Wehrmacht Ostheer

Also in response to "Grenadiers will beat Riflemen at long range" I've decided to test it. Squad vs Squad controlled test, long range, no cover, no vet, no outside factors, no retreating, 20 attempts. Grenadiers won 9 times and Riflemen won 11 times.

The number of survivors per-lane is as follows:
Surviving Grenadiers: 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Surviving Riflemen: 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1


In other words, with both sides on equal footing, victory is mostly RNG. You may take one casualty or lose the squad and anything in between. Riflemen seem to have a very slight statistical advantage, but they have a completely advantage in any sort of actual fight unless Grenadiers are caught in heavy cover and force Rifles to charge. But of course Grens in heavy cover aren't out capping, and heavy cover isn't always available nor can they create it.

Also in response to "Grenadiers will beat Riflemen at long range" I've decided to test it. Squad vs Squad controlled test, long range, no cover, no vet, no outside factors, no retreating, 20 attempts. Grenadiers won 9 times and Riflemen won 11 times.

The number of survivors per-lane is as follows:
Surviving Grenadiers: 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Surviving Riflemen: 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1


In other words, with both sides on equal footing, victory is mostly RNG. You may take one casualty or lose the squad and anything in between. Riflemen seem to have a very slight statistical advantage, but they have a completely advantage in any sort of actual fight unless Grenadiers are caught in heavy cover and force Rifles to charge. But of course Grens in heavy cover aren't out capping, and heavy cover isn't always available nor can they create it.

They can however make building cover.

They can however make building cover.

They can, but it's not feasible at the start of the game. It costs manpower, is restricted to friendly territory, and has a longer build-time than sandbags. You can't build and cap, nor can you make many squads if you start spamming bunkers right away. It provides no benefit to Wehrmacht vs USF at the start.

They can, but it's not feasible at the start of the game. It costs manpower, is restricted to friendly territory, and has a longer build-time than sandbags. You can't build and cap, nor can you make many squads if you start spamming bunkers right away. It provides no benefit to Wehrmacht vs USF at the start.

I said nothing about feasibility all I was simply stating was they can make a cover type.

Also in response to "Grenadiers will beat Riflemen at long range" I've decided to test it. Squad vs Squad controlled test, long range, no cover, no vet, no outside factors, no retreating, 20 attempts. Grenadiers won 9 times and Riflemen won 11 times.

The number of survivors per-lane is as follows:
Surviving Grenadiers: 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Surviving Riflemen: 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1


In other words, with both sides on equal footing, victory is mostly RNG. You may take one casualty or lose the squad and anything in between. Riflemen seem to have a very slight statistical advantage, but they have a completely advantage in any sort of actual fight unless Grenadiers are caught in heavy cover and force Rifles to charge. But of course Grens in heavy cover aren't out capping, and heavy cover isn't always available nor can they create it.

I would say that USF riflemen not only has a slight long range advantage, but a huge advantage at all ranges.

The main reasoning here is that RNG here favors the side with the best burst damage. With USF infantry having reletively high efficency, the squad's inital volley can often times kill a gren model instantly if not heavily wound in any standard range engagement. Gren models also can do the same, but the fact that they only have 4 units against 5 makes them extremely suspectible to burst compared to USF.

THerefore many engagements are won by the time the 1st gren model falls as it cripples grenedier firepwoer by 25%. Any remaining models will just be cleaned up by the rate of fire advantage the USF have.

then they have issues period and if i look on the stats correctly the soviets are also dominating the ost. surprising since cheesy tacts like sniper spam, maxim spam and the power of the early game m3 causes this. issues that the okw doesnt suffer.

Doesn't the fact that one faction can counterplay another faction kind of prove there's a major balance problem between them?

-Obviously this only talking about 1v1 and not even 2v2 and up.-

My comment was more explaining WHY OH was underrepresented on the tournament. I didn't draw conclusion or denied anything on that comment.

OST vs SU is fine. "Fine" if we consider that it's either a Call in vs Call in match up or stock vs stock units. Thing is, OH doesn't bring anything up to the table and OKW can do "everything" better without struggling against USF on most maps.

OST vs USF. Thing is that most of the time you won't catch up fast enough in time or even survive during the early/mid game to make any kind of profit from it's mid-late game.


I'm an advocate of adjusting mostly the OH teching, not so much unit performance.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

221 is as expensive as an M3 (20mp difference same fuel cost). Performance is fine, again timing and teching are the only issues.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Riflemen vs Gren:
So mostly every engagement goes around a 2v2 model fight on which at the end of the day it's decided on RNG. Obviously a "crit" early on it's what decides mostly the result of the matchup.

Gren will beat MP wise a Riflemen at long range. Basically, when played defensively and using cover. Thing is you won't capitalize this early on due to teching dispartiy between factions.

The reality of ostheer has been known for some time and was fully exposed at the tourney.The faction can't compete with its MP tech costs and bunch of useless early units.

-Obviously this only talking about 1v1 and not even 2v2 and up.-

My comment was more explaining WHY OH was underrepresented on the tournament. I didn't draw conclusion or denied anything on that comment.

OST vs SU is fine. "Fine" if we consider that it's either a Call in vs Call in match up or stock vs stock units. Thing is, OH doesn't bring anything up to the table and OKW can do "everything" better without struggling against USF on most maps.

OST vs USF. Thing is that most of the time you won't catch up fast enough in time or even survive during the early/mid game to make any kind of profit from it's mid-late game.


I'm an advocate of adjusting mostly the OH teching, not so much unit performance.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

221 is as expensive as an M3 (20mp difference same fuel cost). Performance is fine, again timing and teching are the only issues.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Riflemen vs Gren:
So mostly every engagement goes around a 2v2 model fight on which at the end of the day it's decided on RNG. Obviously a "crit" early on it's what decides mostly the result of the matchup.

Gren will beat MP wise a Riflemen at long range. Basically, when played defensively and using cover. Thing is you won't capitalize this early on due to teching dispartiy between factions.

hate to say it but the opinions of 2 vs 2 players are not relevant. they barely understand their factions . Unit comparison is once again very bad. somehow you forget that the m3 is transport and garrison and its several time more potent then the 221. And as isad before the lack of a good light vehicle really hurts the ostheer as they are the moment extremely vulnerable to sniper and maxim spam. a single kubel will shut down such cheese instantly

And teching is only part of the problem. You dont seem to understand as an 2vs2 players that the ostheer tier 3 cannot function without proper AT. Currently the jackson completely shuts it down as do soviet call ins. the meta is that soviets do not use callins because their stock is lacking , they use callins because they know that anything but the tiger commander will results in a rather large advantage and some doctrines can easily deal with the tiger im looking at you guard motor .

When was the last time u saw a stug?Even pz4s are shit now.Cost a huge amount of teching to get to which u can't afford.Then either get bullied by soviet call-ins or e8 or 3 shotted by jacksons.Bazooka blobs can deal with quite effectively as well before vet 2 which is rare.
Only good units in ostheer t1,t2 and t3 are grenadier and mortar.
Pak is ok.Rest are overpriced,fragile or incapable of doing their job.

I'm looking at you -
Pzgren(overpriced)
Sniper(Fragile)
Mg42(incapable)
Flame HT(incapable)
Armoured car(Fragile and incapable)
Stug(Fragile/incapable)
Pz4(Incapable)

Might add t4 to that -

Brummbarr -overpriced
Panzerwefer -Incapable
Panther-Overpriced(Tech and cost combined)

There u have the story of wehrmacht.Pathetic situation.

Also in response to "Grenadiers will beat Riflemen at long range" I've decided to test it. Squad vs Squad controlled test, long range, no cover, no vet, no outside factors, no retreating, 20 attempts. Grenadiers won 9 times and Riflemen won 11 times.

The number of survivors per-lane is as follows:
Surviving Grenadiers: 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Surviving Riflemen: 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1


In other words, with both sides on equal footing, victory is mostly RNG. You may take one casualty or lose the squad and anything in between. Riflemen seem to have a very slight statistical advantage, but they have a completely advantage in any sort of actual fight unless Grenadiers are caught in heavy cover and force Rifles to charge. But of course Grens in heavy cover aren't out capping, and heavy cover isn't always available nor can they create it.

Thanks for the testing - I had always assumed grens would loose at long range as well as short range (think that was stated in the patchnotes sometime ).


So it does seem a bit like a reminiscence of the old vCoH earlygame "volks vs. rifle" matchup:
Volks would win (barely) at long range but get decimated at short range.
This lead to a surprisingly intersting and dynamic earlygame.


Of course we now have:

• vastly different unit/upkeep costs/systems
  
• true sight -> more short range engagements
  
• vCoH wher had grens in T2 -> a heck of a lot better then volks against rifles.

When was the last time u saw a stug?Even pz4s are shit now.Cost a huge amount of teching to get to which u can't afford.Then either get bullied by soviet call-ins or e8 or 3 shotted by jacksons.Bazooka blobs can deal with quite effectively as well before vet 2 which is rare.
Only good units in ostheer t1,t2 and t3 are grenadier and mortar.
Pak is ok.Rest are overpriced,fragile or incapable of doing their job.

I'm looking at you -
Pzgren(overpriced)
Sniper(Fragile)
Mg42(incapable)
Flame HT(incapable)
Armoured car(Fragile and incapable)
Stug(Fragile/incapable)
Pz4(Incapable)

I kinda agree, but StuG and Pz4s are good, in fact Ostheer's late game is not bad IMO, but you pretty much have one option which is tiger. T4 is not worth it. But the biggest problem specially Vs USF are grenadiers. As mentioned above, because they have only 4 model, after losing a model yoi lose a lot of firepower, and besides that incoming fire is focused on other models so they die even faster.

Ostheer need some big changes. As an ostheer player you must do very well if you want to win a decent game vs USF, there is no room for error.

Also in response to "Grenadiers will beat Riflemen at long range" I've decided to test it. Squad vs Squad controlled test, long range, no cover, no vet, no outside factors, no retreating, 20 attempts. Grenadiers won 9 times and Riflemen won 11 times.

The number of survivors per-lane is as follows:
Surviving Grenadiers: 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Surviving Riflemen: 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1


In other words, with both sides on equal footing, victory is mostly RNG. You may take one casualty or lose the squad and anything in between. Riflemen seem to have a very slight statistical advantage, but they have a completely advantage in any sort of actual fight unless Grenadiers are caught in heavy cover and force Rifles to charge. But of course Grens in heavy cover aren't out capping, and heavy cover isn't always available nor can they create it.

This game in a nutshell.

hate to say it but the opinions of 2 vs 2 players are not relevant. they barely understand their factions.

Unit comparison is once again very bad. somehow you forget that the m3 is transport and garrison and its several time more potent then the 221. And as isad before the lack of a good light vehicle really hurts the ostheer as they are the moment extremely vulnerable to sniper and maxim spam. a single kubel will shut down such cheese instantly

And teching is only part of the problem. You dont seem to understand as an 2vs2 players that the ostheer tier 3 cannot function without proper AT. Currently the jackson completely shuts it down as do soviet call ins. the meta is that soviets do not use callins because their stock is lacking , they use callins because they know that anything but the tiger commander will results in a rather large advantage and some doctrines can easily deal with the tiger im looking at you guard motor .

I guess all those top players at 2v2 who are also top 1v1 also don't understand their factions. Don't try to troll when:
-You don't play the game.
-You still have to show us your high level replay you promise several weeks ago.

-.-.--.-.--.-.-
Answering your post.

221 vs M3:
So the fact that one has double the armor of the other one n has a turret makes it more potent? When you put a unit inside you are not just taking into consideration a 1v1 comparison.

Sniper/Maxim spam:
Since you decided to go the route of let's just consider 1v1. Show me a game on the tournament when someone went with sniper and maxim SPAM.

T3:
As i said, on the same way T34-76 won't compete with TA/Tiger, PIV won't have it easy either against an IS2. Against T3485 is a matter of teching vs call in price rather than the unit on itself.
Against USF, it's just a matter of surviving the first 10 mins. After that is just who plays better.

Against USF, it's just a matter of surviving the first 10 mins. After that is just who plays better.

Its actually surviving until the tiger.T3 is cake for jackson and u'll never get to t4.Ofc in 60-75% matches u won't even get to t3.

This is literally no different to keeping a jackson at range to a kt, it is the exact same concept.

I wish my Grenadiers could shoot at someone chasing them, they really need a turret.

Wehrmacht as a faction has been stagnating and declining slowly for quite some time now.But it was held together by a few units and builds.Now with the pak nerf and the rifleman buff the true skeletal condition of this dying faction has been fully exposed.
Wehrmacht can never compete on a equal basis with its current tech structure and large number of redundant units in roster.

The only thing is that Ostheer needs a hell of a skill to play with. But I doubt USF is different, you need to work hard with USF too. The difference is between 2 game stages: early game which is harder for one, and late game which is harder for the other one. I guess we shall live with this: Ost and USF are the hardest to play factions and you need "true grit" to play with them.

Wehrmacht as a faction has been stagnating and declining slowly for quite some time now.But it was held together by a few units and builds.Now with the pak nerf and the rifleman buff the true skeletal condition of this dying faction has been fully exposed.
Wehrmacht can never compete on a equal basis with its current tech structure and large number of redundant units in roster.

Most of their units are capable, though, it's just tech holding them back and a few costs adjustment/timings of certain units(looking at you FHT). StuGs perform decently against non-doc medium tanks, infantry and light armour, though could maybe use a penetration buff, but that's really it unless you're going to bump the cost up and vetted StuGs are a blessing with TWP. PIVs are a good generalist tank in comparison to other similar stock vehicles. These units all perform well unless dedicated TDs hit the field and it's really only due to one specific unit: the Jackson.

The only units that really need help, as in need more than 1-2 changes, are the 221/222 and maybe the PW, though all it really needs is a shorter cooldown once the tech costs are reduced to make it more accessible. Fixing call-ins would also help and allow the stock units to battle stock units or have more impact before doctrinal armour hits the field.

Also what may make the 222 even worse at this moment is I think it's bugged. When you upgrade to the 222 when in combat when the machine guns in use, or something else that I didn't notice, the MG only works when its stationary. On the move it doesn't even fire in proper bursts.

222 is not that bad, its just that it arrives at a time where it is easily countered.

Against USF, a USF player can have bazookas, an m20, or an m15 out when Ostheer's 221 arrives on the battlefield. Going Lieutenant, which always seems to be better than going captain first.

Soviets have at nade conscripts - ZiS-3 (if went T2) - or Guards (usually when going T1).

I would like to assume USF defeats Ost T2 better than Soviets do.

I like Ost's teching system, but the timing of units and the price of teching is off. The thing is, i want T3 to work well while T4 being viable as well, but i dont want it to be so where going straight for T4 and pumping out panthers is viable and better than properly using T3. I remember when there was such a time...