Login

russian armor

Soviet grenades

27 Oct 2020, 09:35 AM
#1
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Since grenades have nothing to do with the CD of barrage I will respond in this thread.


Easy to say when your favorite factions

Let try to avoid "favorite factions" comment, they are simply nonconstructive.

have nuke grenades as part of their core army

Its faction has certain things that stock that others factions do not.

Some times and mostly when these things are basic tools they might lead to disadvantage in some area. For instance WFA not having flamers or OKW/USF not snipers is a disadvantage.

HE Grenades don't really create any meaningful disadvantage.


while the Soviets do not even have any grenades available to them in half their doctrines.

Well that is technically incorrect since molotov are grenades and satchel can also work as grenades.

One could even argue that Ostheer/USF/UKF lack stock incendiary grenades.

As for how many doctrines do not have HE grenades that is 8 of 22 which closer to 1/3 than half.
27 Oct 2020, 11:07 AM
#2
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3113 | Subs: 2

I am not sure what the point of this thread is, but let's see where it goes.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 09:35 AMVipper

HE Grenades don't really create any meaningful disadvantage.

This is a mere statement. A grenade has high wipe potential if the opponent acts late or if you can cut into the retreat path. Of course they give a meaningful advantage.
jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 09:35 AMVipper

Well that is technically incorrect since molotov are grenades and satchel can also work as grenades.

I don't want to argue semantics, but the whole point clearly revolved around the "standard" HE and the bundle nade. So nades that have short fuses, high burst damage and force quick reactions. Especially the molotov has not much to do with it, and the satchel can't hit even semi-mobile units like ATGs.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 09:35 AMVipper

One could even argue that Ostheer/USF/UKF lack stock incendiary grenades.

Yes, and that was the point of Aerohank:
Single abilities are not that important, but the factions should have similar tools. SOV does not have many abilities to win infantry fights by putting in burst damage like other factions can do with grenades. Therefore they need an edge in artillery units, and that's where this comes back full circle to the ZiS barrage: This ability is the only burst ability that Soviets have non-doc until they get a Katyusha.
27 Oct 2020, 11:20 AM
#3
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

I am not sure what the point of this thread is, but let's see where it goes.

Because taking about grenades in thred about the CD of barrage is of topic.

This is a mere statement. A grenade has high wipe potential if the opponent acts late or if you can cut into the retreat path. Of course they give a meaningful advantage.

And incendiary grenades have their own advantages like clearing garrison and deny cover.


I don't want to argue semantics, but the whole point clearly revolved around the "standard" HE and the bundle nade. So nades that have short fuses, high burst damage and force quick reactions. Especially the molotov has not much to do with it, and the satchel can't hit even semi-mobile units like ATGs.

Ostheer do not have standard HE grenade, only bundle grenade in their semi elite infatry and UKF also have stock bundle grenade.

OKW also do not have HE grenades and only access to bundle grenades in late game.

Satchel can easily force retreat , destroy ambient building and bunker. There inferior in some areas but superior in other. I am pretty sure player facing emplacements would love to durable squads that had access to satchels


Yes, and that was the point of Aerohank:
Single abilities are not that important, but the factions should have similar tools. SOV does not have many abilities to win infantry fights by putting in burst damage like other factions can do with grenades. Therefore they need an edge in artillery units, and that's where this comes back full circle to the ZiS barrage: This ability is the only burst ability that Soviets have non-doc until they get a Katyusha.

If that was the case the barrage should have a single shot, a timer and friendly damage.

Grenades and barrage are different things comparing them is simply misleading.

And not soviet also have mortars and do not to need the edge in artillery units.

Finally it was not suggested that Zis barrage should be removed but it should start having an actual CD because currently one can, as long as he has mu for it can fire it almost non stop.
27 Oct 2020, 11:44 AM
#4
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3113 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 11:20 AMVipper

And incendiary grenades have their own advantages like clearing garrison and deny cover.

Yes. Also incendiary grenades are not the topic neither I nor you have mentioned, so why do you respond with them at this point?

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 11:20 AMVipper

Ostheer do not have standard HE grenade, only bundle grenade in their semi elite infatry and UKF also have stock bundle grenade.

OST has rifle grenades and bundles that fulfill the burst role. UKF infantry is meaningless in a thread about Soviet grenades that spawned from a thread about Soviet ZiS barrage.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 11:20 AMVipper

Satchel can easily force retreat , destroy ambient building and bunker. There inferior in some areas but superior in other. I am pretty sure player facing emplacements would love to durable squads that had access to satchels

The only thing a satchel can force a retreat on is a flanked, set up MG. The satchel does not help in mobile mainline combat since the fuse is so long that you can just walk out of it. Throwing a satchel is gambling on the opponent managing a completely different part of the map. The advantages of satchels are irrelevant. With the same reasoning I can say that I am pretty sure players (or at least I) would take a bundle grenade over the standard satchel on penals anytime.
jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 11:20 AMVipper

If that was the case the barrage should have a single shot and timer.

Grenades and barrage are different things comparing them is simply misleading.

And not soviet also have mortars and do not to need the edge in artillery units.

I agree that they are different, but matter of fact is that Soviets should have similar tools like other functions, and they currently have almost none (except mortars that have become more of a niche unit especially in smaller modes) for putting in burst damage in infantry-infantry combat if you take away the ZiS barrage.
27 Oct 2020, 12:01 PM
#5
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


Yes, and that was the point of Aerohank:
Single abilities are not that important, but the factions should have similar tools. SOV does not have many abilities to win infantry fights by putting in burst damage like other factions can do with grenades. Therefore they need an edge in artillery units, and that's where this comes back full circle to the ZiS barrage: This ability is the only burst ability that Soviets have non-doc until they get a Katyusha.


Aaaand /thread.

There is hardly anything to argue past this as it is objectively uncontestable statement.
Anything opposing it is pretty much semantics and enforcing personal opinion that does not have any coverage within the faction.
27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PM
#6
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Yes. Also incendiary grenades are not the topic neither I nor you have mentioned, so why do you respond with them at this point?

Simply because claiming that soviet do not have stock grenades is misleading. They have molotovs and satchels.

In addition I read allot more post of people cosplaying about the VG incendiary grenade than I have read about people complaining about bundle grenade or rifle-grenade.

Generally some people like to list the difference of faction and try to use them as argument. Mentioning a difference does not consist of argument unless that leads to unfair advantage.


OST has rifle grenades and bundles that fulfill the burst role. UKF infantry is meaningless in a thread about Soviet grenades that spawned from a thread about Soviet ZiS barrage.

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.

One can claim Ostheer, UKF, USF do not have stock DOT damage does that mean they should incendiary round in their mortars?


The only thing a satchel can force a retreat on is a flanked, set up MG. The satchel does not help in mobile mainline combat since the fuse is so long that you can just walk out of it. Throwing a satchel is gambling on the opponent managing a completely different part of the map. The advantages of satchels are irrelevant. With the same reasoning I can say that I am pretty sure players (or at least I) would take a bundle grenade over the standard satchel on penals anytime.

My point was simply that claiming that Soviet do not have grenades while ignoring molotvs and satchels is simply misleading.

And imo Penal should have grenade instead of satchel. It should be locked behind tech.


I agree that they are different, but matter of fact is that Soviets should have similar tools like other functions, and they currently have almost none (except mortars that have become more of a niche unit especially in smaller modes) for putting in burst damage in infantry-infantry combat if you take away the ZiS barrage.

If Soviet should "have similar" tools then other faction should also have incendiary grenades, satchels and barrage in their ATGs.

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.

But once more the suggestion was never to removed the barrage but to increase its CD.
27 Oct 2020, 12:26 PM
#7
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PMVipper

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.
27 Oct 2020, 13:18 PM
#8
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

The availability of molotovs and satchels hold about as much weight in this discussion as saying that the pak40 can attack-ground as a form of barrage.
27 Oct 2020, 13:21 PM
#9
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 09:35 AMVipper

Its faction has certain things that stock that others factions do not.


well the soviets lack alot more than just grenades in their core army (nondoc)...
early weapon upgrades
a nondoc machinegun (that isnt a joke)
lategame nondoc AI infantry specialization (though ost shares this weakness)
a proper medium tank (instead of a light tank plus)
aoe healing (shared with ost)
an armored damage sponge (shared with USF)

in exchange the soviets only get 3 highlights
6 man squads
Zis-3
T-70
27 Oct 2020, 13:23 PM
#10
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The availability of molotovs and satchels hold about as much weight in this discussion as saying that the pak40 can attack-ground as a form of barrage.

Can we agree that Soviet do have stock grenades in the form of molotovs and satchels for start and they do not have bundle grenades?
27 Oct 2020, 13:35 PM
#11
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 09:35 AMVipper
Since grenades have nothing to do with the CD of barrage I will respond in this thread.


Let try to avoid "favorite factions" comment, they are simply nonconstructive.


Its faction has certain things that stock that others factions do not.

Some times and mostly when these things are basic tools they might lead to disadvantage in some area. For instance WFA not having flamers or OKW/USF not snipers is a disadvantage.

HE Grenades don't really create any meaningful disadvantage.


Well that is technically incorrect since molotov are grenades and satchel can also work as grenades.

One could even argue that Ostheer/USF/UKF lack stock incendiary grenades.

As for how many doctrines do not have HE grenades that is 8 of 22 which closer to 1/3 than half.


im not even sure which squad should get the grenades, when sov would get some.
Cons? Comon..this unit is full of abilitys already
pio? not really a useful unit
penals? they have satchels, at satchels and very good performance overall.

27 Oct 2020, 14:03 PM
#12
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



im not even sure which squad should get the grenades, when sov would get some.
Cons? Comon..this unit is full of abilitys already
pio? not really a useful unit
penals? they have satchels, at satchels and very good performance overall.


From a design point of view I would rather have both Conscripts and Penal swap their molotovs/satchels for HE grenades (same goes for VG also). Penal grenades would have to locked behind tech.
27 Oct 2020, 15:09 PM
#13
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3113 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PMVipper

Simply because claiming that soviet do not have stock grenades is misleading. They have molotovs and satchels.

In addition I read allot more post of people cosplaying about the VG incendiary grenade than I have read about people complaining about bundle grenade or rifle-grenade.

Generally some people like to list the difference of faction and try to use them as argument. Mentioning a difference does not consist of argument unless that leads to unfair advantage.

Again: Molotovs and Satchels are not fast fuse burst weapons that regularly wipe half the squad if your reaction is even only half a second late. You don't throw them on a squad expecting and insta wipe just like you don't shoot a rifle grenade at a mortar pit expecting heavy damage.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PMVipper


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.

You started this thread because you were unhappy of comparing ZiS barrage vs Axis grenades. That point is obviously debatable, but a grenade of UKF on one single squad has absolutely nothing to do with the ability of Soviet's ATG being able to burst infantry in the early-mid game. All grenades can be dodged as part of good game design and "lack of burst damage" still means exactly what it means.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PMVipper

One can claim Ostheer, UKF, USF do not have stock DOT damage does that mean they should incendiary round in their mortars?

Ostheer has pio flamer + 251
UKF has WASP
USF is the only one that does not have an early game DOT/anti garrison unit. That's why the community commander update gave them molotovs (just like every faction got something it was lacking via a commander during that time. UKF got a mortar etc). But still, all of this is a "what about" argument. This thread spawned from a comparison of Axis grenades against the ZiS barrage of Soviets.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PMVipper


My point was simply that claiming that Soviet do not have grenades while ignoring molotvs and satchels is simply misleading.

And imo Penal should have grenade instead of satchel. It should be locked behind tech.


If Soviet should "have similar" tools then other faction should also have incendiary grenades, satchels and barrage in their ATGs.

As above.

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 12:13 PMVipper

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.

But once more the suggestion was never to removed the barrage but to increase its CD.

Exactly. The role of the barrage is to deal damage and kill a couple of models for munitions. To force a retreat if your opponent does not react in time. It is not as versatile as a grenade because one single shell does not burst as well as a single grenade, but can be thrown from distance against further away targets. It is Soviets only non-mortar way of softening up defense positions because the T70 is quite far away and a flanking Conscript is barely able to ensure heavy damage on an at leasat partially supported flanked unit.
27 Oct 2020, 15:25 PM
#14
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

...

Is you argument that Soviet are in disadvantage because they do not have HE grenades and thus it more difficult for them to get early wipes?
27 Oct 2020, 15:58 PM
#15
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2020, 15:25 PMVipper

Is you argument that Soviet are in disadvantage because they do not have HE grenades and thus it more difficult for them to get early wipes?


Soviet core infantry have trouble getting wipes no matter how long the game goes on because they don't have HE nades.
27 Oct 2020, 16:42 PM
#16
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Soviet core infantry have trouble getting wipes no matter how long the game goes on because they don't have HE nades.

Now I think we are getting somewhere and we have a solid basis for a debate.

I have to agree that it is difficult to get wipes with conscript (unless they have SVT/PPsh).

On the other hand I have to point out the following:

1) It is also hard to get a wipe on conscripts especially once they have upgrade to 7 men.

2) Penal can get early wipe since they have great DPS on the move superior to most units of their timing

3) Soviet can get early wipes via other methods like the clown car and the T-70 later.

4) Most soviet doctrinal infatry (and the majority of commander have them) do get HE grenades and good ones.

As I have said many times, I would rather have molotovs/satchel/incendiary grenades replaces by HE grenades since I consider these weapons unsuitable for mainline infatry and better utilized in more specialized infatry.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 9
United States 2
United States 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

842 users are online: 842 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48723
Welcome our newest member, zowinfans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM