Login

russian armor

Ostheer weaknesses

5 Sep 2016, 19:40 PM
#41
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Making Tigerstock unit would be huge nerf. Just sayin...
well it would need a reduced price (similar to comet) and was meant I to show the bullshit(bias) that katiof is always spitting
5 Sep 2016, 19:41 PM
#42
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

well it would need a reduced price (similar to comet) and was meant I to show the bullshit(bias) that katiof is always spitting


Even then it would be huge nerf and Tiger would almost disapear from 1v1 and 2v2.
5 Sep 2016, 19:41 PM
#43
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Making Tiger stock unit would be huge nerf. Just sayin...

No no, let him think it will be good idea to have Tiger in T4. :snfPeter:
well it would need a reduced price (similar to comet) and was meant I to show the bullshit(bias) that katiof is always spitting

Together with reduced penetration(similar to comet) reduced armor(similar to comet) and reduced health(similar to comet).

Right?
5 Sep 2016, 19:44 PM
#44
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474


No no, let him think it will be good idea to have Tiger in T4. :snfPeter:

Together with reduced penetration(similar to comet) reduced armor(similar to comet) and reduced health(similar to comet).

Right?
i would gladly trade comet for panther everyday
5 Sep 2016, 19:45 PM
#45
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Even then it would be huge nerf and Tiger would almost disapear from 1v1 and 2v2.
"and was meant I to show the bullshit(bias) that katiof is always spitting"
5 Sep 2016, 20:34 PM
#46
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670

Why would you shitpost so much? Why would you come to these forums and instead of giving useful, thought out comments spew so much bullshit? Who gains anything?
5 Sep 2016, 21:05 PM
#47
avatar of Corsin

Posts: 600


Then I guess its good that comet costs MORE, is less durable and doesn't have as good penetration, while teching for it locks another unit and abilities?

Also, if you want to see piss poor DPS, look at firefly.


Gotta call you on that.... Firefly has the highest burst damage in the game except from a sturmtiger. Shots + tulips pretty much guarantees a tank kill as long as theres another allied tank or AT gun in the area.

Dps here isnt what you should measure a firefly on... But its burst and killing power especially when coupled with another tank or AT gun...

Christ i killed a KT with a firefly and 2 AT guns purely because of the tulips.
5 Sep 2016, 21:43 PM
#48
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

I wonder what effect on gameplay giving Grenadiers Merge would have...
5 Sep 2016, 21:48 PM
#49
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I wonder what effect on gameplay giving Grenadiers Merge would have...

None, because 251 arrives really fast if you need on field reinforcement.

But you know, giving merge to grens would mean we'd have to make faust and rnade side upgrades and lock LMG behind a doctrine, or you know, "too much utility" :snfBarton::sibPheasant:
5 Sep 2016, 22:54 PM
#50
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276

All Ostheer needs is a 5 man squad upgrade in the late game (maybe tied to BP2/BP3), and some sort of squad spacing fix. All their support weapons are good enough, but not enough to save grens from getting roflstomped lategame by superior allied inf. Maybe some adjustments to their tanks too, namely P4 price/penetration, Panther moving accuracy/reload speed, and Tiger frontal armor.
That, or nerf allied infantry scaling/bullsht double weps.

That's it. All your other points seem to be a non issue honestly. Anymore than what I said above would be overbuff, and it'd be imbalance yet again. My points mostly affect only the late game parts of Ostheer, which was turned into a joke since the Brits arrival and the WFA's power creep.

I wonder what effect on gameplay giving Grenadiers Merge would have...


Merge on a 4 man squad :snfBarton:. also lol at katitof actually taking that seriously.
6 Sep 2016, 03:31 AM
#51
avatar of Svanh

Posts: 181

The first major problem is the insane potency of light vehicles which force Axis off the map, making them invest in AT early on before Allies and potentially losing squads early on. The second major problem is clumping which results in cheesy wipes from tanks and from mortars. T-70/Quad Half Track/Stuart/AA Half track obviously just need a damage nerf. Easy.

A damage nerf would simply move light vehicles from "always build" to "never build". If you want to address light vehicle rushes, you need to make them units in their own right instead of an expected game phase. From another thread:

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Aug 2016, 00:21 AMSvanh
The earlier a vehicle arrives, the less health and armour it should have to make countering it easier within the early lack of options. By the same token, it should have a low target size (< current 15-18), lesser anti-infantry lethality, higher mobility and lower cost so tanks and AT guns don't make it completely obsolete in late-game and it doesn't dominate the mid-game.

Balancing AT weapons is similar. The later a weapon arrives, the more damage and penetration it has and the more it costs. Earlier AT weapons are more accurate and mobile to make it easier to hit but don't do enough damage to destroy a light vehicle instantly.

Picking a random example, the Ostwind should be more mobile, cheaper, and harder to hit than the Brumbarr but have slightly lowered lethality and less durability when actually hit. Currently the Ostwind is significantly less lethal than the Brumbarr and has exactly the same target size but all the other factors hold making the Ostwind generally less useful than the Brumbarr.

When units are balanced along these lines a player can choose the specific type of unit to counter an opponent's army instead of choosing whichever comes from the highest tech level. Against light vehicles you would choose light AT guns, infantry AT, and light tank destroyers (Puma, SU-76, etc.) while heavy vehicles would encourage heavy tank destroyers, AT guns, and AT emplacements to fight frontally but heavy units would have difficulty fighting a flanking force of light vehicles due to weapon and vehicle rotation, fire rates, and harder to hit targets.
6 Sep 2016, 04:32 AM
#52
avatar of OuTLaWSTaR
Donator 11

Posts: 453

Ostheer is the weakest faction in the game.
6 Sep 2016, 06:44 AM
#53
6 Sep 2016, 06:51 AM
#54
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

All Ostheer needs is a 5 man squad upgrade in the late game (maybe tied to BP2/BP3), and some sort of squad spacing fix. All their support weapons are good enough, but not enough to save grens from getting roflstomped lategame by superior allied inf. Maybe some adjustments to their tanks too, namely P4 price/penetration, Panther moving accuracy/reload speed, and Tiger frontal armor.
That, or nerf allied infantry scaling/bullsht double weps.


Pzgren aren't roflstomped at all late game vs infantry. Gren cost 240mp, how can you imagine that a 240/60 unit should be able to go toes to toes with 280/60-120 unit?

Now I'm not saying there isn't a balance issue with Ostheer, I play a lot Ostheer since the USFMortar patch and I know there is an issue. But making Ostheer frontline forces more potent isn't going to solve anything.
If Relic could simply modify Gren/pzgren squad formation in first hand, we would be able to better see the real issue with this point.

Now about general balance, Ostheer vs Allied faction. Ostheer shouldn't be still on the backfoot when T-70 or Stuart hit the field. Those units should be arriving when the match become balanced and bring some decision making for the allied player when entering late game while at the same time the Ostheer player do the same, which is absolutely not the case today. Those units have become not brainer because Ostheer early stage is too underwhelming ATM and almost impossible to recover at mid-game vs a good player.
6 Sep 2016, 07:11 AM
#55
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Sep 2016, 06:51 AMEsxile


Pzgren aren't roflstomped at all late game vs infantry. Gren cost 240mp, how can you imagine that a 240/60 unit should be able to go toes to toes with 280/60-120 unit?


I would happily upgrade my grenadier squad twice, but I can't. This doesn't mean that a riflemen and infantry sections should be better just because they have more upgrades and that the basic design of a faction should be negated by powerful vet, upgrades and indirect fire. What is the use of this faction's design then?

The problem is that the Ostheer mainline infantry unit isn't capable of reliably fighting riflemen, infantry sections or penal battalions. These units gain immense power with vetereancy, which further hampers the Ostheer mainline infantry unit. Grenadiers need to be in cover to fight effectively, yet we have double bar riflemen and double bren infantry sections destroying grenadiers in cover. USF mortar and British mortar pit both deny cover to the grenadiers in a very effective way, meaning you can't utilize the grenadiers as they were meant to be utilized.

Now people argue that you should support your grenadiers with combined arms, including mg42s and mortars. The only problem is that riflemen are supported by the USF turbo laser guided mortar that just destroys weapon teams in mostly 1 or 2 blows, including grenadiers that need cover to fight effectively. The British mortar pit does the same. On top of this, riflemen can utilize smoke and grenades on top of this turbo laser guided mortar. All these facts in essence mean that your weapon teams aren't safe anywhere and can't support your grenadiers reliably.

The only 'mainline' infantry unit the grenadiers can reliably counter are conscripts. Conscripts themselves are a joke. This shows the horrible state of conscripts and the somewhat lackluster state of grenadiers. Something needs to be done.

Edit: not even to mention when an Allied light vehicle comes out and insta gibs half of your grenadier squad on the first shot.

6 Sep 2016, 07:22 AM
#56
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Sep 2016, 06:51 AMEsxile


Pzgren aren't roflstomped at all late game vs infantry. Gren cost 240mp, how can you imagine that a 240/60 unit should be able to go toes to toes with 280/60-120 unit?

Now I'm not saying there isn't a balance issue with Ostheer, I play a lot Ostheer since the USFMortar patch and I know there is an issue. But making Ostheer frontline forces more potent isn't going to solve anything.
If Relic could simply modify Gren/pzgren squad formation in first hand, we would be able to better see the real issue with this point.

Now about general balance, Ostheer vs Allied faction. Ostheer shouldn't be still on the backfoot when T-70 or Stuart hit the field. Those units should be arriving when the match become balanced and bring some decision making for the allied player when entering late game while at the same time the Ostheer player do the same, which is absolutely not the case today. Those units have become not brainer because Ostheer early stage is too underwhelming ATM and almost impossible to recover at mid-game vs a good player.



u forget to say that the rifles have 1 more model, can be super effective vs infanterie or tanks..or very effecitve vs both...u can choose with the weapon upgrades.
can u do this woth grens? no.


have the allies the most effictive indirect fire at moment? yes

if u want to play with grens..u need cover and long time...to much time when u must face lazer sniping indirect fire.

thats the problem.

and a bofors can build inj the first 4minutes...and looks very important points for to much time...till u get a good counter...the enemy had a big ressource income advantage.

even when u play 2vs....the brits can set up their city...the other mate support...


need combine arms with allies? No. U need to spam rifles/ IS / support weapons, which u can stay brain of in back


if u play vs same skilled players as axis...u lost...u need much rng on ur side or enemys which big fail decisions to win....or random vs ts team

proof:

http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4469/yhrgiief_png.htm
6 Sep 2016, 07:46 AM
#57
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


Merge on a 4 man squad :snfBarton:. also lol at katitof actually taking that seriously.

You are reaaly low rank at sarcasm and past references if you didn't got me :sibPheasant:
6 Sep 2016, 08:15 AM
#58
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


I would happily upgrade my grenadier squad twice, but I can't. This doesn't mean that a riflemen and infantry sections should be better just because they have more upgrades and that the basic design of a faction should be negated by powerful vet, upgrades and indirect fire. What is the use of this faction's design then?

The problem is that the Ostheer mainline infantry unit isn't capable of reliably fighting riflemen, infantry sections or penal battalions. These units gain immense power with vetereancy, which further hampers the Ostheer mainline infantry unit. Grenadiers need to be in cover to fight effectively, yet we have double bar riflemen and double bren infantry sections destroying grenadiers in cover. USF mortar and British mortar pit both deny cover to the grenadiers in a very effective way, meaning you can't utilize the grenadiers as they were meant to be utilized.

Now people argue that you should support your grenadiers with combined arms, including mg42s and mortars. The only problem is that riflemen are supported by the USF turbo laser guided mortar that just destroys weapon teams in mostly 1 or 2 blows, including grenadiers that need cover to fight effectively. The British mortar pit does the same. On top of this, riflemen can utilize smoke and grenades on top of this turbo laser guided mortar. All these facts in essence mean that your weapon teams aren't safe anywhere and can't support your grenadiers reliably.

The only 'mainline' infantry unit the grenadiers can reliably counter are conscripts. Conscripts themselves are a joke. This shows the horrible state of conscripts and the somewhat lackluster state of grenadiers. Something needs to be done.

Edit: not even to mention when an Allied light vehicle comes out and insta gibs half of your grenadier squad on the first shot.



At the end, only your edit make sens, yes the issue is around Soviet and USF having better infantry and then better light tanks while from a balance perspective, it should be something opposed. The 222 is really potent for sure for its price but it is too fast denied by Guards, it is a bit better vs USF but cannot really overcome the gap early game made with the Mortar/RM combo.

1- Grenadiers aren't mean to go toes to toes alone vs Penal or RM upgraded. Accept it because it is balanced.
2- There is a problem with the pacing between model which increase the sentiment Grens/pzgren are underwhelming.
3- USF mortar is still too potent, nothing new under the sun, there is nobody to say the opposite.
4- T-70 and Stuart are too potent and come over the already Sov/USF domination while 222 or 251 aren't in great help or already well countered by Guards/zooks.
6 Sep 2016, 09:09 AM
#59
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276


You are reaaly low rank at sarcasm and past references if you didn't got me :sibPheasant:


hmm, didn't really read the whole thread actually, as this topic is basically dead horse paste now. either that or my sarcasm detection meter is broken.


jump backJump back to quoted post6 Sep 2016, 06:51 AMEsxile
Pzgren aren't roflstomped at all late game vs infantry. Gren cost 240mp, how can you imagine that a 240/60 unit should be able to go toes to toes with 280/60-120 unit?


Well, pzgrens are supposed to be expensive and elite hard AI/hard AT units. They do good damage vs infantry overall, but they still have gren-like level of durability, meaning they still get f---d by explosives and survive only a little bit better than grens on infantry battles .
6 Sep 2016, 20:18 PM
#60
avatar of ABlockOfSalt

Posts: 70

What if they just made a side grade that both flavours of grens got +7 HP per tier unlocked?

Explosive weapons destroy all squads with RNG but it would make then slightly more resilient and cost efficient without making them dramatically different. I don't really like the idea of giving a unit more than the traditional 80hpts but it seems the least invasive way to give them a slight buff that doesn't throw things out of whack
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 51
United States 36
United States 23
unknown 11

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

850 users are online: 850 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49122
Welcome our newest member, Harda621
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM