Soviet Average mortar...

Im fairly sure 90% of posters are missing the point of this thread.

The point is that im fairly sure that the soviet pm-41 mortar received some ninja buff at some point, while the Wehrmacht mortar fires 3x faster, the soviet mortar is 2x as accurate with its barrages. + 6 man crew.

Didn't Cruzz tell us about a ninja buff to the PM-41 mortar in the patch before the last one?

Im not sure, i didnt see it, but it would explain alot if this is the case.

Ive had this mortar currently being insanely accurate vs Axis units in recent games. Even when using them. I also noticed the barrage radius is ALOT smaller than it is for the Wehrmacht.

So i guess its confirmed? remove precision strike and increase accuracy by an insane amount to compensate? So Axis squads are still constantly on the backfoot since theyre smaller?

Im fairly sure 90% of posters are missing the point of this thread.

The point is that im fairly sure that the soviet pm-41 mortar received some ninja buff at some point, while the Wehrmacht mortar fires 3x faster, the soviet mortar is 2x as accurate with its barrages. + 6 man crew.

I have literally shown you the stats of the soviet mortar vs. the axis mortar. Maybe you had good/bad RNG. Maybe there was a change, in which case neither Cruzz nor the rest of the "ninjas" haven't been able to find it.

Im not sure, i didnt see it, but it would explain alot if this is the case.

Ive had this mortar currently being insanely accurate vs Axis units in recent games. Even when using them. I also noticed the barrage radius is ALOT smaller than it is for the Wehrmacht.

So i guess its confirmed? remove precision strike and increase accuracy by an insane amount to compensate? So Axis squads are still constantly on the backfoot since theyre smaller?

The accuracy change last patch was not found by Cruz. Someone looked into it and stated that the "ninja buff" was a case of mistaken stat finding. The buff done to the USF MHT was misinterpreted as a change to the soviet 82mm mortar.

Mortars fire more accurate when they have line of sight. Maybe your enemy was flaring all the time, allowing those precise shots?

No way Jose, the difference it's veterancy, the ostheer whermacht altough it's accurate in its LOS the soviet one its in in 6 man plus, i would like too buff soviet hmg with more DPS and less supress than ostheer one.

I think the difference relies in the squad pacing, soviet has 6 man squad for some reason i.e: you can just jump in to the front with your mortar being soviet with ostheer you couldn't why, because either you get stomped by any squad either usf or ussr, that's the difference i would like to know the difference between a con squad and a weapon's squad


DIZ POZT HAZ NO FX I´M DRONK

Im fairly sure 90% of posters are missing the point of this thread.

The point is that im fairly sure that the soviet pm-41 mortar received some ninja buff at some point, while the Wehrmacht mortar fires 3x faster, the soviet mortar is 2x as accurate with its barrages. + 6 man crew.

It didn't.
Its unchanged for at least 18 months.

Only thing that changed is removal of precision strike and addition of flares, which makes it "spot for itself" therefore making barrage more accurate when you'd fire into FoW otherwise.

Barrage ability was always about 30% more accurate.

while the Wehrmacht mortar fires 3x faster, the soviet mortar is 2x as accurate with its barrages. + 6 man crew.

Like pretty much every single ability target reticule, which are defined in abilities manually rather than calculated through actual weapon or offmap scatter, the ostheer mortar one is plain wrong. While ingame the circle balloons to an absolutely massive one with twice the radius of the soviet one, actual hits will be in a circle with maybe 10% larger radius than soviet one.

Also the reload speed difference is not quite that high, you people need to remember that to actually fire a weapon, the crew will need to go through the following delays:

aim time + wind up+wind down + cooldown + reload
0.125 + 4(81mm) vs 3.125(82mm) + 0 + 0 (81mm) vs 3.575 (82mm)
(numbers for barrage, autofire works the same way but numbers different and a bit more in favor of the 81mm)

Like pretty much every single ability target reticule, which are defined in abilities manually rather than calculated through actual weapon or offmap scatter, the ostheer mortar one is plain wrong. While ingame the circle balloons to an absolutely massive one with twice the radius of the soviet one, actual hits will be in a circle with maybe 10% larger radius than soviet one.

Also the reload speed difference is not quite that high, you people need to remember that to actually fire a weapon, the crew will need to go through the following delays:

aim time + wind up+wind down + cooldown + reload
0.125 + 4(81mm) vs 3.125(82mm) + 0 + 0 (81mm) vs 3.575 (82mm)
(numbers for barrage, autofire works the same way but numbers different and a bit more in favor of the 81mm)

Yeah i didnt think the rate of fire difference was that much, just trying to appease the fanboys since heaven forbid i questioned a soviet unit.

Yeah i didnt think the rate of fire difference was that much, just trying to appease the fanboys since heaven forbid i questioned a soviet unit.

dude your trying to say the soviet mortar of all units is op. That in its self is rediculous

dude your trying to say the soviet mortar of all units is op. That in its self is rediculous

And thus the typical level of pathetic that sadly so many members of this games community leap to with the accusations.

My post was an observation/question not a declaration of "OP".

Quote me where i said its OP... i said nothing of the sort. I asked if it was ninja buffed since its basic fire performance seems to of greatly improved since the last patch. (as in... i actually lost less units to it when it HAD precision strike).

May i recommend you take some reading classes before directing criticism at me sir.

I can see that, the increase of MP for certain Wehrmacht units. After all, they are meant to represent a better trained and equipped army so increasing MP for their performance would work and make sense compared to the cheaper Allied counterparts. No balance changes and be acceptable due to the increase cost.

Wehrmacht is already the most MP intensive faction in game the game currently, if anything I would like to see Grens get a 5th man and be made 280 mp (with the same DPS just spread out more) to make Ostheer's mainline infantry less wipey.

A price increase to support weapons would just lead to more gren spam, which is awful as anyone who plays against CAS often will tell you.

Wehrmacht is already the most MP intensive faction in game the game currently, if anything I would like to see Grens get a 5th man and be made 280 mp (with the same DPS just spread out more) to make Ostheer's mainline infantry less wipey.

A price increase to support weapons would just lead to more gren spam, which is awful as anyone who plays against CAS often will tell you.

If a player decides that they don't want support weapons, they are giving up most of their early game power. Grens simply cannot clear sandbags and buildings easily, nor can they hold off rifles. Its a choice that they make. ( see my post one page ago).

Giving grens a 5th man and 280 mp is a terrible idea. Grens already have higher dps than conscripts at close range. The only reason they lose is because the cons have more models. 5 man grens would beat cons at all ranges, and directly feed the grenspam you just said you don't want. All you would be doing is giving ostheer great early game infantry, exceedingly cost efficient support weapons, and 0 drawbacks.

If a player decides that they don't want support weapons, they are giving up most of their early game power. Grens simply cannot clear sandbags and buildings easily, nor can they hold off rifles. Its a choice that they make. ( see my post one page ago).

Giving grens a 5th man and 280 mp is a terrible idea. Grens already have higher dps than conscripts at close range. The only reason they lose is because the cons have more models. 5 man grens would beat cons at all ranges, and directly feed the grenspam you just said you don't want. All you would be doing is giving ostheer great early game infantry, exceedingly cost efficient support weapons, and 0 drawbacks.

Players will decide they don't want support weapons based on cost efficiency, if the MG42 and Mortar cost a lot people will just get a few grens out and rush t2. It would make Ostheer in smaller game modes harder to play and still piss easy in team games.

It would also make reinforcing more hellish than it already is, to many model losses can drain away all your MP early game very quickly making come backs hard.

Personally I think the 4 man squad nature of Ostheer makes it way to vulnerable to squad wipes (USF shouldn't have 4 man squads either), and paying more MP for the same DPS but more durability sounds like a fair trade all things considered.

But ultimately I think the best solution is just to give the other side buffs instead of giving Ost nerfs, the reason Ostheer is so good right now compared to the other factions is that they got the most Alpha buffs of any faction.

Players will decide they don't want support weapons based on cost efficiency, if the MG42 and Mortar cost a lot people will just get a few grens out and rush t2. It would make Ostheer in smaller game modes harder to play and still piss easy in team games.

It would also make reinforcing more hellish than it already is, to many model losses can drain away all your MP early game very quickly making come backs hard.

Personally I think the 4 man squad nature of Ostheer makes it way to vulnerable to squad wipes (USF shouldn't have 4 man squads either), and paying more MP for the same DPS but more durability sounds like a fair trade all things considered.

But ultimately I think the best solution is just to give the other side buffs instead of giving Ost nerfs, the reason Ostheer is so good right now compared to the other factions is that they got the most Alpha buffs of any faction.

In terms of the MG42 price increase I favor, it wouldn't change anything in terms of reinforcing. The price would be going into the cost of the weapon itself. This way, the only difference between live would be the initial purchase cost. 40mp more for what the MG42 currently give would still be cost efficient. They may not be as cheap, but you would still be getting great bang for your buck. The Mg42 absolutely performs at the 280 mp level, when compared to the .50, the DSHK, and the maxim.

I'm not saying that making grens 5 man would be impossible, but it would have to come with a buff for conscripts (so they can win engagements [conscripts currently win cqc battles because they have a higher HP pool, not because they shoot better at close range]), and in return completely screw up Soviet vs. OKW balance, causing more messups, until Relic finally gets it right, and there is no way in hell Relic will make such a crazy change given their track record.

The MG42 getting a price increase alone would be perfectly fine with me, it's just adding a mortar price increase on top of it is were you lose me.

EDIT: The Maxim and Dhsk need help independent of this of course. Like I said buffs my man not nerfs!

The MG42 getting a price increase alone would be perfectly fine with me, it's just adding a mortar price increase on top of it is were you lose me.

EDIT: The Maxim and Dhsk need help independent of this of course. Like I said buffs my man not nerfs!

The mortar increase may not be needed, i'll meet halfway. It may just be better to make the Soviet one more useful, but I'm not sure how you would do that without excessively punishing small squads.

Players will decide they don't want support weapons based on cost efficiency, if the MG42 and Mortar cost a lot people will just get a few grens out and rush t2. It would make Ostheer in smaller game modes harder to play and still piss easy in team games.

You're trying to tell us that HMG42 cost effectiveness=maxim cost effectiveness and 81mm=82mm cost effectiveness?

Your definition of "cost effectiveness" is either extremely skewed towards "cost effective=overpowered" or you should be in support of buffing maxim and soviet mortar in every thread possible.

The cost effectiveness comparison clearly shows that MG42 cost effectiveness is at least on level of .50 cal, which costs 280mp. Grw cost effectiveness also surpasses twice as expensive pack howitzer. Should pack howi cost less then 240mp or grw should cost 500mp?

It would also make reinforcing more hellish than it already is, to many model losses can drain away all your MP early game very quickly making come backs hard.

If you need to reinforce mortar, your placing it wrong. Also because default crew reinforce is 25% cheaper, they'd still be cheaper to reinforce then grens. It wouldn't impact recrewed squads reinforce costs at all.
You're not standing on a strong point here.

Personally I think the 4 man squad nature of Ostheer makes it way to vulnerable to squad wipes (USF shouldn't have 4 man squads either), and paying more MP for the same DPS but more durability sounds like a fair trade all things considered.

So.... .50 cal to 240mp or HMG42 to 280 and pack howi to 240 or turbomortar to 480 then?
Turbomortar is also superior to -NDA- which costs the same.
Cost effectiveness you have tried to back yourself up with is skewed greatly for ost support teams.
Numbers don't lie.

But ultimately I think the best solution is just to give the other side buffs instead of giving Ost nerfs, the reason Ostheer is so good right now compared to the other factions is that they got the most Alpha buffs of any faction.

So we end up with more overpowered units?
I'd rather avoid that.

A price decrease for the soviet mortar should suffice. It does not need to match the effectiveness of the german mortar when it is cheaper.

A price decrease for the soviet mortar should suffice. It does not need to match the effectiveness of the german mortar when it is cheaper.

Yeah ok, so mortar spam is ok? Sorry okw, ost mortar is supposedly OP so we are reducing soviet mortar cost.

Your definition of "cost effectiveness" is either extremely skewed towards "cost effective=overpowered" or you should be in support of buffing maxim and soviet mortar in every thread possible.

The cost effectiveness comparison clearly shows that MG42 cost effectiveness is at least on level of .50 cal, which costs 280mp. Grw cost effectiveness also surpasses twice as expensive pack howitzer. Should pack howi cost less then 240mp or grw should cost 500mp?

Iv always thought the Maxim and Soviet Mortar could use changes. The MG42 right now could use a small cost increase.

Yeah ok, so mortar spam is ok? Sorry okw, ost mortar is supposedly OP so we are reducing soviet mortar cost.

Soviet mortars are especially bad against OKW due to that factions lack of support weapons. At least Ostheer has some static targets for you to shoot at. Besides, you need 3 soviet mortars to match the rate of fire of 1 Ostheer mortar, so I doubt it would become a problem.

I don't think the Ostheer mortar is OP. I like that it is a highly effective unit that is often worth getting over another grenadier squad.
Likewise, I don't think the MG42 is particularly OP (maybe ever so slightly).

What I want is for allied and OKW support weapons to be on the same level of viability. Maxims, DHSKs, LeIG, 82mm mortar and the HMG34 are some examples of units that are completely outclassed compared to the Ostheer equivalents. To give the other factions the same incentive to use combined arms over infantry spam, some units need to change. One way to do it by improving the units themselves, the other is by keeping their performance and lowering their cost.