I agree 100%. It may be mental, but seeing my rank go from the thousands to hundreds to top 100 was a huge motivating factor in my playing. I could tell I was facing better players, but I didn't realize how much I was actually improving until I could see my rank against other players. I think it would encourage a lot of people to play and learn more.
(1) - Soviet game meta: The current medium to late game Soviet teching is tactically very limiting. The large fuel cost of T3 and T4 often makes it infeasible to build both buildings. Furthermore the lack T3's anti-tank ability is a severe shortcoming, especially with the inclusion of the OKW's heavy tanks and the improvement of the Panthers front armour. Finally, T4 builds struggle with out a basic medium tank, especially considering the fragility of the Katyusha and Su-76 and the manoeuvrability of the SU-85. These short comings result in a large dependency on commander choice to fill in weaknesses.
Regardless of whether this is a good idea or not, but Relic has already stated a bunch of times that they do not want players to be able to build both T3 and T4 in a game. The idea is you're supposed to supplement each tiers weakness with commander abilities. Not saying this is a good idea, but that's what Relic seems to think is a good idea. It's why they dramatically raised the price of T3-T4 a while back.
Trivia question: how long does it take for 4 zookas to kill a KT while sitting immediately behind it, assuming they are not getting shot?
Trivia question two: how long does it take 3 shreks to kill an IS2 from the rear?
So, I don't know about you, but this seems about right to me. 3 shreks for OKW costs 270 muni, 4 zooks cost 240 and they perform just about the same against comparable targets. I.e. IS2 vs normal Tiger.
Not entirely applicable to Ostheer, who get 4 shreks for 240 muni, but the trade off is that you have to dedicate 2 pgren squads to AT, which is a pretty huge sacrifice.
Hmm to try this a different way then. Two simple examples.
Would Soviet players care if tomorrow there was a patch which gave the OKW players access to the T70? Some may care a little, most would not give a hoot.
Would OKW players care if tomorrow the Walking Stuka was accessible to the soviets? All would vent their spleens.
One unit, no one cares. Why? Underpowered.
One unit, everyone cares. Why? Overpowered.
My contention again is that, as a rule of thumb, the more you don't want the enemy to have a unit, the more overpowered you know it is.
That makes no sense.
Would OKW players care if tomorrow there was a patch that gave Soviet players access to the MG34? Some may care a litte, but most would not give a hoot.
Would Soviet players care if tomorrow the T34 was accessible to OKW? All would vent their spleens.
That doesn't mean the mg34 is underpowered, nor the T34 is overpowered. I don't see how you don't see this.
This is a dumb way to decide whether or not things are over powered or not, because it is based completely on opinion. I personally would rather have conscripts than grenadiers, but that doesn't mean that conscripts are OP or that they are even better than grens. All it means is that I would rather have conscripts than grens.
Same thing with all of your other comparisons. Some people would say they would rather have any AT gun than the raketen, and others will say that the raketen is one of the most useful AT guns in the game. It's just an opinion, you can't use that to decide balance.
I've been having some pretty good success recently with 3 rifles - nades - pathfinder - Lt/AB/Captain depending. They lack the ability to go 1v1 with most elite infantry, but they can compete with anything with less combat value than a gren squad 1v1, and they're great at providing long range supporting fire while you engage with rifles. As others have mentioned too, their huge sight range, combined with camo, allows them to scale into late game as a spotter unit.
American capping advantage is still there, they don't need rifles for that anymore. They're the only faction that has vehicle crews that can get out and capture while repairing, and having rear echelon troops who don't need to build base building and are not required for repairing vehicles.
On top of that, Americans have a pretty low upkeep system that allows them to field more units than axis factions, especially OKW.
The main issues with USF (in 1v1) to me, seem to be their difficulty with early vehicle rushes, and their late late game vs heavy tanks. Not really their capping ability in early-mid game.
They can also shoot over sight blockers within some buildings. It can be useful to throw a sniper in a tall building for a shot or two, but generally you don't want your sniper in any one place for too long, building or not.
I think a manual fire would be kind of cool for super heavy TDs. Would add a little bit of a skill cap for the huge range advantage you get with the Jagd, or the massive output of the ISU-152. But, it's also no fun for a new player to finally get their super unit and then have no idea how to use it at all. Maybe a manual skill shot AP round/ HE round for Jagd/ISU respectively.
0
Lenny12346
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
