Panzerfusiliers

Hey there EF-team,

I want to post a major gripe with Ostheer and that is to me that Panzerfusiliers are way too powerfull. They are supposed to be long-range monsters, but right now they are all-round monsters. There is not a single non-doctrinal unit that comes this early and has this much power. If you look at their stats it says that they have 5 points against infantry and they get an grenade assault which is mostly a late-game or doctrinal ability wothout any real cost.

I have no replay so far, but I'm(even by the AI!) getting me torn a new one by these fella's.

I presume lowering their effectiveness a bit would be more fair. Making sure they are still better than Grens and keeping their cost but letting them have lower damage output. They can even beat Guards head-on.

It would make it more fun as to keeping Landsers longer in the game and not wasting all that research on them if you are going to replace them by PF's anyway.

Kind Regards.

Pls provide a replay. Panzerfusiliers are very similar to Wehrmacht Grenadiers in terms of stats and also arrive at 60 fuel into the game.

Never really found much use for them, landsers do a better job all round and are a bit cheaper.

Me too, Landsers are great for more or less everything, if anything they are so good that building any other infantry is almost superfluous. They remind me of American Rifles a lot. So as I see it, Panzerfusiliers are a bonus for choosing not go straight for the fourth level building and a Panzer III/Stug III. 

Same here. By the time Panzerfusiliers are available, all of my Landsers have all accumulated a fair amount of veterancy and can pretty much manage all infantry threats, especially after purchasing the Sergeant's promotion.

As a matter of fact, I tend to find all units in the Schutzen War Camp to be more or less...useless. It's probably because I'm a comp stomper because by the time I can build the SWC, the Russians are already spamming their light tanks across the map. So I pretty much just go for the Panzer Kampf Command.

I think PF is not really useful - even the upgrade of Panzerschreck still not making them stronger. Landerser is better than fusilers. If want to go for AT units, the tanks in early stage like Marder 2 or Pak is better.

Since there's no attractive unit in T3 to go for, one of them is this unit for me. I would always use Landsers, even without upgrades, if I loose one get another one and skip T3 and go T4.

T3 is not attractive because it's extremely Defensive even with a Luchs. Luchs good but you can't upgrade them like Pumas, defensless against an AT Armor. I would always spend my fuel for T4 any day.

If you want to make the T3 attractive and useful then Pz3 has to be in T3 because it's too weak to face SU Tank Hall plus there are Stugs and Doctrinal Tanks in Tier 4. By doing this you can add variety to the game instead of T4 rush by every ( smart ) player. Therefore T3 offers nothing to push the enemy.

Last edited July 12, 2013 at 1:16 PM by Riggsman

Well you rush for a tanks when you have an advantage in general, but if you dont then what ?
Still going for tanks when your enemy already have few T34s for example ? Hell no :)  OH have some broken point atm when they got fixed it will(must) be verry hard to defend without T3.

How you gain advantage with T3 can you explain me? With Fusiliers? Or with Panzerwerfers? Or Marders? T3 doesnt have the impact to scare the enemy or the reward of teching. Good Inf play with T2 support is enough to delay opponents Tank Hall. Get some PanzerJaegers in HT and push back the T34. If the SU player has T34s already and you still waste time on T3, gg, dont waste time then. Except PAK there's nothing there for me and just to get a PAK I would not spend my Resources.

I basically build T3 after T4 when I need some artillery support for my offensives. But that's only if I play as Army Elite Troops. Support troops has the Wespe and the Luftwaffe whereas Fortress Troops has the LeFh 18.

All-in-all, T3 isn't very useful.

EDIT: One of the biggest problems of Ostheer T3 is that it requires 2 upgrades to unlock its full potential, unlike the other base buildings. If you don't upgrade them, you only get Panzerfusilliers without any abilities (no MP40s, no Panzerfausts, etc.). So with that cost (building base building+2 upgrades) only to get units inferior to those in T4, I might as well just go for the T4.

Perhaps you devs could put the StuG III or the Panzer III in T3 and take away the Ranged Upgrade thing. It would improve its usefulness a lot.

Last edited July 12, 2013 at 2:15 PM by ubermensche

Panzer III or StuG III in Tier 3 would cause problems in Tier IV ;)
We will see what we can do to solve this issue.

If you go straight T1-T4 ( T2 is a must ) to get Pz3, it means T3 is really redundant. But Pz3 it not exactly a T4 tank and Stug is pretty tough and fast, OH Stug in T3 would be very much Wehr alike so Pz3 would fit there better. In this way there would be an option to stay in T3 with a Tank and defensive/indirect fire options. Almost all good Wehr players go T3 because it's pretty good in all forms, T4 is expensive and you miss the window of opportunity to push the enemy. Here, in Ost, this is done by T4 and very quickly. I think this is a problem.

Last edited July 12, 2013 at 3:15 PM by Riggsman

Lord wrote:
Panzer III or StuG III in Tier 3 would cause problems in Tier IV ;)
We will see what we can do to solve this issue.

Well my suggestion is to put the Panzer III into T3 assault and move the Panzerwerfer to T4 support. StuG III will go to T4 assault (it is an assault gun after all). Every T3 needs some form of light-medium/medium armor, which the Marder II can't really count as. And Riggs is right about the Wehrmacht T3, which grants the StuG IV, which is perhaps the most important vehicle in the Wehrmacht if you ask me. If you upgrade it to vet 3, it is even possible to win late in-game without going T4.

In some ways, this isn't very right either because you kind of lack the incentive to go T4.

Last edited July 12, 2013 at 5:01 PM by ubermensche

If you look at it, the units in t3 and t4 essentially have similar tasks/roles, that's why both tiers are unlocked at the same time.

The point of t3 sort of is that you get specialized units for your tasks - Luchs as a strong AI sniper unit, Marder II as a decent AT vehicle. And if you want to you can also get Panzerwerfers as your non doctrinal "real" artillery and the Pak40, which will ruin all enemy tanks it faces. Panzerfusiliers as a tough unit to support your specialized vehicles with abilities + the mp40II.

T4 was thought of being more expensive, but having more well rounded units in general - StuG III as an improved version of the Marder II, Panzer III as a "better version" of a Luchs, doctrinal tank as alternative to the Pak40, and Kugelblitz as a replacement for the Panzerwerfer.

So, by looking at it t3 would offer you better total AI and the best AT gun to fight soviet heavies and makes you less dependant on fuel. t4 lacks an elite unit to support the more well rounded units, and thus you might want to rely on your doctrinal call in units more instead - Jägers, Sturmfusiliers, Brandenburgers.


I'm not entirely sure about this whole matter, but I actually believe this has a lot to do with Landser's overperformance at the moment. We're working on solutions about this matter and will see what we can do.

These suggestions look good just on paper but not in practice Darc. All those "precious" T3 units doesn't come for free, you spend fuel and manpower for them.

Instead of spending my MP on Fussiliers, I would upgrade my Landsers because it's "global". Also I can call in Jaegers if I need Smg type of unit which Landsers also can have with the upgrade.
Marder II - PAK is defensive character units, Panzerwerfers indirect fire support and Luchs is gonna be on the run when T-70s on the field.

If you put PIII in T4 as a "better" Luchs then of course I'll go straight to T4, why to bother microing a Pak or trying not to be flanked with a Marder? T3 is a higher Tier ( T1-T2 are basic tiers) and has to be OFFENSIVE not DEFENSIVE as hell. Ostheer suppose to be Offensive right? Then something is wrong here. Or maybe Soviets are buffed so much Ost needs a quick Pak or Marder all the time? What ya think? ;)

If I skip T3 and need indirect fire I have the OP Lieg from T2, I have Snipers from T1, I have Doctrinal Arty. Why to spend lots of fuel and Mp to get Panzerwerfers which is in a ineffective Tier.
The units you count in T3 one by one sounds good, looks good but as a composition, they are not.  I don't even mention the Pool shifts, which cost another resource called "TIME".

Wehr T3 with only 3 units can win you game and extremely comfortable. Ost T3 has almost twice more units but doesn't have the same effect even. I don't mean that you can't win a game with T3, you can but this would be one in a million vs a decent player.

I declare here to you all; In every single game, I'll skip T3 and go T4 and I will not regret even a second. Who thinks that T3 is better, I challenge.

Last edited July 12, 2013 at 5:44 PM by Riggsman

I have to agree with Riggs, as I really don't see much a real purpose or pull to get panzerfusiliers in their current condition. Yes, Landsers are currently rapeface but unless they're nerfed beyond the point of use then Panzerfusiliers will lose out, since you can buy global upgrades to landsers much in the similar way you do riflemen.

The other problem is the T3 composition. It resembles somewhat of Wehr T3 on paper, but part of the issue behind it is that said units are much, much weaker than their T4 counterparts in terms of combat and even though there is a steeper fuel cost to climb over but as Riggs said, to unlock T3's full potential you need 2 (!) separate upgrades. With the strong capabilities of Landsers and a deep-in support unit package of shrecks, halftracks, all that jazz, a player can definitely hold his own for the better units in T4.

It is much safer to go T4 for the epic StuG since the Marder is in T3, is weaker, and to boot the StuG is in the first half of the T4 building. Not only is it pretty good against tanks but it is also adequate with dealing with infantry. Deviating to T3 just for some non-doctrinal arty isn't really viable either because you have several other options open to you such as the Field gun from T2.

Riggsman wrote:
If I skip T3 and need indirect fire I have the OP Lieg from T2, I have Snipers from T1, I have Doctrinal Arty. Why to spend lots of fuel and Mp to get Panzerwerfers which is in a ineffective Tier.

Agreed. Unless you're being a super-turtle there's no reason to go T3 as it doesn't pump enough pressure on the enemy as does T4.

I think Riggs' point about moving the PIII to T3 should be considered. If the PIII is in T3 then there is your "Shock" unit for the tier and it actually becomes a viable option to go that teching since you'll be rewarded for going deep in T3 and you can still keep a little defensive maneuverability. As of right now the PIII is kind of silly as I see lots of players actually switching pools just to go for StuG as they see the PIII as a waste of their time in the end game tier.

If you moved the PIII to T3 I'm not too sure which unit to move around. Perhaps move the StuG to Assault pool in the PIII's place, and move Panzerwerffers back to T4?

But what Riggs says is true, even without a dominance on the field T4 is the way to go because the units you get in T3 are not enough to make an impact. For Wehrmacht this is different because if they pop a Puma against 4x Rifles and a couple flamers that is a big deal, especially if they got BARs, but the Luchs isn't like a Puma in that it can't switch to AT mode on the fly. Also the Puma comes around the similar time of a supply depot and motor pool OR nades+bars, but not BOTH. By the time you pop a Luchs the Soviets have a form of AT up their sleeve as they will see you probably didn't invest in Landsers.

T3 is only good for being defensive with the PaK40 or the marder. As for panzerfusiliers, they feel kind like fallshirmjagers without the infliltration ability. they have automatic weapons that work great in close quarters, the have grenades and panzerfausts and are a small squad but im guessing the panzerfusiliers make up for this just like the fallshirmjagers with elite armor (they might have more health than fallshirmjagers too). They are not exactly bad in combat but as many have pointed out, most of your landsers will have vet by now which will prove more effective than fresh panzerfusiliers this post reminded me to ask; what are the health and armor differences between Landsers, Panzerfusiliers, sturmfusiliers and jagers? especially since the last two are doctorinal which means they should have some incentive beyond their weaponry.

Maybe the easiest thing to try first to address this problem would be to give us the possibility of choosing to go either T2 or T3 immediately after T1 or even complete liberty of our choices for the first three tiers with modified fuel values to control what comes out and when.

In my opinion, T3 in its current form and unit composition is not attractive option because of the timing of when first T3 unit comes out. It is usually to late to shock your opponent with such units and what they offer firepower wise is decently covered by T2 units and of course T3 is completely inadequate to plan your late game force. So waiting for T4 seems like an obvious choice at the moment.

In any case, full freedom of choosing T1, T2, T3 would allow for some innovative tactics and OH forces. For example, I have been trying out Sturmpioneers as combat units (with those T1 cars in support, holding out for Jagers), with this, holding out for Panzerfusiliers would be possible. This would allow us to play a risky yet aggressive strategy focused on getting fast light armor out supported by PFs. 
     

Quote
Maybe the easiest thing to try first to address this problem would be to give us the possibility of choosing to go either T2 or T3 immediately after T1 or even complete liberty of our choices for the first three tiers with modified fuel values to control what comes out and when.

No, it would make the Ostheer to imbalanced.

Quote
In my opinion, T3 in its current form and unit composition is not attractive option because of the timing of when first T3 unit comes out. It is usually to late to shock your opponent with such units and what they offer firepower wise is decently covered by T2 units and of course T3 is completely inadequate to plan your late game force. So waiting for T4 seems like an obvious choice at the moment.

If you played against a human player you would find this is not the case at all, getting an early panzerwerfer can have a huge impact on your opponents early to mid game. Not to mention that you can get a marderII out just about the same time as a T90/SU76 and in a fair fight the marderII will beat the SU-76 and the T90 stands no chance.

QuoteIn any case, full freedom of choosing T1, T2, T3 would allow for some innovative tactics and OH forces. For example, I have been trying out Sturmpioneers as combat units (with those T1 cars in support, holding out for Jagers), with this, holding out for Panzerfusiliers would be possible. This would allow us to play a risky yet aggressive strategy focused on getting fast light armor out supported by PFs. 

That strategy would never work against a human.

MarderIIs ALWAYS lose a 1v1 with a SU-76, even if the MarderII fires the first shot, this happens with the STuG too. Both can't seem to take out a SU-76 by themselves. I think I might just be unlucky though :P

It really depends who gets the first shot, they are both an equal fight, but the marders gun is more accurate and if the SU-76 misses one or two shoots in the fight it's dead.

As someone said before, on paper t3 looks pretty useful, but in practice t4 owns and there is no real reason to waste time on Marder or Pzfus. Besides, Marder II gets owned against microed T70.

Last edited July 14, 2013 at 7:36 AM by Xenobane

TheVole wrote:

Quote
Maybe the easiest thing to try first to address this problem would be to give us the possibility of choosing to go either T2 or T3 immediately after T1 or even complete liberty of our choices for the first three tiers with modified fuel values to control what comes out and when.

No, it would make the Ostheer to imbalanced.

Quote
In my opinion, T3 in its current form and unit composition is not attractive option because of the timing of when first T3 unit comes out. It is usually to late to shock your opponent with such units and what they offer firepower wise is decently covered by T2 units and of course T3 is completely inadequate to plan your late game force. So waiting for T4 seems like an obvious choice at the moment.

If you played against a human player you would find this is not the case at all, getting an early panzerwerfer can have a huge impact on your opponents early to mid game. Not to mention that you can get a marderII out just about the same time as a T90/SU76 and in a fair fight the marderII will beat the SU-76 and the T90 stands no chance.

QuoteIn any case, full freedom of choosing T1, T2, T3 would allow for some innovative tactics and OH forces. For example, I have been trying out Sturmpioneers as combat units (with those T1 cars in support, holding out for Jagers), with this, holding out for Panzerfusiliers would be possible. This would allow us to play a risky yet aggressive strategy focused on getting fast light armor out supported by PFs. 

That strategy would never work against a human.

To answer you in reverse order...

Well, to tell you the truth, I only experimented with this tactic to see how a few things work, how sturmpios fare in combat,  find use for other types of infantry rather than Landsers (+PzJ) as well as bring armor up as soon as possible. I know that in the current state of the game with OH being forced to build T1 and T2 first strategy would not work. Not only that, it is absolutely unnecessary as you have access to T1 and T2 units whether you want it or not so you do not save fuel anyway.

With an option to go straight to T3 (smth like extreme PE building choice flexibility), you could transition towards panzerfusiliers more quickly, it is what, 35 fuel now. Besides, what works is more or less a matter of balance and time, just like various pioneer/engineer strategies that worked from time to time in vCoH before being nerfed or countered by different tactics. I remember it still worked against the Brits in the last patch (Pios to Grenadiers to Halftracks and Paks). 


Your second point, you probably know better, I can't play against other people right now until I sort out the graphics stuttering problems. However, I've read through this thread and I see that most people agree with T4 being a better choice than T3 especially if you take into account the modernization delays and fuel costs.


Regarding imbalance, this could be easily solved with tinkering with fuel costs for modernization. I think that only problem for Soviets would be to guess what comes out next.

t2 as requirement is put into the teching as a version to delay t3 and t4. Just like Wehr's teching is delayed by having to escalate battle phases first or USA having to build a supply yard to get access to t3 or t4.

Ostheer t2 fuel is calculated in the way that Panzerfusiliers arrive at 60f, like Wehr grenadiers, and to additionally delay t4 by another gameplay minute, so you cannot rush a Panzer III within 5minutes of the game where no adequate AT is on the field.

Same counts for the internal teching. T3 modernizations costs as much fuel as you need for Wehr to tech to the next tier. Luchs arriving 25f earlier will doom every player not fastteching to AT guns/AT units.

IF we remove t2 from the teching path, t3 and t4 WILL become more expensive. There is no way that t3 will arrive 35f into the game.

Maybe it would help swapping around the units in tier 3:

As i see it, Luchs+Marder would be a quite usefull offensive combo, while in a defensive position, when i already invested in LeIG and HMGs i want the PaK instead of Marder.
So if T3 had like Luchs and Marder on Assault and could still get both with one modernisation it would be a quite attractive vehicle rush strat, while Paks+Panzerwerfer on the other modernisation (not depending on the first one) where really good if the frontlines are frozen.
This has also the advantage that u can finetune the timing of the vehicles by separetly changing the fuel cost of both upgrades. Panzerwerfer would and Paks would be out a bit faster, but i cant imagine that to be a really big problem. If it is, just increase the modernisation costs.

Shiggythor wrote:
Maybe it would help swapping around the units in tier 3:

As i see it, Luchs+Marder would be a quite usefull offensive combo, while in a defensive position, when i already invested in LeIG and HMGs i want the PaK instead of Marder.
So if T3 had like Luchs and Marder on Assault and could still get both with one modernisation it would be a quite attractive vehicle rush strat, while Paks+Panzerwerfer on the other modernisation (not depending on the first one) where really good if the frontlines are frozen.
This has also the advantage that u can finetune the timing of the vehicles by separetly changing the fuel cost of both upgrades. Panzerwerfer would and Paks would be out a bit faster, but i cant imagine that to be a really big problem. If it is, just increase the modernisation costs.

Love the idea, who needs balance anyway!

I just finished a game on comp stomp. And while I was at it, I did some math for T3.

If I want a fully upgraded T3, I'll need to build the base building (250 MP+35 fuel), then research the modernisation upgrade (150 MP+40 fuel) and then research the ranged weapons upgrade (150 MP+30 fuel). All in all, this costs me 550 MP and 110 fuel. And all that so I can get a Panzer II Luchs, a PaK 40, the Panzerwerfer and the Marder. Or I can spend 350 MP and 90 fuel (or whatever the MP cost is) on T4 and have the superior Panzer IIIs and StuG IIIs right off the shelf. So guess what I'm gonna do?

You also get Panzerfusiliers, which you otherwise do not get if you're playing t4. Fusiliers will be buffed next patch, combined with some nerfs to Landsers it will make t3 more appealing compared to now.

Also, Luchs + Panzerwerfers > Pz III/StuG III imo.

In order to Buff Fusiliers nerfing Landsers will cause more problems. You can just put a Light tank into T3 and problem is solved. Experimenting some weird stuff on the main infantry will always cause more fundamental problems. SU early game is already too good for Landsers, how you gonna fix it if you put some Superior units in T3? What you say doesn't sound right. The reason of unattractive T3 is not Fusilliers but lack of Assault Armor, I may get Elite Inf with a doctrine as well- both Elite and Support gives such units.

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 7:27 PM by Riggsman

Fusiliers get more supression resistance, something which Landsers fundamentally lack, so they'll be worthwhile getting if you're facing supression weaponry.
And no, t3 is not unattractive because it's lacking armour, it's unattractive because the StuG III is way too cost efficient at the moment. You get a Pz IV gun with good maneuverability for 325mp/50f and Luchs has been nerfed into oblivion because of constant whining from soviet players in the beta. (Although I think that it's performing nicely even with the nerfs. It's just a bit too expensive atm).

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 8:17 PM by dArCReAvEr

dArCReAvEr wrote:
Also, Luchs + Panzerwerfers > Pz III/StuG III imo.

Really? And what are you gonna do if I sent a couple of SU-76s and T90s?

I think what we need to do is to launch a tournament sometime soon. And with the replays the devs can make the correct balance adjustments.

IMO, the best cure for T3 is to take away the ranged support upgrade.

Another trick might be to do the Soviet Guards (and they kind of are the equivalent anyways) trick. In other words, put them in the standard barracks, but only make them available after research modernisation upgrade of T1 and T2. That'll make it somewhere in between T2 and T3 and it'll give an extra incentive to research T1 modernisation upgrade (for ATM is pretty useless if you ask me because I don't have that much fuel to upgrade it, and if I do, the two other upgrades of the Infantry Gruppen Post is more interesting).

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 8:51 PM by ubermensche

It's not as if Ostheer has no access to AT infantry. Panzerjägers, Sturmfusiliers, Jägers with dual schreck. Panzerfusiliers with Panzerfaust + Marder. All decent weapons to deal with light vehicles from SU. Even a Halftrack with a Panzerjäger can ruin a t90's day easily.

Edit: No way we remove the teching requirement for the Panzerwerfers/Pak40. Pak40 deals enough damage to finish off every soviet tank with no more than 4 shots (except for IS 2 and ISU). Marder II with focused firing also kills off enemy t34-76 unless you don't support it with Panzerjägers/Jägers/Sturmfusiliers.

Panzerwerfers are too strong to be available at the same time as a Wehr t3.

About the other suggestion: We're considering something sort of similar, but it won't come until the 2nd patch I suppose.

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 8:57 PM by dArCReAvEr

What you say means, T1 is redundant and T3 infantry will get buffed so good that I dont even need T1 and main infantry lol. It's like adding some infantry into USA Motor Pool better than Rifles and Sherman is too good so M8 would be enough. Seriously, I feel like I waste my time.

There's not even 1 player supporting your claims that T3 is good enough and needs a Buff to Fusilliers. Nerfing Stug or Buffing something will not make it attractive neither, it will just cause another imbalance issue.

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 11:32 PM by Riggsman

Landsers with G41 are better than Fusiliers. Upgraded Landsers are even better. Practically those two units interfere each other, one of them is redundant and that's not Landsers.

If you really wanna show some love to those Fusilliers, then switch them with PanzerJeagers, put them in T2 and PJ s to T3 in conjuction with Luchs. Anyway we can't skip T2 so maybe some people may use those redundant units more than ever. Gettting some Panzerjegers just to be safe against a potential enemy Armor threat is stupid; you spend your MP to a unit which does shit vs basic Infantry with their pistols anyway, so T3 fits them even better with Armor support.

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 11:43 PM by Riggsman

dArCReAvEr wrote:

Edit: No way we remove the teching requirement for the Panzerwerfers/Pak40. Pak40 deals enough damage to finish off every soviet tank with no more than 4 shots (except for IS 2 and ISU). Marder II with focused firing also kills off enemy t34-76 unless you don't support it with Panzerjägers/Jägers/Sturmfusiliers.

Panzerwerfers are too strong to be available at the same time as a Wehr t3.

Right now, there are 2 teching requirements in order to unlock the panzerwerfer and the PaK 40. I'm suggesting reducing it to 1. This means that when you build the Schutzen War Camp you start with Panzerfusiliers, Marder II and Panzer II. And with the modernisation upgrade, you'll get PaK 40 and Panzerwerfers.

Riggsman wrote:

If you really wanna show some love to those Fusilliers, then switch them with PanzerJeagers, put them in T2 and PJ s to T3 in conjuction with Luchs. Anyway we can't skip T2 so maybe some people may use those redundant units more than ever. Gettting some Panzerjegers just to be safe against a potential enemy Armor threat is stupid; you spend your MP to a unit which does shit vs basic Infantry with their pistols anyway, so T3 fits them even better with Armor support.

Well if you do that, then T2 will have no AT units. And Landsers will become obsolete way too early since most build Infantry Gefechts Command pretty early.

Last edited July 15, 2013 at 11:56 PM by ubermensche

Rofl this is hilarious...

"OMG LANDSERS ARE OP" - "Yes, we know, we'll nerf them" - "OMFG YOU CANNOT NERF THEM THEY'RE MAINLINE INFANTRY"

"T3 IS USELESS LOL! ME PLAYS T4 EVERYGAME BECAUSE ALL UNITS ARE SO MUCH BETTER" - "Yes, we agree. We'll fix it by adjusting some costs and stats for the units that were nerfed before and fix some OP t4 units." - "OMG YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!!"

But redesigning everything ofcourse is fine. But don't edit weapon stats for god's sake! That could accomplish something...

Riggsman wrote:
Landsers with G41 are better than Fusiliers. Upgraded Landsers are even better. Practically those two units interfere each other, one of them is redundant and that's not Landsers.

No they don't.

You cannot tell me that a Landser with 2x 12damage g41 with 35% and 3 guns with 11 damage, 20% accuracy/50% increased cooldown performs better than 4x x15dmg Kar98 with 45% accuracy and a long range cooldown modifier of +25%. This is just wrong by facts.

Quote
If you really wanna show some love to those Fusilliers, then switch them with PanzerJeagers, put them in T2 and PJ s to T3 in conjuction with Luchs.

Yes, let's put Wehr grens into t2, which arrives at 25fuel into the game... Really a great idea. And also let's put the only AT unit t2 has into t3, so playing heavy t2 strategies without rushing t3 or t4 everygame to prevent vehicle rushes is much better. Keep on with these great ideas! How about we put the Tiger into the HQ? That would fix a lot of the AT issues you're describing. Or adding basic Offmap dora arty barrages to Army Elite? They need some more artillery afterall...

Quote Anyway we can't skip T2 so maybe some people may use those redundant units more than ever. Gettting some Panzerjegers just to be safe against a potential enemy Armor threat is stupid; you spend your MP to a unit which does shit vs basic Infantry with their pistols anyway, so T3 fits them even better with Armor support.

Yes? Why is that? Why is it fine to build a pak for 290mp as Wehr in every Wehr vs. US game but for Ostheer getting a schreck squad (which is apparently even cheaper) stupid? Also, with a building time of less than a pak, where's the problem of building them AFTER you've seen the t90?

Riggsman wrote:
What you say means, T1 is redundant and T3 infantry will get buffed so good that I dont even need T1 and main infantry lol. It's like adding some infantry into USA Motor Pool better than Rifles and Sherman is too good so M8 would be enough. Seriously, I feel like I waste my time.

Yes?`Where did I say that? I said Landsers lack supression resistance, which is intended.

Quote
There's not even 1 player supporting your claims that T3 is good enough and needs a Buff to Fusilliers. Nerfing Stug or Buffing something will not make it attractive neither, it will just cause another imbalance issue.

To put it short: no. If your claim would be even remotely right everybody would still spam Luchs no matter how it was nerfed since the beta since it was sooooooooooooo OP and everyone played t3.

Now you don't see it anymore. Why? Ah yeah. Because it costs almost as much as a StuG III atm. And considering how the StuG III is a disguised Wehr pIV which arrives at 100fuel earlier, has decent enough armour to take on everything except for AT guns and costs less than the Wehr StuG it's justified to increase its price.

O rly?


To put this fucking mess back on track:

Suggestions for t2 and t3:
- Fusiliers can use their Faust without needing pools/modernizations, get a 25% supression resistance and will behave like vet 2 grens in terms of supression. Atm they behave like Volks.
- Panzerjägers cost 320mp (from 255)
- StuG III cost increase to 350mp/65f
- Luchs cost reverted to beta values (320mp/35f)

The PzIII in t3 is a whole different story, and we'll not include changes this drastic into the next patch.

Last edited July 16, 2013 at 7:17 AM by dArCReAvEr

First of all as much as you you  try to caricature it I don't talk and sound like this, its immature; fyi.
Second; I've never told those things except the quoted ones, so your claims belongs to you not me. It's your imagination.

You still prove that by those changes, me and people who think like me are RIGHT. How I know that? Because if it was "perfect" and "goes as it is planned" you would not plan to make patch after patch since the release. So please grow up, stop imitating some imaginary talks and make some balance. And it's not bad to say sometimes "you are right", try it.

How many patches did CoH need to reach its current status? 1.10, 1.20, 1.30,1.31, 1.40,1.50,1.51,1.60,1.61, 1.70, 1.71, 2.101, 2.200, 2.300, 2.301, 2.400, 2.400-2.500, 5 beta patches, 2.501, 2.600,2.601, 2.602. And I'm quite sure I missed some patches inbetween.

Can you count? ~28 patches. I guess we're doing okay with having around ~10 patches by now.

I simply do not agree with the point "omg everything is broken redesign everything". It's stupid. At release of 1.00 CoH everyone complained about mg42 being OP and it should be removed from Wehr t1. Can you imagine how Wehr would look/play now if they had listened to those guys and removed it?

And yes, you're right about the issues you pointed out, but your solutions are not really helping at all. Anyways, this is leading to nowhere except for flaming. Better close this. If you want to continue discussing msg me on steam.

Greetings

Last edited July 16, 2013 at 7:33 PM by dArCReAvEr

About the redesign idea: Not anytime soon and it is not needed right now and it would cause more harm than good. Redesigning just for the sake of it is not good, but cynical redesign is worse.

Time to lock this. There is nothing left to discuss and we know there are some stats to tweak so do not despair, we will be working on it.