This is not a "MAKE THIS OR I LEAVE" thread. It's suggestions with thought, that's all. From my favourite of all time strategy game (yes, it was this much Eugen, the work was absolutely outstanding) I just occasionally pop in, try to prepare a game, but leave before the room is full.
Everybody has his/her own idea of balance. Until we see mod tools, with oner or two prominent mods, the balance/pleasure in the game will depend on Eugen. I trust you guys, even though I've been unhappy at how drastic the changes have been, Nerf hammer and buff uppercuts being rather violent.
Anyway, what I'm asking here will be a half step back of some of the changes. I think the changes were needed, they were good ideas, but overdone. It's not a criticism, it was all dependant on the amount of whine, and balance is a tough thing.
I won't give numbers most of the time, simply because I'm no king of balance with numbers. I'm just giving feedback on how I feel it should be, not how it must be because as an humble player I don't know everything. I'll explain thoroughly the why of each of the proposed gameplay changes.
Idea 1: Increase the time it takes to aim on all artillery + reboost artillery.
Reason: The main reason artillery felt overpowered to most players was that as soon as they popped out of cover, they were shot at by shells coming from the sky. Depending on travel time, it often could feel instantaneous. The artillery did "logical" (take with a pinch of salt, I just can't find a proper word) morale and HE damage to all targets, but it was way too fast to react to any situation. Moving was too punishing for most players, causing the static gameplay some people encountered (I never suffered from it though, just a question of drawing the attention elsewhere). I personally find it more frustrating to see a direct hit leave a tank "worried" as they currently are than to be punished for advancing in the open.
Idea 2: No corrected shot for MLRS units.
Reason: There have been several good explanations why over the time. MLRS were used a sniping units simply because it was rather easy to blanket an area you had eyes on, with concentrated, heavy effects. No other units could do that, except in great numbers. If the radius of uncorrected shot was slightly reduced, but there was no correction at all, these weapon systems would do what they are supposed to do: Suppress a big area so an attack can move forward, instead of wiping out areas so your units can occupy a land of craters.
Idea 3: Slightly reducing the range of the tanks that had their range increased. -IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THIS, GO TO DEDICATED THREADS-
Reason: The change gave life to units that were rarely ever used, and that's a great thing. "Heavy tanks" were always part of my deck, with either challengers or Abra(ha)ms and when I saw that the AMX-32 + Kpz 70 also had their range increased, I was incredibly happy because these units deserved a bit of love. They were loved, until everyone realised that two units in the whole game became totally outstanding compared to the others: Leo 2 and T-80s. These combine everything, from speed, armour, damage, accuracy, range, all of those top notch. In itself, it's realistic somehow. In terms of gameplay, it's bad. Units in a game should have some weaknesses. When you take an AMX-32, you have a very accurate while still, powerful and fast vehicle, with poor armour. When you take a challenger, you have a behemoth that moves painfully slowly while raining down some death. With a Kpz 70, you have a fast, accurate and powerful on the move medium armoured tank. All those units have weaknesses unique to them. T-80s and Leo 2s have weaknesses that are common with any other tank: Rather weak sides, and rather high price, but not outstandingly high compared to the other options. With such a range increase, the other heavy tanks can't compare, as they fear the same units, with many more weaknesses. With a slightly lowered range, but still better than "medium" tanks, they would become closer to equals, mainly because their price would be more in tune with their individual battle efficiency.
Idea 4: NO ATGM buff.
Reason: Yes, it's strange to have a proposition that is a no proposition... Buffing ATGMs, that are good against every armoured target, would penalise any land options, especially "medium" tanks that are generally One-shot already. Buffing the range or damage to counter heavies would make any other land unit pretty useless.
Idea 5: Increase the price of "extreme" range AA.
Reason: Currently, the Chapparal and to a bigger extent the BUK create total "No fly zones" as they one-shot their high value targets. Long range AA have nothing to block their sights: If one target is entering their no fly zone, it dies except rather lucky ones. Making those units more scarce by increasing the price or reducing the availability would bring helicopters back as a viable/not depending on luck option. I would have asked for different flight patterns for helicopters, but that would be a lot of work, with no certain result.
Idea 6: Infantry Tweaks.
Reason: The reason why some units were hit with the availability hammer was that units are able to disembark and shoot immediately. It's not their stats/numbers, it's just that you can go and unload in the middle of the enemy. What I'd like to see is infantry units taking more time to unload from APCs OR unable to shoot for a few seconds after unloading OR turning Worried if unloaded close to enemy units, so they aren't that efficient at shooting immediately, depending on the one that's easiest to code. If that was done, Motostrelcis, Piechota Smech, Spadochroniarze and Vyst-whateverthenameis- could be back in better numbers. Currently, Vysts and spades are in too few numbers compared to USSR options, while Piechota Zmech, as one of the most useless infantry units around, isn't ever used, even for the price. On nato's side, i don't care, reducing the overall availability should even be a possibility as they are all professionals but the Riflemen.
So, once again, I don't want this to be applied exactly as I asked. This is just "overall gameplay" changes leads. I'm no developer, just some guy that was active to the community, and average joe, not too good, not too bad, that likes the community, not against changes and just wants to give a bit of feedback.
"Rocks are OP. Paper is fine" signed: Scissors