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.
Logic is absent there. If werfer is crap, why there is still 90% axis and 10% allies in automatch?
.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
