PTRS now OP?

btw, the cons with ptrs one shoted base's mg bunkers lol

That's rich!
Oh Relic, you...!

Ptrs is just at a messed up condition now. tested tank hunter yesterday, built 10 cons upgraded with ptrs. they literally evaporate everything on their way head on, including support weapons and ATs. Then I took a mortar, smoked the base mg, oorahed into base and killed everything in base with a few shot. very simple!

And high cost should prevent such huge blobs. But if not, then only nerf. Yet it must come with separeted files for guards and cons ptrs since guards are useful, not op.

And high cost should prevent such huge blobs. But if not, then only nerf. Yet it must come with separeted files for guards and cons ptrs since guards are useful, not op.

true, but even for guards did you see my comment above? Well I don't think they are supposed to be able to beat obers head on as they do now.

Just from the game balance point of view, comparing the time they (both) hit the field, how much they cost, and the teching required; the one which is much cheaper, has more men in squad with cheaper reinforce cost, and no teching required beats the more expensive one which comes much later and is supposed to be more elite.

That's rich!
Oh Relic, you...!

I have the replay, but it's very simple just test the tank hunter doc lol

Conscripts?

never mind bro!

Another with dealing with the main issue of exploding weapon teams would be the kick the PTRS's damage down to 20 and make requirements of certain targets that would allow it to cause 40. The same thing is on the KV-8's flamethrower against buildings where it goes up to 60 damage per tick rather than 16.

Another with dealing with the main issue of exploding weapon teams would be the kick the PTRS's damage down to 20 and make requirements of certain targets that would allow it to cause 40. The same thing is on the KV-8's flamethrower against buildings where it goes up to 60 damage per tick rather than 16.

Sounds good.

Also, Guards can beat now LMG Obers. It's not supposed to be so, since Obers cost more, come later & are purely anti inf. Either the PTRS needs tweaking here too or Guards should cost more.

Sounds good.

Also, Guards can beat now LMG Obers. It's not supposed to be so, since Obers cost more, come later & are purely anti inf. Either the PTRS needs tweaking here too or Guards should cost more.

Happens only at short range. Obers are long range infantry. I believe this is a fallacy.

Not to mention Guards are purely anti-infantry too at late game where light vehicles don't exist.

Happens only at short range. Obers are long range infantry. I believe this is a fallacy.

Not to mention Guards are purely anti-infantry too at late game where light vehicles don't exist.

No it happens long range too bro! i have replay but just test it. what happens is that you suddenly see ober is dropped to less than half health and dropped two models in a few sec with the PTRS damage

true, but even for guards did you see my comment above? Well I don't think they are supposed to be able to beat obers head on as they do now.

Just from the game balance point of view, comparing the time they (both) hit the field, how much they cost, and the teching required; the one which is much cheaper, has more men in squad with cheaper reinforce cost, and no teching required beats the more expensive one which comes much later and is supposed to be more elite.

Of course Gurads should not beat Obers. Yet with little rng (if ptrs hits) they can win. But like I said, you need little rng. But still its wrong. I find Gurads better against 4 models squads (higher chance to target 1 models with ptrses) than 6 models. But if we compare power of melt, obers own everything. But I agree, they should not win against obers. Maybe sometimes. Neverstheless, current state is better. They were completly useless, now they are elite long range inf.

---

Bunkers were always annihilated by ptrs. Its just no one used them in such numbers before.

I believe Luchs is useless against ptrs just like Stuart against schrecks.

It has affected the game the way that has limited the use of support weapons against such blobs (as they supposed to counter blobs) but now ptrs evaporates (not decrews) support weapons in just a few shots. It has also affect OKW game because now it's no more useful to build the panzer hq anymore because 1. obers lose against ptrs and because of their high price, reinforcement cost, and underperformance they are not worth to build.
2.luchs is way too useless against ptrs
3.panther is the only good unit on this building but with the nerf on its blitz and jackson/m10 buff, and with how expensive panther is, it's now very risky to invest one. Indeed it costs 80+175=255 to get a panther, and with that fuel you can get two JPs for 270 or a JT for 290 OR a panther command for 200.

I specially think it is too not right and unfair game that ptrs demolishes the support weapons

How about volk shrek blob which instantly kill US armor? Its not like volk shrek blob was fixed by the patch.

How about volk shrek blob which instantly kill US armor? Its not like volk shrek blob was fixed by the patch.

It kind of was. By forcing OKW to spend munitions on their ober lmgs, OKW now has to choose between AI obers or AT volks. If you still end up fighting an OKW blob with volk shrecks backed by ober lmgs, you dun goofed and gave your enemy too much map control.

I have always been a fan of the tank hunter doctrine even before the changes to the PTRS (those light AT mines !!!) Now however the doctrine can now stand on its own two feet which is a desirable concept, but it's not when a literal horde of the once-obsolete anti-material rifles can negate support weapons. Increasing the cost of the AT package on conscripts in my opinion would be counter- intuitive towards the aims and strengths of the doctrine it sits in. By increasing the cost to say 60, you still have squads that are just as capable but now you will find less munitions for your PTAB runs, light AT mines, salvage kits and grenade volleys. In other words the core of the doctrine will be negatively effected without solving the issue.

Instead like others have suggested, I propose that the conscripts' At rifles should prioritise the crew members as apposed to the weapon and have a reduction in close/mid accuracy to say 0.5, 0.3 ?

I would like to point out that I feel the AT rifles on the guards are fine, they have a long aim time and they usually prefer to play dance dance 2 as apposed to actually firing their weapons.

I do hope that Relic do not decided to revert the change completely as it breathes new life into the psuedo-extinct guard featuring doctrines

Time for Partisans!

PTRS shouldnt be an AI upgrade in the slightest. Make it scale the same as normal rifles against infantry. An anti tank weapon has its utility against tanks and light vehicles. Not Infantry.

PTRS shouldnt be an AI upgrade in the slightest. Make it scale the same as normal rifles against infantry. An anti tank weapon has its utility against tanks and light vehicles. Not Infantry.

Its definitely not AT upgrade.
And its also immersive and historically accurate that they are effective against infantry-they were used as high powered 'sniper rifles' as well.

I do think they should have their damage halved and fire-rate doubled. Doing 40 damage a hit, their tendency to 'snipe' units is quite strong. Guards actually do Pathfinder's job of crit-killing weakened infantry better than those guys could ever dream to.

Nevertheless, I greatly applaud Relic for finally making the PTRS worthwhile. It is not very effective vs Armour due to it's nature, but allowing it to do AI work as well makes it worth having.

Relic needed a winfall of everyone who doesn't own Tank Hunter Tactics clamoring to buy it.

At least its an easy fix (hopes).

I dont see how cons PTRS are OP, uploaded a replay, cant see any OP at all, no HMG got destroyed by PTRS, no AT gun either.

Thou OST got some nice buff in the patch.