Changes i feel grens need

Grenadiers. This is a 240 MP unit that preforms like a 300 MP unit supported by a 260 MP HMG42 that preforms like a 360 MP HMG. Like most OST units they cost far too little for how well they preform. No one wants to fix this though.

When will You, sir, finally submit some replays? It is difficult to agree with the manpower performance of mg42 and grens you suggest they have. Still it is true that it could be tricky buffing grens

Grenadiers. This is a 240 MP unit that preforms like a 300 MP unit supported by a 260 MP HMG42 that preforms like a 360 MP HMG. Like most OST units they cost far too little for how well they preform. No one wants to fix this though.

I cannot agree with that. The HMG42 performs like a higher cost higher tier unit, but never in any game are these Grens worth more than their current cost in any circumstances.

Balance team:

We cannot buff grens because even if in 1v1 they are crap, we have to take other game-modes into account.

We are buffing tommys because we took account of the 1v1 situation, but we kinda forgot about other game-modes where top people like Seeking and Orange do 10 tommys and spam that commando ability.

Balance team:

We cannot buff grens because even if in 1v1 they are crap, we have to take other game-modes into account.

We are buffing tommys because we took account of the 1v1 situation, but we kinda forgot about other game-modes where top people like Seeking and Orange do 10 tommys and spam that commando ability.

exactly

There's a difference between having to make changes (with, as always, the associated risks) to a faction that isn't even picked in 1v1 because of how badly they perform, and making changes to a unit in an otherwise strong faction just because this particular unit is sometimes being replaced by other doctrinal units in one game mode.

Not to mention that what you're trying to claim (IS supposedly overbuffed) would actually be reason to leave Grenadiers alone, not to make the same supposed mistake twice.


IS (and UKF) were changed with teamgames in mind. 3v3s and 4v4s haven't really changed at all (as expected) except for giving UKF actually a chance in CQC / urban maps like Ettelbruck, and some top players beating (significantly) weaker randoms with IS spam isn't very reliable evidence that something is gravely wrong. In any case their new performance is being reviewed anyway to see if any further changes are needed. This has nothing to do with Grenadiers.

When will You, sir, finally submit some replays? It is difficult to agree with the manpower performance of mg42 and grens you suggest they have. Still it is true that it could be tricky buffing grens

I cannot agree with that. The HMG42 performs like a higher cost higher tier unit, but never in any game are these Grens worth more than their current cost in any circumstances.

It's better to just ignore posts like these than confirm him by giving him attention.

Make Grenadiers 28mp reinforce cost, unaffected by T4, and give them a 25 muni medkit upgrade once BP1 is researched that allows them to use a medkit for free, just like 5man Grens in live.

Or make them 28mp reinforce from the start, unaffected by T4, and give them free medkits once T4 is up.

Does that break teamgames too?

Free medkits at t4 wouldnt really effect much. And I really don't like the idea of breaking the formula for reinforcement will nilly. Units that have to assault are one thing, but units designed to sit behind cover and have the advantage of being as far away from a fight as they can be doesn't feel right. We should be trying to stick as close to the established rules as we can lest there be no order at all that catch on (see ungrades that have literally no negative to them whatsoever for details)

I'd sooner look at the things that make grens feel weak from the other side and look at them. Why to grens feel weak against rifles? Why do they feel weak against Tommie? Why do they feel weak against soviet infantry?
If we can find a common denominator then we buff that aspect of grens, if there are certain scenarios against certain allied infantry we adjust the allied infantry.

I agree with vipper that we need a baseline else we have no bounds to what gets buffed and when we need a nerf.
And I agree further that is should be ost as they, being EFA have all the tools a faction needs stock AND has an all inclusive tech (no branching paths) which gives us a solid baseline for timing.
We don't need to reinvent the wheel, just realign it.

Free medkits at t4 wouldnt really effect much.

Well I dunno man, they buff Tommies and Rifles out their ass, ignore Grens cuz muh teamgames and then claim they're completely different situations. Still no clue why UKF "wasn't even picked in 1v1 because of how badly they perform" when Sander claimed "OKW will be fine after tiger nerf, tournaments are just an indication". It's quite sad how inconsistent they are.

All we're left with is token buffs since even a small kar98 and reinforce cost would be "game breaking".

Free medkits at t4 wouldnt really effect much. And I really don't like the idea of breaking the formula for reinforcement will nilly. Units that have to assault are one thing, but units designed to sit behind cover and have the advantage of being as far away from a fight as they can be doesn't feel right. We should be trying to stick as close to the established rules as we can lest there be no order at all that catch on (see ungrades that have literally no negative to them whatsoever for details)

I'd sooner look at the things that make grens feel weak from the other side and look at them. Why to grens feel weak against rifles? Why do they feel weak against Tommie? Why do they feel weak against soviet infantry?
If we can find a common denominator then we buff that aspect of grens, if there are certain scenarios against certain allied infantry we adjust the allied infantry.

I agree with vipper that we need a baseline else we have no bounds to what gets buffed and when we need a nerf.
And I agree further that is should be ost as they, being EFA have all the tools a faction needs stock AND has an all inclusive tech (no branching paths) which gives us a solid baseline for timing.
We don't need to reinvent the wheel, just realign it.

I dont think you have to buff grens, this would be non stop power creep. Tommies need to have ther changes reverted, vickers should get a suppression buff in its vet somewhere (late games becomes hard to suppress squads) and give UKF a non doc motor. UKF weakness had nothing to do with tommies. Plus they now have CQC squad too. USF inf is definitely the most powerful of them all, but USF infantry is designed to be like that, and they don't have access to non doc elite inf like Pgrens or obers and, which is why they may have to stay OP like the jackson. The only thing i will look at for riflemen is not allowing double Bars.

I dont think you have to buff grens, this would be non stop power creep. Tommies need to have ther changes reverted, vickers should get a suppression buff in its vet somewhere (late games becomes hard to suppress squads) and give UKF a non doc motor. UKF weakness had nothing to do with tommies. Plus they now have CQC squad too. USF inf is definitely the most powerful of them all, but USF infantry is designed to be like that, and they don't have access to non doc elite inf like Pgrens or obers and, which is why they may have to stay OP like the jackson. The only thing i will look at for riflemen is not allowing double Bars.

Introduction of officer had incomparably larger impact on UKF then that tommy buff.... let me remind you that they have the exact same DPS they had pre buff, they are simply little less punished outside of cover and on pair on the move with other bolt action rifle mainline units.

I don't like these free healing ideas. Ost already has affordable healing via medbunker, vet1 healing ability, and free heals+reinforce on the HT that can be built quite early in the game.

On top of that, they have easy access to all sorts of support weapons, weapon upgrades, snares, elite infantry and a sniper. I mean, the other factions don't feel nearly as complete as Ostheer. They all lack something. Why should Grens alone be able go face to face with everything? Maybe grens can be buffed if you give the faction the Soviet/OKW/USF treatment and have half their units locked behind hard to access tech - so when you get a sniper to counter grens, Ost can't just get a sniper from T1 to counter snipe, or if you go for HMG play to counter Panzergrenadiers, they can't just make a mortar willy-nilly to counter you.

I dont think you have to buff grens, this would be non stop power creep. Tommies need to have ther changes reverted, vickers should get a suppression buff in its vet somewhere (late games becomes hard to suppress squads) and give UKF a non doc motor. UKF weakness had nothing to do with tommies. Plus they now have CQC squad too. USF inf is definitely the most powerful of them all, but USF infantry is designed to be like that, and they don't have access to non doc elite inf like Pgrens or obers and, which is why they may have to stay OP like the jackson. The only thing i will look at for riflemen is not allowing double Bars.

What I would try for rifles is them only having 1 slot and earning the 2nd slot with vet 3. This slows the power spike and outs more weight on vet (but not all of it of course) keep elite infantry and officers the same so they stand out a bit more. I feel like that could be enough of a slowing of power that grens would hold better into the late game. It might even be enough that Bars could get a slight buff.

It's too late to reverse the power creep. Riflemen, Sections and Conscripts all got significant buffs within the last patches. At this point, the only option is too buff Grenadiers, otherwise you'd have to adjust all of the above units instead of just Grenadiers.

It's too late to reverse the power creep. Riflemen, Sections and Conscripts all got significant buffs within the last patches. At this point, the only option is too buff Grenadiers, otherwise you'd have to adjust all of the above units instead of just Grenadiers.

It is allot easier to partially revert changes than to introduce new ones. If value A was buff by 100 and it now OP one can simply lower to 50 and see what happens. If it to low one tries 75 if it still to hi one tries 25.

. Why should Grens alone be able go face to face with everything?

They don't go face to face with anything right now is the problem. Maybe they can force a conscript to retreat, but they can't capitalize on it since they'll be down to like two wounded and end up retreating too.

Paradoxically grens not being able to fight makes OST an infantry army since you can't protect team weapons. HMG is only good for the first 5 minutes of the game where there aren't enough squads to flank, and maybe the last 10. Hence the 'team weapon' army almost always fields 4x infantry in 1v1 at least.

The rework I purposed a couple pages ago doesn't fundamentally alter grens balance, but instead trades survivabilty for lethality. If they actually had the damage output to deal with a single squad flank rushing a team weapon you could build more. Until then all you'll see winning in even matched games is 4x infantry, an MG, and maybe a PaK.

Restricting accessibility of 251 might also be in order.

Is the 251 really OP? Just cuz it was popular (like ostruppen) doesn't mean it's OP. But I'm not surprised that this statement is coming from you, katitof. "Nerf whatever is popular for Ostheer. Because God forbid, Ostheer is allowed to win games."

exactly

Ya know, just a few days ago u said grens were fine. You've changed your mind? Or are you stuck getting the 5man doctrine every time u use them?