OST Panzerwerfer: Truly Underpowered

Leaving aside all the justifications that the panzerwerfer has a machinegun, fires more rockets in one go so it deserves a shorter range, and all the countless tit-for-tat arguments.

I think the most important thing is, how often do you see a panzerwerfer being used in a remotely competitive 2v2 game, compared to the Stuka and the Katyusha? I put it to you that for every one time the werfer is used effectively, you'd see ten or twenty katys and stukas. And for those arguing that 'oh the stuka is so much better so the ostheer player doesn't need to build one', even double ostheer don't build werfers. Mixed axis where the OKW doesn't go stuka, the ostheer doesn't go werfer either. And it's not because the werfer is some 'overlooked hidden gem', it's because it's rubbish.

Even if the werfer and the katy were absolutely identical and cost the same techwise, the katy would be better- by virtue of the axis being the defensive (campy) faction more reliant on team weapons, in theory. Add to that the fact that the werfer costs a huge amount to tech to, needs to get within AT gun range to actually hit targets, and has an awful vet1 ability compared to every single soviet indirect fire piece, and you get appalling heap of junk that it is.

It has an Mg for a reason. Its not meant to sit at max range.

It's not that bad. It just costs too much. Adjusting it's price to 60 fuel and 280 MP would make it affordable and useful.

Just reduce it's scatter so it operates also at ranges that are not minimum range and thus in range of tank destroyers and at guns. At the moment I only use it when I have a shot blocker that won't expose the Panzerwerfer to AT gun fire.

The Machine gun is purely cosmetic, since Germans mounted HMG on it in WW2.

Are we talking about SturmPanzer or the Pzwerfer?
It's funny how some people say that Pwerfer should not be used at max range and should get close to do it's job... as an artillery piece.

Are we talking about SturmPanzer or the Pzwerfer?
It's funny how some people say that Pwerfer should not be used at max range and should get close to do it's job... as an artillery piece.

Well, "why ya think it has an Mg mounted ya nooooob?!!?"

Are we talking about SturmPanzer or the Pzwerfer?
It's funny how some people say that Pwerfer should not be used at max range and should get close to do it's job... as an artillery piece.

So are mortars and the closer you put them, the more effective they are.
Scatter you know, if you want to hit things reliably, you need to be in certain distance to do so.

So are mortars and the closer you put them, the more effective they are.
Scatter you know, if you want to hit things reliably, you need to be in certain distance to do so.

But mortars are 240 MP units that were designed for close artillery support. They also don't die in 1 shot (normally) to AT guns and Tanks.

The Pwerf should just operate at the same range as the Stuka and Kat, and both the Pwerf and Kat should have 240 health as well as be somewhat proof to small arms fire (but not totally, the stuka isn't totally).

Panzerwerfer needs a buff... Soviets katyusha is much more efficient.
Fuel cost increase for katyusha! It wipes serval squads with one rocket barrage - way too strong in my opinion.

Never used a Panzerwerfer because its bloody useless atm...
Not very accurate, the mg on top is nearly useless, no much health.
The Soviets have a much better piece of artillery

But mortars are 240 MP units that were designed for close artillery support. They also don't die in 1 shot (normally) to AT guns and Tanks.

They seem to die pretty often to single nade.
Lets not mention stuka.

The Pwerf should just operate at the same range as the Stuka and Kat, and both the Pwerf and Kat should have 240 health as well as be somewhat proof to small arms fire (but not totally, the stuka isn't totally).

Conscripts also should operate at the same range as grens, they are same 240mp after all, right?

And pwerfer have more armor then katy as well as much better mobility(inb4 you mention survivability difference of grens and cons).

Not to mention that katy is BAD from max range, you will hit nothing at max range without using precision strike, you use it only if you don't have another choice, otherwise its always better to get as close as possible, thats not really any different to pwerfer.

They seem to die pretty often to single nade.
Lets not mention stuka.


Conscripts also should operate at the same range as grens, they are same 240mp after all, right?

And pwerfer have more armor then katy as well as much better mobility(inb4 you mention survivability difference of grens and cons).

Not to mention that katy is BAD from max range, you use it only if you don't have another choice, otherwise its always better to get as close as possible, thats not really any different to pwerfer.

The Pwerfer and Katy have exactly the same mobility profile. The Katy functions best at medium range like it should, it can do more than enough damage without having to sit insanely close to the enemy lines.

The pwerfer doesn't have much more armor either, it has only 20 while the katty has 7, but the katyusha doesn't need to operate at point blank range.

Cons and Grens are both about equal in mid range, the Katyusha and Pwerfer should be about equal at mid range, which they aren't. The pwerfer is fine to be better up close and the Kat farther back, but right now we have it were the Pwerfer can only operate at ass snifing range and the Kat is just fine at medium range.

EDIT: and Mortar's do die to stuff don't get me wrong, but they are cheaper and more disposable.

i dont get why some people just cant get over the fact that you have to get close. especially seeing how most maps have clusters of shot blockers that allow you to do that freely as long as you are aware of one or two flanks.

once ostheer t4 becomes more viable, i really think 10 sec reduce in barrage rate would be enough.

i dont get why some people just cant get over the fact that you have to get close. especially seeing how most maps have clusters of shot blockers that allow you to do that freely as long as you are aware of one or two flanks.

once ostheer t4 becomes more viable, i really think 10 sec reduce in barrage rate would be enough.

The issue is even if you are behind a shotblocker you can't escape from him in time (and not every map has shot blockers...) because the Pwerf has extremely poor pathing and acceleration.

i dont get why some people just cant get over the fact that you have to get close. especially seeing how most maps have clusters of shot blockers that allow you to do that freely as long as you are aware of one or two flanks.

once ostheer t4 becomes more viable, i really think 10 sec reduce in barrage rate would be enough.

Because they play axis and were spoiled with all the long range effective weapons to the point where if they see a unit that actually isn't 100% effective from maximum possible range they are like "WHAAAAAT?"

Good Axis long range units: The Stuka

not a very long list.

The issue is even if you are behind a shotblocker you can't escape from him in time (and not every map has shot blockers...) because the Pwerf has extremely poor pathing and acceleration.

risk v. reward. should be more like this imo.

i dont get why some people just cant get over the fact that you have to get close. especially seeing how most maps have clusters of shot blockers that allow you to do that freely as long as you are aware of one or two flanks.

once ostheer t4 becomes more viable, i really think 10 sec reduce in barrage rate would be enough.

Well it's not only about that. Some people are claiming that there is absolutely no problem with Pzwerfer as long as you get up close. for me it's just another nail in Pzwerfer's coffin, but the major issue, as you said, is the T4. Its stats are not bad, but the overall cost and the fact that if you go T4, your best choice is panther makes it extremely UP. If I can get it with a reasonable price, and maybe a bit sooner, I would be willing to get close to the enemy. Although I think the scatter is a bit too much.

risk v. reward. should be more like this imo.

If you made the Katyusha like it nobody would use the Katyusha.

The stuka should be the model of which all artillery is brought up to level with. The Katyusha is already a very efficient rocket artillery platform (even if it does use the incorrect truck model), but the Pwerfer is just as expensive but far far less efficient and easy to use.

If you made the Katyusha like it nobody would use the Katyusha.

The stuka should be the model of which all artillery is brought up to level with. The Katyusha is already a very efficient rocket artillery platform (even if it does use the incorrect truck model), but the Pwerfer is just as expensive but far far less efficient and easy to use.

i use katyusha dangerously close to the frontline when i want to use accurate barrage when i dont have access to concentrated barrage. and most of the times, i at least get my katyusha's target halfway between max and min range for better effect.

and no please. no other arty should copy stuka's model. pin point accuracy from max range? requiring two shots from tank to kill?

i use katyusha dangerously close to the frontline when i want to use accurate barrage when i dont have access to concentrated barrage. and most of the times, i at least get my katyusha's target halfway between max and min range for better effect.

and no please. no other arty should copy stuka's model. pin point accuracy from max range? requiring two shots from tank to kill?

I meant in being more durable and mobile. The Stuka also has a loooong cool down to make up for firing more accurately (although it isn't pin point in accuracy anymore).

The Kat as you said operates normally at medium range just fine because it hits a larger area and fires it's rockets quicker (less hang time). It also denies territory which the Pwerf cannot do.