Unit - Reward suggestions thread:

[Xeones]

KV-1, i totally agree and like Xeones said it should be 3CP and stats/prices similar to Churchill, maybe a bit better gun!

Actually, I said that it should be at least 3CP. If its at the beginning of the doctrinal tree, I'd say it would have to be 4CP. Now if Mechanics were first, and the KV-1 second, then I'd be fine with a KV-1 only costing 3CP. That way, it still effectively costs 4CP to tech to a KV-1, which would keep it from coming out too early for a heavy tank.

I'd still prefer one of the Valentines --probably the IX now that I've done a bit more research on them--since it would have a 6-pdr and a coaxial MG.

[Panocek]

T-34s are good against infantry, T90 have nice suppression values. I think the soviet armor is ok, if the soviets would have an unit like that you are using the wrong reasons.

Replacing the T34/76 from 1943 with a model from 1941 could be interesting. But I don't know if it worth the change.

Yes, T90 is excellent at suppressing infantry, but in terms of killing speed its low. T90 + infantry wins, but, soviet armor, alone, is inferior to American/German counterparts, who have a mg (.50 or MG42), that can do some damage, especially at close range.

But, this is the so-called "IMHO".

Between 1943 and 41 only difference is turret, remaking entire tank is not necessary.

[Paciat]

When you suggest reward-units, you'll have to take into account that not every vehicle is able to replace every other vehicle.
The Brit's Kangaroo is a good negative-example for this. They created a thing which totally differs from the original vehicle it replaces and overthrew the whole balance and especially gameplay of CoH.

EF Kangaroo is balanced. It just needed some nerfs that Relic didnt care to make. I still dont understand why ToV Roo is the cheapest of all troop carriers.

[Red_Stinger]

KV-1, i totally agree and like Xeones said it should be 3CP and stats/prices similar to Churchill, maybe a bit better gun!

Actually, I said that it should be at least 3CP. If its at the beginning of the doctrinal tree, I'd say it would have to be 4CP. Now if Mechanics were first, and the KV-1 second, then I'd be fine with a KV-1 only costing 3CP. That way, it still effectively costs 4CP to tech to a KV-1, which would keep it from coming out too early for a heavy tank.

I'd still prefer one of the Valentines --probably the IX now that I've done a bit more research on them--since it would have a 6-pdr and a coaxial MG.

Hmmm KV1 for breakthrough? Why not. But I would still prefer replace the IS2 with KV1 (with possible upgrade to 85mm in armory) and make IS2 only for breakthrough doctrine. And the LL sherman is so boring, why not instead a sort of bonus for armored unit?
Wordsmith had some really good idea to do that, plus "staline's speech" is really... useless 

And I love the idea of soviet marines "black jackets", but I wonder how add them to the game? Special defensive unit for Propaganda? Or replacement for guards?

T44 and IS3 would be a good idea though, but we need to create a model and animate it... not possible for a while, and I want the Ostheer to be released in the faster way (I dont mean for the next month, but dev shouldnt wast their modding time in this kind of details).

[Blackbishop]

Well, some units are just to fill the place. I.e. sherman L&L, brit's nests & mortar are just placeholders for the soviet units that should be there; as they aren't finished something appropriate should be used...

[IJoe]

Hi fellas,
I'd really like to see naval infantry ingame, as was mentioned before, but somehow unfairly forgotten.
Those heroic men were very common during the defence of Leningrad, Sevastopol, etc in the first phase of Great Patriotic War (the purely defensive one). In fact, if Devs won't consider adding them as a reward unit, I'll be fairly dissappointed and shall settle down on replacing one of the infantry skin for theirs anyway.

Just trying to keep it warm 'bout those mariners.

[HyperSniper999]

I also would like to see the Black Demons.

[neosdark]

I also would like to see the Black Demons.

If i remember correctly we have skins for them. If we make a sub for an exsisting unit it would probably Guards. Although i don't really see a purpose for this switch except aesthetics.

Although we can always switch their roles, Guards are long to mid range, so we can make the Soviet Marines more Close Range oriented by giving them some Fedorov Avtomats or perhaps the AVS-36 (both of which I see as an early attempt at an Assualt Rifle), so as not to reuse the same old PPSh/ PPS CQB system.   

[IJoe]

I also would like to see the Black Demons.

If i remember correctly we have skins for them. If we make a sub for an exsisting unit it would probably Guards. Although i don't really see a purpose for this switch except aesthetics.

Although we can always switch their roles, Guards are long to mid range, so we can make the Soviet Marines more Close Range oriented by giving them some Fedorov Avtomats or perhaps the AVS-36 (both of which I see as an early attempt at an Assualt Rifle), so as not to reuse the same old PPSh/ PPS CQB system.

Why necessarily guards?
Black coats could be an awesome replacement for tank hunters,  but:
1. having AT grenades instead of ptrd and
2. give 'em molotovs against infantry,
3. cut the ambush ability, 'cause they are quite easy to notice in those adorable fancy clothings.
4. Make 'em slower, so they'd be useless against fast-moving light armour, but
5. add some health, so that they would become a dreadful defensive unit,
= effective against heavy tanks and infantry.

[Blackbishop]

You cannot replace tank hunters with those marines because they will rely on their AT grenades with muni-based cost ability to fill the AT role... that doesn't sounds good.

Looks like you want a guard like unit to replace AT infantry. Sounds like the hotchkiss.

[IJoe]

You cannot replace tank hunters with those marines because they will rely on their AT grenades with muni-based cost ability to fill the AT role... that doesn't sounds good.

Looks like you want a guard like unit to replace AT infantry. Sounds like the hotchkiss.

I didn't say anything about muni cost, because I don't see it that way. All their abilities should be charge-free on munitions, just add an upgrade (or use the one that is already in the armory) to activate 'em.
But even with that muni cost on, which I think would be way too OP ('cause in that case you should cut on a cool-down time). you still can do it. Why? - because it's a reward unit
I mean, you are free to use it or not. If you're talking multilayer, then too the use of a reward unit is a subject of arrangements and rules.

[Paciat]

You cannot replace tank hunters with those marines because they will rely on their AT grenades with muni-based cost ability to fill the AT role... that doesn't sounds good.

Looks like you want a guard like unit to replace AT infantry. Sounds like the hotchkiss.

I didn't say anything about muni cost, because I don't see it that way. All their abilities should be charge-free on munitions, just add an upgrade (or use the one that is already in the armory) to activate 'em.
But even with that muni cost on, which I think would be way too OP ('cause in that case you should cut on a cool-down time). you still can do it. Why? - because it's a reward unit
I mean, you are free to use it or not. If you're talking multilayer, then too the use of a reward unit is a subject of arrangements and rules.

Since when did marines fight (and were good at it) heavy armor?
Its like suggesting an anti tank officer. 

[Blackbishop]

I didn't say anything about muni cost, because I don't see it that way. All their abilities should be charge-free on munitions, just add an upgrade (or use the one that is already in the armory) to activate 'em.
But even with that muni cost on, which I think would be way too OP ('cause in that case you should cut on a cool-down time). you still can do it. Why? - because it's a reward unit
I mean, you are free to use it or not. If you're talking multilayer, then too the use of a reward unit is a subject of arrangements and rules.

You are wrong with that... if you replace a unit with the wrong one you'll unbalance the game.

[IJoe]

Since when did marines fight (and were good at it) heavy armor?
Its like suggesting an anti tank officer. 

Not funny! AT ALL !!!
Many heroic soviet men sacrificed their lives in that sacred war (virtually for soviet people it was not a fight for the freedom but for mere survival, for fascist pigs were not only anti-semit and anti-communist, but slavianofobic (hated the noble slavic people) as well, and considered SU population as untermenshen. Millions of soviet people of non jewish origin died or were executed in nazi concentration camps and even on the spot).
SU history books, as well as participants of the GPW I personaly know, tell that during the fierce fights over various soviet port-cities naval infantry not only took part, but was one of most motivated, heroic and thus effective part of soviet defence forces, that fought basically anything they had to, including armour. The only minus of naval infantry as a fighting force was their relatively small number.
And yes, officers too can throw AT grenades in real life.
Post Merge: November 16, 2010, 08:00:02 PM

I didn't say anything about muni cost, because I don't see it that way. All their abilities should be charge-free on munitions, just add an upgrade (or use the one that is already in the armory) to activate 'em.
But even with that muni cost on, which I think would be way too OP ('cause in that case you should cut on a cool-down time). you still can do it. Why? - because it's a reward unit
I mean, you are free to use it or not. If you're talking multilayer, then too the use of a reward unit is a subject of arrangements and rules.

You are wrong with that... if you replace a unit with the wrong one you'll unbalance the game.

What is that particularly wrong about my suggestion, may you thoroughly explain, if you don't mind.
I'm proposing an anti-light armour unit to be replaced by anti-heavy armour one, adding also an ability to throw AP grenade (which molotov in this game is). Cool-down for molotovs could be increased comparatively to that of penal squads.

[Paciat]

Since when did marines fight (and were good at it) heavy armor?
Its like suggesting an anti tank officer. 

Not funny! AT ALL !!!

Sure its funny, no mather how many Soviets will die to prove me wrong. Marines are well trained, light infantry, not anti armor infantry. Its also funny that you dont understand that.