Profile of TradeMrk

I know that this gets talked to death but I feel that there could be a rather simple fix to LMG Grens.

-Swap MG42/Rifle Grenade timing.

This would mean that the Rifle Grenade Can be used at the beginning of the match and LMG Grens would be upgradeable after T1 Research like Rifle Grenades currently.

This change would be positive in 4 ways.
1. Super Early first LMG would require commitment to T1 upgrade (meaning it would come later and require some MP shift to get delaying slightly the next combat unit).
2. Early rifle grenades although certainly not reliable against buildings would allow for Grens to have some solution to building camping.
3. Since the LMG would come a tad later Penals/MGs would not follow far behind.
4. Combined arms with MG42 would be drastically improved as you can punish a player more effectively with a rifle grenade on a suppress squad (this munition expenditure is a favorable manpower trade if only mentally because it is an active attack).

This would need testing clearly but I think it prevents the early LMG which I see as the largest struggle for moderate players. Additionally it would not hinder the German player as he has an active tool immediately available.

Sorry for not posting in the grudge match that is the current post about this let me know what you all think.

Ontopic:

I recommend a per unit upgun option on t34s at about 100munis, to get PIV level penetration and reload rate. Also reduces AoE to PIVlevels, to effectively specialise the unit for AT at the expense of the native t34s excellent AI.

I dont think this threatens PIV own value, since it still has far better armor ,(hp?) and dmg.
It may possibly be necessary to remove Ram on the upgun, but with the recent Ram changes, Im leaning towards it not being necessary to remove them. Especially as t34/85, in their current form, have that anyways, so more consistent to keep it.

As to the 2 Commanders with the double T34/85 call-ins, in conjunction with the above, I recommend they simply get their AT/AI adjusted as above, and retain the same price. The "advantage" of the call-in will then be in it primarily saving you about 200 munis in upgrades, as offset by the very real detractsnt of having to save up the huge MP/Fuel required to bring them in, which leaves you hanging in the interim. As they come in with the improved maingun, they will hit the field capable of the AT required of them, per the changes in the paragraph above.

Tertiary benefit being that ANY Commanser can upgun. These Commanders, however, save 200 muni to field the same net result a bit later ingame + , as is now, they wont need the building to do so.

I have to agree that the munition based upgrade would be excellent however I think that the 76 mm gun should be upgraded with AP ammunition instead of a new cannon thus allowing the penetration to drastically increase without throwing the damage up too high 100 Munitions would be a fair asking price for new ammo which would do substantially worse against infantry. (This ammuntion would now be the standard load in T-34s slowing the ROF to 6 but increasing the penetration to around 120)

As for the T34-85 with the improved chassis and increased armor it could certainly use a increase in ROF (lets say to 6.5) and a little more penetration (lets say 25) to make it a viable call in and sacrificing some AI capability and rear armor would be more than fine with me to facilitate this as I feel I have plenty of ways to deal with infantry already when using this commander.

I think at this point in the war represented in multiplayer, Finland had cut a deal with the Soviets to be part of their side, and having to oust the Germans out of their territory.

But, either way, it's an interesting and fun option.

Of course, I had to laugh a bit when I first saw this because in a lot of the miniature wargames I play, the writers tend to make Finnish soldiers into supermen with crazy abilities.

Good catch I forget when multiplayer is set but if its after Sept of 44 then you are correct.

I think that a simple solution to Penals could be another throw munition based ability similar to the satchel charge in range and approximately 60 munitions that could act as a pseudo teller mine. This doesn't compromise the basis of the unit as anti infantry.

EDIT: (After thrown it would act as a mine be detectable and removed by sweepers)

I'm not a game developer, but having done quite a few programs on my own and with others...just how badly designed does the program have to be such that you can't do something like this easily?

Clearly the game can recognize how many squad members are dead/missing (unit counter per squad) and can recognize just how many actions a player can call based on that (# of revives at HQ). Clearly developers can easily modify the # of resources each action/unit can take based on their schizophrenic way of patching and balancing units and abilities so far. Clearly the grenade ability itself already knows how many squad members exist to determine the # of grenades thrown.

On computation and logical grounds (count how many squad members exist -> compute total resource cost by basic multiplication -> execute), it shouldn't take much programming at all unless the developers realized or are paranoid of some glitches, bugs, or security issues when the ability communicates with # of squad members.

Relic HIRE THIS MAN!