A couple of things for balance changes.

[reciprocate]

You can agree or disagree, but some things do need to be addressed.
- T34 Calliope Barrage Damage needs to be increased = Out of all the rocket barrage pieces, this one has the weakest damage of all, it can barely destroy treads off even medium tanks. The Calliope also has probably the highest profile making it a much easier target to pick off since it's on a Sherman. It can at least defend itself with it's gun, but no one really does that.
- Remove camouflage bonus to flamethrowers attacking in Shrubbery/cover. This one is bothersome. Practically almost all units in grass who attack at least get partially revealed. I don't get why a guy in a mask with a big tank on his back letting out a bunch of fire still can remain unseen, moreso than a sniper or a scout.
- Add a delay of 2-5 seconds when towing artillery pieces. The ability to have an Armored Car rush in to an undefended one and decrew and steal+run off with the thing is silly. The argument is that someone should at least have a form of defense, but at the same time, one can't allocate resources to an artillery piece that may or may not be rushed upon. It's also unrealistic how towing them is instant.
- Lower damage of Katyusha. It's rockets are strongest in game and can annihilate top armor of the most expensive vehicles. I think it should probably be equal with Panzerwerfer/Land Mattress.
- Slight increase in T29 frontal armor. Current values seem to say it's 102mm(same as Pershing) in game. It's the somewhat opposite of what an IS-3 is, has a powerful gun, but rather weak armor, whereas IS-3 has great armor and a lackluster gun. Basically a T29 is an upgunned Pershing that moves slower. I know some things are meant to be kept historically accurate with it's armor at 102mm. But increasing it to 130 or 140 would make enough of a difference so that it doesn't end up being a glass cannon against a King Tiger(it'll live longer), Turtle, etc.
- Lower reload time of KV-2. I almost never see anyone use this unit due to it's high frame, and long reloading time. Has decent armor, but by the time it's on the field, it'd most likely get killed, the SU-122 is more efficient choice. Lowering the reload time will at least make it more attractive.
- Lower Puma accuracy over long ranges. I've seen and used a Puma using the AP incendiary rounds snipe off a IS-3's treads at 110m+ in a few games recently. It's really accurate on a flat trajectory.

[x1mmx]

I disagree with everything except the flamethrower.

Why? Because if you "balance" this game around unit vs unit then every nation becomes a clone. I, and I think the developers as well, dont want that to happen.

One minute you say something is too unrealistic then you say, "I know you guys are trying to use realism but you have to slack off at some point."

The Calope is fine and next to the land matress it's my favorite artillery. For one a lone 20mm vehicle cant come behind your lines to kill your crew and drive off. Secondly the Caliope is the perfect vehicle to put next to your 150mm howitzers for protection while it's reloading.

Flamethrower needs to lose it's camoflauge. They just cant be seen most of the time. You can spread out infantry and run them in and one flamethrower can drop multiple squads. Also while he's spewing his fire he'll often times still be invisible to attacking.

Delay on arty I disagree with because I play UK alot and one of the strengths is hooking up a 17pdr to a jeep and driving it around the field attempting to get flank shots. Secondly it's also a good method when attacking an enemies arty to kill the crew and hook it up and go. You'll just have to protect your crew. A loan ATR is sufficient protection.

Katyusha doesnt have strongest that I'm aware of. Maybe the strongest of the larger barrages but the Nebelwerfer or whatever it is from Germany I've had destroy heavies with one rocket to the hull. That thing is a tank killer in all honesty and is usually dead on most of the time. But again bring your own arty and knock it out or pull up a tank and gun it down with HE.

T29 is fine. I've had some great games vs Germany where the last 10 minutes is covered with heavies and the T29 holds it's own. Personally I'd love to have the Super Pershing instead because that tank was in the war but the 29 will have to do. It's got a great gun and that gun alone poses a severe threat to anyone else. The one tank I think should get an increase to armor and should due to historical numbers is the Centurion which had 118mm think frontal armor.

The KV-2 is a 152mm I think. Lowering the reload would have it eclipse anything else on Soviets side including the SU-152. It's a great early bombard tank but most people have an endgame mindset so they always wait to get the super powerful units. Nothing you can do about that. People want to be the first with a badass tank on the field. The KV-2 is a great tank, it's up to the person to want to use it.

I've never had problems with the Puma. You may have just had an unlucky game or lucky depends on who's using hte PUma where it landed some accurate shots. I've had that think miss three shots on an is1 on it's side and rear armor only to have the IS1 turn and kill me. Also the puma is easily taken out by light vehicles with 20mm. It's just not a huge threat if you know how to counter light vehicles.

[sgt_steiner]

the rushing in of armoured cars and even jeeps or kubel wagons to steal artillery and AT guns is a very sore point and extremely frustrating, especialy as its a tactic i dont and wouldnt use, perhaps if you had to make 2 men crew the gun first before you could grab it with a vehicle would be better, this would certainly make it acceptable to myself.
the flamethrowers really shouldn get a camo bonus either, i love flamers but dont think having them hiding in bushes is very true, as they were an attacking unit NOT a defensive unit.
the puma i would leave as it is, because it did have an exellant gun but crap armour protection, plus although its a very fast moving vehicle its not very good at turning in tight spaces or over moving over bad ground, so i think its pretty spot on,
but overall i would agree with reciprocates post!!!

[x1mmx]

the rushing in of armoured cars and even jeeps or kubel wagons to steal artillery and AT guns is a very sore point and extremely frustrating, especialy as its a tactic i dont and wouldnt use, perhaps if you had to make 2 men crew the gun first before you could grab it with a vehicle would be better, this would certainly make it acceptable to myself.
the flamethrowers really shouldn get a camo bonus either, i love flamers but dont think having them hiding in bushes is very true, as they were an attacking unit NOT a defensive unit.
the puma i would leave as it is, because it did have an exellant gun but crap armour protection, plus although its a very fast moving vehicle its not very good at turning in tight spaces or over moving over bad ground, so i think its pretty spot on,
but overall i would agree with reciprocates post!!!

So because it's a tactic you dont and wouldnt use then you have a problem against it? A lone ATR crew can drop anything that comes behind the lines and tries to tow your guns. You cant just leave things unguarded and expect people to leave it alone. There has to be multiple methods to hampering an enemy force.

I keep my guns guarded so I dont have this problem.

[UsF]

If vehicles had to stop to tow a cannon before continuing to drive, this would also be good and sufficient.

I think that not the flamethrower should be seen easily, but anyone that carries that huge canister or maybe even big secondary weapons like rocket launchers on their back, should be seen more easily when in a single shrub.

Balancing should be done with the cost, not the weapon and armor statistics.

[pedro0930]

The price for a few vehicles can use some adjustment, too.
For example, wirbelwind cost 24 points while a 4H only cost 25. Although wirbelwind has decent hull armor protection, it's turret can be destroyed by practically anything with armor penetration value. Coupling this with its terrible weaponry (quad 20mm, worst weapon out of all AA tank, sometimes fails to even penetrate armored car whereas its American and Russian equivalent is killing tanks and infantries left and right)

25 pounder's HE effectiveness can also use a boost. I mean, sure, its caliber is small for a howitzer, but needing 3+ shots to just take down a thin brick wall makes it completely worthless. (ok, it has good range for early game, but range is nothing if both its HE and AP shell can't damage anything, not to mention it can't even indirect-fire)

Mortar: in infantry only game, it completely destroys infantry in the open, in cover, and in building. If you are playing victory flag and the enemy has one of this in range of the flag, don't even bother with the flag, at all before you take it out (to take it out with infantry is almost impossible since it is always guarded..so the best counter is...another mortar)

In normal unit set, its still extremely survivable due to its small size. It's already a pain to have to risk an equivalently expensive vehicle just to take it out, but often time you will have a hard time hitting it with HE shell from long range and it often requires 3+ hits from 75mm gun to destroy (competent player will move a tank to shield the mortar and relocate it long before you can get that many shots off), this give the enemy plenty of time to sneak up on your tank and in the end you have another mortar duel.

(The best weapon to kill mortar in the end is...auto cannon, which for some reason disintegrate mortar in a single hit)
(One time I tried to crush it with an armored car and the mortar exploded, killing my armored car, some sort of new self defense mechanism..? )

I am actually fine with flamethrower, since I always use officer to look at every bush for AT gun and flamethrower before I advance, so never really got ambushed by it.

[x1mmx]

I dont believe point values are set based on a trumping system. Where as a 30 point should completely dominate a 15 point item. Resource values seem more set on their capabilities in the correct scenarios for what they are best at doing. They dont need a means to kill anything that is 29 or less points than itself or to be able to do a better job at something with a lesser point values.

The wirbelwind is just amazing at dropping defending infantry. Even spraying it into the bushes can do this. It's capable of dropping light vehicles only. The American 40mm AA autocannon has more penetration but it also has alot slower refire rate and a smaller magazine. The wirbelwind's guns arent designed to be a light tank killer.

It's all about using vehicles and weapons for the roles they excel at and not trying to make everyone have teh same weapon that can do the same thing. If we go that route then let's just keep Germany in game and drop the other nations.

We'll all just do Germany vs Germany. No "imbalance" issues.

[sgt_steiner]

NO 1mm if you read my post properly you would realise that my problem is with the way that a car can drive by an AT gun and grab it on the run without even stopping, it is very unrealistic as i have yet to see anything that can grab something towable without some person there to connect the 2 before towing away, perhaps if you had read the whole text instead of the first part of one sentence you would understand my point better!!!

[Zeke Wolff]

I agree to 100% with sgt_steiner here. If you´ve ever seen a AT-gun or anything else that needs to be towed, you will understand that hooking it up to a vehicle isnt something you do in less than 1 second and absolutely not when the towing vehicle is moving!

For example the German 88 took a couple of minutes to bring into action even when handled by a highly skilled gun crew and about the same time to prepare it for towing. It isn´t a task that is made in seconds, we´re talking about minutes.

~Zeke.

[Zeke Wolff]

The price for a few vehicles can use some adjustment, too.
For example, wirbelwind cost 24 points while a 4H only cost 25. Although wirbelwind has decent hull armor protection, it's turret can be destroyed by practically anything with armor penetration value. Coupling this with its terrible weaponry (quad 20mm, worst weapon out of all AA tank, sometimes fails to even penetrate armored car whereas its American and Russian equivalent is killing tanks and infantries left and right)

Thats because the Wirblewinds 20mm Flak guns weren´t designed to act as a anti-tank weapon. They were designed first as a anti-aircraft weapon and to a lesser degree, as a anti-personal weapon. The armor penetration of the 20mm guns aren´t that good, nor was it range anything to brag home about, and these two things were one of the biggest reason to why the German Army wanted to replace the Wirblewind with the Ostwind which had a single 37mm Flak37 gun. The 37mm Flak37 had an armor penetration of almost 60mm at 100 metres which made it quite good against the armored Thunderbolts that roamed the skies but also against light armored tanks and vehicles.


25 pounder's HE effectiveness can also use a boost. I mean, sure, its caliber is small for a howitzer, but needing 3+ shots to just take down a thin brick wall makes it completely worthless. (ok, it has good range for early game, but range is nothing if both its HE and AP shell can't damage anything, not to mention it can't even indirect-fire)

The UK 25 Pounder isnt a true howitzer. It was designed as a field gun, which means that it comes with a direct-sight but it could be used as a indirect-fire weapon, although its range wasnt as good as a true howitzer. But from my own experience, the 25 Pounder in the game isnt as bad as you claim it to be. Sure it cant knock out the heaviest German tanks from the front, but a Pz4 is no problem at all. Also it has a big advantage over other guns, since it has a 360 degree traverse.

~Zeke.

[pedro0930]

I wasn't really expecting to see wirbelwind destroying tanks (which the Russian equivalent, ZSU-37, can do with certain ease) , I am just saying for 24 points, you can get vastly superior units. I believe the reason for wirbelwind to be so expensive is because is has extremely good armor for an AA tank (same armor value as Pz4 H), which is fine, however, this armor protection does not extend to the turret (and wirbelwind has a huge turret), which makes it really useless if the enemy has any form of AT defense (even the dinky 37mm AT gun can take out its turret at maximum range).

As for 25 pounder's AT capability, that's not really my main complain since it's not designed to be an AT weapon so I wasn't expecting much when I use it. My main complain is its very lackluster HE shell. HE shell from Pz4E, which only has 75mm gun is just as strong, if not stronger than 25pder (while having much better mobility..bishop is just sluggish to control..to the point that it's probably the only vehicle that I put auto-fire on). The towed version is just too vulnerable to employ against anything for more than 30 seconds before HE shells from the enemy knocks it out at max range. (and since it has a fairly poor rate of fire and the above mentioned poor high explosive rounds, it HAS to be firing constantly to make up for it. Hell, 6 pounder can often do better job at both anti-infantry and anti-entrenchment although historically its HE capability was considered to be too weak...)

[reciprocate]

I personally consider the Wirbelwind nothing more than just a quad 20mm with some armor. Even then, I rarely use it, I'll take the sdkfz223, since that usually does the job(less armor, but more mobile and same gun but in less capacity). I'd use the Wirlbel as a means of Anti Air, but so far there's no real air units in multiplayer.

The 25pounder imo is fine. This isn't like COH where the British 25PD'er is strictly artillery in form of spam based rape. I don't think it needs any changes, fine as it is.

As for the Calliope, it does need some type of damage boost. The land mattress is clearly stronger than it(probably around the same level as Panzerwerfer). Also, who would stick a reloading unit like a calliope next to another artillery piece? That's just begging to have it hit by counter-arty. As I've already mentioned, the Calliope does have the minor edge with it's own 75mm gun and an MG, along with the Sherman armor(Zeke can correct me if it's M4A2 or M4A3 non Jumbo armor). But no one really uses the Calliope for those, they're just an added bonus to it. Also I doubt no one wants to use those armaments because if they expose the Calliope, it may get fired upon once it reveals itself thereby risking it and having it killed.

I'm glad most of us can agree about the towing speed, it needs to be increased to a point, instant isn't really proper. It's not realistic nor is it balanced. And even if an ambushed artillery piece did have protection, there is no guarantee that whatever is protecting it will be successful in stopping the ambusher. A lucky shot or counter-artillery fire can kill a nearby unit.

So far the balance changes I've suggested are meant to ignore tactics and focus on direct unit balance itself. Sure you can have a security force to find a well concealed flamethrower. Sure you can have something defend an arty piece with anti tank weaponry. But that was never the point, I mentioned that already but you must've ignored it.I'm not recommending a massive list of units be changed to be exactly like a clone of another nation's. What I am suggesting is modifying some attributes to give the underpowered more strength, and the overpowered less. While it does seem like it may do that, the subtle differences in each unit is what makes them stand out. If a Calliope's cost was lowered to reflect it's power, I wouldn't mind that either. Same with the Katyusha, while it's fairly expensive, it's devastating knockout power could be addressed, is it guaranteed to kill a heavy tank? No, but I've seen become effective in doing so more than 60% of the time it's used when it unleashes the rockets in full to a single target.

The SU-122 is the best artillery like SPG the Russians have in terms of cost-efficiency. Making the KV-2 worthless(ok not worthless, but underutilized, be honest, how often do you see ANYONE use it? The last time I've seen a person use it was myself nearly 2 weeks ago), it could cost less or have increased armor or movement speed. But the real weakness to it is just like the IS-3's, it's the reload time. Lowering the time by even a few seconds can make a difference and increase use for it.. By the time it takes to reload 1 152mm shell, you could've probably thrown in a couple SU-122 rounds at the same target(from a lesser range, but I think they have the same max range, I am not 100% sure).

I have never ever seen a Panzerwerfer or Raketenwerfer kill an IS-2 or 3, let alone a Centurion/Pershing/Turtle/T29. It has on a rare occasion knock the engine out(but not light on fire), but more often than not it just takes out a tread or both. Yet, countless times I've seen and used Katyusha kill King Tigers, Elefants, Jagdtigers, T29, Turtle, the list of what the Katyusha can kill in regards to armor is practically endless, all it takes is 1 full barrage on the unit and there's a good chance it'll have the rockets go destroy or if you're lucky pierce the hull. I personally focus whatever I got to kill the damn Katyusha when I see it. It's too dangerous to be left alive.

The T29 change is a bit overreaching I admit, but I think it wouldn't hurt to give it a stealth buff for the frontal armor, it's gun is great(almost equal to the 88mm of the Ele/JP/Nashorn/KT).

The Puma suggestion is also a bit overreaching too, but I use it as a sniper to disable treads due to it's accuracy and low reload time. Of course it's vulnerable, but all you need is a couple of good shots, then run away, the fact you can do it so far is what makes it strangely odd. I figure that it would have decreased accuracy over 100m, but really it doesn't.

[Ludovsky]

Actually, the "strenght" if the 25 pounder if I recalls well didn't even had to do with any characteristics of the 25 pounder itself rather than the sheer quantity of them the british fielded.

So much that when captured germans asked the british to see their "self-loading artillery", they were thoroughly disapointed to see it actually was regular 25 pounders.

Just that by "regular 25 pounder", we're talking about a ****ing load of such(pardon for the use of the f-bomb for emphasis), so much that these germans(prior to seeing the guns) truly thought the brits had developped a form of "self-loading artillery" why the true reason for the british's rate of fire actually had more to do with "artillery spam".

[Walderschmidt]

While the SU-122 is a superior self propelled gun (artillery), it lack a machine gun and thus is extremely vulnerable to infantry attacks. I'm sure most competent players would guard it with infantry, but it is easy to take it out from the side with a rocket launcher infantry. It's structure is similar to some German heavy tank destroyers, so hull shots are easy.


Regards, Thomas