Hull MG

Theres consideration of adding hull machineguns to tanks (where applicable). This would add a relatively short-ranged, limited-arc medium machinegun to each tank, moderately improving their suppression capability against infantry.

Here is a list of units that would have these added:

BRITISH

Cromwell (both)
Churchill
Firefly

GERMAN

Panzer III
Panzer IV
Jagdpanzer IV
Jagdpanther
Tiger
Panther
Tiger II

USA

M5 Stuart
M4A4 Sherman
M4A3(76) Sherman
M4A3(105) Sherman
M4 Sherman Jumbo

SOVIET UNION

T-34-76
T-34-85
IS-2

Tested adding a hull MG to Cromwell to start off with.

It didn’t seem to change anything tbfh. All I did anyway was spawn a single Cromwell and attack an AI start position. Even with two MGs nothing got pinned and the Cromwell was quite easily destroyed by auto-roaming uncontrolled infantry with me trying my best to save it and make sure maximum hull MG time.

I’m also just not happy with how retardedly crappy machineguns are damage-wise. Even with both MGs blazing away at individual guys it took awhile for them to die.

Infantry prone armor bonus was increased a couple of months ago in order to avoid vehicles from dominating too much. Which increased their lifespan greatly.
Recently it was made so that smallarms do less damage to vehicles.
This has given longer time to manage infantry skirmishes and battles and you can be able to reinforce undergoing skirmishes where 1 side already would have been defeated without the increased infantry armor bonus.

some gbr infantrist (i think bren) can take 30+ bullets ,after some xp (i did 2 kills ). Superhuman infantry is not good for a realistic game , bullets of some mg’s could rip off limbs.
I dont know why infantry is so expensive . Their equippment is cheap , their trianing take some time but shouldnt be expensive, i dont think that they paid much for a soldier in 1944 , Diktators will just recruit.
Infantry has special weapons like AT ,sniper, motars and anti infantry weapons like mg,rifle,smg ,u have weapons for many purposes, u have a chance 2 counter anything. Sniper needs a change, they r OP sometimes. (in Goddes hands mainly). Stationary cloak is more realistc (camoflage works better without moving), sniper outrange most rifle/mg anyway.
Without HQ platoon , most reinforcments will come 2 late because infantry from barrack is too costy (mainly a time problem), if u can kill ger or gbr HQ in early game (rushing air prolly) u have almost won because your oponent will lack infantry (maybe Godde will manage 2 build 2 or 3 barracks very fast) . Prone armor is only the medecine for the symptoms and not for the reason.

why are you reporting this here?

infantry health is quite obviously not realistic, because the spring engine has no way to make use of cover, or anything approaching realistic infantry behavior. if we used realistic infantry health, this game would be utterly absurd and there would be no point in using infantry for anything except capping flags after your vehicle army had swept everything clear.

their health just represents about the number of bullets that would have to be fired at them in order to bring them down - even 30 is probably too low in that regard, but it is better for gameplay if they die at some point.

as for cost, I don’t think you have thought about the implications for gameplay that such a change would bring. do you -really- want to see 3-4x more infantry on the field when most people’s computers struggle with the numbers we have currently? how would having dramatically more infantry who happened to die very easily improve gameplay? answer: it would not - you’d end up with much more WWI mass-rush kind of play, where the goal would be to build such a large army that in running them at the enemy you would have a large enough chunk survive that you could deal some damage before they were all slaughtered.

a unit being OP only when used by one player does not really qualify - there’s no way to tell if the unit is a problem based on its inherent ability/cost effectiveness, or because the player is outright better than other people at using it (which is almost certainly the case).

Please take more time to present your ideas more coherently when you next decide to post something like this. I value feedback of this sort, but you need to present it in a more thought-out manner, rather than just rambling through a list of things you don’t like at the moment.