So what if we increased the range of the Penal PTRS by 5-10? This would make it better able to deal with the faptrack, and other light vehicles, with the trade off being that the squad needs to be stationary and spend a long time aiming to actually get shots off. In this way, the penal PTRS is an actualy AT upgrade that makes the squad into a better light vehicle hunter, instead of a consolation-prize AT unit.
I know that PTRS already has 5 more range than AT rockets, but I think that PTRS should get a little more range if we are removing most of its AI efficiency.
But I will admit, I know I'm arguing a weak point here. Veterancy in CoH2 has needed an overhaul for a long time. If anything my argument only applies for infantry squads. For vehicles the current vet system more or less works, but for infantry, especially ones that wield AT weapons, it's a problem.
That said:
I think vet is far too ubiquitous which lowers the impact vet has (and can have, to be balanced.) But quite frankly, infantry vet was outright BROKEN for MONTHS and no one really noticed. (Or attempt to explain it without certain people shutting down all discussion for the sake of post count.) Units get to max vet almost independently of any strategy or tactics. In fact, just keeping a unit alive means that they'll most likely be maxed out in vet. But I'm mostly talking about the first few units built in the game, not Comets, Tigers or OKW units getting to vet 5.
I mean, I feel like units on the field could get veterancy automatically on fixed timed intervals and the vet system would play out more or less the same that it does now.
-EFA was outdated in comparison to both WFA/UKF.
-AT weapons should apply a debuff on xp gained (similar but on the opposite direction of the UKF commander), on the current system.
-People didn't notice that veterancy was broken is easily explained:
Not all aspects of veterancy were broken (at first). Abilities and defensive were proccing. Offensive buff were lost upon losing models but as the game progressed, DPS/lethality was increased on other ways through weapon upgrades and usage of AoE (grenade, mortar, tanks, arty).
-If you could recieve passive xp, you would just reward people who just sit with their units idle or camping.
And using Raketen43s performance as an argument to buff a perfectly balanced unit is close to trolling.
If we talk about zero's opinion, yeah he mostly trolls in favor of SU. If we talk about Zis, it's fine. If we talk about LIVE version of M42, it's bad either due to commander or performance (which could be improved on the utility department rather than raw stats).
Other AT guns enjoy the benefit of green cover. Green cover is not useless against AOE units.
Unfortunately you are wrong. At least on 90% of the cases and for what it matters most of the time.
1-The AT gun does not provide green cover for the guys operating the weapon. You do full damage (i can't test accuracy outside of making a mod) either through small arm fire or explosives (grenades or mortar shells for example). Easy to check by either killing the crew with a grenade/mortar or activating the dmg indicator on cheatmods.
2-The AT gun ITSELF does create green cover and each of them has a hitbox (which can blocks incoming shots). The thing is, it's mostly irrelevant for the crew due to formation.
Check the pic (for some reason the rak 4th guy spread out)
So yeah, green cover on the AT gun for the crew is useless, cause a shell landing on top of it will kill the 2 operating guys and heavily wound the 3rd guy which might be nearby.
That been said, it's not worthless putting AT guns behind cover, cause that will protect the operators.
dont really give a rats backside about its RA cuz from gameplay experience it has the worst survivability out of all the AT guns. And whats so good about its damage per model? you want to go attack a rifleman squad with your rekketen?
RA is irrelevant against AoE. There's also probably the issue with the hitbox of other AT guns blocking some shots.
As i said before, i'm not here to discuss weapon perfomance rather than back up that the claim that OKW crews are "not working as intended" is true.
High damage per model means that if you flank an OKW support weapon with a lower model squad, engineer or inside a house, there are big chances that you are actually gonna lose the fight and that's inconsistent with the other 4 factions (unless you recrew the weapon with normal infantry)
isnt tier 1 suppose to be like a risk reward tier, you go for it to have better AI at the cost of AT. If soviets need AT, then do what ostheer does and tech up. It stupid enough that penals are getting some form of AT and now people want a buffed m-42 in it lol.
I've said this in other threads before. T1 high risk/high reward was a thing from the past.
This concept died when soviet sniper (good thing they remove sprint but some changes overall should had been done) and the M3 were nerfed either directly or indirectly (pfaust on Volks practically killed any viability). T1 was dead till they re introduced Penals into the meta. And spamming Penals is not high risk at all.
I'm in favor of a T1 been purely AI, problem is for it to be viable either ALL units must be good or one has to be OP. Introducing either PTRS/M42 solves the problem but that's a change in the design of the tier.
-OKW Rak is the only AT gun with 0.85 RA. Rest have 1.0 and USF 1.25
-OKW crew (MG/ISG included) for some reason are using Volks instead of "OKW crew"
This is the damage per model:
OKW: 1.93 / 4.94
SU: 0.29 / 1.32
OH: 0.18 / 3.40
USF: 0.67 / 2.41
UKF: 1.02 / 2.03
If that is your reasoning then how should Assault Grenadiers, AI panzergrenadiers and obersoldaten avoid these situation?
Is the AT-satchel linked to the PTRS upgrade? If so you can skip this question.
That's not the point.
AT units can be bullied around by pushing the model which carries the weapon. PS gets frontloaded damage (+ snares on grens/Volks), zook/piat has less of it but they get better RoF.
Anyway, PTRS are not for alpha/burst damage but deterrent with sustained damage. Right now, if you go T1 is because you want Penals, if you go Penals you don't get more than 1 conscripts and even with 2, it's hard to justify investing on molos/AT nades. So unless you have Penals with PTRS inside a building, you could just mop them with a Flamer HT/222/P2/Flak HT (which is now the case) by pushing them around. With Guards you have button to avoid this.
Saw the vid and you briefly mention the M3 and the SU sniper. Again, once the changes to Penals are implemented, the current situation would still remain the same.
-Are penals worth getting or not? You won't think about combining your army composition with M3 and snipers (you get sometimes a single one depending map and opponent and still not worth the cost/risk/reward).
I know there are some ideas roaming around on how to bring T1 as a whole into the late game, but this means it's just a stop gap patch till the other changes are on the scope of been implemented.
"What do PTRS Penals do, that Guards don't? And the answer is really nothing..." That's the problem. We are not getting T1 because we want snipers and M3, we are getting it because LIVE Penals with Flamers are OP.
The whole point of high risk/high reward on T1 was when either M3 and/or snipers were OP. Every noob can just blob around a ball of Penals with flamers and Guards and be effective. That's not the case with utilizing either snipers or clowncars. That's why live T1 is low-medium risk/high reward.
-Less relevant but i won't think PTRS penals will make Shocktroops return.
-IMO, the key to bring T1 into play is not having a single unit been viable/OP rather than the whole tier been balanced. I think with PTRS or not we are going in the direction of making Penals balanced but again making T1 been dead. Why not play Cons/T2 instead (quoting Jesulin/Hans) and with that, why not play USF/UKF competitively.
1- Penal: I do think that the AT Satchel is really a great idea. Why? Cause it would be too easy to bully/push around the unit if that wouldn't be the case. Guards have button to avoid this.
2- M3: same with other light vehicles (Kubel) why not start by reducing veterancy requirements.
Better veterancy? Utility? Faster unload/load of troops?
3- Sniper. Since we have to embrace the whole 2 man snipers concept why not:
-Make flare vet 0 again. Flare (same with mortar/trip wire) reveals cloaked units. Flare are shot by the spotter only.
-Sniper model has same sight range as infantry units (35)
-Spotter models has current sight plus 5 (45>50). You will have same sight range as shoot range.
-Vet1: increase spotter sight range by +10
-Spotter and sniper model can independently die. Spotter is cheaper to reinforce than sniper model (45vs90).
Train thought:
?
Chukonoku
Ballrok
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
