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.