Profile of elchino7

IB4 mortar gets assigned to a new commander.
IB4 mortar replaces 1919 on Tactical support company

And players generally don't attack with the back of their Panthers towards the front-lines, nor do they leave the back of their tank towards the AT.

Pathing changes want to have a word or 2 with you

I kind of get off on garrisoning common buildings so when they click in the fog of war they end up walking onto the map.

Unfortunately you can know if a building is garrisoned or not.

Again, I really don't get the instant dismissal due to me not playing axis, the points I gave are observations that are clearly over/under performing or simply broken.

Maybe they are not as clear as you might think.

*For example: you say that the ISG outranges other emplacements. I guess you are talking only about the Bofor on barrage mode cause the mortar pit outranges by 10 IIRC. The ISG gets further range when it's vet1 but only by 5.
Also, it's 330mp (?) without the capability of retreating and been effective while firing behind hedges or houses in comparison to other mortars.
Finally it's range at vet0 is comparable to the 120mm mortar.

You want a long explanation, i'll give one.

1-Flame grenade: besides the point of needing side upgrades and which ones, the incendiary nade performance is fine. It cost around the double of a molotov while having the same performance. Difference is only on throwing animation timings. It can't kill full health models on impact as it lacks the damage to do so. That's the difference between it and a normal nade.

2-IIRC it's 40dmg. Not enough to wipe full health models. Only fix it needs is the fact that it interrupts retreats orders.

3-It's been discussed the possibility of sidegrades for OKW. No need to adjust performance.

5-Bias here. Allies offmaps as well as Axis offmaps are able to target enemy bases. It's a matter of normalizing behaviour.

8-This is where lack of play show off.

"- Stuka: Slightly increase the time it takes for the rockets to land along with a reduction of the blast radius. Currently it's accuracy is perfect and it's damage is extremely high, where is it's downside?
- Panzerwerfer: Remove pin/suppression, reduce damage, and greatly reduce accuracy the further away from the target area it is.
- Katyusha: Reduce base scatter to bring it in line with the axis counterpart, reduce accuracy the further away from the target area it is, and increase the number of rockets fired in each salvo by 2."

Stuka downside is that it's predictable on where, when and how it is gonna land. Only on "tunnel" maps is good or against slow reaction support play.
The part about Katyusha and PW shows lacks of game knowledge. They are already innacurate at long range, specially into FoW. They also have different roles, as you want the PW as close as much, while you want the Katyusha at mid to long range (unless you REALLY want to destroy something specific).

PD: PW and CalliOP mid and far damage profile needs to be adjusted.

9- This was useful on the days the truck was free and used as a unit itself. After adding a cost, there's no need to waste effort in implementing this. If it could be done with a simple click, sure, but i'll rather have Relic focus on something else.

10- Maybe this is a problem of game design at really low levels and teamgames (blobs been effective in comparison to effort) cause i can't agree with this
"Now ask yourself this, and be honest, when was the last time you played against OKW and saw a Raketenwerfer?
The reason is simple. Cloak, damage, suppresion and range. You need it unless you want your squads to get pushed and crushed by light vehicles or tanks.
While you might get lucky hitting with a shreck/piat/zook, that's also a weakness as you can capitalize on squads who already fire a salvo before pushing with vheicles.

PIATS been bad (or "different" at least) doesn't warrant a whole change on the infantry AT based behavior. I might only agree that xp gain could be adjusted by adding a debuff on xp gain on any unit who picks an AT weapon (besides AT rifles).

13- If the KT was scary as it used to be sure. With the increased cost and limitations, i'm not against the idea but i don't see it necessary at this moment.

14- Good micro Comets are way more scary than Churchills and i don't see a reason to limit either of them with their current performance.

15- You are a game designer. You know how many headaches would bring trying to implement this on the game.

Doing ^this^ since WFA release.
Got caught only a few times by smart opponents who were actually paying attention to dodging move pattern.

Or when you are on a map where there is no place to run (Troispoint/Ettelbruck). Stuka is meant for support weapons and predictable retreat paths.