Login

russian armor

Panzergrens

PAGES (7)down
8 Feb 2014, 22:12 PM
#101
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2014, 22:06 PMwooof


i think we all know what you guys would say if a german complained that 1 mg42 couldnt stop 3 cons...

I'm talking about blob, zero attempting at micro or flanking, just a-move.
You out of all should know it best that MG42 suppression increases the more entities it shoots at, maxim doesn't share this benefit as far as I'm aware.

And don't say 'you guys' to me. I like playing germans as much as soviets. Only happens I don't agree with german only players bitching more then with soviet ones.
8 Feb 2014, 22:14 PM
#102
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

Wut? The surpression doesn't increase. Bystanding units just get surpressed too. (Ok, thats wording, but I wanted to make this clear so that we are on the same page) And I am pretty sure thats the same for the Maxim.
8 Feb 2014, 22:31 PM
#103
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Wut? The surpression doesn't increase. Bystanding units just get surpressed too. (Ok, thats wording, but I wanted to make this clear so that we are on the same page) And I am pretty sure thats the same for the Maxim.


German MG42:
- Increased nearby suppression multiplier from .4 -> .55. This applies 55% of the weapon’s suppression to nearby squads.
- Increased nearby suppression radius rom 10 -> 12

This pretty much means the more squads are in AoE, the better MG42 suppression is.
Unless I've made some horrible mistake in understanding this.
Maxims values should be lower for that, but I couldn't dig them up.
9 Feb 2014, 04:40 AM
#104
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2014, 22:06 PMwooof


i think we all know what you guys would say if a german complained that 1 mg42 couldnt stop 3 cons...

hilarious replay by the way. blobs everywhere on both sides. i especially liked it when the kv8 tries to attack a pak and 2 p4s.


yea i didnt care much after that. none of us did after the initial pgren rape, both of us were so demoralized we didnt play proper.

and you wanted us to spread out? not sure how conscripts fare against vetted pgrens without critical mass. even with critical mass, its all bleed for soviets, just health damage for pgrens.

going maxims is even more lol, guess what pgrens counter? bloody support teams. snipers isnt going to stop a blob that big and even sinking more mp into dedicated anti infantry at early mid? are you right in the mind?

when there is almost no telling what they might do in the 1st 4mins of the game and i've already got 3-4x conscripts by then. so i have to read minds in order to not get shit on by this strategy?

completely sick of this shit. im not even sure how u guys can even defend this, u guys are a bloody disgrace. not to mention there are substantial casualties even as pgrens were on the move and at LONG range. i dont care if they have assault rifles or plasma cannons, game balance dictate if a unit has this much dps upfront, there must be a drawback while pgrens just rape at all ranges.

also don't gimme how lore says assault rifles are supposed to work in game. have you ever fired straight while running? practically impossible. your hands arent camera stabilizers.

yes im totally butthurt, but not because im completely outplayed, i dont care about the guy who did that to me. im more annoyed by the fact that the balance is totally off.

but fuck this, this is a pro german forums, my post will probably get picked on by them anyways.
9 Feb 2014, 05:34 AM
#105
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 04:40 AMwongtp

when there is almost no telling what they might do in the 1st 4mins of the game and i've already got 3-4x conscripts by then. so i have to read minds in order to not get shit on by this strategy?


he had 2 pios and built a fuel cache. that should already tell you he was rushing t2 for pgrens. theres clearly no point in actually discussing this though, since thats not what youre trying to do.
9 Feb 2014, 05:45 AM
#106
avatar of buckers

Posts: 230

PG's aren't assault grens on steroids, assault grens are PG's on crack.
9 Feb 2014, 07:35 AM
#107
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 04:40 AMwongtp

when there is almost no telling what they might do in the 1st 4mins of the game and i've already got 3-4x conscripts by then. so i have to read minds in order to not get shit on by this strategy?


Mistakes from that match:

-None of you tech neither T1 or T2. Less flexible.
-You saw a cache and 2 pios. NO T1 units from 1 guys. KINDA OBVIOUS.
-Brolaire lost at 4mins a cons pushing frontally on redcover an mg being supported by 2 mortars.
-At the same time 3 Cons from Glum were forced out by 1 PG vetted. He ate with the whole squads a nade forcing 1 squad to inst retreat. The other squad went 1on1 with the PG while the 3rd squad was move out of combat for some reason. No usage of molotov.
-Glum researched AT nades earlier than 4:35 (i cant go back and see when he started it). If we discount that both floated almost 600mp. Brolair after losing a CON and seeing vet PG pulls out another CON. By this time both of you had 1 CP being able to get Shocks as a quick answer.
-AND the first Shock was not supported and sent alone against 2 vet PGs. PLUS, he tried to do a soft retreating losing shooting time.

I stopped briefly later. Problem is, you tried to stop a blob of PGs with a blob of Cons. There are several easy ways to punish that kind of "strat".
Maxim, mines, sniper, mortar, shocks. With some proper micro you can make PPSH work in a relation 2on1 or landing good molotovs. Choose your drug.
You didnt secured any of the both fuels neither build a cache nor make usage of the early fuel advantage you have from 1 guy vetting 3/4 units. If the other guy didnt sat down with his MGs that game should had end sooner.


Regarding PGs n topic: PG are fines. What is not as fine is rifle damage MAYBE. If you have problems with PG is more of a L2P issue rather than balance.

Regarding vetting troops: it needs a nerf (not so big). Increasing MP, increasing cooldown or negating using it on allies is a good direction in making it more balance.

9 Feb 2014, 10:19 AM
#108
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647



Mistakes from that match:

-None of you tech neither T1 or T2. Less flexible.
-You saw a cache and 2 pios. NO T1 units from 1 guys. KINDA OBVIOUS.
-Brolaire lost at 4mins a cons pushing frontally on redcover an mg being supported by 2 mortars.
-At the same time 3 Cons from Glum were forced out by 1 PG vetted. He ate with the whole squads a nade forcing 1 squad to inst retreat. The other squad went 1on1 with the PG while the 3rd squad was move out of combat for some reason. No usage of molotov.
-Glum researched AT nades earlier than 4:35 (i cant go back and see when he started it). If we discount that both floated almost 600mp. Brolair after losing a CON and seeing vet PG pulls out another CON. By this time both of you had 1 CP being able to get Shocks as a quick answer.
-AND the first Shock was not supported and sent alone against 2 vet PGs. PLUS, he tried to do a soft retreating losing shooting time.



Regarding PGs n topic: PG are fines. What is not as fine is rifle damage MAYBE. If you have problems with PG is more of a L2P issue rather than balance.

Regarding vetting troops: it needs a nerf (not so big). Increasing MP, increasing cooldown or negating using it on allies is a good direction in making it more balance.



3rd con out in the 1.30min mark.
1st fuel cache sighted in the 1.40min mark.
1st engagement with pios close to the 1.40min mark

pretty damn obvious? we have already committed to conscripts before we spotted the fuel cache.

true about not going t1/t2.

frontal assault to mg a mistake? it was covered by fog and I had a good chance to throw a molotov, didnt work because i got shat on by rng and mortar, single shot wiped 3/5 men, retreated asap but still con squad lost to mg42. no qualms there.

2nd con squad lost to 2 vetted pgren squad. retreated with 5 men, 0 men returned. showcasing insane pgren dps and terrain stuck.

molotovs has long windup, easily missing moving pgrens. stg44 dps wipes conscripts so hard they would be down to half squad by the time they throw a molotov. as shown later on, molotovs completely misses, cons insta retreat.

2cons do not stand against a 2vet pgren squad. staying at long range was his only salvation. judging from the speed that the con squad fall to the pgren squad, the supporting con squad would not be able to effectively chase the pgren away.

4 pgren squad + fht, ran across a field against 6 cons who stopped and firing, 1 casualty. while cons were almost wiped before pgrens got into mid range.

our fault for not supporting the shocks, no qualms there.

halftrack got shat on by pzschrecks atfar range, again relic not learning anything from vcoh. 20 target size, 0.025 long range accuracy, 0.4% increased accuracy = 70% chance to hit.

unvetted pgrens are fine, i agree but 6mins vetted pgrens are not.

here are the vet bonuses for pgrens:
Vet 2 +40% Armor -25% Cooldown
Vet 3 +40% Accuracy +25% Range on bundle grenade

vet2 pgrens get 2.1armour and even more dps. vet3, they excel even at long range thanks to the 40% acc boost, oh and more dps too.

insane firepower, good amount of armour, good mobility, even more firepower on the move and popping in at the 6th-7th minute.
9 Feb 2014, 17:24 PM
#109
avatar of Mad_Hatter

Posts: 134


Regarding PGs n topic: PG are fines. What is not as fine is rifle damage MAYBE. If you have problems with PG is more of a L2P issue rather than balance.


So what im gathering from this is that dealing with install vetted pgrens is a l2p issue yet more expensive shocks at 1cp is a balance problem?? Really???? Get a hold of yourselves people. The only real difference is is that shocks are doctrinal, more exoensive and a bit better (god forbid soviets have even one unit that outperforms the axis counterpart) but as a drawback can't be upgraded to be the best AT infantry in game. Where exactly is the problem with shocks? I honestly dont see it in theory here on the forums or in action in a game. Is it because i dont play 1v1s? Becausebin team games shocks and pgrens strike me as good, but not as op.
9 Feb 2014, 18:31 PM
#110
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

^
It's about shocks being used to get an irrevocable early advantage that expands to mid game.

PzGs are great but with weak armor and HP compared to shocks. They slaughter conscripts. I don't know what their damage is, but it's definitely comparable to shocks. Plus they have the range. They do considerably more damage than the 5 assault grenadiers.

I always get 2 PzGs and by mid-game, get them the panzershrecks. They are usually vetted by then.

As for shocks I usually get only 1 or sometimes 2 because they are expensive and not scalable.
9 Feb 2014, 20:29 PM
#111
avatar of link0

Posts: 337

I would like to see Vet2 PGrens vs Vet0 Shocks. I'm willing to guess that the PGrens will win easily, which is pretty stupidly OP.

You can vet the PGrens to Vet2 for a stupidly small amount of fuel, and yet their reinforcement costs stay the same. This means PGrens become far far more cost effective than Shocks over the course of a few engagements.

It just goes to show how ridiculously OP purchasable vet is for the elite troops doctrine.
9 Feb 2014, 20:44 PM
#112
avatar of Mad_Hatter

Posts: 134

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 20:29 PMlink0
I would like to see Vet2 PGrens vs Vet0 Shocks. I'm willing to guess that the PGrens will win easily, which is pretty stupidly OP.

You can vet the PGrens to Vet2 for a stupidly small amount of fuel, and yet their reinforcement costs stay the same. This means PGrens become far far more cost effective than Shocks over the course of a few engagements.

It just goes to show how ridiculously OP purchasable vet is for the elite troops doctrine.


+1
9 Feb 2014, 20:58 PM
#113
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 10:19 AMwongtp


3rd con out in the 1.30min mark.
1st fuel cache sighted in the 1.40min mark.
1st engagement with pios close to the 1.40min mark

pretty damn obvious? we have already committed to conscripts before we spotted the fuel cache.
Capping order. If you dont see X part of the map cappped or trying to be capped can be a good signal of what is comming. 3 Conscripts is not a heavy commitment. Knowing that you´ll face T2 you could also avoid teching molotovs. You still were in time to tech
true about not going t1/t2.

frontal assault to mg a mistake? it was covered by fog and I had a good chance to throw a molotov, didnt work because i got shat on by rng and mortar, single shot wiped 3/5 men, retreated asap but still con squad lost to mg42. no qualms there.

Even if you throw the molotov he could just have to move back. Read what you wrote: "Frontal assault to MG".

2nd con squad lost to 2 vetted pgren squad. retreated with 5 men, 0 men returned. showcasing insane pgren dps and terrain stuck.

Could have retreat earlier when seeing the first PG. 2nd PG assured the wipe

molotovs has long windup, easily missing moving pgrens. stg44 dps wipes conscripts so hard they would be down to half squad by the time they throw a molotov. as shown later on, molotovs completely misses, cons insta retreat.

So dont rely on Cons to counter PG spam

2cons do not stand against a 2vet pgren squad. staying at long range was his only salvation. judging from the speed that the con squad fall to the pgren squad, the supporting con squad would not be able to effectively chase the pgren away.

Dodging the nade and ganging up 3v1 while keeping map control was his best option. Mantaining both Cons in order to deal damage and force a retreat (while your other conscript with hoorah could have also help) and still mantaing map presence was still an option.

4 pgren squad + fht, ran across a field against 6 cons who stopped and firing, 1 casualty. while cons were almost wiped before pgrens got into mid range.

So you expect to stop a blob of 4 vetted PG with FHT with 6 cons?


Anwsers in orange.

Just in case, i agree that vetting needs to be balance.
I also want to see:
-vet0 Shock vs vet 2 PG
-vet 2 vs vet 3 PG
9 Feb 2014, 21:19 PM
#114
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 1003

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 20:29 PMlink0
I would like to see Vet2 PGrens vs Vet0 Shocks. I'm willing to guess that the PGrens will win easily, which is pretty stupidly OP.

You can vet the PGrens to Vet2 for a stupidly small amount of fuel, and yet their reinforcement costs stay the same. This means PGrens become far far more cost effective than Shocks over the course of a few engagements.

It just goes to show how ridiculously OP purchasable vet is for the elite troops doctrine.


+1
9 Feb 2014, 21:26 PM
#115
avatar of HappyPhace

Posts: 309

In regards to pgrens and their AI capability I think they are fine where they are at. A sniper, maxim, 2 conscripts at range with luck will counter a charging pgren, at least bring them to half.

The only problem I have with them is their extreme long range and accuracy with the streks. Seriously they are homing missiles for no apparent reason, I have been shocked at the range they have at times on a tank that should clearly be out of range.
9 Feb 2014, 21:29 PM
#116
avatar of Sarantini
Honorary Member Badge
Donator 22

Posts: 2181

Here is some quick testing:
http://www.twitch.tv/sarantini/b/502117617
It's all in no cover and at ranges where cover gets ignored anyway
I think Shocks have higher DPS when moving but in this test they are standing still.
Results:
0:56 Vet0 PG vs Vet0 Shocks = easy win for shocks
1:56 Vet2 PG vs Vet0 Shocks = equal, both died at the same time :D
3:07 & 6:00 Vet 3 PG vs Vet2 Shocks = PG wins but is very hurt

It needs more testing for better and more consistent results obviously and i forgot the hotkeys most of the time
9 Feb 2014, 22:14 PM
#117
avatar of link0

Posts: 337

Here is some quick testing:
http://www.twitch.tv/sarantini/b/502117617
It's all in no cover and at ranges where cover gets ignored anyway
I think Shocks have higher DPS when moving but in this test they are standing still.
Results:
0:56 Vet0 PG vs Vet0 Shocks = easy win for shocks
1:56 Vet2 PG vs Vet0 Shocks = equal, both died at the same time :D
3:07 & 6:00 Vet 3 PG vs Vet2 Shocks = PG wins but is very hurt

It needs more testing for better and more consistent results obviously and i forgot the hotkeys most of the time


Thanks for doing a few tests. HOWEVER, you spawn the shocks right on top of the PGrens, then you proceeded to move the PGrens around for some reason which caused the PGrens not to fire for a bit in the first crucial moments.

You should have it so that PGrens are standing still while Shocks charge them from afar, because this is the most realistic game scenario. Since PGrens are far superior at long range, realistically it will always be the Shocks that charge into close range, not the PGrens.

From what I can see in that video, I can almost guarantee that vet2 PGens will beat Vet0 Shocks with ease.
9 Feb 2014, 22:25 PM
#118
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 20:29 PMlink0
I would like to see Vet2 PGrens vs Vet0 Shocks. I'm willing to guess that the PGrens will win easily, which is pretty stupidly OP.

You can vet the PGrens to Vet2 for a stupidly small amount of fuel, and yet their reinforcement costs stay the same. This means PGrens become far far more cost effective than Shocks over the course of a few engagements.

It just goes to show how ridiculously OP purchasable vet is for the elite troops doctrine.


shocks come out sooner than pgs, especially vet pgs. vetting a pg also makes it cost more than a shock squad, not to mention the fact you have to tech. also, shocks reinforce cost is cheaper than pgs and each entity is more durable...
9 Feb 2014, 22:39 PM
#119
avatar of ATCF
Donator 33

Posts: 587

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 22:14 PMlink0


Thanks for doing a few tests. HOWEVER, you spawn the shocks right on top of the PGrens, then you proceeded to move the PGrens around for some reason which caused the PGrens not to fire for a bit in the first crucial moments.

You should have it so that PGrens are standing still while Shocks charge them from afar, because this is the most realistic game scenario. Since PGrens are far superior at long range, realistically it will always be the Shocks that charge into close range, not the PGrens.

From what I can see in that video, I can almost guarantee that vet2 PGens will beat Vet0 Shocks with ease.



Shocks and Pgrens fire more often if they move, raising their DPS
10 Feb 2014, 00:22 AM
#120
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 22:39 PMATCF
Shocks and Pgrens fire more often if they move, raising their DPS


False, that was the case for Assault Grenadiers in CoH1, but not here. The Panzergrenadiers lose act exactly the same moving as they do not moving. Shock Troops fire in 50% longer bursts but have 25% less accuracy.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

901 users are online: 901 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48785
Welcome our newest member, tp88living
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM