Profile of SgtBulldog

How do you want to kite with it? Conscripts have cheap-to-tech-and-use AT grenades which disable engine and guards reliably hit it even on long range with their AT rifles. On top of that it deals very low damage on long range.

I think we mnight be using the scout cars differently then.

There is no way you can avoid taking damage with the SC. Don't ask for a safe no-damage solution.

What you should do is kite at the max range and then pull the SC away for repair when it nears half health. And of course you have to monitor the animation of the target infantry. As soon as something looks like the beginning of an AT-toss, back off. DOn't use move order - it takes too long. Use reverse.

Repair is free in terms of MP, which is so important in the early game.

There are only 2 units that the scout car counters: Penals and Shocktroopers. However, even they'll deal reasonable damage to it.

You are thinking of a 'hard counter', but the SC is only a soft counter to anything. And there's nothing wrong with that. Who says every unit has to be a hard counter to something?

Problems the SC has:

1) it's t2, so it's arriving too late to have an impact
2) t2 also offers halftracks, which are superior while costing only marginally more
3) 20mm upgrade is overpriced
4) soviet AT infantry is too effective against it
5) it's damageable by small arms

There's not much you can do apart from either moving it in t1 or buffing it's health/armour massively while making it more expensive.

@1) No problem since getting to T2 is so easy. Disagree that it is only usefull for a short while.
@2) Not sure what you mean. The FHT costs a boatload of ammo. Saving for that might take too long.
@3) You might have a point here
@4) Soviets have rather few early AT-options. I wouldn't change the AT-nade just because of a scoutcar.
@5) Yes. It's nothing but a car with sme extra plating. It's not a tank.

I still don't see a major problem. The SCs are usefull enough for their costs IMO.

Anyway all this remains me of a little known option: shock nades will also damage or kill SC and HT if you time it right. And ofc so do satchels. It's rather rare to pull that stunt off, but bulky vehicle pathing sometimes makes it an option.

the 120mm precision is actually stronger than the 82mm, though not by much. the 120mm does 200 damage with 9 AOE (the same stats as the german howitzer....) but the 82mm only does 160 damage. same range, same AOE. that means the 120mm with wipe squads more consistently with its precision, but even the 82mm can wipe squads easily.

But the 82mm has a much higher fire rate, effecively increasing its chance to hit targets, right?

The only way RNG will hit you unfairly is if you are a fanboy and only play one faction. If you play both sides and many games, you'll get the same benefit/hurt from RNG in average as everybody else.

This is maths from elementary school.

Buffing german units is the answer to every balance thread nowadays. I understand why some like to jump that bandwaggon, but it really won't be good for the game overall.

Isn't the point about the snipers simply, that if they worked as intended and didn't hold fire or get trapped in all kinds of stuff, they would be a decent counter?

Agree with OP on the general concern, but

Soviet TM35 Mine

-remove the chance of destroyed engine critical on undamaged engine

No. It makes perfect sense. But maybe reduce it?

As rofltehcat explained in the One-shot-wipe-potential thread, mines deal as much damage in the center of the blast as they do on its edge, resulting quite often in squadwipes depending on a dice roll.

Unfortunately that thread vastly exaggerated the one-shot problem. It is not a good reference.

The stun would give time for the rest of your army, a flanking second squad for the engine critical for example. But if you manage to do that, you will be rewarded 100% of the time. Not because the game decided so, but because of your unit control and positioning alone.

Think about that for a second.

I did. And I don't see any reason why a stun should succeeed 100% of the time. That - if any - is something that should really happen in random.

T34 ram

-100% chance on destroyed engine and gun on rear armour hit

-on front armour hit only engine damage OR destroyed gun possible

Against heavy tanks like the tiger, positioning currently plays almost no role. (300 front armour, 250 rear armour - ram from the front yeah whatever)
Similar to AT grenades and Panzerfaust, i want to see flanking being rewarded heavily, while diminishing the potential on frontal rams.

Giving something a 100% chance Means killing the risk/gain aspect. It's bad for the tension and will make COH2 feel more like SC or RA.

I'll have to say no.

Flamethrower for CE/Pionees

-chance of exploding only on squadwipe

No. I really like this and I don't think it is that bad.

Skillplanes

-remove the ~0,1% chance of pintle mounted machine guns to destroy airplanes
-increase the chance of ostwind and quad halftrack to destroy airplanes
-reduce the damage of shot down planes drastically

You are complaining about randomness getting decisive influence on the outcome of the game, yet here you want to remove a random effect so small that it hardly ever triggers.

And there's no need to remove the AA capability of the M5. It's the Ostwind that needs more.

Finally, yes it should hurt to be hit by a planecrash. The point is, it will be the risk you run when investing in AA. AA should not become a no-brainer.


To sum up, I understand your concern, but I think you are taking your suggested changes too far. So far that you will take a big chunk out of the risk, which I find to be a big part of what makes this game interesting.