OstGrenadeers - glasscannon with no damage.

Well, everybody knows, that Ostheer weak point was and still is infantry. Soviet infantry goes up, specially with incoming patches, and that's great (now they will only need to fix the Maxim or add some kind of HMG bunker/position), but why not to do the same for Ostheer infantry, which is also in pretty poor state?

A lot of times people suggested to add 5th ubermenschsoldat into squad, but... that was already used for UKF (and what for, actually? even 4 men tommies squads tearing everything apart in late, never used that upgrade and they were still dominative). I think, there should be some work done with grens late game accuracy or/and with LMG-42 stats. Cos really, it's pretty funny to look, how 2 Tommy squads take absolutely no damage from my 2 LMG-42ed squads of grens, while tommies just sniping my troops with each 3rd shot. I guess, there are more problems with tommies themselvs, than with grens (cos really, mainline infantry with lowest for mainline troops recived accuracy (or target size) stats and with really nice rate of fire and their own accuracy on guns), but... grens still could be improved. I think, that there should be veterancy modificators to grens accuracy, which will allow them to... kinda ignore recived accuracy bonuses of veterancy of opponent infantry squads. It might sound OP, but... for such fragile 4 men squad, which main power is ability, to do high damage from range - it's fair deal. No need to improve their survivability and ruin their design - support their glasscannon style design with such improvement, and... maybe grens won't suck so much in late against overveted tommies, yankees or vanyas...

And one more - LMG-42. It also has awful accuracy, really, which really breaks all profits from gaining that gun for squad. Seriously, it's better even not to give them that LMG and keep 1 more mauser for squad, cos mausers do way more DPS, than LMGs (from my own experience, obviously, but that happens almost all the time with me, so...). And more than that - when my gren squad takes droped BaR or Bren, they usualy start to deal real damage, so - problem is in LMG-42. Would be nice to have that fixed, give to that LMG more accuracy too, so it would worth to buy it.

cos mausers do way more DPS, than LMGs (from my own experience, obviously, but that happens almost all the time with me, so...)

Kark98 damage: 5.988 3.001 2.263
LMG 42 damage: 6.517 9.43 9.407

at short range, LMG 42 do a little more damage than kark 98, at mid distance, it does 3X more damage, and at far range it does 3.61X more damage

So at mid and long range, 1 lmg 42 damage is "equal" to others damage, if you keep not moving its like having 6 grenadiers ( entity ) firing

If you think that lmg 42 do less damage, its maybe cause =

- moving to much ?
- engaging at close range ?

And for information, LMG 42 does more damage than Bren

Bar will be good at close and mid range, and allow you to move, but in anycase bar can win in term of damage against an immobile lmg42 at mid and long range

Maybe lmg42 doesnt fit your playstyle, you should try using more G43 with grens.
or use panzergrenadiers

And for information, LMG 42 does more damage than Bren

Bar will be good at close and mid range, and allow you to move, but in anycase bar can win in term of damage against an immobile lmg42 at mid and long range

Aside from the MG 42 not being the right way to balance Grenadiers, you severely misrepresent the BAR. A Rifleman Squad with a single BAR will beat Grens with an MG 42 at any but the longest ranges - no, the MG 42 does not magically outperform the BAR at medium range, not when the BAR deals two times the damage at close range (as it currently does). Then there's of course the Bren, which simply can't perform on the same level as the MG 42, as it comes on a potential 5 man squad that already massively outperforms almost any other infantry unit (when sitting in cover). Giving Infantry Sections even more firepower by buffing the Bren would be more than just stupidity.

As I said, the MG 42 is not the way to balance Grenadiers. Ostheer already demands way too much ammunition investment to stay on the same level (not even to outperform, just to be equal) as other factions. Emphasising that even more would corner Ostheer even more - just as beating up the fat, ugly kid in school isn't very heroic.
The balance approach should rather come from either adjusting the other infantry units, or by re-evaluating veterancy bonuses. Sadly the Winter Balance Preview focusses most of its energy on relatively sideline topics, instead of finally tackling the major infantry problems, so we will most likely not see anything happen here anytime soon. Sure, there are some adjustments of veterancy bonuses, but what has been shown so far are negligible changes at best.

Aside from the MG 42 not being the right way to balance Grenadiers, you severely misrepresent the BAR. A Rifleman Squad with a single BAR will beat Grens with an MG 42 at any but the longest ranges - no, the MG 42 does not magically outperform the BAR at medium range, not when the BAR deals two times the damage at close range (as it currently does). Then there's of course the Bren, which simply can't perform on the same level as the MG 42, as it comes on a potential 5 man squad that already massively outperforms almost any other infantry unit (when sitting in cover). Giving Infantry Sections even more firepower by buffing the Bren would be more than just stupidity.

As I said, the MG 42 is not the way to balance Grenadiers. Ostheer already demands way too much ammunition investment to stay on the same level (not even to outperform, just to be equal) as other factions. Emphasising that even more would corner Ostheer even more - just as beating up the fat, ugly kid in school isn't very heroic.
The balance approach should rather come from either adjusting the other infantry units, or by re-evaluating veterancy bonuses. Sadly the Winter Balance Preview focusses most of its energy on relatively sideline topics, instead of finally tackling the major infantry problems, so we will most likely not see anything happen here anytime soon. Sure, there are some adjustments of veterancy bonuses, but what has been shown so far are negligible changes at best.

I had a look at the stats.

DPS with a single BAR/LMG42/Bren:

Squad	DPS(Close)	DPS(Far)	Vet 3 DPS(Close)	Vet 3 DPS(Far)
BAR Riflemen	41.01	13.09	57.1	18.28
LMG42 Grenadiers	23.61	17.06	33.25	25.64
Bren IS (in cover)	18.63	17.22	26.26	22.43

Effective Squad Health:

Squad	Vet 0	Vet 3
Grenadiers	352	457
Riflemen	412	669
Infantry Sections (in cover)	444	585
Infantry Sections (out of cover)	400	526

The stats certainly agree with you on the BAR. It effectively adds an additional Rifleman to the squad at long range which heavily impacts Grenadiers while its close-range damage makes it difficult to use Panzergrenadiers.

Oddly enough, Infantry Sections don't massively outperform DPS-wise. Their durability will allow them to win any long-range firefights but a competent player can simply rush them with CQC infantry.

I certainly agree with you that Grenadiers (and their LMG42) aren't really the problem.

Aside from the MG 42 not being the right way to balance Grenadiers, you severely misrepresent the BAR. A Rifleman Squad with a single BAR will beat Grens with an MG 42 at any but the longest ranges - no, the MG 42 does not magically outperform the BAR at medium range, not when the BAR deals two times the damage at close range (as it currently does). Then there's of course the Bren, which simply can't perform on the same level as the MG 42, as it comes on a potential 5 man squad that already massively outperforms almost any other infantry unit (when sitting in cover). Giving Infantry Sections even more firepower by buffing the Bren would be more than just stupidity.

As I said, the MG 42 is not the way to balance Grenadiers. Ostheer already demands way too much ammunition investment to stay on the same level (not even to outperform, just to be equal) as other factions. Emphasising that even more would corner Ostheer even more - just as beating up the fat, ugly kid in school isn't very heroic.
The balance approach should rather come from either adjusting the other infantry units, or by re-evaluating veterancy bonuses. Sadly the Winter Balance Preview focusses most of its energy on relatively sideline topics, instead of finally tackling the major infantry problems, so we will most likely not see anything happen here anytime soon. Sure, there are some adjustments of veterancy bonuses, but what has been shown so far are negligible changes at best.

Nice analysis, but i fail to see where you saw i was talking of ranger ? We are talking of grens, LMG, and Bars, i was comparing Gren with bars ( obviously picked up ) and grens with LMG42

I had a look at the stats.

DPS with a single BAR/LMG42/Bren:

Squad	DPS(Close)	DPS(Far)	Vet 3 DPS(Close)	Vet 3 DPS(Far)
BAR Riflemen	41.01	13.09	57.1	18.28
LMG42 Grenadiers	23.61	17.06	33.25	25.64
Bren IS (in cover)	18.63	17.22	26.26	22.43

Effective Squad Health:

Squad	Vet 0	Vet 3
Grenadiers	352	457
Riflemen	412	669
Infantry Sections (in cover)	444	585
Infantry Sections (out of cover)	400	526

The stats certainly agree with you on the BAR. It effectively adds an additional Rifleman to the squad at long range which heavily impacts Grenadiers while its close-range damage makes it difficult to use Panzergrenadiers.

Oddly enough, Infantry Sections don't massively outperform DPS-wise. Their durability will allow them to win any long-range firefights but a competent player can simply rush them with CQC infantry.

I certainly agree with you that Grenadiers (and their LMG42) aren't really the problem.

Bren problem is the insane reload time, 8 sec i think ?

Puzzling title. "Cannon" means high damage dealt.

Puzzling title. "Cannon" means high damage dealt.

In that case "cannon" means design of them, no damage - poor reality, where grens can't stand against tommies or yanks, and unlike OKW you can't call Obers for to punish your opponent for relying on infantry - Grens (without doctrines) are your only choise of AI infantry, cos PzGrens... well... cost too much, just a bit less fragile, not really good as AI unit.

Invissed a post for spam and the one quoting it.

Grens (without doctrines) are your only choise of AI infantry, cos PzGrens... well... cost too much, just a bit less fragile, not really good as AI unit.

You misconcept the role of Grenadiers. Grenadiers are not Wehrmacht's main AI damage dealer, they are there to form a frontline for other units to deal damage (MG42s + Mortars + Paks + Panzergrens + Wehrmacht's armour units). There's a reason why Osttruppen just feels better than Grens, cause they are more durable and better at forming/holding a frontline than Grens.

Also, about Panzergrenadiers, they cost less than Obers (340MP to Obers' 400MP), lower reinforement cost (35MP to Obers' 40MP)‎, come out way earlier than Obers, don't need upgrade to be good at AI (They are already extremely good with 4 StG44s) while still can be a good AT units when you need. Panzergrens are way better than you think! Even better than Obers if you know how to properly use them (While Obers excel at long-range combat, Panzergrens are literal gods at close-to-medium range, non-doctrinal wise)‎

Oddly enough, Infantry Sections don't massively outperform DPS-wise. Their durability will allow them to win any long-range firefights but a competent player can simply rush them with CQC infantry.

I guess a competent player mods the game in order to have access to such cqc troops.

I can't think of a single reason why glass cannon design is a good idea for any infantry unit. Especially with all the HE shells falling/flying in from so many different units throughout any given match.

If this game is about unit preservation and veterancy, all infantry units (maybe with the exception of infiltration ones, but they're another story altogether) need to be reasonably durable, at least in cover.

And if the Grens and Panzergrens were created as 4-model squads because of some kind of historical reference, the Ostheer numbered nearly a million more frontline personnel than the Red Army in 1941, so there is no basis for that either.

Just either make both of these squads 5-model, or improve their durability in addition to the upcoming WBP squad clumping/USF mortar fixes.

I can't think of a single reason why glass cannon design is a good idea for any infantry unit. Especially with all the HE shells falling/flying in from so many different units throughout any given match.

If this game is about unit preservation and veterancy, all infantry units (maybe with the exception of infiltration ones, but they're another story altogether) need to be reasonably durable, at least in cover.

And if the Grens and Panzergrens were created as 4-model squads because of some kind of historical reference, the Ostheer numbered nearly a million more frontline personnel than the Red Army in 1941, so there is no basis for that either.

Just either make both of these squads 5-model, or improve their durability in addition to the upcoming WBP squad clumping/USF mortar fixes.

You cannot improve squad durability against shells (aoe weapons, also counting grenades, mortart sheells, tank shells etc) except by 2 things. Squad spacing and number of members where squad spacing is more important because weapons deal aoe, so more members won´t help you that much if they are clumped.

Recived accuracy have nothing to do with aoe shells, only affects small arms fire.

Green cover reduces damage taken from shells and explosives by 50%.


So after all, fixing squad spacing in the open was best think that modders could have done for next patch.
(will be live in february I think)

In lategame I recommend you either staying in green cover or going in the open against enemy with lots of aoe weapons, because yellow cover doesn´t give you any cover from explosives and units clump there most

Theory has nothing to actuall game play , If grneadiers are not moving they gonna get wiped by USF and Brit morartar at second shell.

Theory has nothing to actuall game play , If grneadiers are not moving they gonna get wiped by USF and Brit morartar at second shell.

IS get wiped by second doubleleigt shot as well if not moving. (UKF mortar have 2 mortars in 1 pit).

Its job of mortars. Keep in mind that mortar means 1 less squad on field for player so you can push and force mortar to retreat. Then cap cut off and get tank faster to outbleed him

IS get wiped by second doubleleigt shot as well if not moving. (UKF mortar have 2 mortars in 1 pit).

Its job of mortars. Keep in mind that mortar means 1 less squad on field for player so you can push and force mortar to retreat. Then cap cut off and get tank faster to outbleed him

You should probably stop with the theory and play more.

USF mortar is so strong vs Ostheer that it doesn't mean anything like "1 less squad on the field". I have countless of squad wiped or half dead in one or two shots that I, as Ostheer player, have "1 less squad on the field" after a couple of minutes.

Ostheer are designed for defensive static play.

USF mortar denies that type of play from Ostheer...

I really hope that nerf for it in WBP are enough...

You should probably stop with the theory and play more.

USF mortar is so strong vs Ostheer that it doesn't mean anything like "1 less squad on the field". I have countless of squad wiped or half dead in one or two shots that I, as Ostheer player, have "1 less squad on the field" after a couple of minutes.

USA mortar is overperforming. Thats also why it get smaller range compared to other mortars in next patch on top of some stat nerfs.