Panzerwerfer sound/tier

Swapping the Ostwind for the Panzerwerfer is very convenient when you have a do-everything-tank in T3 already. Because what the game needs is even more P4 spam.

I'd be cool with it though since an early Ostwind is way more powerful than early werfer. But for that to be even remotely balanced the T34 would need its much needed buff and the P4 would either need a cost increase or nerf.

A quick word on the T34 even though it's also not connected to any of this, not even loosely. Firstly, the T34 is the most powerful tank in the game for its cost, one ram will instantly disable any tank the germans can field. It's also not meant to go toe-to-toe against a P4 in any instance, for that very reason. A lone microed T34 or one lightly supported (we're talking one conscript squad at the least) can win an engagement. T34 also, by the way, is very very effective against infantry. VERY effective. At the very least it's way more effective than, say, the P4 in the same roll. It's the closest thing soviets have to an Ostwind. The flaw in reasoning is thinking a T34 is a P4 or should be equal and they're different.

So, added together there's no comparison between the T34 and P4 and considering the aforementioned there shouldn't be. And lastly the reason there's 'P4' spam is because there's Soviet T4 spam. Solve the former to fix the first.

Back to topic: The Ostwind is better at infantry killing than the P4, we know. That's the only reason to choose this over the P4. But as I stated, It's too susceptible to soviet T4 that exists by the time T3 goes up... anyone doing the math is going to build a P4 over an Ostwind. However, I WOULD consider building a Panzerwerfer over a P4 at the same stage because it's indirect fire and can (potentially) survive longer. We need this back in T3.

Panzerwerfer and Ostwind should swap places and this is why:

(1) The Ostwind requires just as much fuel as the P4 for less utility. By the time you field an Ostwind it will meet T34's or an SU-85, the first is a problem but the last totally prevents you from using the Ostwind in any meaningful way. Same fuel, more risk, for less utility than a P4. By every calculation a P4 makes more sense.

(2) German indirect fire options are meager and it got markedly worse after the Panzerwerfer was moved from T3. That's when we starting seeing the MG and sniper spam tactics rule. They still do to some degree. MG spam is still a huge thorn especially in maps with houses. Snipers still almost have no counter. Especially if there's one Su-85 on the field preventing an ostwind or P4 from getting to them. German mortar, despite the changes, aren't doing anti-sniper duty. Panzerwerfer is the balance here, for both. Again, these tactics were always in check before the Panzerwerfer move to T4.

(3) Swapping these units causes no imbalance for the soviet player considering they have the OPTION to build T4 anytime they want, they have no HQ upgrade's to go through. It's a tactical decision for them. So moving our T4 unit to T3 is not a balance issue on the Soviet side. And besides, they build direct T4 now anyway every time and have since early beta.

(4) This needs repeating: The P4 and Ostwind are redundant in the same building. T3 comes at a time when T34 or Su-85 are already on the field, forcing the decision to a P4 every time.

The more I think about this the more I feel it's strongly needed.

I disagree with idea of swapping the two.

To respond to your points in kind;

1) I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. The Ostwind is far more effective against infantry and thus it makes itself vulnerable to armor counter attack for a shorter period of time. It kills infantry faster and forces their retreat thus an SU-85/T-34 has to react faster to it's positioning. Keep in mind that the Ostwind can fight toe to toe with an T-34 in the current balance. The SU-85 is a danger to the Ostwind but it's an equal threat to the P4. You can't pit either tank against the SU-85 without losing most of the time. The Ostwind can accomplish its job though and when supported by anti-tank infantry can force away Shocks and other dangerous infantry in time to save Pak40s and PGs who can in turn pressure the SU-85 away.

2) German artillery is unit for unit far better than the Soviet ones with the exception on the 120mm Mortar which doesn't really have a parallel and is doctrine locked. The Panzerwerfer's cooldown was accelerated in a recent patch to match its T4 place. It's better than a Katyusha. The Leif Howitzier is way better than the Soviet counterpart as it can fire 90% of the time and has greater accuracy. The mortar re-balancing probably has the German mortar ahead of the standard soviet 82mm.

Comparing unit to unit is largely pointless though, I admit. The context of units matters more than their raw power more often than not. Still, I disagree that Germans have the weaker indirect fire.

To be honest I don't really understand your (3) point. I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Any balance change is going to affect the Soviets. Having to worry about cheap and quicker Rocket Artillery is most certainly going to change the balance of the game an Soviets will have to respond. I mean you admitted that it could have a profound balance effect. When rocket artillery hits earlier and can punish AT guns and Maxims that's going to make Soviets reconsider buying those units.

I like the Panzerwerfer in Tier 4. It was very strong in Tier 3 and I felt like this was a good way of balancing the game while also making T4 have something to offer other than "heavy tank that costs 150+ fuel".

Honestly, I agree Tier 3 is really boring and bland. It gives you a medium tank, a specialized medium tank or a medium assault gun. Your solution sort of just shifts the problem though. Tier 4 already has a dedicated anti-infantry tank: The Brummbar. It sucks. No one builds it. I'm sure everyone would ignore the Brummbar for the Ostwind if you actually swapped them. That's assuming they bother with Tier 4 at all because the only useful thing remaining will be the Panther. Is that better?

I think the better choice is to balance underutilized units until they gain some relevance in their battlefield role. I actually think that the Ostwind does have some of that relevance right now. It's a good unit for the price. Pushing it back by ~90 fuel in tiers will cause it to become useless. Whereas the Panzerwerfer is useful and valuable in it's current location.

I think we would have seen the rise of Maxims and Snipers regardless of the swap. They weren't used because the game was still being explored and a strategy like "build 4 MGs and use them to capture the map" is so outlandish that no one would gravitate to that strategy naturally. So its discovery was slow and other balance changes were happening independent to its discovery.

edit: Wow that a long post.

Maxim spam is not due to changes to German T-4 and 3. It's due to German T-1 not having anything to cope with it especially well.

German T-3's biggest weak spot at the moment is the StuG vs. SU-85 matchup being off, as far as I can see.

Currently, German T-4 is attractive in a standard game because it introduces the new element of the rocket arty into your army. Ostwinds are attractive in a standard game with certain circumstances (Soviet T-70 or T-34 (if you have other AT), a map with flanks that are hard for an SU-85 to dominate, like Kholodny, a metric ton of early guards making P-IV use problematic) because you can get them from T-3. I think changing them back would give German T-3 too many options, German T-4 introduce too few new elements to be worth it in a close match and make the Ostwind genuinely redundant.

yes, reich fanbois wants their T3 even more powerful, relic please hear them

Ost T3 indirect fire is inadequate.

Currently Ost has too few indirect options for engaging turtled defenses at this tier.

I endorse swapping the Panzerwerfer back to T3 and the Ostwind to T4.

Currently Osts only means of engaging defenses is direct or flanking assaults with armor, with only a 81mm mortar as fire support to soften enemy positions.

This has nothing ro do with fanboism, it has to do with timings and relative strengths at given tiers, which for Ost are linear, and leave Ost with only a 81mm mortar as indirect fire at a timing/tier where Sov has ZiS Barrage, SU76 Barrage and Katyusha.

Returning Ostwind to T4 would undoubtedly make it rare, but that is a separate issue.

Osts indirect fire options, in their linear progression, are categorically, systematically and indisputably, inadequate, in any objective analysis.

Ost T3 indirect fire is inadequate.

Currently Ost has too few indirect options for engaging turtled defenses at this tier.

I endorse swapping the Panzerwerfer back to T3 and the Ostwind to T4.

Currently Osts only means of engaging defenses is direct or flanking assaults with armor, with only a 81mm mortar as fire support to soften enemy positions.

This has nothing ro do with fanboism, it has to do with timings and relative strengths at given tiers, which for Ost are linear, and leave Ost with only a 81mm mortar as indirect fire at a timing/tier where Sov has ZiS Barrage, SU76 Barrage and Katyusha.

Returning Ostwind to T4 would undoubtedly make it rare, but that is a separate issue.

Osts indirect fire options, in their linear progression, are categorically, systematically and indisputably, inadequate, in any objective analysis.

sounds like soviet T3 has adequate indirect fire /thread

Sov does.

Ost doesn't.

Ost T3 indirect fire is inadequate.

Currently Ost has too few indirect options for engaging turtled defenses at this tier.

I endorse swapping the Panzerwerfer back to T3 and the Ostwind to T4.

Currently Osts only means of engaging defenses is direct or flanking assaults with armor, with only a 81mm mortar as fire support to soften enemy positions.

This has nothing ro do with fanboism, it has to do with timings and relative strengths at given tiers, which for Ost are linear, and leave Ost with only a 81mm mortar as indirect fire at a timing/tier where Sov has ZiS Barrage, SU76 Barrage and Katyusha.

Returning Ostwind to T4 would undoubtedly make it rare, but that is a separate issue.

Osts indirect fire options, in their linear progression, are categorically, systematically and indisputably, inadequate, in any objective analysis.

It'd make the Ostwind redundant and Ostheer T-4 fairly redundant (in that it wouldn't introduce any new elements into the army), as well as making Soviet T-3 still less attractive relative to Sov T-4. The ZiS barrage is pretty expensive, so I'm fine with that, the SU-76 comes at the cost of your first vehicle being flimsy as anything and the Katyusha is made of papier mache. . The Ostheer also has the better Howitzer and Mortar Halftracks, so I don't think they're too hard pressed for options.

Last time I checked, Katyusha was T4, everyone seems to be talking as if it's a T3 option for Soviets.

And in terms of earlier Ost indirect fire, your mortars just received very nice buffs and are rather good at what they do. Hint: Try using them.

EDIT: And the argument "Soviet have ZiS Barrage, Su 76 Barrage + Katyusha is hardly appropriate. That would require going T2, T3 and T4, and no Soviets would do that in the current state of the game.

Ost T3 indirect fire is inadequate.

Period.

Ost T3 indirect fire is inadequate.

Period.

As a largely Ostheer player I'd rather have Ostwinds be in a useful place and Tier 4 actually be a useful choice because it adds a new element. The problem with German T-3 vs. Soviet T-4 is obviously the Blues Brothers SU-85 rather than not having indirect fire you can make up with doctrine choices if you're so inclined.

Sov does.

Ost doesn't.

Ost T3 indirect fire is inadequate.

Period.

how about you just go play soviet once, and check out if soviet "does" have indirect fire in T3 ......

Ost indirect fire upto and including T3 is

-81mm Mortar.

Thats it.

This is a ridiculous discussion.

Ost indirect fire upto and including T3 is

-81mm Mortar.

Thats it.

This is a ridiculous discussion.

Go for the MHT if you want earlier mobile indirect fire or the Howitzer if you want to add indirect fire to T-3 without teching up. Not a big enough problem to merit screwing over the Ostwind and the usefulness of Ostheer T-4 for.

All your options are doctrinal and therefore irrelevant, since they have counterparts also in Sov doctrines (equalled out both quantitatively and qualitatively by 120mm Mortar and Sov Howitzer).

Ost indirect fire is limited to ONE unit, upto and including T3:

-81mm Mortar.

Thats it.

All your options are doctrinal and therefore irrelevant, since they have counterparts also in Sov doctrines (equalled out both quantitatively and qualitatively by 120mm Mortar and Sov Howitzer).

Ost indirect fire is limited to ONE unit, upto and including T3:

-81mm Mortar.

Thats it.

You do realize that it's the same for Soviets by that metric, right? Barring Doctrines, the only indirect fire unit is the Soviet 81mm mortarm upto and including T3. There's the barrage on the ZiS-3 but that doesn't make it an "indirect fire" weapon. If you want proof, try and use a ZiS-3's barrage on something behind a hedgerow or a building. I'm 90% certain that the fire will clip the hedge row and the building instead of going over it. IE: Direct fire. The SU-76 does this too.

Why should we just ignore Doctrines for this discussion as well? No one plays CoH2 without them. The units and strategies they enable define your unit composition. They're in the game.

I get that you're talking to a timing rather than a tier comparison but I don't like this framing of the discussion in "Well, if you look at the game ignoring the doctrines and only between the minutes of 10-12 you can CLEARLY see that X side is underpowered right here"

CoH2 seems to me to be balanced around just one side being overpowered at certain timings. When an M3A1 Scout Car loaded up, a Flamethrower Halftrack, or a T-70 hits the field these units are near unstoppable during their "window". There are certain phases of the game where you just have to buckle your self down and try to survive and fight the best you can under a bad situation.

This is part of the asymmetric design. Which is another thing why we shouldn't just compare the two sides so directly. The Soviets are designed to have more artillery-like powers because that's their flavor.

Ost indirect fire upto and including T3 is

-81mm Mortar.

Thats it.

This is a ridiculous discussion.

Soviet equivalent to bunkers:

Oh right.

And the 81mm Mortar is quite good right now.

Doctrinal indirect fire options:

Sov:
-120mm Mortar
-Howitzer

Ost:
-MHT
-Howitzer

Result: Balanced.

Nondoctrinal indirect fire options at 3 tiers:

Sov:
-82mm Mortar
-ZiS Barrage
-SU76 Barrage
-Katyusha

Ost:
-81mm Mortar

Result: Not balanced.

@Marxist: I talk about indirect fire options, you talk about bunkers. Gj, kid.

@Corp Shephard: The analysis above includes doctrinals since that seemed to rustle you, though I accounted for them in my last post. Whats your next irrelevant counterargument?

@Marxist: I talk about indirect fire options, you talk about bunkers. Gj, kid.

Which is why Soviets need earlier indirect fire options, kiddo.


Your argument is the only thing ridiculous here.