Generally some people like to list the difference of faction and try to use them as argument.
And some other people like to pretend abilities that are completely non functional as other factions abilities somehow, magically are functional and it is not only viable, but also effective to use them as such, when in truth it couldn't be further from truth.
Mentioning a difference does not consist of argument unless that leads to unfair advantage.
Neither is mentioning fundamentally different abilities that aren't even supposed to be used against targets like infantry like some people claim, or completely lack any kind of burst and are extremely slow to apply, but some people claim they are equally useful as instantly exploding long range abilities or short range, fast fuse explosives that are being thrown quickly.
One can claim Ostheer, UKF, USF do not have stock DOT damage does that mean they should incendiary round in their mortars?
And here you are showing complete and utter lack of understanding of application of ability and are focusing exclusively on mechanics of the ability.
Molos role is cover denial and soft counter of garrisons.
USF has that as WP rounds for pack howi.
UKF has that as WASP.
Ost has that as flame 251.
You lack any kind of understanding for asymmetrical balance, what it is, what it does and how its applied in game.
UKF grenades have the same relevance as ostheer grenades in a thread about grenades. Both riflegrenade and bundle grenades can be dodge and the "luck of burst damage does not really means much.
UKF is not fighting against soviets and their grenade accessibility could not be more irrelevant for the discussion.
My point was simply that claiming that Soviet do not have grenades while ignoring molotvs and satchels is simply misleading.
Molotovs are not burst damage.
Satchels work exclusively against you in the whole community.
So you're the one who is being misleading everyone.
At this point, its a miracle you do not claim demo charge to be equally viably and used in same circumstances as grenades.
And imo Penal should have grenade instead of satchel. It should be locked behind tech.
So now you're admiting they do NOT have an ability that would have the same application as grenades?
Make up your mind, you are contradicting your own statements in the very same post.
If Soviet should "have similar" tools then other faction should also have incendiary grenades, satchels and barrage in their ATGs.
You mean like flamer vehicles, arty pieces capable of leaving DoT on ground, long range grenades and barrages on units like brummbar or JT?
This is how asymmetry works. You have the exact same end result, applied differently.
Why are you struggling so much with that concept is beyond human comprehension.
Contrary to a grenade a Zis barrage can frontally and from 60 dislodge a HMG so it faction is not to for "putting in burst damage in infantry-infantry" combat. Actually it is rather bad into that role.
Practically, you can shoot barrage from 60 range OR you can have it dislodge HMG, because you'd have to be EXTREMELY lucky for both conditions to be met at the same time.
But once more the suggestion was never to removed the barrage but to increase its CD.
Ok.
Add 10 seconds to its CD then.