[USF] Any - Rifle grenades

#1
9 months ago

Problem:
Riflemen rifle grenades are locked behing vet 1. In long games if you lose your squads you will lose access to AT snares until you manage to vet your squad again.

Solution:
Remove veterancy requirement. Rifle grenades should be unlocked after researching weapons or grenades.
or
Keep veterency requirement. Requirement dissappears after teching Battalion Command Post (tier 4).

Comments

  • #2
    8 months ago

    Unlock rifle grenades after research and bump the squads up to 6 men. If they're going to cost 280mp I expect another man for it.

  • #3
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    > @SimpleSimon said:
    > Unlock rifle grenades after research and bump the squads up to 6 men. If they're going to cost 280mp I expect another man for it.

    Keep expecting. Not a chance in hell you get 6 man riflemen.
  • #4
    8 months ago

    Perfectly reasonable as long as they're knocked down to 260mp.

  • #5
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    > @SimpleSimon said:
    > Perfectly reasonable as long as they're knocked down to 260mp.

    Nope. Its going to happen. Rifles are a 5 man squad with a smaller than 1 target size and semi autos (better on the move) capable of arming AT and absolutely deviating when armed with BARS who can be fired on the move. Their only problem lies in volks STGs which shouldn't exist from a design standpoint.
  • #6
    8 months ago
    XlossXloss Posts: 235
    edited August 2018
    Rifleman is really strong as mainline infantry i dont think it need additional squad member.

    In the other hand rifle grenade has a very long animation time and slow projectile speed which I think needed some adjustment.

    This should be considered through all skill based projectile to make it balanced.

    1. Slow firing animation plus fast projectile speed
    Or
    2. Fast firing animation plus slow projectile speed
  • #7
    8 months ago
    SimpleSimonSimpleSim… Posts: 49
    edited August 2018

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > @SimpleSimon said:
    > Perfectly reasonable as long as they're knocked down to 260mp.

    Nope. Its going to happen. Rifles are a 5 man squad with a smaller than 1 target size and semi autos (better on the move) capable of arming AT and absolutely deviating when armed with BARS who can be fired on the move. Their only problem lies in volks STGs which shouldn't exist from a design standpoint.

    You need them back to an HQ to arm and the pathing at USF HQ is a great time waster. Hell I try to force USF players to go weapon racks because it blows so much of their time which translates into map control for me. They can't arm at the front like the British can. Critical lack of flexibility worth knocking down weapon racks around 20mp or so. I know that won't happen, it just should happen. Volks pay nothing for a double StG upgrade, the best infantry small arm in the game. The Americans have to pay for the weapon rack, then pay 60 (50?) munition for EACH BAR. It's outrageous.

  • #8
    8 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,012

    Wait... you think Volls get their STGs for free?

  • #9
    8 months ago
    You think ive been playing the game for years and am saying Volks actually pay nothing for the StG?

    Be less pedantic bro.
  • #10
    8 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,012
    Thats not me being a pedant - be clear in your meaning. What exactly do you mean by Volks pay nothing for their STG upgrade?
  • #11
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    I think they mean no weapon rack upgrade (the 25 fuel one there) but last I checked the only factions that pay for weapon racks are *drum roll please* factions (this is going to floor you) WITH WEAPON RACKS!
    OKW doesn't pay to unlock STGs because they can't slap them onto every squad they have from their sub 200mp engie unit to the officers they get free with teching to the crews that come with their vehicles.
    Okw doesn't pay for the ability to turn ANY squad with legs into an AT platform because they can't turn any unit into an AT platform. They have 1 option, who is expensive and capped at 4 models.
    What's next? Usf has to pay for grenades and okw doesn't? It's a shame a 1 time cost can't provide grenades to their front line, and smoke to 3 free squads and possibly grenades on 1 of them

    Flexibility isn't free so quit bitching about having choices.
    Look at Soviet, don't pay for weapon racks and get no weapon upgrades at all! Is that what you want for the usf?
  • #12
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2018
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > What's next? Usf has to pay for grenades and okw doesn't? It's a shame a 1 time cost can't provide grenades to their front line, and smoke to 3 free squads and possibly grenades on 1 of them

    I'm with you up to here but this point lost me. Once rifle smoke was removed (and the tech cost wasn't reduced from 25 fuel), OKW absolutely gained the advantage as far as unlocking nades/snares go over USF. I have to unlock snares for every new rifle squad, whether it's at 0 minutes or 25. Okw has to spend some fuel they were going to anyway, and it's there the rest of the game.

    You're never going to have all 3 officers in a competitive game, and the only one you'll always have is a 3 man squad you don't want on the frontline. So it's your 1-2 RE squads, an Lt. OR Cap., and that's it for smoke nades.

    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > Flexibility isn't free so quit bitching about having choices. Look at Soviet, don't pay for weapon racks and get no weapon upgrades at all! Is that what you want for the usf?

    And this idea I have to go against completely. Flexibility? The US are quite literally the least flexible faction in the game. Their mainline infantry is absolutely the MOST flexible, but that's by design in order to make up for the rest of the roster.

    Youre giving me a choice between having 8 different units to play with at start for 30 fuel. Or for 40 I can have grenades on 1 squad, and weapons to put on them and my shitty engineers (assuming i have the muni), and now I need another 50 or 60 fuel to get my first tier? There's a reason the Soviets are astronomically stronger than USF right now
  • #13
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    @SkysTheLimit the 3 squads are you cap or lieu, major and starting RE. The cost wasn't changed I think because it still brings smoke and frag, smoke however was moved to a number of different units.
    Tbh I'd almost rather snares be tied in to the upgrade and smoke be a vet ability or something. But usf still has the most access to smoke of any faction with a little bit in each tier. Smoke on rifles just enabled rifle blobs countering their intended counter.


    The USF's flexibility imo comes from Theur ability to turn munitions into whatever they need of it. Usf can do a bit of everything and their munitions generally go into making something do that job better.
    Somw things need adjustments for sure, look at the pak howi- a great indirect piece with a weird crew and shot range and small barrage But get it vetted and that WP is unparalleled at softening the enemy before a push. The AT gun, kinda lack luster but HVAP let's it punch hard when needed without having to forfeit its ROF making it a great little piece. The 50 cal is a beast of an MG, the AP rounds could use some more pen to make it maybe a bit spooky to the luchs but all in all its a good Lil gun. The m20 scouts and lays mines, it can also harass and the Zook crew it handy for finishing enemy armour or caches. It's a bit UP for sure but by design its whatever you need it to be. The AAHT is God tier, the Stuart isn't the be all end all it was but offers support abilities right into the late game making it a good choice. The sherman has its AP which is blessed with above cost pen and only slightly reduced AI and the HE shells are pretty good now but again by design the sherman is designed to adapt to what you need. The Jackson I feel was lost. It's HVAP should have been non vet so it could always up the ante instead of being king AT but I digress...
    All infantry can be pressed into AT or elevated with AI...

    The flexibility is there it's just being buried.

    The usf should be as powerful with their munitions as OKW is with fuel (or was designed to be) each needing a different resource and fighting to deny the enemy the other.

    The usf are flexible because whatever comes their way SOMETHING should be able to double duty as a counter.
  • #14
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2018
    You're choosing between MGs and AT-guns every game. I don't care what they can put on their mainline infantry, flexibility with 1 unit =/= a flexible roster.

    And to me It's not that they CAN turn Muni into whatever they need; they NEED muni or theyre fucked. And it's not like they need fuel less, their first tier takes the longest to get to and you need fuel to make your mainlines work.

    I would argue that rifle smoke did nothing to encourage blobbing, in fact quite the opposite. All you need is 1 RE/officer in the blob and you're still fine. Now I can't spread riflemen out as much because I need them grouped near a mortar or officer. They are less self sufficient than before, but can be blobbed with smoke nades just as easily. Not hard to just mix an LT or Cap in there, blobbers usually did that before anyway.

    I get that people don't like a mainline being THAT self sufficient, and I'm fine with that. Then add to the smallest roster in the game, or fix it's accessibility issues
  • #15
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    I agree the layout of their lineup is wonky. I would personally swap the AAHT and the Stuart so you can chose fuel suppression and MP AT or vice versa. Each tier would then have a bit of everything.

    USF didn't HAVE to spend munitions to be competitive originally. Rifles were the best bar none, being able to spend munitons to make that undeniable against even elites is part of what broke the game. NOW you need BARS to contend against stg volks who only have them because they were so entirely trounced by bar rifles before they lost their role when the Shrek was removed.

    Not BARing should be an option but because there was nothing else to spend munitons on and nothing with near the dominant impact that that has become the only option by balance.
    Outside the m20 and racks there's nearly nothing to spend munitons on, then come major and you have pintle (which are UP imo across the board. Get em if you have the muni but don't get them over a Bar)
    Munitions expenditures in this game are either over powered auto buys or trash that you only get if you already have the others and that I feel is the crux of it. Munitions were never balanced to be equally competitive to fuel.
  • #16
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2018

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Outside the m20 and racks there's nearly nothing to spend munitons on, then come major and you have pintle (which are UP imo across the board.

    Okay but the entire point im making is that US needs to spend more than anyone else on weapon upgrades, in order to make up for the rest of the roster. Im kinda already admitting this exact point.

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    I agree the layout of their lineup is wonky. I would personally swap the AAHT and the Stuart so you can chose fuel suppression and MP AT or vice versa.

    I like the spirit of it, but honestly I just want the 57mm available no matter what or at least make it easier to get once I've gone LT. Put it in the HQ Mg34 style (requiring either tech) or Make Captain tier like 75% cheaper once I've gotten my major. Then I can spend a quick 15 fuel to unlock AT guns. The stuart will have no use at that point anyway so I don't see anyway in which that could be game-breaking.

  • #17
    8 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,012
    I'm a little curious to see what wpuld happen if US had the 57mm in LT and a 76mm in Capt, with the .50 in LT and a .30 in Capt - the idea being you still get all your tools whatever tier while keeping the emphasis on each tier. Maybe keeping the .30 and 57mm locked behind the racks upgrade so you need to put in the side tech as well - just to give each tier an MP only option that is less optimal than full teching/spending the muni on BARs/Zooks, but still functional so you can't be locked out of the game.

    I mean - it ultimately doesn't matter what we do, WFAs optimal strat will always be to spam your mainline infantry and a-move through the enemy.


    As for the whole - RM getting their snare at vet 1? As long as they can be bazooka squads I think it's a necessary balance measure. The only AT inf with snares are AT Rifle inf and that's a necessity to stop them from getting shoved about.
  • #18
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2018

    @Lazarus said:
    As for the whole - RM getting their snare at vet 1? As long as they can be bazooka squads I think it's a necessary balance measure. The only AT inf with snares are AT Rifle inf and that's a necessity to stop them from getting shoved about.

    Very fair point, I wouldn't be opposed to stripping RM squads of a snare once they buy a zook. If it's even possible from a technical standpoint.

    And I'm very intrigued by the .30 and 76 idea.

    @Lazarus said:
    I mean - it ultimately doesn't matter what we do, WFAs optimal strat will always be to spam your mainline infantry and a-move through the enemy.

    Yeah that's my least favorite part. A guy can wish tho.

  • #19
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    I certainly like the idea of the lower cal guns in opposite tiers. However what kind of stats would we be looking at? Pak clone for the 75? Maxim for the 30 cal?
  • #20
    8 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,012
    I'd split the difference between the ZiS and the Pak for the 76mm, as for the .30, well why not 3/5ths of the .50? (I know that's not how that works but shhhh).
  • #21
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2018
    I would say lower the 57s damage to 120, keep all other stats/abilities the same but AP rounds adds 20 damage. Then I'd say start the 76 at a lower pen than zis/pak/6lb and at vet 1 it gets a passive % buff to equalize it instead of a vet 1 ability.

    I feel like this way both AT guns are nothing special, but theyll get the job done. The trade off for getting two of them
  • #22
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    I dig it
  • #23
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2018
    Having 2 MGs might be Overkill though. If you do the 2 AT guns thing captain should just get the AAHT I think. I would then drop LT to 40 fuel and increase captain to 70.

    US does have fighting positions, and the AAHT is a great unit so giving them 2 MGs could get hairy. And the US is already better against infantry than tanks, generally speaking.
  • #24
    8 months ago

    USF has fewer problems against soft enemies than hard ones. Main issue for now is that the BAR is overpriced. Performance wise it's acceptable. The Browning is acceptable although it should come with a special ability for what it does. I believe it used to have some kind of suppression ability built in but I remember it being way op. It should either have cost more or only work on a single unit target like RE volley fire. Removing it was not the proper solution.

    Knock the Jackson down to 110 fuel or 120 fuel/360mp to (near) match the cost of the Sherman Chassis it is ostensibly built on and there is your solution to Axis armor. I think it should be cheaper than the Sherman tbh since it's only useful as a tank destroyer but I bet that'll be shouted down as bloody murder so there's the compromise. Of course it would be nice if the American TD's got some kind of HE shot since they're both locked behind techs now.

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.