Snare Inconsistency.

Can you articulate why Grenadiers being "better" against medium tanks than other squads, and "worse" against Heavy Tanks is an important part of design?

From the basic faction design of Ostheer vs Soviets when the game released. Heavy tanky Ostheer tanks vs numerous Soviet medium tank hordes. It's better for both factions this way.

If you standardize them both to faust penetration and AT-nade deflection values, it's essentially a huge nerf to Soviets. Soviets would be doing a potential 25% more damage to axis mediums (where the damage doesn't even matter enough to change snare rates except against the brumbar and vet2 jagpanzer where their high armor is likely to bounce them anyways and not make a difference) while the Ostheer snare would be doing a guaranteed 100% more damage to allied heavy tanks.

From the basic faction design of Ostheer vs Soviets when the game released. Heavy tanky Ostheer tanks vs numerous Soviet medium tank hordes. It's better for both factions this way.

If you standardize them both to faust penetration and AT-nade deflection values, it's essentially a huge nerf to Soviets. Soviets would be doing a potential 25% more damage to axis mediums (where the damage doesn't even matter enough to change snare rates except against the brumbar and vet2 jagpanzer where their high armor is likely to bounce them anyways and not make a difference) while the Ostheer snare would be doing a guaranteed 100% more damage to allied heavy tanks.

There are three other factions now, and this alleged design philosophy isnt even applying to them consistently.

OKW have a greater number of "heavy", tanky vehicles than Ostheer, and even their medium tank rolls out with more armour than the OST equivalent (Until vet2), and yet Volksgrenadier Fausts have high penetration, equivalent deflection damage to allied snares, and even a lower cooldown than allied snares. Their faust doesn't fit your suggested "design philosophy" at all. (They also have the Panzerfusilier, which has what is literally an "allied design" AT grenade, low penetration and high deflection)

USF and especially UKF don't have "hordes" of medium tanks rolling around like Soviet do, with UKF even having two stock heavy tanks... But their snares have low penetration and high deflection.

Ostheer and Soviet's "benefits" over one another don't translate properly against the other three factions.

How does the Faust/AT grenade difference in targeting around sight/shot blockers fit into this design philosophy, anyway?

There are three other factions now, and this alleged design philosophy isnt even applying to them consistently.

OKW have a greater number of "heavy", tanky vehicles than Ostheer, and even their medium tank rolls out with more armour than the OST equivalent (Until vet2), and yet Volksgrenadier Fausts have high penetration, equivalent deflection damage to allied snares, and even a lower cooldown than allied snares. Their faust doesn't fit your suggested "design philosophy" at all. (They also have the Panzerfusilier, which has what is literally an "allied design" AT grenade, low penetration and high deflection)

USF and especially UKF don't have "hordes" of medium tanks rolling around like Soviet do, with UKF even having two stock heavy tanks... But their snares have low penetration and high deflection.

Ostheer and Soviet's "benefits" over one another don't translate properly against the other three factions.

How does the Faust/AT grenade difference in targeting around sight/shot blockers fit into this design philosophy, anyway?

You seem to have it backwards.

OKW have a greater number of "heavy", tanky vehicles than Ostheer, and even their medium tank rolls out with more armour than the OST equivalent (Until vet2),

So essentially that makes the soviet snares even better against OKW than against Ostheer... why is that a problem?

USF and especially UKF don't have "hordes" of medium tanks rolling around like Soviet do, with UKF even having two stock heavy tanks... But their snares have low penetration and high deflection.

What does their own tanks have to do with their snares? Snares are for hitting enemy tanks....

If you want to nerf OKW snares say you want to nerf OKW snares instead of trying to mess with every other faction in the game.

So essentially that makes the soviet snares even better against OKW than against Ostheer... why is that a problem?

And yet, again, OKW snares are balanced like Allied snares. Or, I should say, Ostheer snares are uniquely "balanced" differently to every other faction. Soviet snares also still have a FAR higher cooldown than OST or OKW ones. Why is this latter attribute the case?

What does their own tanks have to do with their snares? Snares are for hitting enemy tanks....

You stated that the fact that SOV has "massed mediums" versus OST "Heavy tanky tanks" is the reason their snares are the way they are. USF and UKF do not fit this dichotomy. UKF have stock heavies, unlike Soviet. USF have no heavy tanks. The closest they come is the Pershing, which is closer in equivalence to the Panther than a heavy tank. Their Medium tanks are also armoured/priced closer to OST tanks than to SOV tanks. Despite this they have Soviet style snares, not OST styled ones. This balance you're trying to suggest doesn't fit.

Also: Soviet do not have highly armoured tanks for Ostheer's snares "weakness" to affect, except through doctrines. In a stock game, or one where Soviet don't pick a doctrine with a heavy tank, OST's snare is simply better.

If you want to nerf OKW snares say you want to nerf OKW snares instead of trying to mess with every other faction in the game.

I would like all factions to have access to equally effective snares. Your hyperbole is really a bit odd, Ost is the outlier.

You stated that the fact that SOV has "massed mediums" versus OST "Heavy tanky tanks" is the reason their snares are the way they are. USF and UKF do not fit this dichotomy.

Bro... Soviet mediums are why Ostheer has good snares against mediums. Ostheer heavy tanks are why Soviets have a snare good against heavy tanks. USF and UKF still follow this pattern because they fight Axis heavy tanks.

They don't impact their own snares because they don't snare their own vehicles. At this point you must be refusing to understand.

Allied snares are indeed weaker. Medium tanks are not the only tanks on the field. Both the Brummbar and Jagdpanzer can take between two and three snares before they receive engine damage, dependent on the luck of the draw.

Allied snares have the dubiously intentional benefit of apparently retaining lockon around sight blockers. This isnt communicated in the game at all, has absolutely no logical basis, and is more likely a bug or oversight than an actually intentional trait.

Even if we're just talking about mediums, allied snares take, on average, around one more application to have killed a 640HP axis tank, than a Gren faust takes to kill an allied tank. Why?

Also: 140 far penetration on the Grenadier Faust is at 30 range. The faust's actual maximum cast range is 18 (or 19.26~, with the range bulletin).

The problem is that you are looking it from allies vs Axis and trying to prove that axis have an clear advantage in snare.

There are things that need to be fixed but making all snare having 100% chance to penetrate and doing the same damage on deflection imo is not necessary.

Why SHOULDN'T it be standardised? There's no reason for snares to be inconsistent/random at all in their mechanics. Allied snares bouncing doesn't add anything interesting to the game, it just causes frustration. If you want Axis and Allied snares to be balanced differently it should be in a consistent way (i.e allied snares are cheaper, but cause less damage (to the point they don't two-shot 800hp vehicle's engines)), though I don't think Axis and Allied snares SHOULD be different in their mechanics at all.

Like i said i doesnt feel random or inconsistant to me. People only came to this conclusion that its frustrating/random after tightrope's video pointed it out, it went unnoticed for years. And now all this is happening.

Its a good thing that the 0hp no kill was put out there. That should be fixed, other then that nothing needs to be done. Dont fix what isent broken imo.
Allies have better td's plus inf and axis have better tanks and a easier time snaring stock armour. I see no problem with that. The assymetry or whats left is a good thing in this game.

With 160 total damage 2 AT grenades will always cause engine damage to medium tank.

On the other hand 2 faust with 140 far penetration have a 0.24% probability to bounce and not cause engine damage.

Allied snare are different not weaker.

Imo the penetration and deflection mechanism is fine for snares.

I don't think it works like this. If I understand it correctly, the values are given for the Faust weapon which has a max 30 range. Cast range of the ability is 17 (or 18?), which basically means you have a pen value of about 150 at least. The only question remains when the distance check is being done: the moment you click the ability or the moment the dude actually takes his pocket Faust and fires it.

And soviets do a guaranteed 80 damage. They take the same number of hits to snare a vehicle either way, unless it's a heavy tank where the gren faust is only going to be doing 40 damage. The only axis vehicle that has 800 health so it requires 2 100 damage snares is the Brumbar, which has high frontal armor so it would probably bounce atleast one faust-tier snare anyway.

I already pointed out it is a quite minor issue.
I was more interested in why Vipper was disagreeing while he usually is for standartizations and removing outliers/weird design quirks.
The only thing the current system achieves is unpredictable behaviour vs the Brummbar and the Comet. And in rarer circumstances, it might also screw Ostheer over with mediums.

I don't think it works like this. If I understand it correctly, the values are given for the Faust weapon which has a max 30 range. Cast range of the ability is 17 (or 18?), which basically means you have a pen value of about 150 at least. The only question remains when the distance check is being done: the moment you click the ability or the moment the dude actually takes his pocket Faust and fires it.

Regardless how the mechanics work exactly there is change that one of the two faust can bounce and thus fail to do engine damage. I have seen it happen.

2 AT grenades do enough deflection damage to cause engine damage.

Imo faust and AT grenades are different weapons types (and faust is a more advanced weapons) so it makes sense to have different penetration values.

Why this is thread is even a thing anyway? I mean, the only problem I see, is that not all snares kill vehicles on deflection, which is most likely missed bug and not intentional feature.

Because if Relic had an idea that any AT grenades shoudnt kill tanks on deflection, then Volks pfaust would have been working like Grenadiers one. Its either Relic forgot to add this mechanic to EFA factions or they just didnt properly copy-pasted snares for WFA factions.

No-one ever, not even tightrope complained about stats of the snares, his only complain was that not all snares kill tanks upon deflection, which is again most likely a bug. What is this discussion about penetration values and so on.

Show Spoiler

I think bare minimum the issue of tanks not being snared at 75% and dead at 0% and CDs of all snares should be standardized. The other things being standardized would be nice as well, but less crucial given those are fixed.

Show Spoiler

I think bare minimum the issue of tanks not being snared at 75% and dead at 0% and CDs of all snares should be standardized. The other things being standardized would be nice as well, but less crucial given those are fixed.

I think they took the pfaust values that the Fallschrimjagers had, which is probably why they are way better than normal coming from an elite squad.

Removing the 0hp snare effect is worth doing if possible. I had a match were a hetzer ate 3 of them. Aggravating.

I'm also ok with snare deflections being removed. Maybe the situations where deflections result in no engine damage when they otherwise should have are uncommon but they still occur. This should not be a thing. Im sure I noticed this once or twice as well though its possible it's happened before even without my notice or without me recognizing the issue in the moment.

snares should not be mirrored between both factions. Allies have inferior snares as faction design since Axis rely a lot more on tanks than Allies do. And generally Axis tanks are more expensive too.

The 0hp thing is weird though and counterintuitive so remove it.

snares should not be mirrored between both factions. Allies have inferior snares as faction design since Axis rely a lot more on tanks than Allies do. And generally Axis tanks are more expensive too.

The 0hp thing is weird though and counterintuitive so remove it.

The thing is, ~35-55 damage difference doesn't REALLY impact one way or another.

My main reason for standardization is because it means there's less room for fucked up variables and stupid bugs like the one that brought this to our attention. Why does ANYTHING do 45 damage? Why is it possible for something deemed so necessary to all factions that access has been nearly standardized for equal access across all factions to be so all over the place? Why is it possible for SOME snares to bounce and fail to kill? Like how is that actually a possibility? It wouldn't be if it was standard and nothing would be lost by them being standard. All pros and no cons if you ask me.the damage differences and pen differences as so incredibly insignificant that many don't even know them (myself included) making them all the same just makes sense...

i don't think snares dealing less damage on deflection is necessarily a bad thing as is (and i'm not talking about failing to kill on deflection, that should be fixed obviously!).
penetration and deflection damage are integral parts of the game, and even though it may not be directly communicated to the player most will be familiar with the concept that damage may vary based on rng, as it does for every weapon in the game.
it's more the current implementation which makes it meaningless in all but fringe cases, as pointed out by hannibal earlier, that creates an issue, if at all.
i wouldn't mind if all medium tanks required a minimum of 3 hits for a guaranteed crit at full health, but could also be snared by 2 penetrating hits. after all, this would mean that positioning (i.e. near vs far, front vs rear) would play a more significant role in determining the success of a snaring attempt.
that is, of course, assuming that snares do even differentiate between front and rear armor and that it is actually the activation range (not the distance when firing the projectile) that determines the pen value.

Bro... Soviet mediums are why Ostheer has good snares against mediums. Ostheer heavy tanks are why Soviets have a snare good against heavy tanks. USF and UKF still follow this pattern because they fight Axis heavy tanks.

They don't impact their own snares because they don't snare their own vehicles. At this point you must be refusing to understand.

That really doesn't make any goddamn sense. The snares are approximately equal when fighting medium tanks, taking two to damage engines in any realistic scenario, the extra 40 damage being meaningless in almost any case as far as breakpoints are concerned. It's only when you reach premium mediums that there starts to be a difference.

Gren Faust vs KV1140/160 pen) 26%/34% chance to snare in two. 38%/49% (I think?) chance to snare in three, 36%/17% in four.

Generic AT grenade vs Panther100 pen) 13% chance to snare in two. 87% in three.

In such a case Ostheer has a BETTER chance of snaring the vehicle in two shots, but then a smaller chance of it taking three, and a smaller still chance of it taking four. This is just wildly inconsistent, rather than strictly being worse in all cases.

They don't snare their own vehicles, but they do snare Ostheer ones, and Ostheer snare theirs, despite their tanks being much closer in performance to one another than the Soviets' are. Brits have stock heavies/premium mediums, for example, and both factions' stock tanks are more expensive/heavily armoured than stock soviet ones.


You still haven't explained why the snares need to be inconsistent. That's the main thing I'm attempting to argue. Even if you'd like to accept that Ostheer snares should be "better" against mediums, and Soviet/other allied snares should be "better" against heavies, why does there need to be a penetration calculation, and why is none of this explained at all in the game?

[...]
Even if you'd like to accept that Ostheer snares should be "better" against mediums, and Soviet/other allied snares should be "better" against heavies, why does there need to be a penetration calculation, and why is none of this explained at all in the game?

not to take anything away from your reasoning above, which is valid, that last part is a pretty poor argument given the overall quality of the in-game descriptions as a whole.

not to take anything away from your reasoning above, which is valid, that last part is a pretty poor argument given the overall quality of the in-game descriptions as a whole.

The argument could be made that most in-game descriptions could stand to be significantly improved, but I see your point.