Rifle grenade=dodge BUT allied grenade=MP bleed

Jump back to quoted post6 Aug 2020, 11:05 AMMr Carmine

I agree allied nades are more cost effective but they use nades far less then axis. This cuz they are either tech or doctrinaly locked. Also sections and rifles are very expensive to upgrade. This in turn leads to less midel losses overall and probably evens out the bleed across factions.
(Edited)

Jump back to quoted post6 Aug 2020, 15:33 PMachpawel

Not really. This grenade sidetech is not always used only because allied players prefer to get AEC, T70, or generally armour as soon as possible. They also prefer not to spend resources (fuel, monpower, munitions) on nades because they can be dodged (to many players weapon upgrades or offmaps are better in the long run). Having a vehicle faster usually will bleed the enemy more reliably and will save munitions on the mentioned upgrades or offmaps. Plus elite infantry units get grenades irrespective of extra tech premium. So what happens is that extra tech can be skipped to have vehicles faster (axis can't really do that) and elite infantry squads will have their grenades anyway.

Footnote: with UKF grenade tech is actually recommended instead of weapon upgrades early game (probably due to their grenade great cost/power efficiency)

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 01:42 AMthedarkarmadillo

Tldr. Different but not neceshsarily worse.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 07:25 AMachpawel

Similar grenade use skills will lead to similar number of models killed for both allies and axis. This will usually transfer to more manpower lost for the axis, especially ostheer. Different model count for squads affects the grenade balance. It is also one of the reasons why osttruppen doctrines are popular.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 10:39 AMMr Carmine

Check the aftermatch grahps. It tends to show allies lost more models, lost more tanks, more damage taken due to the overall but not every case higher dps and mostly more durable tanks. This is mostly the case unless axis where dominated that game.

The higher reinforce cost for inf and pricier tanks for axis even it out at the end.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:03 PMachpawel

But it has nothing to do with that. What matters is the cost of models. With osttruppen builds ostheer will probably lose more models. With elite infantry builds it will be fewer.

Grenades kill 80hp entities. The manpower cost is different for different models but grenades treat them the same. So killing an obersldaten model will cost okw 40 manpower while killing a shocktroop or guards model will cost much less. Grens will lose 30 manpower per model while cons will lose much less, etc. Same for UKF and USF infantry.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:12 PMMr Carmine

It has everything to do with it.

Say conscripts loose 50 models in a game. For simplicity take them at 18mp reinforce after the upgrade. Thats 900mp for reinforcing.

Grens loose 30 models x 30 reinforce thats also 900 mp.

Soviets loose the most models by far. Hence cheap reinforcing is a trait to stem the bleed.

Cons have about 30% more losses but the mp spent on reinforcing is about the same.

Rifles also drop more models then grens overall. Hence their slightly cheaper reinforce cost.

It all evens out about equally in the end.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:17 PMachpawel

Grenades don't differentiate whether the squad is a con or obersoldaten squad.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:26 PMKatitof

Funny you say that, because with recent vet changes they actually do.

Vet3 grens can't be killed by nade as long as they have more then 80% health.
Earlier something similar applied to Rangers as well, but it got removed and replaced by rec acc.

Also, you're both completely wrong on reinforcement costs.

Basic old formula is (total squad cost/model count/2), there are exceptions and vast majority of these exceptions come from axis units that have cheaper reinforce(like aforementioned obers who used to have 50mp reinforce cost) or penals who reinforce for more then the formula would indicate as a result of balance tweaks.

To understand all the tweaks and changes, you'd have to go through 7 years of patch notes, but that's general formula.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:39 PMachpawel

None of this changes the general pattern. One situation with vet 3 above 80% health gren squad changes nothing tbh. Just an exception from the rule which does not change the rule.

How mp per model is counted changes nothing in this discussion, either.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:26 PMKatitof

Funny you say that, because with recent vet changes they actually do.

Vet3 grens can't be killed by nade as long as they have more then 80% health.
Earlier something similar applied to Rangers as well, but it got removed and replaced by rec acc.

Also, you're both completely wrong on reinforcement costs.

Basic old formula is (total squad cost/model count/2), there are exceptions and vast majority of these exceptions come from axis units that have cheaper reinforce(like aforementioned obers who used to have 50mp reinforce cost) or penals who reinforce for more then the formula would indicate as a result of balance tweaks.

To understand all the tweaks and changes, you'd have to go through 7 years of patch notes, but that's general formula.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 15:38 PMMr Carmine

I wasent talking about the reinforce formula. I was talking about damage done and taken by soviet and ost. How soviets mostly take much more damage but cuz of lower reinforce cost loosing about 30% more models is same in costs of mp.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 15:56 PMachpawel

But it just does not have to be like that. Cons, like most larger squads, often will first lose health and then will start losing models. Because they have more health than smaller squads they will usually start losing models later. If you retreat in time and don't charge them into stronger units they won't bleed you much. Generally, there is little value in this logic when it comes to discussing grenade power.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 14:39 PMachpawel

None of this changes the general pattern. One situation with vet 3 above 80% health gren squad changes nothing tbh. Just an exception from the rule which does not change the rule.

How mp per model is counted changes nothing in this discussion, either.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 19:04 PMDerKuhlmann

With usa nade bulletin and vet 3 riflemen can throw the same distance as a rifle grenade

same with brits

same with conscripts molotow

ostheer just get the nade range first

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 19:33 PMKatitof

Did you even accepted the rule?
You know, the ACTUAL rule I have brought up?
Or are you saying that in context of that bullshit you have regurgitated earlier about reinforcement costs?