Profile of GachiGasm

Well CoH2 is super risk free in every department. Capping has no risk, teching has no risk I don't think people would appreciate risks in coh2 at this late of a stage.

Well its not nessery risk problem, its a common sence problem. For instance, previously coh2 had a very lethal explosives, be it nades\mines\mortar\arty everything pottentually could have deliver lucky RNG wipe.

Everything was tonned down, with an aurgument that it punished not only idiotic play, but more often then not punished normal play just because you had a bad RNG roll (same aurgument used against abandon critical). And this indeed was and still is a valid aurgment.

But the problem is, while mentioned mechanics indeed were questinable, they still acted somewhat as a soft counter to idiotic play aswell.

As an example we can look at arty units. Ppl complained about it for ages especially in teamgames and always got the same responce "Teamgames were and always will be an arty fest".
At the same time simple friendly fire mechanic was never introduced, because of "teamkilling", while teamkillers are able to just destoy your base anyway, ruining your game just as if there was a friendly fire.
This leads to cali\katy\stuka\Werfer delivering 10 hot loads while friendly blobs just stay inside the arty zone taking 0 damage, while enemy is taking full damage.

Or lets say mortars. Realistically if your squad is hit by them during attack\deffence you most likely will have to retreat it anyway, so why not give mortars suppresion like in vCoH? It will punish blobers heavily, while objectively it wont affect single squads anyway, since as I said after direct hit you will have to retreat them anyway. But we have mortars, which can barrage on top of your own troops dealing 0 damage to them, while when it comes to blobs they are effectively can just bleed them with lucky hits sometimes, but not stop them.

Hell, even armor gameplay was done better in vCoH. Even if your tank\AT gun hit didnt penetrate it still dealt cheap deflection damage, meaning that even Sheman vs KT front to front could have done at least some damage to it, while in CoH2 we have flat penetration or no penetration, meaning that your PIV can either penetrate churchill 5 times in a row with lucky RNG or do absolutely nothing to it.

Thats imo the main problem with coh2 balance and dev team, instead of thinking out of the box how to address gameplay problems we are left with stats masturbation buffing and nerfing same units from patch to patch and when it fails we have new ability\upgrade which will requare multiple patches anyway to ajust.

And again imo, thats why CoH2 lost its vibe a lot of ppl liked. Not because game has less BS or less OP units or fun units.
Its because for past few years road to balance was achieved using raw stats and abilities, not mechanics, thats why a lot of ppl say that game lost its assymetry and everything feels like its mirrored units just with different stats.
While in vCoH balance was achieved (at least US vs Wehr) using mechanics not stats.

The premise is the same.
You're not allowed to make all of your cheap, spammable mainline into infiltration army.

To be frank here, they are not an infiltration army, since they wont stay in come while moving, unlike lets say commandos.

They are ambush units, and honestly it could have been done from this standpoint, that it simply takes much more time to get in camo, preventing them from getting better possition and becoming camoed just before the enemy gets close.

I was convinced they were going to double-down on the Eastern Front because there was so much potential that they hadn't touched. Some of the shit you hear in the vanilla factions is really awful. You also commit a war crime every time you shoot the writhing infantry models btw.

I think for financial reasons they decided to go with WFA because they had many of the assets for the setting already. It might have been already decided before launch (or the planned launch) to "return" to coh1. You'd have to ask a dev.

I think with many ww2 games there is a lot of opportunity to really milk the shit out of the game and coh2 is no exception. There easily could have been late/midwar vs. early war variants of factions. German allies could've been worked into the game as their own faction and a Tales of Valor style mini campaigns for those factions created.

Point being that even Eastern Front had much more potentual then WFA anyway. Staring off from PE like faction (SS in other words) and Guards like soviet faction, ending up with combined army of German allies and Soviet like NKVD faction or something like that.

Real shame is that both Red Army and Wehrmacht respectively had much-MUCH more real life vehicles\reglaments\support weapons which would could have filled multiple different factions.

But most likely because CoH2 orriginally resieved so much shit from russian community, they dicided to back off from EF for their own safety. Or, which is most likely, it was planned from the beggining to bring WFA factions, since most of the games have their DLC roadmap even before the relise.

Actually, who knows, maybe USF was actually planned as a soviet faction, but because of the shitstorm, they quickly turned them into WFA, made few new assets and voice lines. OKW lacks identity anyway, its a generic german faction in a global terms.

Some people complain that having a beefy tank like the Panther and then a Jackson behind would be OP but they forget that its already a thing. Brits can field churchill/comet and firefly, Soviets can field a KV1 and SU-85, OKW have Jagdpanzer and Panther and finally Ost has Stug/Panther combo.

You are a bit wrong imo. UKF indeed can have FF+comet\church but FF is a very slow firing TD with low mobility. Soviet can have SU-85+KV1, but KV1 have really mediocre at best in AT departemet + SU85 is turretless low mobility TD. Stug and JP while being a good TDs they are medium counters not Heavy tank countets since their penetration is somewhat lacking in comparison to other TDs when they are facing anything heavier then medium, thats why panther exist in a first place.

Jackson on the other hand isnt suffering from a single disadvantage of other TDs be it speed, penetration, ROF, turret, range. The single disadvantage of Jackson - its not well armored, but you should keep your range with TDs anyway.

As Aarotron said, doctrines regularly break the core faction rules and they can still be balanced.
Assgrens make a very defensive Ostheer into an early aggressive faction (same for Assault Sections and UKF), G43s on Grenadiers make them mobile and aggressive as well. Soviets get multiple highly durable tanks on doctrines. There's nothing inherently wrong with USF getting a durable tank as well. The exact design is up for debate obviously, but USF having thin armor otherwise is not reason against the EZ8 being survivable.

This is bad comparison tbh. Doctines dont, in a global scale, break faction rules, they allow different playstyle with-in the faction rules.

When they are truly breaking the core of the faction we have VSL, pre-nerfed SVTs and osttroopens. Its been proven a lot of the times by now, that its very dangerious to add tools which potentually just strateforward changing how faction works.