Changes for the next version!

[LCH98]

Duke is right,
Landers have their standard Kar98 rifles, but they can now upgraded with Mp40 or with Panzerbüchse (AT).
The Panzerfüsiliers are now more defensive, they can be upgraded with LMG 34 and G41.

I'm sorry, but wouldn't that make the Landers a OP early-game SMG-squad?
Or does the MP40 upgrade require a expensive research, like the Mkb42 (H) in the current version?

Yup, unlocking mp40/pzb requires teching of course.

1)
Damn you react fast.
2)
Thank you for clearing that up.

3)
Just a slight idea, but shouldn't the PaK 40 75mm AT gun be support doctrine, as it's slow and can't really be used offensivly, and the Marder in the offence pool, as it can keep up with other tanks and provide extremely mobile, yet effective AT support?

Edit: removed typo

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

Duke is right,
Landers have their standard Kar98 rifles, but they can now upgraded with Mp40 or with Panzerbüchse (AT).
The Panzerfüsiliers are now more defensive, they can be upgraded with LMG 34 and G41.

I'm sorry, but wouldn't that make the Landers a OP early-game SMG-squad?
Or does the MP40 upgrade require a expensive research, like the Mkb42 (H) in the current version?

Yup, unlocking mp40/pzb requires teching of course.

1)
Damn you react fast.
2)
Thank you for clearing that up.

3)
Just a slight idea, but shouldn't the PaK 40 75mm AT gun be support doctrine, as it's slow and can't really be used offensivly, and the Marder in the offence pool, as it can keep up with other tanks and provide extremely mobile, yet effective AT support?

Edit: removed typo

It works like that.

[LCH98]

Duke is right,
Landers have their standard Kar98 rifles, but they can now upgraded with Mp40 or with Panzerbüchse (AT).
The Panzerfüsiliers are now more defensive, they can be upgraded with LMG 34 and G41.

I'm sorry, but wouldn't that make the Landers a OP early-game SMG-squad?
Or does the MP40 upgrade require a expensive research, like the Mkb42 (H) in the current version?

Yup, unlocking mp40/pzb requires teching of course.

1)
Damn you react fast.
2)
Thank you for clearing that up.

3)
Just a slight idea, but shouldn't the PaK 40 75mm AT gun be support doctrine, as it's slow and can't really be used offensivly, and the Marder in the offence pool, as it can keep up with other tanks and provide extremely mobile, yet effective AT support?

Edit: removed typo

It works like that.

Might be me, but with support pool, i get the Marder and the Pz3, with assualt pool i get the luchs and PaK 40

[Codename "Tiger"]

It will be changed in the next Patch

[LCH98]

It will be changed in the next Patch

That's good to hear, it always seemed illogical to me.

Thank you for informing me about that.

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

It will be changed in the next Patch

That's good to hear, it always seemed illogical to me.

Thank you for informing me about that.

There'll be more detailed informations on the faction changes in the near future, I think those will clear up a lot of confusion.

[Flash_KOTI]

Apologies, just wan to "bump" the thread by re-posting my su-122 query, since it seems to have been buried in posts:

"Since it was brought up, what kind of role will the SU-122 have?  In one of the older versions of EF, I vaguely remember it being a soviet version of the Wehrmacht's StuH, ie an anti-infantry short-range mobile artillery piece.  But the real-world version was also a capable tank destroyer, so it could conceivably be a replacement for the SU 85/100."

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

Apologies, just wan to "bump" the thread by re-posting my su-122 query, since it seems to have been buried in posts:

"Since it was brought up, what kind of role will the SU-122 have?  In one of the older versions of EF, I vaguely remember it being a soviet version of the Wehrmacht's StuH, ie an anti-infantry short-range mobile artillery piece.  But the real-world version was also a capable tank destroyer, so it could conceivably be a replacement for the SU 85/100."

The SU 122 will no longer be a reward unit for the KV 2 and is removed for now. I am not aware of plans to readd it as part of a soviet reward doctrine at this point. But if it's readded it's likely to be used as multi-purpose vehicle instead of being a howitzer only. Much like the ISU 152 will be in the next release. 

[Flash_KOTI]

That's a pity, I saw in one of the recent threads that a new model had been finished, so I thought it was going to be implemented again in an upcoming patch.  Ah well.

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

That's a pity, I saw in one of the recent threads that a new model had been finished, so I thought it was going to be implemented again in an upcoming patch.  Ah well.

That's the SU 100 that'll see action in the new release version

[Miles Dixon]

I hope it is not so off topic, but will the new version going to have compatibility for 2.602 too? Since the recent version of Steam requires all-time online with Steam (no more offline - it will shows cannot connect to Steam Server), which is a bit annoying when the internet connection is not so good...

[Blackbishop]

I wonder if he is confusing the SU-122 with the ISU-122 :\. The HE ammo of the SU-122's shell could dislodge turrets and break tracks by brute percussion force(in common English: due to the massive size and explosive force) but only in close range which caused a lot of losses(either destroyed or captured); so, it cannot work like the ISU-122 or SU-85 that were real tank hunters.

Also, SU-85 was produced after SU-122, which means they needed a real tank hunter, so I really doubt it could replace the former's role. Maybe an ability could be added to break turrets or treads, but that would be checked in due time.

@miles_dixon
As long as you install the compatibility patch, any EF version will work with 2.602.

[Miles Dixon]

@Enrique 'Blackbishop' E.

Thanks on the answer. :> Does it means that after installing the new patch, then install the compatibility patch? As I experienced with the 2.2.2.0 (for steam version), the game crashes (for 2.602) when I install them in order 2.2.1.0 -> 2.2.2.0 -> compatibility, but it works fine if 2.2.1.0 -> compatibility.

Also, will Ostheer have a MG/ defensive building like others (not the doctrine specific Panzernest), since it is not mentioned in the announcement?

[Blackbishop]

No, Ostheer is not going to have new defensive structures.

[LCH98]

No, Ostheer is not going to have new defensive structures.

So no PaK 36 "Doorknocker" emplacement, as had been mentioned earlier?