Lets talk Pgrens.

They are basically grenadiers with an AR upgrade that's worth around 60 muni.

An interesting question to the people who think the PzG are overpriced would be if they would buy the PzG if they were 240 Manpower, 60 muni. Then the panzershreck unlock would need the AR 60 muni buy first, so PzG w/PzS would total 240 MP, 180 Muni.

But the problem here is cheap MP PzG spam would break the balance quite badly, so the PzG must be priced higher in the MP department

Munition points are obviously rarer and are worth more than manpower. Some of the munitions to manpower conversations show that, that's how relic values them as well.
.

Addtional Muni expense effects neither pop cap nor reinforce. They should at least have lower value in these areas if they are valued so highly in the others.

Thats the BEAUTY in Grens. LMG bad assness no addtional Pop cap, Higher XP requirement, Reinforce cost.

Same as Penals pre patch. They cost as much Manpower as Pgrens, Did as much damage as G43 Grens, Had a higher XP requirement to vet, upkeep, and reinforce.

EXACTLY where Pgrens are now.

Funny enough though Penal Troops were better then, rather than now. Then they could defeat Grenadiers at any range, now they can only do it at close range but they lose people closing in. Their saving grace is that once they close in, they have almost double the DPS of Conscripts. And Flamethrowers of course, although I'm not convinced they actually increase DPS.

Funny enough though Penal Troops were better then, rather than now. Then they could defeat Grenadiers at any range, now they can only do it at close range but they lose people closing in. Their saving grace is that once they close in, they have almost double the DPS of Conscripts. And Flamethrowers of course, although I'm not convinced they actually increase DPS.

I agree but its offtopic so I didnt want to bring it up they were nowhere near Pgrens then and cost the same though.

Point is Pgrens are going to be like them imho. And I like to see diversity

^
If there was a 6 man, non-doc low quality/cheap squad for Germans then this squad wipe complaint would not pop up so much. Cascading from this will be fewer complaints about the rest of their infantry and support weapons.

If Relic releases a commander with both Osttruppen and Tiger then it'll be pretty popular I believe.

Honestly I think the real issues with pg oddly enough are a combination of rifle nades + g43 + assault grenadiers.

1. Rifle nade.

In vcoh grenadiers did not have a rifle nade. So this meant to assault you needed mortor smoke + pg or flame pios. It was a standard tactic. In coh2 the rifle nade is a cheap and safe way to kill at guns and weapon support teams. So a lot of players expect the pg to be a way more powerfull option because of tier and cost. No need for tactics now, you just click a button with grenadiers.

2. G43

Ost players now have another medium/ cq unit for a cheaper price and no teching. Doctrine specific but available in many of the p2w commanders. Again another issue of players thinking pg should perform better than grenadiers because teching and cost.

3. Assault grenadiers

Yet again another option for ost players in cq combat. Cheap and tier zero no need for pg when combined with grenadiers.

The issue of pg effectiveness is more complicated than just buffing them. It s easy to just cry and stamp your feet in the forums but you have to look at a much broader picture here.

Let me guess, you're going to say the answer is to nerf Grenadiers, Assault Grenadiers, and G43's?

Honestly I think the real issues with pg oddly enough are a combination of rifle nades + g43 + assault grenadiers.

1. Rifle nade.

In vcoh grenadiers did not have a rifle nade. So this meant to assault you needed mortor smoke + pg or flame pios. It was a standard tactic. In coh2 the rifle nade is a cheap and safe way to kill at guns and weapon support teams. So a lot of players expect the pg to be a way more powerfull option because of tier and cost. No need for tactics now, you just click a button with grenadiers.

2. G43

Ost players now have another medium/ cq unit for a cheaper price and no teching. Doctrine specific but available in many of the p2w commanders. Again another issue of players thinking pg should perform better than grenadiers because teching and cost.

3. Assault grenadiers

Yet again another option for ost players in cq combat. Cheap and tier zero no need for pg when combined with grenadiers.

The issue of pg effectiveness is more complicated than just buffing them. It s easy to just cry and stamp your feet in the forums but you have to look at a much broader picture here.

1.loads of bullshit. grens where the most cost effective unit as soon as they reached vet 2 in vcoh and could kill any rifle or tommy squad easily in cover. grens could also attack a 30 call head on with their longer ranged grenades and the fact that kars where not as susceptible to suppression

2. Its a all rounder upgrade that most importantly upgrades the medium and long range power of the grens

3. have you ever compared them with shock troopers? the same shock troopers that nearly have twice the durability nearly the same dps and smoke grenades and are cheaper to reinforce?

Whole picture my ass your only looking at half the picture.

2. Its a all rounder upgrade that most importantly upgrades the medium and long range power of the grens

Actually it's close to mid, long range damage is reduced compared to stock Grens.

Let me guess, you're going to say the answer is to nerf Grenadiers, Assault Grenadiers, and G43's?

No I am not going to say that. Although I would like to see rifle nades removed from vanilla grenadiers as they cause a lot of balance issues in many different ways. They should be doctrine specific.

I am trying to discuss how some of the ost design concepts are in need of some reconstructing and pg are kinda redundant now as a result. I don't like how g43 are medium and close range weapons. That was the role of pg. but it is way better to have g43 Grens as you get a Faust + rifle grenade + cq weapons and cheaper.

Just trying to bring to light why some players have the perception that pg are needing buffs when in my opinion other units are crossing over and out performing in the pg role.

Actually it's close to mid, long range damage is reduced compared to stock Grens.

do you use this chart?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdGF4VURuYjVGZXlIN3ptbV8tbzRzN0E&usp=drive_web#gid=0

even so g43 are not worth it when you get lmg's

do you use this chart?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdGF4VURuYjVGZXlIN3ptbV8tbzRzN0E&usp=drive_web#gid=0

even so g43 are not worth it when you get lmg's

http://coh2-stats.herokuapp.com/ actually

do you use this chart?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdGF4VURuYjVGZXlIN3ptbV8tbzRzN0E&usp=drive_web#gid=0

even so g43 are not worth it when you get lmg's

ALL STATS ARE CURRENT AS OF THE 3/28 HOTFIX

G43s are worse than K98s at long range as of the latest patch. That spreadsheet hasn't been updated.

No I am not going to say that. Although I would like to see rifle nades removed from vanilla grenadiers as they cause a lot of balance issues in many different ways. They should be doctrine specific.

You said you didn't want to nerf Grenadiers, but I'd say removing their grenade would be a pretty massive nerf.

I am trying to discuss how some of the ost design concepts are in need of some reconstructing and pg are kinda redundant now as a result. I don't like how g43 are medium and close range weapons. That was the role of pg. but it is way better to have g43 Grens as you get a Faust + rifle grenade + cq weapons and cheaper.

There's nothing wrong with Ostheer's design, and G43's being close-medium aren't a problem. Yes it was the role of the PG, and it still would be if they weren't nerfed separately of the G43 rework.

Just trying to bring to light why some players have the perception that pg are needing buffs when in my opinion other units are crossing over and out performing in the pg role.

They only need changes because they're terrible at their own role now. If other units do their role better, that means something's wrong with them, not with everything else. The changes you outlined would just throw off the entire faction and you'd have a mess.

1.loads of bullshit. grens where the most cost effective unit as soon as they reached vet 2 in vcoh and could kill any rifle or tommy squad easily in cover. grens could also attack a 30 call head on with their longer ranged grenades and the fact that kars where not as susceptible to suppression

2. Its a all rounder upgrade that most importantly upgrades the medium and long range power of the grens

3. have you ever compared them with shock troopers? the same shock troopers that nearly have twice the durability nearly the same dps and smoke grenades and are cheaper to reinforce?

Whole picture my ass your only looking at half the picture.

Not sure what loads of bullshit you are quoting you didn't actually add anything truthful or discuss what I quoted?

You are talking about vcoh. Not once was this conversation about vet 2 Grens in vcoh? But seeing you are now I will state that vet 2 Grens got elite armor. This was to allow them to compete with allied elite infantry which spawned with elite armor. The 30 cal was garbage for anti infantry in coh 1. It was for killing scouts and light armor. It had almost zero suppression. Again you have a units designed role incorrect.

Now you want to compare pg to soviet shock infantry. Shocks are doctrine dependent and come in at two cp with no at options. Might I add that shocks need to be dry humping the ost players leg before they actually do damage. Pg are not shock troops, they are more special forces type infantry.

Not sure why you are swearing and spazzing out. Post like a grown up.

You said you didn't want to nerf Grenadiers, but I'd say removing their grenade would be a pretty massive nerf.



There's nothing wrong with Ostheer's design, and G43's being close-medium aren't a problem. Yes it was the role of the PG, and it still would be if they weren't nerfed separately of the G43 rework.



They only need changes because they're terrible at their own role now. If other units do their role better, that means something's wrong with them, not with everything else. The changes you outlined would just throw off the entire faction and you'd have a mess.

It wouldn't be a nerf. You would see more snipers mortars/mortars half track , flame pios and smoke in games. That's how we did it vcoh 1. We didn't have a rifle nade and the game worked just fine. Us Wehrmacht players had to use skill and tactics instead of the line infantry clicking a button.

Why would you ever pick a pg over a g43. G43 are better in every single way except pure at roles. And that is a design issue because you have over lapping roles with core infantry. One is doctorine specific but in many of the most powerfull and used doctrines I may add.

Pg are not terrible. They do exactly what they have done since vcoh. People compare their economics to grenadiers and right now coh2 grenadiers are way more powerfull than vcoh Grenadiers and the difference is the rifle nade added on coh2.

Not sure what loads of bullshit you are quoting you didn't actually add anything truthful or discuss what I quoted?

You are talking about vcoh. Not once was this conversation about vet 2 Grens in vcoh? But seeing you are now I will state that vet 2 Grens got elite armor. This was to allow them to compete with allied elite infantry which spawned with elite armor. The 30 cal was garbage for anti infantry in coh 1. It was for killing scouts and light armor. It had almost zero suppression. Again you have a units designed role incorrect.

Now you want to compare pg to soviet shock infantry. Shocks are doctrine dependent and come in at two cp with no at options. Might I add that shocks need to be dry humping the ost players leg before they actually do damage. Pg are not shock troops, they are more special forces type infantry.

Not sure why you are swearing and spazzing out. Post like a grown up.

Sry my tolerance to you particular bullshit is low. And so far your arguments and so far are pretty strawmen,

Pg are not terrible. They do exactly what they have done since vcoh. People compare their economics to grenadiers and right now coh2 grenadiers are way more powerfull than vcoh Grenadiers and the difference is the rifle nade added on coh2.

ROFLMAO gren spam in vcoh was even more common then it was now. had something to do with average gren doing to 30-70 % more damage then a rifleman depending on range and having 2.5 times the staying power as they reached vet 2.

It wouldn't be a nerf. You would see more snipers mortars/mortars half track , flame pios and smoke in games. That's how we did it vcoh 1. We didn't have a rifle nade and the game worked just fine. Us Wehrmacht players had to use skill and tactics instead of the line infantry clicking a button.

Removing Rifle Grenade would be like removing Oorah, it's a key part of the unit's combat ability. I use that comparison because Grenadiers can use Rifle Grenades to stun a Maxim and try to crawl away, whereas Conscripts can evade an MG by Oorah'ing away. Alternative you could compare it to the Molotov, aka forced decrew / retreat of any support weapon within range.

Why would you ever pick a pg over a g43. G43 are better in every single way except pure at roles. And that is a design issue because you have over lapping roles with core infantry. One is doctorine specific but in many of the most powerfull and used doctrines I may add.

Using the "Grens with Assault Rifles" comparison, you should look into why x4 MP 44's for 60m aren't worth it compared to x2 G43's for 60m. The reason is because less G43's allow for some range, but still give you an incentive to close in, while the MP 44's force you to close in but you can't close in too much or you lose, and if there's no cover nearby you automatically lose. The G43's are more versatile and effective, while the MP 44's are funneled into a role that the unit wielding them isn't great at.

Pg are not terrible. They do exactly what they have done since vcoh. People compare their economics to grenadiers and right now coh2 grenadiers are way more powerfull than vcoh Grenadiers and the difference is the rifle nade added on coh2.

CoH1 Panzer Grenadiers are not comparable at all to CoH2 Panzergrenadiers. CoH1 Panzer Grenadiers start off as the weakest core infantry but slowly become the strongest core infantry as you upgrade them.

Likewise vCoH Grenadiers are not comparable to CoH2 Grenadiers, and CoH1 Grenadiers were much stronger than CoH2 Grenadiers. CoH1 Grenadiers had higher health than any American or British unit in the game, and were more accurate as well. They came out generally when Americans researched BAR's, but could still counter them with just their Kar 98's, and could get 2 MG 42's to counter any Infantry the Americans or British could throw at them. CoH2's Grenadiers are much weaker in comparison.

Removing Rifle Grenade would be like removing Oorah, it's a key part of the unit's combat ability. I use that comparison because Grenadiers can use Rifle Grenades to stun a Maxim and try to crawl away, whereas Conscripts can evade an MG by Oorah'ing away. Alternative you could compare it to the Molotov, aka forced decrew / retreat of any support weapon within range.



Using the "Grens with Assault Rifles" comparison, you should look into why x4 MP 44's for 60m aren't worth it compared to x2 G43's for 60m. The reason is because less G43's allow for some range, but still give you an incentive to close in, while the MP 44's force you to close in but you can't close in too much or you lose, and if there's no cover nearby you automatically lose. The G43's are more versatile and effective, while the MP 44's are funneled into a role that the unit wielding them isn't great at.



CoH1 Panzer Grenadiers are not comparable at all to CoH2 Panzergrenadiers. CoH1 Panzer Grenadiers start off as the weakest core infantry but slowly become the strongest core infantry as you upgrade them.

Likewise vCoH Grenadiers are not comparable to CoH2 Grenadiers, and CoH1 Grenadiers were much stronger than CoH2 Grenadiers. CoH1 Grenadiers had higher health than any American or British unit in the game, and were more accurate as well. They came out generally when Americans researched BAR's, but could still counter them with just their Kar 98's, and could get 2 MG 42's to counter any Infantry the Americans or British could throw at them. CoH2's Grenadiers are much weaker in comparison.

Except in my last game 1x Pgren moved in and squad whiped 2x Conscript with PPSH without taking a single loss.....

But they didnt start at max range truesight. Way better than a G43 gren would fair.

But I still think they are too expensive. PPSH sucking balls is another topic.

Except in my last game 1x Pgren moved in and squad whiped 2x Conscript with PPSH without taking a single loss.....

But they didnt start at max range truesight. Way better than a G43 gren would fair.

But I still think they are too expensive. PPSH sucking balls is another topic.

I'd like a replay of that, since they couldn't even do that when they had 1.5 armour.