PTRS Penals and Soviet vs Ostheer balance

This is from 2's, 3's and 4's.

Why are PTRS performing so well now? They easily counter Axis mediums, plus they get the AT Satchel. From what I have seen lately, all Russians do is make 2 clown cars, 3-4 Penals with PTRS and rush a T70, make a B4 and a few T34's and grind you down. Ostheer are unable to recover from early manpower bleed to put up any kind of resistance, unless they get lucky.

The maps need to be changed alongside the balance changes. If munitions are now the most important resource for Ostheer - to allow fausts, shreks, LMG to fight the Russians hordes early. A vast majority of maps, make this task for Ostheer almost impossible.

The design of the Ostheer faction needs some love. If Soviets are allowed such versatility in early game:
1. Cons from HQ
2. Penals, clown cars and snipers from T1
3. MG, Mortar and AT Gun with barrage ability from T1

Oh and if something goes wrong, Soviet can skip all tech straight to T4 - Katyush

Too many options for Soviets, not enough options for Ostheer. Why do Soviets need two front line, extremely versatile infantry units available from T0 and T1 respectively.

Because it was a high time for soviets to get an actual, real AT infantry, especially considering the fact that you have to severely delay ATG for that infantry.

M3 and Penals is so easy to counter as Ostheer. Not sure what your problem is. Get MG42 LMG Grens and Pgrens and make sure you have a Pak once it's time for T70 and you should always win against equally skilled players. What's way harder to counter is 4 Cons + Zis into T70.

Oh and if something goes wrong, Soviet can skip all tech straight to T4 - Katyush

This is incorrect. The Soviets must build T1/T2, T3, then T4. They cannot skip any tiers.

M3 and Penals is so easy to counter as Ostheer. Not sure what your problem is. Get MG42 LMG Grens and Pgrens and make sure you have a Pak once it's time for T70 and you should always win against equally skilled players. What's way harder to counter is 4 Cons + Zis into T70.

6 men dps monsters vs 4 men shitty k98k ? Until you get lmg42 you will suffer great manpower losses.

especially considering the fact that you have to severely delay ATG for that infantry.

What are you high or have you never played the game. That is the most stupid statement that I'v heard from you.

M3 and Penals is so easy to counter as Ostheer. Not sure what your problem is. Get MG42 LMG Grens and Pgrens and make sure you have a Pak once it's time for T70 and you should always win against equally skilled players. What's way harder to counter is 4 Cons + Zis into T70.

You do realize he is talking from a 3v3+ perspective. It would be very easy to counter m3 as Ost if this was only 1v1.

Because it was a high time for soviets to get an actual, real AT infantry, especially considering the fact that you have to severely delay ATG for that infantry.

But Soviet didn't need REAL AT infantry - they have a good AT Gun from T1 and cheap mines and Cons with AT nade, Penals with AT Satchel and now PTRS upgrade that comes too soon and is too good. Fine, give them a PTRS but lock it behind T4 tech for late game.

M3 and Penals is so easy to counter as Ostheer. Not sure what your problem is. Get MG42 LMG Grens and Pgrens and make sure you have a Pak once it's time for T70 and you should always win against equally skilled players. What's way harder to counter is 4 Cons + Zis into T70.

In 1v1 yes, but in team games the resources needed by Ostheer to counter this play is almost impossible to keep up with. Plus, Soviet with this strategy doesn't care about fuel anymore and rushes the munitions so they can spam PTRS upgrades. As I said previously, current map designs make it almost impossible to gather the munitions for LMG upgrade, plus fausts, plus flamers, forget teller mines.

It requires a great deal of skill and micro to fend off such a strategy against skilled players who are not braindead.

What are you high or have you never played the game. That is the most stupid statement that I'v heard from you.

Are you some kind of weirdo who gets T1 then T2 then T3 and then T4 as soviets?
I can't see any other way that comment would confuse you so much.

But Soviet didn't need REAL AT infantry - they have a good AT Gun from T1 and cheap mines and Cons with AT nade, Penals with AT Satchel and now PTRS upgrade that comes too soon and is too good. Fine, give them a PTRS but lock it behind T4 tech for late game.

In T2.
ATG is in T2.
You don't get T1 AND T2 together before early late game.

Mines are deterrent to reckless vehicle use, NOT AT weapon, AT nade is NOT AT weapon.

Do you also want to suggest that PG shrecks should be T4 locked? Because that's how stupid your suggestion sounds.

You do realize he is talking from a 3v3+ perspective. It would be very easy to counter m3 as Ost if this was only 1v1.

M3 is harder to kill in 1v1 and 2v2 than 3v3 and 4v4 because you need space to move around and in 3v3 and 4v4 there are snares everywhere because of unit density.

In 1v1 yes, but in team games the resources needed by Ostheer to counter this play is almost impossible to keep up with. Plus, Soviet with this strategy doesn't care about fuel anymore and rushes the munitions so they can spam PTRS upgrades. As I said previously, current map designs make it almost impossible to gather the munitions for LMG upgrade, plus fausts, plus flamers, forget teller mines.

It requires a great deal of skill and micro to fend off such a strategy against skilled players who are not braindead.

What rank are you playing at?

If a Soviet spams PTRS on all his Penals the OBVIOUS counter is to just get 1-2 MG42 + 2x LMG Gren and 2x Pgren and completely demolish him. He can't counter the MGs, his infantry is bleeding like hell because PTRS Penals are horrible at infantry combat while still costing 28 MP to reinforce. What is the problem here?

Are you some kind of weirdo who gets T1 then T2 then T3 and then T4 as soviets?
I can't see any other way that comment would confuse you so much.


In T2.
ATG is in T2.
You don't get T1 AND T2 together before early late game.

Mines are deterrent to reckless vehicle use, NOT AT weapon, AT nade is NOT AT weapon.

Do you also want to suggest that PG shrecks should be T4 locked? Because that's how stupid your suggestion sounds.

How can you argument something with someone who thinks AT Nade and mines aren't AT weapons?

How can you argument something with someone who thinks AT Nade and mines aren't AT weapons?

AT nade and mines are deterrents first and foremost and can't be compared to proper AT weapons like AT guns and TDs. AT nades are very short range, have a muni cost, and rely on your opponent getting careless or greedy. Mines similarly require your opponent to not be careful in order to be effective and the effectiveness of mines can vary wildly. Neither are nearly as reliable as other, proper AT weapons.

Imagine trying to fight off tanks with only PanzerFAUST and Teller mines, no shrecks, no PaK40, etc. It doesn't work very well. That's why they aren't considered AT weapons and rather as deterrents in the game.

To add to the argument: Why do you think Soviets don't need AT infantry? Because they have snares and AT gun? Every other faction has snares and an AT gun in addition to infantry AT options such as PIAT, Zook, or Schreck.

To add to the argument: Why do you think Soviets don't need AT infantry? Because they have snares and AT gun? Every other faction has snares and an AT gun in addition to infantry AT options such as PIAT, Zook, or Schreck.

Maybe I used wrong words, Soviets can have AT infantry - that's fine by me. However, it's all about the timing, the cost, the effectiveness and durability of the PTRS squad.

When I play Soviets, I can kite the Ostheer Infantry with T70 and cause constant bleed and force him to field presence due to only have 4 man squads. The same can't be said for Ostheer against Soviets? How are they supposed to caused manpower bleed, when they don't have a vehicle to do it with. Instead, Ostheer are forced to concentrate forces and lose map presence.

As it only takes a shot each with 3 PTRS squads to force Panzer 4 back for repairs without receiving much damage in return. By the time Panzer 4 arrives it's already too late anyway. The timings are out. Even 5 CP for Mobile Defence Puma is not fast enough to deal with T70, plus it would only get raped by PTRS.

So the answer must be a Pak 40 no? Because, T70 just circle it or go to where the Pak isn't, again lose map presence as Ostheer must have Pak 40 back up.

There is eventual counters to everything, but Soviet Early-Mid game is bullet-proof right now.

How can you argument something with someone who thinks AT Nade and mines aren't AT weapons?

How can you argue with someone who thinks they are?
When was last time you've destroyed a tank using ONLY mines or AT nades?
Would you like to know how often that happens compared to ONLY using AT squads or ATGs?


Its basic noob lesson 1 knowledge that mines, as I've said, are deterrents to reckless vehicle play and so are AT nades.
You're a clown.

It's important to remember that Penals still cost 290 Manpower and even in teamgames where Fuel and Munitions resources are heavily inflated that you don't gain any additional manpower to field more units. When you upgrade PTRS on your Penals they turn into a very weak AI squad that will lose a 1v1 to Grens in any reasonable scenario. (The only situation where PTRS Penals can deal enough AI to win a fight vs Unupgraded Vet 0 Grens is when they're Vet 3 which is a ridiculous fight that should never happen.)

PTRS Penals are actually incredibly inefficient since you have to take one of your valuable mainline infantry units and turn them into a dedicated AT unit, and even in the instance where you can use them on LV's you're still not particularly happy because you have to severely sacrifice your Anti-Infantry capability to do so, and because anymore than 1 PTRS Penals will decimate your ability to fight infantry, your opponent can simply avoid that squad and fight elsewhere or otherwise dispose of it through the usage of Machine Guns or focus fire with infantry which leaves you without proper mobile AT on the field.

Also worth considering that others have pointed out that going Penals means you're skipping the Tier 2 Building which denies you access to Zis Guns which are a significantly stronger and more efficient tool in the Soviet Arsenal for dealing with vehicles and the Zis Barrage is a powerful AI resource in it's own right for dislodging team weapons and units in cover.

Just from a cursory glance from your problem, you might be playing your Pak40 too aggressively if it can regularly be flanked by the T70, alternatively you might not be supporting it enough with infantry since the PTRS Penals won't be able to push off your Grens in any realistic fight. You might also be lending way too much credence to spreading your army out wide instead of focusing specific areas to actually take and control ground. You're also not making any mention of the 222 which while it will lose to PTRS Penals and the T70, is an amazing tool for vision purposes allowing you to see how your opponents army is situated which is valuably information since it can sight for your Pak, and help you move your infantry into advantageous positions, same can be said for any recon abilities. You could also be taking poor infantry engagements where you aren't using proper cover, or where while in a 1v1 PTRS Penals will lose to Grens, multiple PTRS Squads will simply overwhelm you due to spreading your forces too thin vs amassed army.

Maybe I used wrong words, Soviets can have AT infantry - that's fine by me. However, it's all about the timing, the cost, the effectiveness and durability of the PTRS squad.

And what's wrong with the timing? Ptrs have low damage and penetration but with higher ROF compared to other handheld AT. That makes them strong against lights, which they need to be. If you go T1 you don't have an AT gun