Profile of OrionHunter88

Since the last two patches the role of vehicles has changed dramatically. In March the tech requirement cost was greatly increased. Now in April we saw blanket changes to all vehicles and an overall increase in cost. What I've noticed is that the resulting meta has become more dependent than ever on call-ins. Some of the "IMBA" of certain vehicles (looking at you tiger/elephant/ISU) that have been recently pointed out may not be from those vehicles directly. Some tweaks may be in order, but I've thought about it quite a bit and decided the combat stats of all the vehicles are quite close to balanced. There is another issue that is exaggerating imbalances with vehicles.


The Underlying Problem:
The increased cost of teching/vehicles themselves as allowed a player to establish a potent anti-tank force well before any assault guns/tanks hit the field. The result is that most people rely on either infantry/ATG to reach CPs high enough to call-in tanks, or use stock tanks very sparingly until high CPs are reached. At which time ALL PRODUCTION is diverted to call-ins.


The Solution:
I think there is one simple fix that could greatly improve the meta. Decrease the cost of light armored vehicles. This will go a long way towards defining the roles of both light and medium vehicles.

Germans:
Stug E 160MP/65FU (from 200/75)
Stug G 200MP/70F (From 230/80 )
Ostwind 260MP/90FU (from 280/100 )
German half track 200MP/25FU

Soviets:
SU-76 160MP/60FU (from 200MP/70FU)
T-70 160MP/60FU (From 200MP/70FU)
M5 200MP/25FU (From 270MP/30F)



The Reason:
It's very simple. Lighter vehicles still have less of an impact on dominating an opponent than medium/heavy tanks. The recent changes scaled everything so far back that most people are just content to wait till the heavier vehicles can hit the field. Also, the cost-effectiveness between light and medium vehicles, especially with regard to fuel, is too close with medium tanks. What this change does is allow all lighter vehicles to be earlier sooner and cheaper, possibly before excessive AT is present. It would add alot of definition to the vehicle roles. If a player is getting over run by light vehicles he will be forced to build medium tanks to counter the light vehicles. ATG would only be effective when used in conjunction with vehicles. And rather than simply spamming high utility vehicles (Panzer 4/T34) until a heavy call in, a player may be tempted to build a couple of light vehicles and then force a counter of medium tanks.

Dear OP,

Which would you rather have in your arsenal?

Non-doctrinal panzerschrecks? or doctrinal guard PTRS w/ 75MU upgrade to unlock button and pay MU every time you use it.

Nothing ruins a campsite more than heavy smoke.

Smoke has got to be one of the most underused features in CoH2.

Fascists hiding behind bunker? dont know what to do? Can't get through the chokepoint? Drop a smoke barrage all over their faces and a direct assault has never been made easier.

Precision Strike seems borderline useless for the 82MM Mortar

You're freaking kidding right? 82mm precision strike gives you absolute mortar dominance over german 81mm.

I only use mortars on certain maps and situations as Soviets. I see the 82mm mortar as a measure to counter german mortars so I can hold my position. German mortar auto barrage is more accurate faster and so german mortar is therefore much more useful vs regular infantry/MG units. But the soviet mortar dominates the german mortar in duels, even at vet0, at vet1 it's not even a contest.

To be honest, and maybe I just haven't experienced true puma spam yet, I have a sigh of relief because I know that he's not building panthers saving up for tigers, and I wont have to do battle with an elephant.

Pumas are weak sauce compared to the rest of the german tank army IMHO.

A good, diverse, AT game (Mines/AT nade cons/Zis gun and or guards and or T34 and or SU 85 and or Call-in tanks) combo is what you need anyway vs Panzer 4, Tiger, Panther, Elephant. Puma is easier to take out than any of those.