Panzerfusiliers

[ubermensche]

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).

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

 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.

[Riggsman]

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.

[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.

[ubermensche]

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.

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.

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

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...

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.

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...

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?
 

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.

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.

[Riggsman]

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.

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

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

[Blackbishop]

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.