Ostheer (Wehrmacht) Grenadiers

Yes, I have thought about it as well and the solution is quite simple.

Give all close comabt units sprint ability and/or smoke nades.

Not to mention armor on Shock troops which makes them much more durable on the open field than any other (and it should be like that, yet vetted inf, becasue of rec. acc is more durable )

Thanks australian for such a good manner answers and way to explain your opinions. much appreciated.


really tired fo these forum battles plenty of nosense and bad manners...much appreciated man.


Sometimes I miss a lot my times in COH1 where I used to ask for help in gamereplays.org

In that time (v3.01 IIRC, when 3 cloack shoots from paks, flamepios blobs and so on....) no one was figthing in the forums because that unit is OP....as no one expected a patch any time soon, people put their efforts in develop strategies to stop this or that very powerfull unit....

Maybe was is nostalgic, but I miss those threads where people only post to add his strategy, or how they defetead that unit using other unit....don´t know, it was better for me at least.


Excuse for the off-topic.

Like Johnny and Zyllen?

Grens are SUPPOSED to be overwhelmed by other infantry if you spam them alone like a retard.
There are early potent support weapons for a reason accessible right off the bat to you as opposed to allied factions(except brits, who are equally dependent on supporting units as ost).
If you want to play with just basic infantry, play the faction that actually is designed to do so and protip: its not ostheer nor OKW.

You don't need wipe prone grens as support.Osttruppen much more cost-efficient and wipeproof,pzgrens do as much dmg as lmg grens,better survivability,better on the move,better at countering enemies trying to close and overrun the mgs.
So what good is gren for?If i want support i'll go with cheap osttruppen or costlier pzgren along with mg42 or combo of both.Grenadier is not needed with being a muni sink,poor survivability,can't fire on move and high reinforce costs.

No, I don't for a singular reason.

Axis are balanced to put out firepower to deal with 5-6 man squads and brits have 4 by default.
USF team weapons already are testament to that firepower, dying in moments compared to soviet counterparts.
Already forgot why ost sniper had to be nerfed and how he is still extremely effective?

Meanwhile, allied units are still balanced to fight 4-5 men squads, fun stuff happens when units like osttruppen and pfussiliers swarm the field and get some vet stars.

So again no, there isn't any contradiction, just one confused player blind to the wide picture.

last time i checked maxed out is/rifles have far more firepower then the grens. even guards have more firepower then the grens these days.

Prostuppen > Grens

last time i checked maxed out is/rifles have far more firepower then the grens. even guards have more firepower then the grens these days.

We'd have horrible imbalance if it was other way, because you know, tremendous resource investment difference?

A way to solve this issue is not necessarily with 5-men Gren/Pgren squads, but give Riflemen a 5th man at vet 2. Reduce cost to 260 mp, give Veteran Riflemen 5 men at vet 0, start them off at vet 1 like they are.

A way to solve this issue is not necessarily with 5-men Gren/Pgren squads, but give Riflemen a 5th man at vet 2. Reduce cost to 260 mp, give Veteran Riflemen 5 men at vet 0, start them off at vet 1 like they are.

Still won't stand a chance lategame with current vet bonuses vs rifles or IS.No way to tiptoe around the issue.Grenadiers are obsolete.

We'd have horrible imbalance if it was other way, because you know, tremendous resource investment difference?

Fun fact, we have this "horrible imbalance". That tremendous resource investment you are talking about is 40 mp/muni, which is nothing to justify how bad volks/grens are. Maybe if you'd play the game you would see that grens can only handle cons, everything else beats them.

last time i checked maxed out is/rifles have far more firepower then the grens. even guards have more firepower then the grens these days.

actually, in certain situation a vet 3 lmg42 grenadier will still have more firepower than a double bar vet3 rifleman.

vet3 2bar riflemen:
0 10 20 30 35
66.44951131 46.86322698 31.14046879 22.78079253 19.33754971

vet3 lmg42 grenadier
0 10 20 30 35
33.259402 30.58985495 27.88947124 25.63595732 24.13423875


although if you nerf the vet3 weapon accuracy bonus on the grenadier:

0 10 20 30 35
31.91772017 28.40486531 25.89736615 23.80481751 22.41036456

the advantage get much lower.

If Riflemen are nerfed, M1919s need to be buffed and Paratroopers should have vet 0 camo.

Atleast 1 amongst pzgrens or grens need 5 man lategame to survive lmg blobs.Or ukf and rifle vet bonuses need nerf.One of these scenarios need to happen .

You know, the conscript v gren balance is only an early game thing. Late game conscripts and grens do not match up in any real sense. (I don't think people play full games using only conscripts v grens either.)

A T4/BP3, 5th gren model upgrade that simultaneously increases the cost of gren squads to 280 (from 240) would not wreck that apparent perfect balance. It would give the Wehrmacht an infantry squad that's less prone to wipage. (Hell, the 5th man could just have a pistol. The point, for all senses and purposes, is that he's just an extra body to bring the vet back to base.)

Not to mention if the upgrade cost fuel it would be a choice that would delay/hinder further teching or vehicles.

However, the real consideration is to determine if this is reactionary to allied infantry, or if the Wehrmacht faction needs a mainline infantry that is less prone to full squad wipes. Buffing grens because of rifles is a poor lens to balance from, but I do think that grens needs something for survivability. I just find that 4 man infantry squads love to wipe themselves. (Of all varieties, really, from Jaegers and Fallschirms to REs and Combat Engis.)

The one thing I don't get, is that certain people want Axis's infantry to rival that of Allies late game right? Specifically USF?

But USF late game, specifically vehicles, don't rival that of Wermacht? From what I understand as the current state of the game is that Allies have better infantry, but Wermacht has better vehicles and support weapons. Where would the trade off be for Wermacht having amazing scaling on their grens since they have some of the best vehicles and support weapons?

I also play with a brit friend of mine. His Vickers never pins, at all. I don't know where everyone gets this idea that the thing is just as good as the MG42.

I also play with a brit friend of mine. His Vickers never pins, at all. I don't know where everyone gets this idea that the thing is just as good as the MG42.

vickers is a killing machine (it kills models very fast), faster vet 1 and increased fire range while garrisoned is good tbh

vickers is a killing machine (it kills models very fast), faster vet 1 and increased fire range while garrisoned is good tbh

From what I understand the MG42 and Vickers have the exact same dps at most ranges, and the vickers does massive damage within like 7 right? I don't think an MG should ever be that close.

Faster vet 1? Do brits actually get veterancy faster?

Prostuppen > All

Fixed that for ya

(Nope still not tired of it yet)

vickers is a killing machine (it kills models very fast), faster vet 1 and increased fire range while garrisoned is good tbh

vicker have similar dps as the mg42.

The only possibility that the vicker kill faster is because that enemies are not being suppressed and therefore not receiving the defensive bonus.

stop twisting the vicker's lack of suppression into an advantages. If there's 4x grenadier barrelling toward me I want them suppressed asap. a machine gun that can't suppress is a crappy machine gun at all. If I want dps I will just get another tommy or sniper.

vicker have similar dps as the mg42.

The only possibility that the vicker kill faster is because that enemies are not being suppressed and therefore not receiving the defensive bonus.

stop twisting the vicker's lack of suppression into an advantages. If there's 4x grenadier barrelling toward me I want them suppressed asap. a machine gun that can't suppress is a crappy machine gun at all. If I want dps I will just get another tommy or sniper.

Vickers' is better at range >35, which is variably an advantage rather than a straight up good point (Suppressing enemies within that range is hardly impossible, but neither is it necessarily preferable to just suppressing enemies past that range which the HMG42 certainly does faster).

Vickers' is better at range >35, which is variably an advantage rather than a straight up good point (Suppressing enemies within that range is hardly impossible, but neither is it necessarily preferable to just suppressing enemies past that range which the HMG42 certainly does faster).

I'm not saying that it never suppresses (which it does equal to allied type MG's) I'm talking about pinning, which it never does at all.

Vickers' is better at range >35, which is variably an advantage rather than a straight up good point (Suppressing enemies within that range is hardly impossible, but neither is it necessarily preferable to just suppressing enemies past that range which the HMG42 certainly does faster).

>35 is also where you have to start worrying about grenades, especially the rifle grenade which reach 30.