Zis Barrage

That is exactly the problem and the change is a good idea. The manpower and popcap you would have to use to build a mortar can be saved for more infantry units, and zis can be very effective as an indirect fire platform. Plus it is not inferior to Pak.

The at aspect of the siz is inferior to the pak 40.
It has inferior pen, inferior reload, same fire cone, same traverse, its vet ability is non at focused unlike the pak.
It has more hp. And a secondary ability.

Soviets who lack a real nade non doc. Real ass cqc inf non doc. Such as sturm and esp pgrens. At the time a far worse mortar in every aspect but hp. Now the mortars are equel. They also lack high sturdy armour non doc.

This is why the zis and su76 have a secondary function. Nothing op about them.

If you remove this ability, cons need a normal nade, penals need a nade like the bundle nade. The su76 t70 needs more hp and armour. Be carefull what you wish for.

The at aspect of the siz is inferior to the pak 40.
It has inferior pen, inferior reload, same fire cone, same traverse, its vet ability is non at focused unlike the pak.
It has more hp. And a secondary ability.

Soviets who lack a real nade non doc. Real ass cqc inf non doc. Such as sturm and esp pgrens. At the time a far worse mortar in every aspect but hp. Now the mortars are equel. They also lack high sturdy armour non doc.

This is why the zis and su76 have a secondary function. Nothing op about them.

If you remove this ability, cons need a normal nade, penals need a nade like the bundle nade. The su76 t70 needs more hp and armour. Be carefull what you wish for.

I wouldn't be so sure about all that. Soviets are really strong. They have lots of units through commanders and stock and all You wrote suggest that they are inferior, which is not true.

Zis is just a tiny bit worse penetrationwise (10 or sth like that). If it gets barrage at vet 1 just like pak gets its stun ability. The fact that it has larger crew balances it. Barrage is just an extra feature that you don't pay for.

I wouldn't be so sure about all that. Soviets are really strong. They have lots of units through commanders and stock and all You wrote suggest that they are inferior, which is not true.

Zis is just a tiny bit worse penetrationwise (10 or sth like that). If it gets barrage at vet 1 just like pak gets its stun ability. The fact that it has larger crew balances it. Barrage is just an extra feature that you don't pay for.

I did not say they were weak. I said the at aspect of the zis is just as the su76 is inferior. They have other uses and abilties to compensate. And the siz has the same cost as the pak 40 so you defenitly pay for it. Its also 30 muni per use. By your logic pgrens dont pay for their bundle nade.

If you remove tracking and make barrage a vet ability you need to change a lote of stuff to compensate such a nerf. Since soviets lack a real nade of any kind non doc.
I find it easier to wipe six men teams as ost then the 4 men as soviets. Because sovs lack a real nade or cqc inf non doc. The barrage helps a lot in that area.

Doctrines should be left out of balancing a faction. Doctrines should add or fill in gaps in the faction.

I wouldn't be so sure about all that. Soviets are really strong. They have lots of units through commanders and stock and all You wrote suggest that they are inferior, which is not true.

Zis is just a tiny bit worse penetrationwise (10 or sth like that). If it gets barrage at vet 1 just like pak gets its stun ability. The fact that it has larger crew balances it. Barrage is just an extra feature that you don't pay for.

A tiny bit less pen vs a lot higher armoured targets. So that tiny bit becomes a large bit. And yes it does do a poorer job in the AT area then the pak.

A tiny bit less pen vs a lot higher armoured targets. So that tiny bit becomes a large bit. And yes it does do a poorer job in the AT area then the zis.

But that is not true, either. The armour on sov tanks is almost the same if not higher. The problem, however, are fast cheap t34s and t70. They can circlestrafe ATs. For heavies you have su85, which is a better TD than a stug or even a panther. What is even more important, sov have larger squads to recapture, they are also better on the move, plus have lots of cheap hand held ATs.

What you seem to be repeating are just myths.

I did not say they were weak. I said the at aspect of the zis is just as the su76 is inferior. They have other uses and abilties to compensate. And the siz has the same cost as the pak 40 so you defenitly pay for it. Its also 30 muni per use. By your logic pgrens dont pay for their bundle nade.

If you remove tracking and make barrage a vet ability you need to change a lote of stuff to compensate such a nerf. Since soviets lack a real nade of any kind non doc.
I find it easier to wipe six men teams as ost then the 4 men as soviets. Because sovs lack a real nade or cqc inf non doc. The barrage helps a lot in that area.

Doctrines should be left out of balancing a faction. Doctrines should add or fill in gaps in the faction.

I don't agree with most of it. To make it short. Zis is an at gun, which should be countered by infantry. Barrage makes it too easy to deal with infantry which is supposed to be its counter. It is even more of a problem for 4 men ost squads. The often used argument that Soviets have worse units is just (often repeated) rubbish. What they have in fact are extremely potent units for how much you pay for them. Cost/performance value is top notch.

To sum up, moving zis barrage to vet 1 seems a very good idea.

I don't agree with most of it. To make it short. Zis is an at gun, which should be countered by infantry. Barrage makes it too easy to deal with infantry which is supposed to be its counter. It is even more of a problem for 4 men ost squads. The often used argument that Soviets have worse units is just (often repeated) rubbish. What they have in fact are extremely potent units for how much you pay for them. Cost/performance value is top notch.

To sum up, moving zis barrage to vet 1 seems a very good idea.

The zis is a field gun. Because it can do more then at. And its not the best at AT compertevely. The soviets non doc vehicles are good for their price. But they get penned by every axis at source with ease, lights get one shotted by their at mines mines. unlike axis stock vehicles.

The barrage is a counter to setup teams. Aka stationary targets. If your inf gets hit by it, you walked into it or left them idle. Sov dont have real non doc nades to instantly wipe or cripple teams and squads. Hence the barrage is always available.

Sov bleed the most out off any faction. So to say their price preformance ratio is top notch means you dont know how they play.

Please stop trying to make problems where none excist. This will only come full circle and bite you in the butt.

The zis is a field gun. Because it can do more then at. And its not the best at AT compertevely.

At guns' anti tank performance is really similar. There are no differences in combat situations. Problems occur when one side pays more for something that works the same or when one side gets more for the same price. Imo Soviets often get more than tha pay for. Zis barrage is a good example here.

But that is not true, either. The armour on sov tanks is almost the same if not higher. The problem, however, are fast cheap t34s and t70. They can circlestrafe ATs. For heavies you have su85, which is a better TD than a stug or even a panther. What is even more important, sov have larger squads to recapture, they are also better on the move, plus have lots of cheap hand held ATs.

What you seem to be repeating are just myths.

What i am talking about is the non doc line up. Not the doctrinal stuff. You dont balance a faction on docttines, you adjust the doctrines to the faction. The fact is that the zis faces everything from the p2 up to the kt non doc. That upto 300+ armour non doc. Ost v sov face 160 armour non doc. If you dont see that difference you are blind. All soviet heavy armour is in doctrines stop lying.

Soviet inf are not better on the move. 0.5 moving is the same as ost. Stop spewing lies and fantasy. T34,s and t70,s cirvle strafing your at gun means YOU fucked up. Why is your pak unsupported? A p4 circle straving a unsupported zis ends the same it gets wiped.

Those cheap handheld ar,s are also worse at weapons overall. Shreck has a far better chance off killing armour ptrs just forces it off.

Go play soviets, stop nitpicking at every unique thing soviets have that have not been a problem since launch. Get off the axis forever UP drugs you seem to be taking.

At guns' anti tank performance is really similar. There are no differences in combat situations. Problems occur when one side pays more for something that works the same or when one side gets more for the same price. Imo Soviets often get more than tha pay for. Zis barrage is a good example here.

No, they don’t. Anti-tank guns usually have the worst high-explosive projectile, due to the fact that the projectile in them flies at a higher speed. So the walls of the projectile have more thickness to withstand the pressure of the powder gases and less explosives. Plus anti-tank guns have a lower elevation angle of the gun. QF 6 pounder: + 15°, PaK-40: + 22°, ZiS-3: + 37°

At guns' anti tank performance is really similar. There are no differences in combat situations. Problems occur when one side pays more for something that works the same or when one side gets more for the same price. Imo Soviets often get more than tha pay for. Zis barrage is a good example here.

What do the pak and zis cost? What is the highest armour value they both face non doc? Test the chances to pen.

Im preeeetty sure substitute DOES mean alternative.

Substitute is using something when the original is not available. It can be of equal value or it cab be of less value that can get job done.

Zis barrage is a substitute of the mortar.

Alternative is another option usually of close value.

At guns' anti tank performance is really similar. There are no differences in combat situations. Problems occur when one side pays more for something that works the same or when one side gets more for the same price. Imo Soviets often get more than tha pay for. Zis barrage is a good example here.

When ost reaches tech to build the pak. They get acces to lmg 42 and rifle nade. Talking about getting more then you pay for. Cons require a lot more cost then grens to to get them at their peak. Soviets getting more for the same price please.

Stop talking when you dont know what you are talking about.

When ost reaches tech to build the pak. They get acces to lmg 42 and rifle nade. Talking about getting more then you pay for. Cons require a lot more cost then grens to to get them at their peak. Soviets getting more for the same price please.

Stop talking when you dont know what you are talking about.

I know what I'm talkin about.

The performance of at guns' in this game is almost identical.

The problem is that Sov get more stuff that is cheaper. If you play them right you have higher chances than the ost player. Zis barrage is one of those situations when you get more than your opponent. Stop spreading nonsense about pak being superior. It is different but shooting at tanks it will perform almost the same as zis. Zis will have bonus in terms of survivalability. Barrage should either make zis more expensive to buy or be moved to vet 1.

I know what I'm talkin about.

The performance of at guns' in this game is almost identical.

The problem is that Sov get more stuff that is cheaper. If you play them right you have higher chances than the ost player. Zis barrage is one of those situations when you get more than your opponent. Stop spreading nonsense about pak being superior. It is different but shooting at tanks it will perform almost the same as zis. Zis will have bonus in terms of survivalability. Barrage should either make zis more expensive to buy or be moved to vet 1.

The pak and zis face targets non doc with very different armour values. The zis faces far higher armour and higher hp values non doc with a slower rof and slightly lower pen profile. How the hell does this play almost identical to you?
The pak can pen any sov stock vehicle no sweat, the zis cant do the same. It has a higher chance to bounce because of it. AND STOP BRINGING IN DOCTRINAL UNITS TO BALANCE A FACTION. YOU ADJUST THE DOCTRINE TO THE BALANCE OF A BALANCED FACTION. Soviets have no heavy armour non doc, sov have no nade or ai upgrade non doc. The su76 and zis barrage compensate that.

The pak and zis face targets non doc with very different armour values. The zis faces far higher armour and higher hp values non doc with a slower rof and slightly lower pen profile. How the hell does this play almost identical to you?

It doesn't and it shouldn't. You keep making logical mistakes. In general, the price should reflect performace. If zis is not more expensive than pak, it shouldn't be better. It is better because of the barrage. Some people on this forum suggest moving it to vet 1 which makes semnse to me and is very logical as it counters units that are designed to counter zis, which is already more difficult to decrew because of higher number of models.

The armour on vehicles is another story. Those with more armour are more expensive and require more complicated tech. To counter them you should build more powerful AT units or build 2 zis guns for example. You can't have a very cheap unit to counter expensive units. Soviets are supposed to build more cheaper tanks to overrun enemy. It can be done easily. With doctrines they get much heavier units. But this has nothing to do with zis barrage which is just still too potent.

The pak can pen any sov stock vehicle no sweat, the zis cant do the same. It has a higher chance to bounce because of it. AND STOP BRINGING IN DOCTRINAL UNITS TO BALANCE A FACTION. YOU ADJUST THE DOCTRINE TO THE BALANCE OF A BALANCED FACTION. Soviets have no heavy armour non doc, sov have no nade or ai upgrade non doc. The su76 and zis barrage compensate that.

No it doesn't. SU 85 compensates that and satchels, etc. Zis barrage keeps making it too difficult for typical at gun counters to counter them, and you get it for free as an extra.

No, they don’t. Anti-tank guns usually have the worst high-explosive projectile, due to the fact that the projectile in them flies at a higher speed. So the walls of the projectile have more thickness to withstand the pressure of the powder gases and less explosives. Plus anti-tank guns have a lower elevation angle of the gun. QF 6 pounder: + 15°, PaK-40: + 22°, ZiS-3: + 37°

I meant at guns that are manned by infantry and that we use in game. Not in real life.

It doesn't and it shouldn't. You keep making logical mistakes. In general, the price should reflect performace. If zis is not more expensive than pak, it shouldn't be better. It is better because of the barrage. Some people on this forum suggest moving it to vet 1 which makes semnse to me and is very logical as it counters units that are designed to counter zis, which is already more difficult to decrew because of higher number of models.

The armour on vehicles is another story. Those with more armour are more expensive and require more complicated tech. To counter them you should build more powerful AT units or build 2 zis guns for example. You can't have a very cheap unit to counter expensive units. Soviets are supposed to build more cheaper tanks to overrun enemy. It can be done easily. With doctrines they get much heavier units. But this has nothing to do with zis barrage which is just still too potent.



No it doesn't. SU 85 compensates that and satchels, etc. Zis barrage keeps making it too difficult for typical at gun counters to counter them, and you get it for free as an extra.

Ost has a better barrrage actual nades and cqc inf non doc to deal perfectly fine with 6 men teams. The p4 can kill inf teams faster then t34 can. Axis inf have better dps to deal with bigger squads as well. You know they balanced it this way. You use mortars flanking inf nades etc to deal with at gun, nit just run towards them and fuck m up. Esp not when supported.
If you cant do that its on you. If you stay still and get hit by the barrage its on you. its no excuse to nerf the zis.

The zis and pak start out simaler vs mediums. The fact ost and axis in general has a far easier time getting heavier armour somehow elludes you. At that moment the difference in zis and pack become clear. The pak will penn easier still. Can support armour better because of its vet ability. The zis falls behind in at at that point.

Now i know you will ignore this. no non doc nades no non doc ai upgrade, worse barrage on the mortar lower pen thus worse at prefornance vs higher armoured targets, all non doc still. Because docs fill in gaps as you should know. That is why the zis and also the su76 are multyrole.

You say that weapon teams are its counter. And your inf gets raped by it. Again dont stand still dont walk into it. The barrage is for static targets, if your pgren volks whetever gets hit bye it you are unlucky or fucked up.

Sov do build more powerfull units to counter heavier armour because they need to every game. Axis can get 240 armour minumum every game. Soviets only via doctrines, other wise they are stuck at 160 armour.

The fact that only when some one else bring it up that the siz barrage is to potent, and only then you feel the same way says it all. You never noticed before. Because it has not been to potent since launch. They changed and nerfed it already last patch.

And you can have 2 "cheap units" counter a expensive unit. Esp when their focus is mostly or completly ai or ai. And also when their total cost is equal or more then the single expensive unit.

That you think otherwise shows that you are an entitled indevidual. With no real interest in real balance. I am done talking with you.
Happy trolling sir.

At guns' anti tank performance is really similar. There are no differences in combat situations. Problems occur when one side pays more for something that works the same or when one side gets more for the same price. Imo Soviets often get more than tha pay for. Zis barrage is a good example here.

I didnt realize higher rof and stun rounds are completely worthless compared to the zis barrage. A Zis barrage is the same cost as a bundle grenade, and it gives ample time for you to take the 5 steps needed to get out of its barrage. It no longer instagibs squads at point blank. If you stay in the barrage now, it's your own fault. If you charge 3 squads into the barrage, its your own fault. For the same reason why you dont do the same vs pgren. Long range barrages are fairly inaccurate, meaning that 9/10 times it will just force an mg to displace. When I play germans, I have literally never had an issue with dealing with the zis.

I didnt realize higher rof and stun rounds are completely worthless compared to the zis barrage. A Zis barrage is the same cost as a bundle grenade, and it gives ample time for you to take the 5 steps needed to get out of its barrage. It no longer instagibs squads at point blank. If you stay in the barrage now, it's your own fault. If you charge 3 squads into the barrage, its your own fault. For the same reason why you dont do the same vs pgren. Long range barrages are fairly inaccurate, meaning that 9/10 times it will just force an mg to displace. When I play germans, I have literally never had an issue with dealing with the zis.

Agree with all the points. The problem is that it counters it's counters and requires you to micro. You never leave zis alone and it is supported. Attacking zis will mean you have to deal with support AND the barrage. And that is the problem - in real game scenario a prey will throw a grenade at the predator. If support is where it should be attackers have much harder time and the barrage will turn the engagement in your favour. Adding larger crews zis guns are really difficult to dislodge. Vet 1 would be a good idea.

Combing back to rof. Generally the difference is insignificant. You absorb the same number of shots and retreat with a vehicle. Doesn't really matter if it is zis or pak or 6pounder or USF at.