Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 44
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby Death_Kitty » 23 Oct 2018, 23:44

Quick preface: ever so often i get sick enough of studying math related things and playing certain metas of certain games/mods and embark on a holy quest to change that meta. This is that quest. This is going to be an extension of my balance rant in other threads, hopefully more specific and structured this time around.

The general goals of this thread (this will be aimed mostly at US and axis, if you have stuff/gripes/ideas related to CW, feel free to add):
-Remove the versatility of german small arms (lets get rid the StG everywhere)
-Suggest some changes to give SMG's a place in the game (for all factions)
-help airborne become at least somewhat effective
-take a long look at the ridiculous bonuses that tend to add up quick on german infantry
-Turn the 50 cal in the anti infantry and vehicle terror it was meant to be
-make sticky bombs great (cant say again, b/c they were not to begin with), while tuning down german AT

1.) I've discussed this already, and things like the StG and MG-42 and G-43 are present everywhere in the german arsenal, especially with PE. One think I think would be innovative would be to lower the upgrade slots of german infantry to 1 slot: they can only carry one of their upgrades at a time. At the very least, they should lose access to many of their current options. In addition, perhaps more german infantry should be restricted to fausts instead of the shreck.
2.) A lot of this stems from the fact that SMG using infantry tend to be torn apart by MG's and assault weapons (ahem) before they can get into effective range. In additions to reducing the access to such weapons, I propose increasing suppression (but not damage (until within effective range)) of SMG infantry, allowing players to pin units with assault troops with SMG's. (So tldr, increasing SMG supression while mobile)
3.) Combining the previous 2 solutions, as well as making AB units tougher (especially 82nd) and giving them camo and better accuracy would really do a lot for these guys. In addition, I see no reason why 101st need an HQ squad to get Thomsons when Fallshirmjager land with 5 fg42 and a Shrek right off the bat for free. Either buff the AB to the same standard or nerf the luft infantry
4.) Not gonna lie, but im going to need some help here. I know the defensive bonuses on luft are out of hand, and defensive doc can get downright nasty, but I dont know the numbers well enough to offer precise feedback
5.) I would be in total favor of making 50 cal's ingame pressures as hard as MG-42. It gives US a much needed hand in withstanding attacks by german supermen elite infantry. Maybe even penetrate halftracks, though I get the impression this is not going to be well liked.
Spoiler: show
Because god forbid german halftracks can be damaged by american ones and not just the other way around

6.) Shreck here. Faust there. Wurfmine here. Mag-mine there. HAND HELD AT EVERYWHERE!!! And its good too. So can we please reduce it? Or at least require research? mean while american stickies DO require research and barely ever do anything. Should immobilize a target EVERY SINGLE TIME.

That's it for a first pass. Hope you lot enjoy :)

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3071
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby Warhawks97 » 24 Oct 2018, 00:07

1. That reminds me on vcoh PE inf. Not saying its bad. Not sure if they should only be able to hold one type of weapon at a time.
One thing i might suggest for PE inf is that stormpios start with 1 stg right away but all others get MP40 right away, making it pure close range unit.
The assault grens could start with 1-2 stgs at default to underline its role as assault infantry and not "i can turn it into whatever i want". Also able to fully upgrade the squad with stgs. In TH doc also supplied with Panzerfausts as ability after unlock. AT nades need to be unlocked just like stickies.

The WH grens could get doc depending upgrades.
BK: MP 40 (6) and lmg42.
Terror: MP40, Flamethrower, lmg42
Def: G43´s, lmg42, Mp40.


But i would also say that rangers need to be limited on inf doc and limited in numbers.

Panzerfaust for all Gren squads at default. The def doc would get the Panzerfaust 100 after defensive training unlock (or whatever unlock).

2. Idk if suppression for smgs would be that great. They arent bad just currently simply usless due to stgs and fg42´s.

3. The 82nd really needs something to become special.


5. It got discussed but idk if devs are still on it. The best way would be to make the cal 50´s as an upgrade. Else it would be unfair since cal 50´s are mounted on all vehicles.

User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 44
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby Death_Kitty » 24 Oct 2018, 02:06

I like your ideas. I would not mind giving some assault weapons for free to PE units, and like the ideas for WH.
and ofc 50 would need to become an upgrade. 100% agree it should be an upgrade.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2460
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby MarKr » 24 Oct 2018, 11:34

It often seems to me that people make posts like this based on their experience from the game where something felt "too strong" and so their conclusion there is "it needs to be nerfed". However they often don't think of possible issues with proposed changes. Here is what comes to my mind when I read the post.
Death_Kitty wrote:1.) I've discussed this already, and things like the StG and MG-42 and G-43 are present everywhere in the german arsenal, especially with PE. One think I think would be innovative would be to lower the upgrade slots of german infantry to 1 slot: they can only carry one of their upgrades at a time. At the very least, they should lose access to many of their current options. In addition, perhaps more german infantry should be restricted to fausts instead of the shreck.
I already said that I would not be against some sort of limitation on possible Axis loadouts. Limiting squads to one upgare per squad would be possible but it seems to me that if it is made that way then e.g. Volks would not be able to get 4xMP because they get 2xMP40 with one upgrade and you would like to limit it to one upgrade only so you would not be able to turn them to "close range" squad - it is not very viable against US Riflemen with the Garands but still could have some use agaist CW. Also if you bought Pazerfaust upgrade, would it disable other upgrades?

Also would you apply the same principle of one "upgrade only" also to US and CW? So For Riflemen only BAR or Grease gun or Riflenades, for Tommies only Bren or Riflenades, for Rangers only Thompsons, only LMG or only zooka (actually in adition to your "less schrecks" point, would Rangers also lose the Bazooka upgrade)?

Hawks's ideas for infantry loadouts are quite good (something similar was planned for WM in the doc rework anyway) but he complained that "StG44 is a nobrainer pick and in late game you see them on almost every Axis squad but he suggests to give 2 StG44s to Assault grens for free and still have them able to upgrade to full StG44 loadout - what will that change for PE? They can have 4x StG44 now and (according to Hawks) people always buy them, now they would have 2 for free and other 4 would be possible to buy so overall you would have a full StG44 squad for same ammo price as now. Sure, they would not have the LMG and G43 but since "everyone goes for StG44 anyway" it doesn't seem to matter that much.

Death_Kitty wrote:2.) A lot of this stems from the fact that SMG using infantry tend to be torn apart by MG's and assault weapons (ahem) before they can get into effective range. In additions to reducing the access to such weapons, I propose increasing suppression (but not damage (until within effective range)) of SMG infantry, allowing players to pin units with assault troops with SMG's. (So tldr, increasing SMG supression while mobile)
I don't think this is a good idea. Small arms in BK mod don't have any good suppression values (maybe unless you shoot at basic Engineers/Pios) and if the SMGs get suppression, people will ask why SMGs suppress but not the LMGs (which would honestly make more sense) and there is also this issue that there are alerady many sources of suppression and adding more will only make infantry combats harder and more micro-demanding.

Death_Kitty wrote:3.) Combining the previous 2 solutions, as well as making AB units tougher (especially 82nd) and giving them camo and better accuracy would really do a lot for these guys. In addition, I see no reason why 101st need an HQ squad to get Thomsons when Fallshirmjager land with 5 fg42 and a Shrek right off the bat for free. Either buff the AB to the same standard or nerf the luft infantry
Agree on the Thompson thing, though I would argue that Thompson upgrade is sort of pointless anyway - the Carbines got the same "fast-fire" feature as Riflemen Garands (and will be tweaked a bit more to get a better suited performance) so they are/will be able to do more damage if opponent closes even without SMGs. If there will be a change to SMG performance then the 82nd will already be your "close range" squad because they come with 6x SMGs by default.

Also I would be against creating a "mirror" units so saying "buff AB to perform as Luft or nerf Luft to the level of AB" is not something I would go for.

Death_Kitty wrote:4.) Not gonna lie, but im going to need some help here. I know the defensive bonuses on luft are out of hand, and defensive doc can get downright nasty, but I dont know the numbers well enough to offer precise feedback
This topic might give you more insight.
Death_Kitty wrote:5.) I would be in total favor of making 50 cal's ingame pressures as hard as MG-42. It gives US a much needed hand in withstanding attacks by german supermen elite infantry. Maybe even penetrate halftracks, though I get the impression this is not going to be well liked.
Hawks mentioned .50cals then being an upgrade - still, some vehicles are not really gonna work as an upgrade - namely the US mortar HT where I am not sure if the model animations would allow it, M20 where it would basically need to come without any weapon, HTs which get gunners as soon as a squad is loaded and also the US .50cal Jeep in infantry doctrine and the armored .50cal Jeep in AB doctrine - again if the gun requires an upgrade then they would come without any weapon, yet they would "quickly suppress" as you said and would be capable of quite easily killing HTs and lightly armored units which are usually more expensive.

Just plain buffing things without any compensation usually creates just more ballance issues and for these vehicles it would simply be a direct buff. How would this be counter-balanced?

6.) Shreck here. Faust there. Wurfmine here. Mag-mine there. HAND HELD AT EVERYWHERE!!! And its good too. So can we please reduce it? Or at least require research? mean while american stickies DO require research and barely ever do anything. Should immobilize a target EVERY SINGLE TIME.[/quote] Schrecks could be mostly replaced by Fausts, I guess. However currently the option to upgrade a Schreck gives to Axis an option to counter vehicles with a one-time ammo investment. This would mean investing less for Faust upgrade but then spend ammo on each shot so in general the ammo consumption when fighting tanks would go up - now add to that those suggestions that came from you about changing Sherman performance to easily counter PIVs and JPIVs (I know, it is not part of this suggestion, but I suspect it will be part of one of those that are comming :D ). This means that medium Axis tanks would have harder time fighting US medium tanks and would need to use AP ammo more often, at the same time infantry would need to pay every time to shoot at a tank + .50cals would be stronger so it would be a nerf of Axis in terms of infantry survivability against vehicles and at the same time a nerf for Axis in terms of countring vehicles + the buffs to hull and coaxial MGs which Warhawks IS going to bring up again sooner or later and you have Axis infantry in sort of a problem.

As for Stickies - I don't know if 100% immobilization against any taget is a good idea - especially when the squads with Veterancy gain the "throw 2 sticky bombs" ability. What would be the point of it if you immobilize everything everytime with a single stikie? Also I think the Skirts upgrade for Axis tanks should lower the chance to detrack a tank - after all skirts were there to protect the tracks even from devices like this + it would give another gameplay purpose to those upgrades rather than just more armor.
Image

drivebyhobo
Posts: 101
Joined: 08 Mar 2015, 00:53

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby drivebyhobo » 24 Oct 2018, 13:34

MarKr wrote:This is something I could agree to. The versatility of Axis infantry is a huge advantage and I also agree that the StG44 is vastly over-represented in the mod.

I don't see overrepresentation of equipment being applicable to this game. Company of Heroes was designed to represent company/battalion level operations in the most interesting battles. Battles such as Market Garden pitting the XXX Corps against the II SS Panzer Corps and the 3rd Armored division closing the Falaise pocket. Well equipped divisions armed with the best equipment available to their nations.

These are definitely not reserve/garrison units equipped with whatever was at hand. Leave the problem of equipment overrepresentation/availability to Grand Strategy Games where the scope is to command the entire armed forces including the rear troops.


MarKr wrote:I already said that I would not be against some sort of limitation on possible Axis loadouts

That versatility of Axis infantry is a core strength. That would erode a key factional difference.

MarKr wrote:Schrecks could be mostly replaced by Fausts, I guess. However currently the option to upgrade a Schreck gives to Axis an option to counter vehicles with a one-time ammo investment


That would make the Axis very fustrating to play. AT abilities are micro intensive. It's not a problem in the early game or targetting specific high value tanks (since the AT faust ability does more damage). But having to do select unit/select ability/select target/activate ability adds up quite fast in micro.



MarKr wrote:So yes, I know that Garands had very little negatives but my point was that if you demand some change on the pretence of "it will be more realistic", then this realistic approach needs to be applied to all units and guns because otherwise you don't get a "realistic"
but rather a "parallel reality" where everything has as realistic as possible positives but nothing has as realistic as possible negatives and in that case, how closer to reality are you really getting?

Every simulation/game design has to have abstraction of details on some level. So yes, every game exists in its own 'parallel reality'. There is nothing scifi about that.

I think given the thread topic, it should be noted that infantry combat is much less constrained on "realistic" behavior. Tanks have the problems of acceleration being modeled as a constant factor, armor modeled as front/rear, component damage caused by RPG style criticals and so on. Infantry combat doesn't.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2460
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby MarKr » 24 Oct 2018, 15:09

drivebyhobo wrote:I don't see overrepresentation of equipment being applicable to this game. Company of Heroes was designed to represent company/battalion level operations in the most interesting battles. Battles such as Market Garden pitting the XXX Corps against the II SS Panzer Corps and the 3rd Armored division closing the Falaise pocket. Well equipped divisions armed with the best equipment available to their nations.

These are definitely not reserve/garrison units equipped with whatever was at hand. Leave the problem of equipment overrepresentation/availability to Grand Strategy Games where the scope is to command the entire armed forces including the rear troops.
Yes, as I've said before - the "realism" argument can be a "support" one but not a main argument - which is the game-play . This overrepresentation would fall under the realism, the main argument here is the STGs are available everywhere and at the same time are so powerful that they make any SMG pointless against it so there is basically no reason not to buy STGs if you have spare ammo.

So from the gameplay point of view - why should this weapon be spread across so many units?

drivebyhobo wrote:That versatility of Axis infantry is a core strength. That would erode a key factional difference.
I wouldn't say that is the case, or at least no completely. Weapon upgrades are available in all factions and they usually are also some sort of short-rage weapon, LMG and sometimes AT option. One of the core differences between axis and allies is that Axis usually have some unlocks or upgrades that provide some passive improvements to their infantry in general (Def upgrade in Def doc, Zeal in Terror, and then upgrades for PE such as Veteran sargeant, Fieldcraft etc.). Allies usually have unlocks that only affect some "elite" or doctrine-specific types units (Ranger/AB/Commandos/Sapper training) but not all infantry in general.

drivebyhobo wrote:Every simulation/game design has to have abstraction of details on some level. So yes, every game exists in its own 'parallel reality'. There is nothing scifi about that.
Sure, but my point there is that people often say "Sherman at max range penetrated my Tiger! This is absolutely unrealistic! Nerf Shermans!" - basically using the "realism" as a reason for a change suggestion but you never hear them say "My Tigers never have any random engine damage! So unreal! Fix this BS!". So if they are OK with playing in a settings of a "pararel reality" where Tigers never show this problem (which realistically was there), they should be just as well OK playing in the same paralel reality where Shermans are able to penerate Tigers at max range. But but that is not the case - people willingly overlook the fact that some unit overperforms when compared to reality (even if this overperfomance is in lack of realistic downsides) while crying about other unit overperforming. And that is why call it "selective realism" - apply realistic behavior but only in those aspects that help me win easier.
Image

User avatar
seha
Posts: 191
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby seha » 24 Oct 2018, 15:50

Warhawks97 wrote:The WH grens could get doc depending upgrades.
BK: MP 40 (6) and lmg42.
Terror: MP40, Flamethrower, lmg42
Def: G43´s, lmg42, Mp40.


before the kch removal....grenadiers used to be like that and they were called "useless" because they were not different from volks.
grenadiers cant lose the panzershreck, or kch must return.

MarKr wrote:This overrepresentation would fall under the realism, the main argument here is the STGs are available everywhere and at the same time are so powerful that they make any SMG pointless against it so there is basically no reason not to buy STGs if you have spare ammo.

So from the gameplay point of view - why should this weapon be spread across so many units?

if whermacht grenadiers lose mp44 then they must become cheaper. and 2 default mp44 with 4x mp44 upgrade (6 in total) would be fair for the assault panzer elite grenadiers as consequence.

argument of "mp44 was limited in real life but most axis infantry has it in bk mod" is not correct because panzerfaust was available in reality with very high numbers but only few units have it in bk mod.

and this from the other topic.....
MarKr wrote:the smoke is deployed on their position and once they leave the smoke they are no longer affected by it, so it does not work like "pop up smoke and run to enemy with suppression immunity".

https://youtu.be/pekI1wXSEyE?t=485
no suppression for as long the ability is active.
so axis infantry cant do this except with veterancy or command aura...but many allied infantry have fire up or smoke and can do this by default.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3071
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Infantry weapons (balance crusade)

Postby Warhawks97 » 24 Oct 2018, 21:01

MarKr wrote:
Hawks's ideas for infantry loadouts are quite good (something similar was planned for WM in the doc rework anyway) but he complained that "StG44 is a nobrainer pick and in late game you see them on almost every Axis squad but he suggests to give 2 StG44s to Assault grens for free and still have them able to upgrade to full StG44 loadout - what will that change for PE? They can have 4x StG44 now and (according to Hawks) people always buy them, now they would have 2 for free and other 4 would be possible to buy so overall you would have a full StG44 squad for same ammo price as now. Sure, they would not have the LMG and G43 but since "everyone goes for StG44 anyway" it doesn't seem to matter that much.


Thx.
Thing with "overreprestend STG" is not that there are too many in total, but simply everywhere. lets say we can have 6 stgs in total. Having 6 of them in one squad which has nothing else than stgs and thus one specific purpose is less an issue than having 6 stgs spread over 3 squads which also have schrecks and perhaps lmgs. Battles can often be micro intense which means that a unit that can do actually everything by its own makes things a lot easier while also much harder to encounter from the enemies point of view bc he simply dont know what to send against what as each of the three squads can kill his units at close, mid and long range (k98 and lmg) but also vehicles or tanks that come too close.
And thats what long term WH gren spam with three type of weapons in each squad makes its harder to encounter than simple Commando spam or PE assault gren spam (which have no AT by themselves or non that activates automatically once a target comes into range).


I got lots of ideas floating arround my head.
Like perhaps you could really upgrade just pne type of equipment. For example once you gave BAR your can only add a second BAR but no smg. Or the other way arround.

Only stuff like upgrades that only enables abilties (faust, rifle nade) can be mixed with any other upgrade.

In return these upgrades become more effective. For example you can get instead of only 4 smgs for rifles/volks full 6. Either by buying 3x2 or each upgrade gives 3 smgs right away.

I also thought about some kind of "packages".
For example close quarter package for grens which gives them full MP40 (6 of them) and also the frag grenade which only dev doc got.
Also perhaps some sort of "AT package" which gives fausts, the hollow charge, schreck and AT nade.
Thing is here that we already have such AT squads so having AT packages wouldnt make that much sense anymore.
Or a "ranged combat package" for grens giving them lmg and G43 right away..... idk.

Or only certain upgrades could be combined. Like if grens in terror get flamethrower you can combine this with smgs but not with lmg. Thing is idk how the lmgs would be or how they could get combined with what.


So we have a few options.
1. Simply limit ammount of total upgrades available (and/or doctrinal specific)
2. Maintain the ammount of upgrades but you can always only go for one.
We still would have to discuss which squad is allowed to get what and where.
3. Single upgrades become some sort of packages which dont only give an additional weapon but weapons and abilities. Some can be combined with others or not.


Mainly think about the regular infantry that can just like that get tons of different equipment at once with good abilties.
Having a huge mix of weapon types should be more something for the elite infantry like falli units, stormtroopers and rangers.
That of course means that rangers would get added to the list of basic inf and thus able to use one or max two types of equipment at once or if we switch it to elite status which would mean doctrinal and unit cap but upgrades could stay. The ammount as well as the numbers avaialble at once.


Coming back to Grens in particular and as example. I think the best way is to have the upgrades doctrinal in order to fit in the roles they are supposed to do there as every doctrine plays them differently. And upgrades or packages are differently combinable.

In BK doc:
1. They should have MP 40´s and perhaps one stg at default after doctrine pick. But idk if we make it by simple weapon upgrades or packages.

For example the assault package for BK grens could contain a set of 5xMp40, 1xSTG and grenade bundle ability. Once purchased you cant by anything else.
2. Second option is an lmg 42 but then it remains as ranged fire support team with one lmg and their k98.
Or else a ranged package or fire support package with two lmg34 but thats it again. But then they would be quite similiar to the suppression squad which however has better lmgs and can hide and has generally stormtrooper stats.
The assault ability of the doctrine unlock would enable them afterall to throw multiple nades at targets. Thus with assault package upgrade they can use assault ability and grenade bundle as well as normal nades.

So two upgrades/packages and one can be picked.

Terror:
1. They would have a close quarter upgrade giving either 6 Mp40 at once or 2x3 or 3x2. But once going for it you have just that. Not sure what abilties could be added here. Open for ideas.

2. This can get combined with a flamethrower package giving them one or two flamethrower. (Which of course gets buffed to be usefull)

Perhaps gren squad in terror doc could also get some sort of heroic charge ability to boost nearby inf like old kch where able to. But it can be used just once in a time and a shared cooldown among all grens (to prevent multiple stacks).


So terror grens would perhaps not have the very best weapons but therefore good abilties (nebler vt, heroic charge, flame nades, Zeal boost for every dead men etc). Also both upgrades can be picked at once.

Def doc:

1. One defensive package that contains G43´s. A package contains perhaps 1x scoped and 2x normal G43. In total two can be purchased thus having 2x scoped G43 and 4x normal one. Advantage is that they can stand still and engage target at range but also benefit when targets close in just like Garand does. Or its just one package instantly giving them all the G43.

2. Defensive fire support. That contains two lmg42 and suppression ability.

3. Anti tank package. That adds Panzerfaust 100 as well as the hollow charge ability. Grens in def doc have a Panzerfaust at default.
This package can be combined with any of the two above.


The defensive training boost would only apply when the unit does not move and having cover. It really sucks that this passive boost is so far the best you can get even during your assaults in late game when you find cover at every meter.
This should be true for def doc as well as for the Luftwaffe. The bonuses it gives are massive and passive so it seems fair that cover+not moving is the requirment.



Volks/Rifles:

I would go the same here. You can either buy smgs but then no more lmgs. The SMG´s get upgraded either 1x6 or 2x3. They have been build in millions and are very cheap designs so having many of them for low cost seems fair.
Once you go for BAR/lmg 34 you cant buy smgs anymore. The BAR gets perhaps upgraded as package which means two of them right away.
Faust/Rifle nade can be combined with any of them.

Rangers:
Even though being perhaps only in inf doc i still think that we should proceed the same way here. LMG+Bazooka or smg+Bazooka.


As for PE:
Stormpios should spawn with 1x or 2x STG but also 4-5x Mp40 right away making them pure close combat.

Assault grens should come with 1-2x STG to underline its assault status and can get full squad equiped with stgs and also maintain its lmg42. In TH doc they would get Panzerfaust after unlock.

Normal Grens should be able to get more G43´s untill full squad is equiped with it.


But i will express concerns about the G43 when coming to the field in such numbers. I am afraid that with their current performance they would anihilate just everything in seconds at long and short range. They are shooting fast, accurate (more accurate than Garands) and have very fast reload as well large magazins. The Bullet damage is also extremely high. So tweaks might be needed here if the G43 shows up in numbers.
Def doc grens with two scopped and two normal G43 would become real badass.


[b]AB:[/b]

The 101st as some kind of elite unit and fighting behind lines need to maintain different weapon upgrades. However perhaps johnson can also come in pair as a package just like the BAR´s for rifles.











Hawks mentioned .50cals then being an upgrade - still, some vehicles are not really gonna work as an upgrade - namely the US mortar HT where I am not sure if the model animations would allow it, M20 where it would basically need to come without any weapon, HTs which get gunners as soon as a squad is loaded and also the US .50cal Jeep in infantry doctrine and the armored .50cal Jeep in AB doctrine - again if the gun requires an upgrade then they would come without any weapon, yet they would "quickly suppress" as you said and would be capable of quite easily killing HTs and lightly armored units which are usually more expensive.



Just plain buffing things without any compensation usually creates just more ballance issues and for these vehicles it would simply be a direct buff. How would this be counter-balanced?




The m20 and jeep would have them at default bc its their primary weapon. The 20 mm vehicle dont upgrade their 20 mm either.


The Jeeps with cal 50 are t2, need fuel and lots of MP. The armored jeep is described as being able to counter armored vehicles so...The cal 50 wouldnt be same against all vehicles. The Puma for example afterall maintains a strong frontal armor that is slopped so pen chances here would be lower as vs HTs.

The jeeps themselves can also get oneshoted and countered by AT rifle, AT guns, 37 mm HT, 28 mm.... All avaialble t2 so i dont think they would become a too big issue.

The mortar HT can perhaps be the only cal 50 using not the allround armor piercing rounds that was given to all units and instead using the softer anti infantry with less pen power vs vehicles.


Schrecks could be mostly replaced by Fausts, I guess. However currently the option to upgrade a Schreck gives to Axis an option to counter vehicles with a one-time ammo investment. This would mean investing less for Faust upgrade but then spend ammo on each shot so in general the ammo consumption when fighting tanks would go up



Well, as terror doc i did tend not upgrade anything and spare ammo for arty and off maps which can be crucial support.

I usually run for 3 grens with their default STG... no ammo investment, AT squads, officer and forward base and thats it. I used the 50 mm Puma with big success as mobile and fast deployable anti vehicle unit vs recces and a 50 mm as safe back up as well as stugs (even unupgraded or only with HE sometimes)
That was enough to deal with any vehicle and medium tank bothering me. I repeated attacks and each became stronger and later got supported by arty. I dont think things become too complicate. You just play them like playing brits more or less.

With def doc i often used them only with lmg upgrade, used sandbags and defensive training. Backed by Jagdpanzers they do handle any situation well enough and def doc has enough arty to push the advance.

And the new AT rifle shouldnt get forget which helps grens to handle nasty vehicles well enough. So i dont think things would become "too micro intense" just bc a few schrecks less. Everybody who can play cw would still be able to fight with them.




drivebyhobo wrote:
I don't see overrepresentation of equipment being applicable to this game. Company of Heroes was designed to represent company/battalion level operations in the most interesting battles. Battles such as Market Garden pitting the XXX Corps against the II SS Panzer Corps and the 3rd Armored division closing the Falaise pocket. Well equipped divisions armed with the best equipment available to their nations.

These are definitely not reserve/garrison units equipped with whatever was at hand. Leave the problem of equipment overrepresentation/availability to Grand Strategy Games where the scope is to command the entire armed forces including the rear troops.


As you see i or we dont aim at simply dropping the quantity speaking of sheer numbers. Its more that we dont have a single squad using all three of them at once (lmg42, stg and schreck) unless its an elite unit.

Grens would be more doing their job in their doctrine instead of being stg assault heroes even in def doc. The G43 is also an elite weapon and esspecially the scoped one. Its not that elite weapons would suddenly be underrepresnted. I mean we have elite tanks and guns in every doctrine afterall.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest