of TD)
-Engine upgrade removed (to encourage good placement and limit ability to influence multiple areas of the battlefield, also allow a good flanking attack to succeed)
-Barrage range normalized with main gun (have the same range to make it obvious to all players its area of effect)

You can't just straight nerf an insanely expensive TD unit; there needs to be a trade. I agree with most of your changes; currently range is a bit silly, speed upgrade is unnecessary, and barrage over-range is bad for gameplay. However, remember, this unit has one thing no other unit in the game has; Stun-Lock. If it gets flanked (especially now with reduced rear-armor), it's basically lost. If you want all these nerfs, then stun-lock needs to go.

Also, just no to one-time use. Basically no other unit in the game has this, why should the JT?

CmdPanther
(Balance)
The CmdPanther is too strong at higher levels of vet. It is still a very attractive tank at vet 0.
-Vet bonuses removed from 3, 4, and 5
-Standard Panther bonuses applied to vet 3, 4 and 5
-MT brought in line with Soviet equivalent (35% increased damage)

I agree with this. Vet 3-5 is kind of excessive; but you need a reason to get to vet 3-5 - normal vet just isn't good enough for a unit titled "command". I'd probably give it a passive sight bonus (rather than vet 5 when static) at vet 3, a "mark target" ability at vet 4, and a smoke-mortar call-in at vet 5 (with abilities costing muni).

This way the unit still gets useful abilities as it vets that actually apply to its "command" status, but all these abilities are support focused.

Bofors
(Gameplay and balance)
The Bofors completely denies early Wehr play without a FHT. Even with a FHT the Wehr player is very vulnerable to be out teched and must rely heavily on munitions based abilities to attack the Bofors. From the Brit point of view, the Bofors is central to denying the enemy map area while they tech to tanks. The Bofors however generates extremely boring and static play. The changes attempt to please both players.
-Bofors barrage removed (no longer nullifies mortars)
-Bofors gains suppression on its regular fire to deny infantry simply approaching the gun from the front

Agreed; also needs a received repair speed nerf, so you can't repair it from 10% to 100% in a single barrage cooldown.

Schwer HQ
(Gameplay and balance)
Similar to the Bofors the Schwer completely denies interesting flanking from infantry. In teamgames it can be combined with other units too quickly, completely denying whole areas of the map at no additional cost to a team. Indirect fire is far too vulnerable attempting to take it down because of the length of time required.
-Schwer HQ requires upgrade to use gun

No. The Flak is what makes the unit interesting; and also adds a very high risk-reward. You CAN put it somewhere aggressive, where the Flak will do a lot of damage, but it IS your T4 building - lose it and you fall back a LONG way. As is, brits can build their own FHQ (that self repairs) and use a Bofors to defend it (which has brace) for less than the cost of OKW T4. If it needs ANY nerf, just reduce its armor pen. Other than that, there's a ton of counters (AT guns, arty, mortars, etc.) that already work just fine. And yes, it needs to be that high in HP/Armor since it's literally a T4 building - there's a lot of risk there.

On-map static artillery guns
(Balance)
Artillery guns are countered in a binary fashion (access to off-map artillery strikes, then on-map static artillery not useful). In team games especially the idea that a team would not have access to off-maps is unthinkable. The solution applied to AT guns would work well here.
-Guns now survive with 5% health when crew is killed.

No.
Part of the game is denying the possibility to re-crew stuff, hence why the AT guns need to be destructible by large arty. You could possible add to their HP (the weapon, not crew) so they don't get insta-wiped, but you can't just have a magic "only the next shot will get it" passive on everything.


My Additions
Show Spoiler

OKW blob spam is going to better than ever.

Now the main AI infantry has an upgrade to be even better against infantry, the shreks go on the squads that can already defend themselves well, it's all supported by fausts (can't escape the shreks!) and the raketten has more arc.

Calling it now: All this gets reverted, and we go back to volk spam. Only way to fix this is by having a separate squad in T1 that's 3man with 2 shreks.

Seriously though, this looks pretty good. Still waiting on Royal Engie reduced cost vet and Rifle double upgrade (or Vet 3) changes.

Honestly, the best counter I know of right now is an MHT + a stug. Yea, you need to stall out for 4min+ after a rushed bofors, but it works quite well.

Working around it

Doesn't really work on small maps like Kharkov, where direct fire can cover half the map width, and barrage covers 2/3rds...

Panther, P4, Jagdpanzer, Tiger, Sturmtiger, King Tiger, Jagdtiger,

These are all T4 and later via doc. Not really sure how useful that is when Bofors can show up at ~8min.

Mortar Halftrack, Flame HT, Inc. nades+schrecks.

You need two MHTs for it to work by itself, since you need to keep constant fire on it. Also requires either a very rare doc, or one of the most useless docs in the game.

Flame HT is made of paper, but works. However you need to get to it and take it out during a single 'brace' period, hope there's no AT... it's very risky.

Nades and Shrecks require support to force it into breace. So you're looking at multiple squads with 120m upgrades, support weapons... not sure how it's fair to counter a single 280/30 building with 1000mp+ and 300muni+.

So considering Brits always build a mortar pit to accompany their Bofors, now whats the counter? As Ost? lol

Pretty much this. OKW has a pretty easy time countering this stuff, Ost, not so much.

I advocated an idea like what he is suggesting a while ago. That idea, though, was that the British trenches would get a 150 MP upgrade (or so) for a single mortar team inside of it (which would fill the trench slot). Same range as the pit but still static, and easier to take down. It would reward good placement and make Trenches much more present.

Would really depend on how the trench works. I would consider that alright, provided the trench worked correctly - i.e. super susceptible to fire and explosives (directly in it). Also not sure if you're implying that the trench would increase the range to that of the mortar pit, or if the mortar should have the same range all the time. I'm not really in favor of the trench increasing range.

The point in general of this change would be to remove the 'campy' nature of the mortar pit, and replace it with a more mobile (but resistant) mortar.

Doesn't really fit with the faction otherwise doesn't it? If we're going to lose an emplacement, I'd prefer for the Mortar to stay defensively-themed.

The point, however, is to get rid of the theme; it's really not a good theme for CoH in general (camping, defensive play). In particular, the idea is to remove the "set and forget" theme of the mortar pit, which really doesn't fit well at all with the game (micro and mobility heavy game play).

I'm pretty sure ostheer mortar can go instead ostheer trenches...

Honestly, not sure; I haven't use Ost trenches in a long time. I seem to remember it only taking infantry and MGs, though.

Oh yeah, but I'm assuming the power was designed to be justified by the immobility, ergo, a mobile half-price half-power version would be overperforming.

Really? I'd figure at ~240-260mp (ok, so not half) a mortar that performed roughly equal to the Ost mortar would be alright.