Profile of Thebazookajoe

Asymmetrical balance? A pipe dream. Best we can do is hope for a moderately close faction list. But Snipers as currently concieved are NOT balanced.

So you would like both factions to have the same units? whats the point of different factions then?

You have to look at the whole picture, you can't just balance the soviet sniper only to the ostheer sniper. You have to look at the whole picture of the different army types. In a game like this, even small changes can have a very big impact on the gameplay.

If you make the german sniper 2 man, it can just snipe away without the risk of being instantly lost. This means that conscrips, that have to stall out in cover at long range against grens, will suddenly become almost useless.

In 1v1 i haven't found the russian sniper to be a big issue. Remember that it fires slower then its german counterpart to make up for the squad number difference.

Also, going for snipers means not having mg's. So a sniper is a manpower drain, but the soviet can't really hold ground. So instead of retreating, its sometimes better to just push on and make the sniper have to retreat and take a big portion of the map to gain a tech advantage. A half track is a great addition for this to just keep reinforcing. Keep in mind that the sniper has to kill a hell of a lot of grens to earn its 360 manpower back. Of course this depends on the situation, in some engagements its better to hide behind buildings and hedges, forcing the sniper to advance and therefore be more vulnerable.

Concerning a sniper in scout car, it is hard to kill indeed, but the sniper also gets a 50% accuracy penalty if i remember correctly.

2v2 is a whole other story indeed. Real sniper spam is not only hard to deal with, its just not fun to play against. A simple limit of 2 snipers as i suggested earlier should solve this without any major balance issues i think.

I see you think that i'm an incompetent whining soviet player, but i'm not. I prefer playing axis by far and think the PIV gives me an unfair advantage in its current state. And about incompetence, i just beat StephennJF who was using SU-85

SU-85 isnt dominant if you avoid it by using shot blockers and truesight. If it is dominant now its more due to bad maps. When there are (comunity made) new maps that are smaller and have more shot blockers SU-85 will be a lot weaker. For example Kholodny now, that map is by far the easiest map to deal with SU-85.

Pak 43 isnt a necessity against SU-85. shrecked up grens and paks do fine as well, but are less cost effective most of the time.

Concerning coh1: I ment T1,T2 and then T3 or T4. Also, i was lvl 16 in coh1 so it's not that i don't know what i'm talking about.

Stugs were never ment as tank destroyers, not in WWII or in coh1. They were used to protect the infantry from vehicles and never had immense range. In WWII the only thing making them good against tanks was their low profile.

Don't think that i am sure my suggestion is the best option, but i still haven heard a normal argument as to why a PIV is so essential.

I see your point. Going straight to T4 will have its risk of being overwhelmed by lower tier units, but that's what balances a rush. It is a risk/reward. Maybe the costs of going to T4 should be lowered a bit to balance it properly.

T-70 is wonderfully countered by ostwind. An ostwind is a better counter to T-70 then a PIV is.

My current problem with the PIV is that it gives you an all round great unit, so a great reward, without the risk. In coh1 PIV was also in the latest tier, just as a sherman. You could go for them quickly and have a big advantage, but you had to skip T3 so you were vulnerable for a while. Going T3 for wehrmacht and US gave you a safer option of having AT and AI quicker, but the disadvantage of investing in weaker units then T4 units.

Ostwind wouldnt have to be buffed, its fine as is. Maybe a tiny cost reduction. I usually get an ostwind out or have it already building at the moment a T-70 appears.

Stug only needs a cost reduction and maybe small things like a tiny bit faster turn rate etc.

Panzerwerfer in T3 would have to be nerfed. (lower AOE, less damadge, longer cooldown and maybe higher cost)

Concerning SU-85. Soviet going for T4 usually means not having any AI in the form of vehicles. You should use this by avoiding the SU-85 with your tanks and investing in infantry instead of vehicles. Your infantry can then gain ground and chase the SU-85 around, just denying your opponent use of all the resources that have been invested into the building and SU-85. A mistake a lot of people often make (including me) is that they think they have to kill a SU-85 or any other "big" unit. While denying it any usage will be more cost effective (it will cost you less losses and increase the upkeep of your opponent).

I don't really see the problem of not having a PIV. You can manage just fine with only an ostwind and stugs supported by pak 40 or (pak 43 if you're facing SU-85). You can't dominate the map with that, but can secure a part of it. So again, it's a lower risk, but also smaller reward of having less map control.

In my opinion of course.

What do you guys think of bringing the PIV to T4 and the Panzerwerfer back to T3.

I think this would make 1v1 matches a lot more fun and diversify build orders. Currently it is not a safe build order for soviets to go for T34 because of the inevitable PIV's and for ostheer T4 is unnecessary because T3 gives you everything you need.

If stug gets a slight cost reduction T3 has anti tank and anti infantry (with ostwind) but without a PIV no means of charging in and chasing all soviet units off the field because the turret less stug is vulnerable that way. In combination with the panzerwerfer T3 would be used to slowly creep up onto the map in a concentrated army.

Building T4 as ostheer would give a more mobile army that is capable of doing raids into enemy territory all over the map at the cost of having to tech up.

For soviets this would mean that T34 is great against ostheer T3, roaming around the map, avoiding the "static" stugs and flanking in if there is an opportunity.

Soviet T4 would be a great counter to the "static" ostheer T3 but vulnerable to the more mobile ostheer T4.

TLDR: Switching PIV and panzerwerfer will give more dynamic gameplay. Ostheer T3 will become more static and require a concentrated army while Ostheer T4 will enable ostheer to move around and control the map more easally. This will make soviet T3 more viable.

Addressing concerns about soviets having a real tank a lot sooner then ostheer: Currently I usually go for an ostwind first supproted by a pak and manage just fine against one T34 or SU-85. The follow up PIV (if there are multiple T34's) would be replaced by stugs.