[Wehr] Rework for their Mainline Infantry.

12346»

Comments

  • #152
    2 years ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 692
    edited November 2016
    if you add a 5th man to ost inf (especialy grens), the per model stat/dps needs to be lowered or their support weapons need to be toned down imo. Because the are backed bye better if not the best support weapon teams in the game. and they would benefit massivly if the get 5 men and keep their dps/ability,s and support weapon strength. they would be really hard to force a off.

    looks at Volks for example: wich are to good for their price, they have simaler utility as cons but have much better scaling and combat stats for only 250mp 60 muni and no side tech :/ .
    I know they have weapon teams that are pretty meh but imagine if they get mg42, ost turbo mortar and pak! :s u would destroy the balance ost has with sov.

    In an inf battle (without double lmg) grens at their most effective range are just fine.
    yes they need to retreat early, but they always make models drop on aproach and should always have backup like mg42 or more grens.

    i still believe that squad spacing, accuracy nerf to us mortar and the light vehicle aoe/accuracy nerfs is almost all the wher inf need.

    (ow yeah doulbe lmg does need to go, only bar and dp28 for guards should be exeptions)
  • #153
    2 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited December 2016

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    if you add a 5th man to ost inf (especialy grens), the per model stat/dps needs to be lowered or their support weapons need to be toned down imo. Because the are backed bye better if not the best support weapon teams in the game. and they would benefit massivly if the get 5 men and keep their dps/ability,s and support weapon strength. they would be really hard to force a off.

    And those "support units" are obsolete and gone after the 20 minute mark...at best you will see an MG 42 here and there...

    Also mortar pits from brits...smoke on rifles, oorah, 120 mil mortars on the soviets, two man snipers, dual purpose su 76 and ZIS....and generally bigger squads on the Allied side.

    They (OST) dont even out with support weapons, as they are just that, merely a "support"...for OST infantry that cant hold at all versus their Allied counterparts, bleeding you out with high reinforcement cost...

    High reinforcement cost on Grens also leads to a situation where you spend manpower on reinforcing instead of geeting out more support units...and even then, those support units cannot do things mobile infantry can...the Grens just dont pass the threshold of being good enough to work in synergy with support weapons.

  • #154
    2 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289
    edited December 2016

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    if you add a 5th man to ost inf (especialy grens), the per model stat/dps needs to be lowered or their support weapons need to be toned down imo. Because the are backed bye better if not the best support weapon teams in the game. and they would benefit massivly if the get 5 men and keep their dps/ability,s and support weapon strength. they would be really hard to force a off.

    I would leave their rifles alone, they are no longer exceptional, and the LMG 42 got nerfed mulitple times over and over again to the level that its now actually roughly equal to a single BAR.. that being said, a 5th rifle would be too much since we are aiming for staying power, not DPS increase. Adding a single MP40 guy to the Squad would be a golden solution, as he has next to non-existent LR firepower but would add another model and some disencouragement to Allied facehugger infanty. Cost would need to increase of course.

    The reference DP, with 4 / men Grens vs 5 men Grens, stock/upgraded.

    4 men all K98 Grens Close / Far 24,88 / 9,64 DPS
    4 men 3 K98 + LMG42 Grens Close / Far 26,32 / 14,42 DPS
    Suggestion:
    5 men Grens (4 K98 + 1 AGMP 40) 35,32 / 10,14 DPS
    5 men Grens (3 K98 + 1 AGMP 40 + 1 LMG42) 36,76 / 14,92 , DPS

    As you can see long range DPS barely changes, and its not something hilla

    For cross reference,
    unupgraded_Riflemen (5 Garands) have 38,3 / 9,2,
    1 BAR Riflemen (4 Garands, 1 BAR) have 45,34 / 12,36
    2 BAR Riflemen (3 Garands, 1 BAR) have 52,38 / 15,52
    (P.S. for some of you who wondered whats the problem with double BARs is).

    unupgraded Volks (5 Volks98k) have 24,7 / 9,65
    upgraded Volks (3 Volks98k, 2 Volks44) have 31,36 / 9,77

    So the long range relation would not change much, Grens would be still slightly higher DPS at LR, but loose out gradually to Riflemen the closer the range gets... and totally owned at mid range.

  • #155
    2 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited December 2016

    Nah the MP 40 is silly, just make them 5 man and then cut down their kar 98k stats , say 20 %...also why is long range advantage such a problem...

    Most infantry engagements go from "long" to "medium" and "close" in a few steps.

  • #156
    2 years ago
    Can you put up the stats for cons and penals in relation to grens?

    Cons are about outlasting and face hugging the grens...... and even at that they will be worse then grens if we add a 5th man to grens mp40 or k98.
    They will only beat pios.

    Grens usualy gun down 2 cons before cons can get at their best fighting range keeping the favor with grens, even as the cons get closer they already lost. Now imagine grens with 5th man in that setting.

    Cons would need a buff as well.

    I know the 5th man would solve random wipes, but grens would be op if not toned down imo. And still their better support weapon play is a factor to keep in mind.

    Volks already eat cons for breakfast at all stages of the game. And have the same utilties cons are being praised for.
    Why did they get a damge increase again?
  • #157
    2 years ago
    RSW2002RSW2002 Posts: 14
    edited December 2016

    @Kurfürst: What would the values be with a Pioneer-grade MP40 for the 5th man instead of an Assgren-grade MP40? And what are the Conscripts/Penals stats? (For example, if the Cons had access to a 1xDP-28 upgrade?)

    Cons could use a buff anyway.

    As for having the best support weapons: They may or may not have a performance edge over their counterparts while they are on the field, but given the low squad size they also die much faster/are much easier to force off than their counterparts, so that kind of evens it out.

  • #158
    2 years ago
    You have a point there.
    But still the worse acuray at long range and rof on sovjet mortar and cons, the penals long range acuracy are actual bonus/buff to axis weapon teams initself so right now its balanced.

    Make their screening unit more models/tougher will make their weapon teams indirectly more effective.
  • #159
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723

    ..., the penals long range acuracy are actual bonus/buff to axis weapon teams initself so right now its balanced.

    That is the weirdest theory I have ever read...it simply makes absolutely not sense

  • #160
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,605

    I'll just quote this here again to remind people of something about grens:

    Wehrmacht Infantry Scaling
    There are roughly 4 allied squads that appear to be consistently outscaling Wehrmacht infantry in ways that we feel are undesirable. This is a very delicate issue to balance because the issue isn’t so much with Wehrmacht infantry directly, ## it’s more with the fragility of 4 man squads in conjunction with area of effect weaponry and some of the strong Allied Infantry in particular. Thus, rather than fortifying Wehrmacht core to match the aforementioned problem, we found the simpler solution was to focus on the overperforming squads.

    Whis means that BOTH of the issues causing grens to fall short were addressed. USF and UKF mainline inf was nerfed with LMG restrictions, squad spacing was fixed to prevent squad OHK in the open and soviet guards and penals were nerfed hard with penta and septa nerfs.

    That means this thread is as irrelevant as it can get because the issue was never with how strong grens are, but how strong allied inf was+AoE, which again, both are fixed now.

  • #161
    2 years ago
    Sorry but i meant to say the bad long range acc they start with.
  • #162
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited December 2016

    @Katitof said:
    I'll just quote this here again to remind people of something about grens:

    ....

    Whis means that BOTH of the issues causing grens to fall short were addressed. USF and **UKF mainline inf **was nerfed with LMG restrictions,...

    Since you are quoting let me quote also:

    "M1919 Light Machine Guns (INFANTRY SCALING)
    The ability to equip two M1919 LMG’s on a squad was resulting in over performing long range DPS for a squad as durable as Riflemen or as cheap as Rear Echelon.

    Can no longer be double equipped via weapon racks."

    Actually UKF can still Double equip LMGs and riflemen can still double equip bars, so what you say is incorrect...

  • #163
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,605

    @Vipper said:

    @Katitof said:
    I'll just quote this here again to remind people of something about grens:

    ....

    Whis means that BOTH of the issues causing grens to fall short were addressed. USF and **UKF mainline inf **was nerfed with LMG restrictions,...

    Since you are quoting let me quote also:

    "M1919 Light Machine Guns (INFANTRY SCALING)
    The ability to equip two M1919 LMG’s on a squad was resulting in over performing long range DPS for a squad as durable as Riflemen or as cheap as Rear Echelon.

    Can no longer be double equipped via weapon racks."

    Actually UKF can still Double equip LMGs and riflemen can still double equip bars, so what you say is incorrect...

    You're right on the UKF, for whatever reason I believed it affected both USF and UKF.
    Bars aren't nearly as influential as M1919s though and you still need to get close for maximum potential instead of a-moving.

  • #164
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited December 2016

    @Katitof said:
    You're right on the UKF, for whatever reason I believed it affected both USF and UKF.

    Now that is real progress, simply admitting of making a mistake as all of do helps the debate speed up allot.

    I personally have not tested enough to see if the spacing is enough reduce the Wer squad wipes so I am not sure a 5 member is necessary.

  • #165
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,605

    @Vipper said:

    @Katitof said:
    You're right on the UKF, for whatever reason I believed it affected both USF and UKF.

    Now that is real progress, simply admitting of making a mistake as all of do helps the debate speed up allot.

    Not a problem for me to admit mistake I am able to verify.
    Now, if more people around the boards would be equally capable of this feat....

    I personally have not tested enough to see if the spacing is enough reduce the Wer squad wipes so I am not sure a 5 member is necessary.

    I have, you need to be hit with an off-map to be wiped outside of cover as full 4 men squad now, random mortar won't OHK now, barrage weapons with huge aoe or rapid fire still are bit dangerous, but that's understandable, that's what they are for.

  • #166
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Yeah, I was overly swayed by some of the rhetoric here, the space is a huge help, I might be going back to my original positon that grens just need a better healing item (the patch fix was still crappy) and better spacing and are basically ok otherwise.

  • #167
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @MCMartel I admit I have as well, especially after the community balance team confirmed that they want to bring over mainlines down in performance to match them, and look into aoe damage.

  • #168
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    @Farra13 said:
    @MCMartel I admit I have as well, especially after the community balance team confirmed that they want to bring over mainlines down in performance to match them, and look into aoe damage.

    Which post was this?

  • #169
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647
    edited December 2016

    @MCMartel

    Wehrmacht Infantry Scaling
    There are roughly 4 allied squads that appear to be consistently outscaling Wehrmacht infantry in ways that we feel are undesirable. This is a very delicate issue to balance because the issue isn’t so much with Wehrmacht infantry directly, ## it’s more with the fragility of 4 man squads in conjunction with area of effect weaponry and some of the strong Allied Infantry in particular. Thus, rather than fortifying Wehrmacht core to match the aforementioned problem, we found the simpler solution was to focus on the overperforming squads.

  • #170
    2 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289
    edited December 2016

    @Katitof said:

    UKF can still Double equip LMGs and riflemen can still double equip bars, so what you say is incorrect...

    You're right on the UKF, for whatever reason I believed it affected both USF and UKF.
    Bars aren't nearly as influential as M1919s though and you still need to get close for maximum potential instead of a-moving.

    BARs not so influental? Uhm, no. With double BARs and Brens, you just have to stand there, at any range, even at long and beat the living crap out of Grens regardless.

    Effective HP (HP x RA) at Vet 0, DPS near/far when upgraded with 1 LMG 42 / 2 BAR/Bren

    Grens: 352 EHP, DPS near/far: 26,32 / 14,42
    Riflemen, 1 BARs: 412 EHP, DPS near/far: 45,34 / 12,36.
    Riflemen, 2 BARs: 412 EHP, DPS near/far: 52,38 (!!) / 15,52

    Infantry Sections, 1 Bren, no bolster: 400 EHP, DPS near/far: 22 / 15,14
    Infantry Sections, 1 Bren, w. bolster: 500 EHP, DPS near/far: 28,34 / 21,04
    Infantry Sections, 2 Bren, no bolster: 400 EHP, DPS near/far: 23,12 / 17,96
    Infantry Sections, 2 Bren, w. bolster: 500 EHP, DPS near/far: 28,34 / 21,04

    Thus infantry sections already out DPS Grens at long range with 1 Bren and even without bolster, and badly so if they get a 2nd one, while Riflemen badly out DPS upgranded Grens at most ranges. AND have a higher effective HP pool. They are already largely better with a single Bren or BAR. When they get a 2nd one, Grens melt away with double BARs:

    And heres lies the problem. Grens are just 4 men. IF you start dropping Gren models sooner, they also start loosing cc 25% of their DPS and so their ability to drop models extends to the infinity. They loose models and thus DPS a lot earlier.

    Here's the single LMG42/BAR/Bren situation - effective HP vs. DPS.

    LMG Grens thus drop a Riflemen model every 5,71 seconds at long range, 3,13 seconds at short range.
    LMG Grens thus drop an Infantry section model every 6,93 seconds, at long range, 3,8 seconds at short range.

    1 BAR Riflemen drop a Gren model every 7,11 seconds at long range, 1,94 seconds at short range.
    1 Bren Unbolstered Infantry sections drop a Gren model every 5,81 seconds at long range, 4 seconds at short range.
    1 Bren Bolstered Infantry sections drop a Gren model every 4,82 seconds at long range, 3,23 seconds at short range.

    Actually even with BAR/Bren the WFA mainline already outdoes Grens as much as you can except from the price. RM are dropping somwhat faster at long range (but can afford having an extra man), but out DPS Grens close. IS is already better at long range with a single Bren, and completely wipes them with Bolster.

    Its 2 BAR/Bren where things get ridiculus - as in double BAR Riflemen wiping half the Gren squad with a good chance of not loosing a single model in the process at close range. Infantry sections will kill a Gren model, and probably kill the 2nd one before loosing their first model themselves. At which point (cc 6 seconds to the engament) the DPS of the Grens is so low now that they probalbly not kill any more model and so low on HP that they have to retreat anyway.

    2 BAR Riflemen drop a Gren model every 5,67 seconds at long range, 1,68 seconds at short range.
    2 Bren Unbolstered Infantry sections drop a Gren model every 4,89 seconds at long range, 3,23 seconds at short range.
    2 Bren Bolstered Infantry sections drop a Gren model every 4,18 seconds at long range, 3,10 seconds at short range.

    And needless to say, altough Allied infantry drop a lot slower, they are also cheaper to reinfoce. Its completely botched up. You have a situation where you have the ability to

    • kill models faster
    • loose models slower
    • loose DPS slower
    • and replace your fewer losses cheaper

    When Grens and Cons were balanced, they were only allowed to pick 2 of these four.

    And this is all just Vet 0 Squads, without the Terminator RA for five men sqauds kick in. And having five men is important since the RA will apply to all of them, so at VET 3 their Effective HP will be:

    Grens, Vet 3 : 457 EHP (+105 HP)
    Riflemen, Vet 3 : 536 EHP (+124 HP)
    Infantry Sections, Vet 3 no bolster: 526 EHP (+126 HP)
    Infantry Sections, Vet 3 w. bolster: 658 EHP (+158 HP)

    No wonder few build Grens anymore. The only thing that this does for ya past single Bren/BAR time is to bleed you out hopelessly.

  • #171
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    @Farra13 said:
    @MCMartel

    Wehrmacht Infantry Scaling
    There are roughly 4 allied squads that appear to be consistently outscaling Wehrmacht infantry in ways that we feel are undesirable. This is a very delicate issue to balance because the issue isn’t so much with Wehrmacht infantry directly, ## it’s more with the fragility of 4 man squads in conjunction with area of effect weaponry and some of the strong Allied Infantry in particular. Thus, rather than fortifying Wehrmacht core to match the aforementioned problem, we found the simpler solution was to focus on the overperforming squads.

    Ah! It was in the blogs, not the forum got it.

  • #172
    2 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited December 2016

    @Farra13 said:

    Wehrmacht Infantry Scaling
    There are roughly 4 allied squads that appear to be consistently outscaling Wehrmacht infantry in ways that we feel are undesirable. This is a very delicate issue to balance because the issue isn’t so much with Wehrmacht infantry directly, ## it’s more with the fragility of 4 man squads in conjunction with area of effect weaponry and some of the strong Allied Infantry in particular. Thus, rather than fortifying Wehrmacht core to match the aforementioned problem, we found the simpler solution was to focus on the overperforming squads.

    Finally, even they admit it ...

    Cant wait to see all those allied wunderwaffe squads nerfbatted and their legs broken...the triggering will be epic.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.