Brits in 1v1 is a joke

Don't make this a whine about Grens thread, they at least have options and tatical flexibilty.

Tactical flexibility

Terrible on the move
Cannot build free sandbags or trenches
Grenade that doesn’t help when flanking or against charging units
Poor survivability

Tactical flexibility

Terrible on the move
Cannot build free sandbags or trenches
Grenade that doesn’t help when flanking or against charging units
Poor survivability

Infantry sections are worse on the move.
Pio can built sanbags and come in T0. You have sandbags event before you have gren.
Rifle nade have longest range of all nades as a trade off. Gren doesn't good when flanking because they are not designed to do so.
Also, gren come with fause while being cheaper than sections, and they receive weapon upgrade right on the field.

Tactical flexibility

Terrible on the move
Cannot build free sandbags or trenches
Grenade that doesn’t help when flanking or against charging units
Poor survivability

>Faust on every squad.
>Grenade without a timer
>Excellent pool of upgrades including G43, Vet Leader, and LMG
>Currently has 20%d damage reduction at Vet3
>Better than IS on the move and out of cover.

I'd say Grens are far better generalists for a cheaper cost. The only thing they can't do is out shoot IS in two very specific situations: Green vs Green cover at long range. Build Sandbags.

Grens also have pgrens to make up for their weaknesses. Pgrens have a close range nade that works well on charging infantry or on flanks of an assault, they have close-mid range weapons with good moving DPS, are pretty tough, and even get a movement bonus near vehicles. They also have access to a handheld AT upgrade (one of the best too). That makes up for everything grens are bad at. Brits have no other nondoc dedicated combat infantry squad and that's where sections suffer. They're not as versatile as rifles or volks and yet they are forced to do everything (even though they're bad at everything except stationary long range defensive fights) for lack of an alternative in a way grens are not.

>Faust on every squad.
>Grenade without a timer
>Excellent pool of upgrades including G43, Vet Leader, and LMG
>Currently has 20%d damage reduction at Vet3
>Better than IS on the move and out of cover.

I'd say Grens are far better generalists for a cheaper cost. The only thing they can't do is out shoot IS in two very specific situations: Green vs Green cover at long range. Build Sandbags.

in ur dreams

in ur dreams

No lying that would be my wet dream.

Tactical flexibility

Terrible on the move

G43.

Cannot build free sandbags or trenches

Pios can so they don't have to waste time doing it.

Grenade that doesn’t help when flanking or against charging units

Stun nades.

Poor survivability

Only squad in game that won't lose full health models to direct mortar/regular nade hit.

In addition, ambush camo, 5th man, global sprint.

Sure, these are all doctrinal options, but they make grens extremely flexible.

in ur dreams

Are you saying that 20% moving accuracy of sections and 30% longer cooldown is better then 50% moving accuracy of grens?

in ur dreams

Out of cover, 4 man sections win gren with 1 model and a tini bit of HP, for a more expensive squad and sections is worse on the move.

Out of cover, 4 man sections win gren with 1 model and a tini bit of HP, for a more expensive squad and sections is worse on the move.

I literally highlighted the part I don't agree and us plain wrong , is gave more DPS out of cover than gren

G43.


Pios can so they don't have to waste time doing it.


Stun nades.


Only squad in game that won't lose full health models to direct mortar/regular nade hit.

In addition, ambush camo, 5th man, global sprint.

Sure, these are all doctrinal options, but they make grens extremely flexible.


Are you saying that 20% moving accuracy of sections and 30% longer cooldown is better then 50% moving accuracy of grens?

80-90% of what you wrote is doctrinal. The author of the post wants non doctrinal stuff. You can't compare doctrine for ost and non doctrine for UKF.

Out of cover, 4 man sections win gren with 1 model and a tini bit of HP, for a more expensive squad and sections is worse on the move.

Do you compare it when they are 4 or 5 men?

I literally highlighted the part I don't agree and us plain wrong , is gave more DPS out of cover than gren

Sure, i have nothing against that.

Do you compare it when they are 4 or 5 men?

You can see i write "4 man sections"

You can see i write "4 man sections"

Well, they can get upgraded to 5 men, and they scale much better than grens, plus have more stock upgrades. It is a nice game design I wouldn't change that by making UKF stop relying on sections. There are other allied factions to do that. Don't forget you really have a lot of nice tanks, emplacements, etc. And you have one very potent upgradable infantry squad. You could probably think of giveing them some AT or close range weapons, but they get such things through commanders.

80-90% of what you wrote is doctrinal.

That makes me think you never made it to the end of my post, because I specifically underlined that.

The author of the post wants non doctrinal stuff. You can't compare doctrine for ost and non doctrine for UKF.

I know and its not relevant, because there are all the options he wants specifically made for doctrines already.

Stock grens are long range DPS squad that excels from cover fighting, but is reliant on support from other units.

Picking right doctrine makes it much more independent in a way you think you need, so solutions to his problem already are in game. And they aren't going become stock, because infantry flexibility is NOT design of ost or axis at all, contrary to UKF, which is very much supposed to be flexible, scaling and reliant on strong mainline. While UKF was introduced as allied response to Ost, weaker early game, but strong late game, that's where similarities end, ost isn't reliant on grens to the point UKF is reliant on tommies. Ost got much more options to support grens and they are meant to use them together with grens, UKF is build to have a very strong, but not so numerous tommy force that can be supplemented by much less cost efficient support weapons, that's why HMG42 is much more efficient then vickers, that's why ost sniper is much better then UKF one.

lol grens better then IS? bunch of clowns in here. IS sh*t on grens, heck most infantry sht on grens, but ostheer has very good support for grens. IMO i would make IS only 4 man with no bloster upgrade. But buff ther base stats so being 4 man, they are justified in being powerful in terms of DPS whilst being able to dual equip brens. Or maybe allow bloster to 5 man but no upgrade to brens available thus, giving the brit player a choice between Firepower or surviveability

That makes me think you never made it to the end of my post, because I specifically underlined that.

I did. Still it is a lot of arguments that you enumerated that are misleading. The truth is that there are more upgrades avaliable for sections than for grens. The truth is that sections are simply stronger.

Stock grens are long range DPS squad that excels from cover fighting, but is reliant on support from other units

Sections can do the same but better. Remember that after the first few minutes of the game all factions can rely on support. Stop repeating the myth that it is only ostheer. There is no difference between factions in this respect. A good player always supports their infantry. The problem begins when players can't use support units they have and keep asking for buffing their mailine infantry instead. Anither problem begins when they lose to a player who can support and they think it is because of their infantry being inferior. It is simply wrong to not notice how much support IS can have.

Picking right doctrine makes it much more independent in a way you think you need, so solutions to his problem already are in game. And they aren't going become stock, because infantry flexibility is NOT design of ost or axis at all, contrary to UKF, which is very much supposed to be flexible, scaling and reliant on strong mainline. While UKF was introduced as allied response to Ost, weaker early game, but strong late game, that's where similarities end, ost isn't reliant on grens to the point UKF is reliant on tommies. Ost got much more options to support grens and they are meant to use them together with grens, UKF is build to have a very strong, but not so numerous tommy force that can be supplemented by much less cost efficient support weapons, that's why HMG42 is much more efficient then vickers, that's why ost sniper is much better then UKF one.

Those support weapons are not less cost efficient! Many of UKF units are simply more cost efficient that those of ostheer's.

I did. Still it is a lot of arguments that you enumerated that are misleading. The truth is that there are more upgrades avaliable for sections than for grens. The truth is that sections are simply stronger.

Half of these upgrades grens have without spending additional dime....

Sections can do the same but better. Remember that after the first few minutes of the game all factions can rely on support. Stop repeating the myth that it is only ostheer. There is no difference between factions in this respect. A good player always supports their infantry. The problem begins when players can't use support units they have and keep asking for buffing their mailine infantry instead. Anither problem begins when they lose to a player who can support and they think it is because of their infantry being inferior. It is simply wrong to not notice how much support IS can have.

Sections actually can't snipe team weapons just as good, can't make enemy HMG deathloop, can't get opponent out of cover without exposing themselves, can't keep light vehicles away from team weapons.

And yeah, there is a MASSIVE difference on reliance on support weapons between the factions.

Now, about the red part, agreed, you are 100% correct, that's why people who want to buff grens should finally shut up. Sections were overnerfed on the other hand and had to be rebuffed.

Lastly, sections have LESS and less efficient support then grens, vickers suppresses worse then HMG42, sniper shoots slower, there is no mobile mortar to help them at all, no reinforcement halftruck that also heals them, no assault infantry protecting them from CQC specialists.

Those support weapons are not less cost efficient! Many of UKF units are simply more cost efficient that those of ostheer's.

Name one.

Ukf at gun

Ukf at gun

PaK vet1 is arguably better, there is no longer accuracy bonus vs lights, try again.