Does the Zis really need barrage?

I keep seeing the Zis being sent in front of an mg42 or mortar squad and start firing its barrage forcing that unit to retreat. The way its being used like that reminds me of the maxim at the beginning of the game.

Back then you could send it into the fog of war, find a deployed mg42 and manage to suppress it first. That was bad game play and I kind of see a similar thing happening with the Zis where it's being sent solo to take down a deployed support unit.

This makes me wonder what was the developers' original purpose for the barrage ability? Do they consider what I describe above proper and balanced role for this ability?

yes it does, it's an artirelly piece. Does a mortar really need barrage? It costs 60 munitions. 2 riflegrenades do pretty much the same vs a maxim.

Pak has 50% faster rate of fire, and target weak point.

Burts is right, the ZiS-3 field gun was dual purpose. It could function as light artillery by lobbing HE shells at an upward angle, or as anti-tank by firing AP shells at a more directly. Be happy 'barrage' is an ability and not a fire-mode. Could you imagine?

yes it does, it's an artirelly piece. Does a mortar really need barrage? It costs 60 munitions. 2 riflegrenades do pretty much the same vs a maxim.

Pak has 50% faster rate of fire, and target weak point.

A mortar doesn't go right in front of an mg without getting suppressed and fires a devastating barrage to force the unit to retreat or get killed.

Burts is right, the ZiS-3 field gun was dual purpose. It could function as light artillery by lobbing HE shells at an upward angle, or as anti-tank by firing AP shells at a more directly. Be happy 'barrage' is an ability and not a fire-mode. Could you imagine?

Historical accuracy doesn't have to dictate balance in the game. In fact just recently while discussing wf, the developers stressed this point.

I don't have a problem with the ZiS Barrage. It sacrifices some effectiveness as an AT gun for that ability, which still costs 60 munitions to use.

Tracking is a bigger "problem" than Barrage, for me. I'd love to get my PaK to shoot at max range without sacrificing capping power by making someone spot for it.

60 munitions and easy to dodge,if you're not a static unit,that it's meant to be used against.
People just cant stop finding things to complain about.

A mortar doesn't go right in front of an mg without getting suppressed and fires a devastating barrage to force the unit to retreat or get killed.



Historical accuracy doesn't have to dictate balance in the game. In fact just recently while discussing wf, the developers stressed this point.

So you want the pak to be superior in every single way ? Relic stated that soviet tier options are supposed to be more effective because you can only get 1 out of two....

I don't understand, why do you guys want zis to be inferior version of PaK in every single atspect? It allready is, Pak has 50% more dps than a goddam SU-85, zis-3 AT is like nothing compared to PaK.

Guess people really hate combined arms these days, all they want is conscript spam vs grenspam. Dear god if a support unit is more effective than an infantry squad...

So you want the pak to be superior in every single way ? Relic stated that soviet tier options are supposed to be more effective because you can only get 1 out of two....

I don't understand, why do you guys want zis to be inferior version of PaK in every single atspect? It allready is, Pak has 50% more dps than a goddam SU-85, zis-3 AT is like nothing compared to PaK.

Guess people really hate combined arms these days, all they want is conscript spam vs grenspam. Dear god if a support unit is more effective than an infantry squad...

What I want is for someone who understands the game and knows what he is talking about to help me understand how barrage is a balanced feature. What are the scenarios that make it a fair feature, because as I see it now this feature is making the zis more like a one man army in the face of many different units.

And the guess work is exactly what I am not interested in.

What a question man, what arguments... just leave the ZIS as it is!
If you don't get it then you don't get the game. Sorry man, no of fence.

i see no problem here in current mechanic, and btw when WFA arrives, soviets and ostheer will need many tricks up their sleeves to cope up with versitility of new armies

What I want is for someone who understands the game and knows what he is talking about to help me understand how barrage is a balanced feature. What are the scenarios that make it a fair feature, because as I see it now this feature is making the zis more like a one man army in the face of many different units.

And the guess work is exactly what I am not interested in.

ok. So let me tell you.

PaK 40 fires 50% faster, has more penetration and if target weak point wasn't bugged, would be absolutely BEAST againts tanks. It's also 60 munitions. 2 riflegrenades cost the same and 2 grens are much more versatile than 1 zis gun. 2 riflegrenades will not only force a support weapon to retreat, but will often WIPE the entire team outright. So why can't soviets have something similar?
Their units are supposed to be more versatile because they can only have 1 out of two tier options.

Get it? That said, if you want to make a zis-3 a more effective version of a pak, please do so,relic said that soviet tier options are supposed to be more effective than german ones because you can only have 1 out of two and germans will always have the counter available to them, while soviets need to rely on doctrines more often than not.
I would love to have an at gun that can kill ostheer tanks reliably, you know, kind of like the pak 40. That would be so fun. ZIS-3 spam into kv-8 spam. So amazing strategy . Just 10/10. I guess you would like it, since that is apparently what you want it to be.

I really like the assymetrical design of this game. Please keep this relic.

While I do find the barrage useful enough, I'd take the extra AT performance of the pak any day of the week over it. The biggest benefit of the barrage on ZiS is that you don't have to touch the crappy soviet mortars if you're willing to sink lots of munitions into barrage.

ok. So let me tell you.

PaK 40 fires 50% faster, has more penetration and if target weak point wasn't bugged, would be absolutely BEAST againts tanks. It's also 60 munitions. 2 riflegrenades cost the same and 2 grens are much more versatile than 1 zis gun. 2 riflegrenades will not only force a support weapon to retreat, but will often WIPE the entire team outright. So why can't soviets have something similar?
Their units are supposed to be more versatile because they can only have 1 out of two tier options.

Get it? That said, if you want to make a zis-3 a more effective version of a pak, please do so,relic said that soviet tier options are supposed to be more effective than german ones because you can only have 1 out of two and germans will always have the counter available to them, while soviets need to rely on doctrines more often than not.
I would love to have an at gun that can kill ostheer tanks reliably, you know, kind of like the pak 40. That would be so fun. ZIS-3 spam into kv-8 spam. So amazing strategy . Just 10/10. I guess you would like it, since that is apparently what you want it to be.

I really like the assymetrical design of this game. Please keep this relic.

Ok, what I get from this rambling is that you dont know, lol.

On a serious note, when designers make a unit/feature they usually try to implement it with a specific role/purpose in mind. This helps insure the unit/ability is meaningful and balanced.

For the zis I dont see what is the role of barrage except making it a one unit army in some situations. If you need barrage you should use mortar. Now since soviet mortar is next to trash that doesn't make zis barrage a balanced ability. Also because Zis is weaker than pak against armor also doesn't make barrage a balanced ability.

It's just bad game design to say zis has barrage because soviet mortar is trash or pak is much stronger against tanks. Maybe Zis should be a little cheaper to compensate for its lower performance against tanks for example.

While I do find the barrage useful enough, I'd take the extra AT performance of the pak any day of the week over it. The biggest benefit of the barrage on ZiS is that you don't have to touch the crappy soviet mortars if you're willing to sink lots of munitions into barrage.

Sadly that is true, its called bad game design where an important unit like mortar is practically useless (especially heavy mortar after patch).

ok, for me it's not bad game design. And the soviet mortar in my experience is not useless. It's just that its much worse than the german mortar. But its still OK. it can still kill stuff. Just not as effectivelly as the german one. The heavy mortar however is too inaccurate.

Abdul , you don't like it, too bad for you, i think that the zis having a barrage ability while pak 40 doesn't is a great design feature. It's assymetrical.

Sadly that is true, its called bad game design where an important unit like mortar is practically useless (especially heavy mortar after patch).

Hey I am with you. Get rid of barrage and give it Pak level DPS. Or at least Elephant level DPS (less than Pak) because it has more men. o.O

ok, for me it's not bad game design. And the soviet mortar in my experience is not useless. It's just that its much worse than the german mortar. But its still OK. it can still kill stuff. Just not as effectivelly as the german one. The heavy mortar however is too inaccurate.

Abdul , you don't like it, too bad for you, i think that the zis having a barrage ability while pak 40 doesn't is a great design feature. It's assymetrical.

Wasn't that the idea behind the t34 being good against infantry and the panzer4 being good against tanks. At the time the t34 did only 80 damage and had like 75 penetration and ultimately was changed to where its very close to the panzer 4.

So asymmetrical doesn't always work. Plus there is an easier solution, make the zis a little cheaper to compensate for its lower performance without the need for barrage for example. There is some asymmetrical design for you quality vs quantity.

Its a stationary target shooting at the same piece of ground. Just move your units. When some idiot actually uses barrage, i split my grenadiers and rifle nade it. It either breaks their animation altogether, or it stalls for 3 seconds as my grenadiers surround it and kill it, because most people will leave it firing, not wanting to waste 60 munitions on two shots only

Stop complaining like a wuss.

Wasn't that the idea behind the t34 being good against infantry and the panzer4 being good against tanks. At the time the t34 did only 80 damage and had like 75 penetration and ultimately was changed to where its very close to the panzer 4.

So asymmetrical doesn't always work. Plus there is an easier solution, make the zis a little cheaper to compensate for its lower performance without the need for barrage for example. There is some asymmetrical design for you quality vs quantity.

How about this. Get rid of barrage. Then lower the Paks DPS to that of the Zis. Make Ost pay 30 Muni (not 60) to make it fire as good as it does now for say 15 seconds and make them both cost the same.

Wasn't that the idea behind the t34 being good against infantry and the panzer4 being good against tanks. At the time the t34 did only 80 damage and had like 75 penetration and ultimately was changed to where its very close to the panzer 4.

So asymmetrical doesn't always work. Plus there is an easier solution, make the zis a little cheaper to compensate for its lower performance without the need for barrage for example. There is some asymmetrical design for you quality vs quantity.

But why is the current balance wrong? Like i said, 2 riflegrenades cost the same, you will always have 2 grens around, and they work better in the sense that is is instant, while if ZIS-3 miss the first shot, you can just easily reposition.
The t-34/76 is still good vs infantry, P IV vs tanks. T-34/76 loses to P IV practically every single engagement still. And thats good.

Like i'm not sure why it should be removed if rifle grenades stay in the game. Oorah + molotov can also do practically the same for even cheaper... Not the same, but almost...