Login

russian armor

Shreked PGrens... Balanced or no?

6 Apr 2014, 11:21 AM
#41
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 01:06 AMwooof


guards are support units. theyre not meant to attack vehicles in the same way as pgrens. combine guards with a zis or su85 and they synergize a lot better than pgrens and a pak.


Why do the Germans deserve far superior at infantry when they already have superior armour? Guards have to be paired with something else to have any hope of killing tanks, where as panzergrens do not. They are more than capable of killing armour on their own. That is my issue with them. Buff guards to be the same as Panzer grens and make them a core unit. Then you can leave panzer grens as they are.
6 Apr 2014, 11:42 AM
#42
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

shrecks are fine, there are bigger problems that need a look first...but the scatter nerf on moving vehicles was a bad idea in the first place
6 Apr 2014, 11:46 AM
#43
avatar of spajn
Donator 11

Posts: 927

soviet are meant to be shit because they were shit irl
6 Apr 2014, 12:18 PM
#44
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 11:46 AMspajn
soviet are meant to be shit because they were shit irl


Using that logic, Germans are meant to lose because they lost the war.
6 Apr 2014, 12:58 PM
#45
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 11:46 AMspajn
soviet are meant to be shit because they were shit irl


raw
6 Apr 2014, 13:14 PM
#46
avatar of raw

Posts: 644

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 11:46 AMspajn
soviet are meant to be shit because they were shit irl


they still won the war tho
6 Apr 2014, 13:49 PM
#47
avatar of VonMecha

Posts: 419

So if Sovs deserve guards to be better vs tanks maybe German tanks should be better vs Sov infantry.And guards should have to spend 120 munitions to upgrade to antitank. If you feel pgs are too strong vs tanks, how does making guards stronger vs tanks solve the pg problem?
6 Apr 2014, 13:50 PM
#48
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293



cmon there is no reason this needs to turn into a flame war. :)
6 Apr 2014, 13:52 PM
#49
avatar of VonMecha

Posts: 419



Using that logic, Germans are meant to lose because they lost the war.


Some would argue they lost the war because of bad decision making by the high command as opposed to their military capability. In Coh you are the high command.
6 Apr 2014, 13:56 PM
#50
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

So if Sovs deserve guards to be better vs tanks maybe German tanks should be better vs Sov infantry.And guards should have to spend 120 munitions to upgrade to antitank. If you feel pgs are too strong vs tanks, how does making guards stronger vs tanks solve the pg problem?


I would love to trade guards in their current state to where you can get panzershrek equivalent weapons for 120 muni. As it stands now soviets have to spend 100 muni to make the unit half useful against armour just for button. People (German only players) seem to think shrek grens are more than balanced. If they truly believe this to be the case, then buffing guards is an option and would atleast give soviets equal infantry based at. As it standards now their infantry at is inferior not to mention doctrinal only.

Please tell me which tank has problems against infantry. The only 2 I can think of are the Panther (but it has an mg upgrade and is far better vs infantry than an su85, not to mention strong armour and blitzlol) and the Elephant. Elephant has crazy armour even on the rear that T34's struggle to penetrate and what is quite frankly stupid view range. It's also much better at taking down armour vs anything the soviets have.
6 Apr 2014, 13:58 PM
#51
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

it should be 1 for 60, it was like that in the beta and it was perfect

Sure it was.
For german only players, not for balance.
6 Apr 2014, 13:59 PM
#52
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 11:46 AMspajn
soviet are meant to be shit because they were shit irl

So lets cut the unit costs of all soviet units by 80%, because that was pretty much the difference in the economies behind the armies back then.

Up for that?

That german fanbois....
6 Apr 2014, 16:11 PM
#53
avatar of VonMecha

Posts: 419

Well in that case since Hitler wont be commanding, and people with 2 brain cells and absent of being meglomanaics will, the Germans will crush Sovs by not getting entire army groups decimated for the pride of Hitler and Germans win coh2 game over. Great argument.
6 Apr 2014, 16:24 PM
#54
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Well in that case since Hitler wont be commanding, and people with 2 brain cells and absent of being meglomanaics will, the Germans will crush Sovs by not getting entire army groups decimated for the pride of Hitler and Germans win coh2 game over. Great argument.


I wouldn't be so sure about the megalomania part.
6 Apr 2014, 17:00 PM
#55
avatar of Ginnungagap

Posts: 324 | Subs: 2

I believe in 1v1 PGrens with schrecks are fine. They are a high-cost, high-efficiency unit, and that's alright on a small scale.

In 2v2+ their value especially in the late game increases, because the munitions cost is easily affordable. Massed PGrens can easily attack move multiple soviet tanks except IS2, ISU152 and KV8. All other soviet tanks rely heavily on rng to do damage, as mentioned before. The scatter change on move (which i personally like) and negligible range difference prevents effective kiting with tanks.

That's also when you notice the lack of any serious soviet infantry AT. (I would be in favor for a bazooka upgrade for engineers once T3/T4 is up)
To specifically address the "massed PG problem": Decreasing the penetration and range slightly, while also decreasing the munitions cost a little bit could give them a more reasonable performance.
6 Apr 2014, 20:08 PM
#56
avatar of c r u C e

Posts: 525

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 11:46 AMspajn
soviet are meant to be shit because they were shit irl


Please stop eating sh*t,it's beginning to smell
7 Apr 2014, 11:55 AM
#57
avatar of Cyridius

Posts: 627

PzGrens are an inefficient platform for any kind of anti-tank weaponry and Schreks are a sign of either stupidity or desperation. I've always advocated for 5 model PzGren squads.
7 Apr 2014, 12:27 PM
#58
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

PzGrens are an inefficient platform for any kind of anti-tank weaponry and Schreks are a sign of either stupidity or desperation. I've always advocated for 5 model PzGren squads.


Use what wehr and PE did like... always?
Don't treat PGrens with shrecks as attacking AT, you have tanks for that.

Shrecks in vCoH were for protection of PaKs, 88s and Marders and this haven't changed in CoH2.
7 Apr 2014, 13:22 PM
#59
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

it should be 1 for 60, it was like that in the beta and it was perfect
It was 75 (=

On Topic: you can easily kite Pgrens wih Shreks already.
7 Apr 2014, 13:25 PM
#60
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293

i think the problem is when you build them in mass. and is probably highlighted more so in this patch as tier 2 is very powerful for germans now. while tier 3 and 4 for sovs is so hard to get to.

a m5 aa truck can be very good against pgren blobs because it outranges them. ;)
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

793 users are online: 793 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM