I think the ability to plant a demo charge with a vehicle only mine on the cheap combined with much needed flamethrowers has made them a great unit as it stood. Can't tell you how many pumas I got with that combo on semosky lol.
It's great they are even better now. But before the hot fix they were kubelwagon level of silly.
TBH I like AEs as they were. Maybe some incoming accuracy received would have helped but they had over 50DPS at close range. Thats some good good DPS for 280MP.
Cant expect too much for the same price as vanilla riflemen.
"My friend, a nice fellow, Lyosha Kurov was killed near a place named Gorshik. He was killed due to his boyish folly. We stood in defense, everything was quiet. Lyoshka ascended a railroad embankment and went heckling the Germans exposing his naked buttocks to them. The Germans fired at him with a cannon and killed him."
I would like to add that a lot of people only bring up resource balance for 4v4 and say that lowering resources gained would fix it, but they are over looking something: Unit design. There are units in the game that are flat out made for 1v1 to 2v2 and will never be reliable in 3v3 and 4v4. Allies rely on early game light vehicle swarms, in 1v1 and 2v2 they have room to maneuver and are fully utilized. However in 3v3 and 4v4 what happens when you have to face a line of 4-8 Pak 40 guns and Grens with Fausts? The answer is that over half the units in the game are not made for 3v3 and 4v4. Realistically even with decreased resources you are still going to see the same infantry blobs fighting until heavy tanks, because light vehicles are just too unreliable for cost in large games on the maps we have now.
To balance for 3v3 and 4v4, Relic would have to redesign maps, redesign resources, and redesign units. Relic is still having problems balancing for 1v1 and 2v2, balancing for 3v3 and 4v4 is low on their priorities list. Also to whoever said 4v4 was the most popular mode, I thought recent statistics pointed that the most popular mode was 2v2 by a large margin over the other modes?
I guarantee making losses painful through resource scaling and making things like Offmaps cost alot would be LEAPS and BOUNDS better then it is currently. And its an easy as hell fix. If there are still problems then the units could be looked at.
I wonder if one of our talented Map Makers out there can try to make a reduced resource 4v4 map to test it?
Wher: (Varying strategies are more build dependent)
-Generalist (Grens + MG)
-The choice to go Ostruppen for massive wall punch.
-A mobile Army of Panzergrens + light vehiciles
-A fully automatic army of SMGs (ass grens) and Assualt rifles (Panzergrens) + tanks
-Ostwind + pak wall turtle strat
-Piospam into T2
-Pio + support teams defensive build
Note: Although the most diverse faction, some builds are weaker than others, not all are on the same power level.
OKW: (varying strategies are more map dependent)
-Generalist (Volks + sturm)
-Kubel lol wagens + inf spam
-Same tech as USF but 2x as many options due to types doctrine units (playstyles differ with each unit)
-If not doc inf, then Ober elites for 2nd tier inf
-If behind, choice between werfer or volks for AT
Note: Generally, OKW relies on inf, therefore the surprise comes from their 1st showing of Doctrinal unit. This also holds true for the 2x panzer call in.
Soviets: (Strategies are all locked to certain Doctrines and the 1st building built)
-If T1 then T4, doc spam tanks
-If T2 then T3, doc spam inf and then tanks
Note: Stock infantry play will more often punish player than enemy.
Note 2: If trying builds straying from the norm above, it will punish player even more heavily than Wher players.
USF: (Strategies are determinate of early game success)
-Spamming Rifleman until critical number will almost ensure early-mid game success
-If greatly ahead, spam tanks to push them off the map.
-If not ahead, dig in and try bleeding VP
Note: Almost all units for USF will be the same every game. Rarely will they ever change.
So from what we have here, you can kind of get the basic summary.