Buff for 5 man grens

I think ideally Ostheer mainline infantry should look like this:

• LMG Grens same as now, as long range defensive specialists that are okay at A-move attacking too;

• Osttruppen pretty much same as now, for fast map control and cheap cannon fodder;

• Gren G43 upgrade to focus on close-mid range firepower with 3x G43, but with toned down moving DPS to avoid blobbing;

• Gren VSL upgrade to focus on high durability (but with a slower build up compared to Osttruppen) over firepower with 5th model and STG 44, but with current cooldown bonuses traded for the extra -10% received accuracy. Similar to 7 men Cons.

I'm a bit confused....

• When does g43 on gren give them 3 of them????

• Ok, how does cooldown bonus work toward durability??? And what do you mean by cool-down bonus now?? they always had 10% cool-down bonus

Even so K98/3 G43 would made grenadier use the same weapons as g43 ST while having worse received accuracy.

Stormtroopers use elite G43s. They'd have way better firepower.

Stormtroopers use elite G43s. They'd have way better firepower.

I think he means the Kar98 they have. it's weapon they both share.

Stormtroopers use elite G43s. They'd have way better firepower.

Τrue. Its difficult to keep track of all the changes with g43.

On the other hand Grenadier in jaeger benefit from first strike bonus and ST do not. With the bonus they will probably have better DPS.

Weapon would be re-balanced according to number

the total DPs of the squad is balance issue the number of different weapons is design.



Comminication is also a reason to avoid 75% of weapons replacement. It would be better if some standard was used for normal weapons (not lmg/AT) like half the weapons or all in this case 2 or 4.

Number of weapons and their DPS are both connected to how the unit works and is therefore both designed and balanced. You can barely separate these.

There is no reason to standardize this as long as the player knows what is going on.

Number of weapons and their DPS are both connected to how the unit works and is therefore both designed and balanced. You can barely separate these.

There is no reason to standardize this as long as the player knows what is going on.

One can balance a unit with changing the number of weapons, that is my point.

The number of weapon affect the behavior of unit when they lose models.

It is good for squad with low entity count to keep the number of weapons low to reduce the DPS drop off when model die. This is part of the reason Commandos are easier to use to than MP-40 ST.

Using 3+1 weapon basically make the unit's DPS profile complicated and makes the DPS drop abnormal when they lose a model.

If in your opinion there is benefit of using 3 weapons instead of 2 or 4 pls explain your point of view because I can not think of one.

Gren G43 upgrade to focus on close-mid range firepower with 3x G43, but with toned down moving DPS to avoid blobbing

This is role of the PGs G43.

If anything then Grenadiers G43 upgrade should be mirrored with Cons PPSH. In other words, make them good at ranges they are prefered to be used long\mid range, with more towards mid range, just like PPSH improves ranges cons are good at.

Because not all maps allow you to effectively use LMG and LMG is static weapon. If G43 were counter part for LMG, trading single model damage into more spread damage + allowed grens to be more mobile, then imo G43 is much better.

And to begin with I dont think that grens being mid\close range inf is a good idea, simply because allies already have much supperior options for mid\close range.

This is role of the PGs G43

No, the role of G43 PGrens is to be all round elite infantry, of which you get 1 or max 2.
Not comparable to 3-4 mainline infantry squads in any standard army composition.

And to begin with I dont think that grens being mid\close range inf is a good idea, simply because allies already have much supperior options for mid\close range.

Eh, the G43 upgrade for Grens has been a close to mid range upgrade with good moving DPS on top for years now. And with Allies you mean only Riflemen? Because Infantry Sections and unupgraded Cons are definitely not good close to mid range mainlines.

One can balance a unit with changing the number of weapons, that is my point.

The number of weapon affect the behavior of unit when they lose models.

It is good for squad with low entity count to keep the number of weapons low to reduce the DPS drop off when model die. This is part of the reason Commandos are easier to use to than MP-40 ST.

Using 3+1 weapon basically make the unit's DPS profile complicated with no real benefit.

A 3+1 profile is not 'more complicated' than a 2+2 or 1+3. As long as you tell the player that the squad will take significant DPS hits when the third model dies it is fine. Knowing when to retreat and when to keep the squad in a fight, when closing in is worth it and when not is part of properly playing the game.

Having units behave differently is crucial to keeping diversity in fights. Standardizing all of it makes them more boring.

Eh, the G43 upgrade for Grens has been a close to mid range upgrade with good moving DPS on top for years now.

Ment long\mid range, my bad.

A 3+1 profile is not 'more complicated' than a 2+2 or 1+3. As long as you tell the player that the squad will take significant DPS hits when the third model dies it is fine.

(guess you mean 4).
Imo it does not work that way because:
Different weapon deliver different DPS at different range in different ways (evenly or volleys). Mixing weapons might lead to over kills or other deviation from theoretical DPS especially with when some of the weapon has focus fire.

Different DPS drop off from first to second entity add complexity without any real benefit that I can see of.

To make things even more complicated the DPS drop off might be greatly effect from range ranging from unnoticeable to significant

Knowing when to retreat and when to keep the squad in a fight, when closing in is worth it and when not is part of properly playing the game.

I see little connection to this and the number of weapons.

Having units behave differently is crucial to keeping diversity in fights. Standardizing all of it makes them more boring.

That is correct but again I fail to see the connection with the number of weapon.

Imo the benefits from having 2 or 4 are:
if 4 weapon are the same one can better predict the behaviour of his squad at all ranges
if 2 weapons carry the DPS and 2 weapons are inferior the squad suffers less from DPS drop off and in a way mitigates some of the issues of the lower entity count

I still do not see a benefit from having 3+1 weapons.

german infantry doctrine is centered around VSL, which is now nice, compared to OP it was previous, but still not worth picking the commander just over a few nice things.

So i would suggest that VSL revert to pre-nerf, but would now require 2 part upgrade:

-2 CP, upgrade to VSL, but with 4man squad
-BP2 upgraded/T3 built, can bolster VSL to 5man squad, along the lines of late-game cons/AssGrens

If 5-men grens are shit how come professional streamers like Dane still use them??? Checkmate wehraboos.

If 5-men grens are shit how come professional streamers like Dane still use them??? Checkmate wehraboos.

Well, ID doesn't know that wehr has medic upgrade for bunker to heal his troops and VSL offers free medkits.
Its like that doctrine was specifically made for him, so he stops running around with half health squads, losing to everything and blaming balance vocally on his streams.

german infantry doctrine is centered around VSL, which is now nice, compared to OP it was previous, but still not worth picking the commander just over a few nice things.

So i would suggest that VSL revert to pre-nerf, but would now require 2 part upgrade:

-2 CP, upgrade to VSL, but with 4man squad
-BP2 upgraded/T3 built, can bolster VSL to 5man squad, along the lines of late-game cons/AssGrens

This IMO is a really cool idea. The timing of the old VSL was causing most of the issues. Something like,

> 1G43 + 10% cooldown
> Ability to reinforce to 5 men with T4 built can be really interesting while not being bonkers.

STG really feels off. Maybe just make the upgrade like Soviet mobilize reserves without any additional weapons with a late CP timing like 3CP and a high cost of 80Muni.

add 1 more stg44

cost 60 ->75 muni

done

maybe give 5 men gren ability to build medic and reinforce bunker faster?

maybe give 5 men gren ability to build medic and reinforce bunker faster?

Building time is per entity, not per squad, 5 man grens already build bunkers faster.

I'll be honest I kind of wish they didn't replace the G43 on the upgrade with a STG, I feel like that kind of made the LMG generally the better choice but I think you can still go for 1-2 5 man upgrades if you get 3-4 Gren squads. I don't really like the current buff in the Commander Patch to G43 Grens either. I feel the extra received accuracy is going to make them extremely durable at Vet 3 but they still aren't going to have much in the way of firepower. Instead of the 10% received accuracy I would prefer maybe a 3rd G43 but keeping the price at 60 and 2 CP so its similar to the SVT's firepower wise. Otherwise take the current G43's make them 1 CP and tone down SVT's instead.

Show Spoiler

I actually meant 3+1 and 1+3 as a term of how many weapons a squad gets (3xG43 as opposed to 1xLMG).

I'll sum the rest up so that we don't loose ourselves in too many details.:
The number of weapons a squad gets determines how much thought you need to put into closing in. If all models are upgraded, each lost model hurts more. That's why most SMG (/close range in general) squads are fully kitted or at least have a large number of weapons: So that you are forced to think about when to close in or not. Those units usually get some type of defensive ability like a smoke or camo. If most of your damage is concentrated on few models, then there is less thought necessary for choosing the moment to push. Those units have to work via "brute force" and generally do not get defensive abilities (Rifles, Volks, Rangers).
Another general design point is long range units having concentrated DPS so that it is harder to take them out of a fortified position by slugging it out.


The number of weapons and the number of high value and low value models is therefore more a function of "how do I need/want to use the squad", so design and balance. Not of "unit A has 2 upgraded weapons, unit B also needs 2 weapons".
There is no reason for G43 Grens to have exactly 3 G43s. But there is also no inherent reason for them not to. It depends on how we want to see the squad designed and balanced. But this has nothing to do with "squad X also gets two weapons with the upgrade". If we can create a balanced 3xG43 Grenadier squad, there is no reason not to. It would at least add something a bit more special to the upgrade compared to every other squad that uses either 2 or 4 weapons.