Ostheer infantry scaling

The misinformation and theory crafting in this thread is disgusting.

Veterancy awarded and squad value follow the same formula for 90% of the squads in the game. Dividing the manpower cost of the squad by the number of models and acting like this is a useful metric is moronic.

XP awarded for damaging/killing an entity is related to cost of entity itself and not the actual squad value. So one has to divide the squad value by the number of entities. Thus the argument that axis vet faster for attacking more expensive squads hold little water, if their is advantage allied infantry have it for firing on more expensive entities.

I do agree that it WFA that need to be toned to EFA level and not the other way round.

XP awarded for damaging/killing an entity is related to cost of entity itself and not the actual squad value. So one has to divide the squad value by the number of entities. Thus the argument that axis vet faster for attacking more expensive squads hold little water, if their is advantage allied infantry have it for firing on more expensive entities.

I do agree that it WFA that need to be toned to EFA level and not the other way round.

The cost of the entity itself is related to the squad value....
Killing half of a penal squad is worth more than killing half of a grenadier squad.

Squad balance and dps is designed to reflect the differences in number of models.




This is fairly off-topic anyways, I don't believe the difference is meaningful enough to matter. The actual combat effectiveness of the units offsets the increased vet they give out.

The cost of the entity itself is related to the squad value....

No it is related to the squad value divided to number of models. As simple as that. The XP rewarded are exactly that (multiplied for each vet level as pointed out by Mr.Smith)

Killing half of a penal squad is worth more than killing half of a grenadier squad.

Yes but 3 Penal model have more Hp and more EFH then 2 grenadier models.

Squad balance and dps is designed to reflect the differences in number of models.

This is fairly off-topic anyways, I don't believe the difference is meaningful enough to matter. The actual combat effectiveness of the units offsets the increased vet they give out.

As you have pointed out there is little balance in WFA armies and EFA. A heavy sapper with 3 LMGs (2 V-k 1 bren) is hardly balanced in DPS or as squad cost.

In the end of the you seem to agree with my point. Axis infantry do not have advantage in veting faster for attacking higher value squads.

No it is related to the squad value divided to number of models. As simple as that. The XP rewarded are exactly that (multiplied for each vet level as pointed out by Mr.Smith)

Yes but 3 Penal model have more Hp and more EFH then 2 grenadier models.

That is still based on the initial value of the squad. 400 MP obers are worth more than 240 MP grens, even though they have the same number of men. You need to be looking at the squad as a whole, not the individual numbers. Individually a grenadier model is more expensive and does more dps at all ranges than a penal model, but making that comparison is highly misleading. Grens are designed to fight larger squads, penals are designed to fight smaller squads. The only way to see a real value is to look at the starting manpower price.

As you have pointed out there is little balance in WFA armies and EFA. A heavy sapper with 3 LMGs (2 V-k 1 bren) is hardly balanced in DPS or as squad cost.

In the end of the you seem to agree with my point. Axis infantry do not have advantage in veting faster for attacking higher value squads.

I agree with your point, but you are arriving at that conclusion wrong.

Everyone derailing my thread

Ostheer infantry scale better with a 251 nearby. The problem is its fuel cost and being super weak vs small arm fire.
The 251 should be the backbone of Ostheer infantry so they can stay on the field longer.
If we could somehow remove the flamer upgrade and improve the 251 resiliency vs small arm fire and light tank, the balance would probably be restored without having to nerf or buff that much any infantry units.

Vs infantry = increase its armor value.
Vs LT = give 251 a native smoke so it has more chances to escape.

Ostheer infantry scale better with a 251 nearby. The problem is its fuel cost and being super weak vs small arm fire.
The 251 should be the backbone of Ostheer infantry so they can stay on the field longer.
If we could somehow remove the flamer upgrade and improve the 251 resiliency vs small arm fire and light tank, the balance would probably be restored without having to nerf or buff that much any infantry units.

Vs infantry = increase its armor value.
Vs LT = give 251 a native smoke so it has more chances to escape.

Would be cool if the 251 could be upgraded to a forward retreat and reinforcement point. It would require an upgrade on the 251 for like 250-300 mp and a like 45-50 fuel, it could be a toggle ability and make the vehicle immobile when activated and perhaps gives a little more hp or armor to the 251. This would make it potent but also risky since the 251 is fragile.

That is still based on the initial value of the squad. 400 MP obers are worth more than 240 MP grens, even though they have the same number of men. You need to be looking at the squad as a whole, not the individual numbers. Individually a grenadier model is more expensive and does more dps at all ranges than a penal model, but making that comparison is highly misleading. Grens are designed to fight larger squads, penals are designed to fight smaller squads. The only way to see a real value is to look at the starting manpower price.

Not when it comes to XP reward. In the exact same way that XP rewarded for damaging a vehicle is related to damage done divided by total HP pool of the unit, the same applies to infantry squads.

Since most squad have 80 HP entities both the number of entities (number of squad entities X 80 = total HP pool) and the cost of squad are equally important. The initial value of unit on it own does not mean much, since it has to be multiplied by damage done/total HP.

I have nothing more to add on this matter so if you want to, will have to agree to disagree.

(Actually Penal SVT slightly more DPS at range 10 than Grenadier 98K.)

Penals wreck Grens. If both are in green cover and at range, penals beat lmg grens in a 1v1. Unvetted Penals beat vet 2 Grens.

Protip: Never 1v1 allied infantry with Grens. Unless they are conscripts, or you can get the drop on some Tommies out of cover. But even then the matchup is wildly inconsistent.

Volks are capable of 1v1ing conscripts and rifles with surprisingly consistency so long as they have the same or better cover. However at close quarters without the benefits of cover rifles or in open cover rifles will beat volks with pretty good reliability. Conscripts kinda just lose but sometimes win at close range versus Volks.

So here's another angle: cover. Cover is HUGE in this game. The better cover pretty much always wins. Moving will also spell defeat for just about any squad except Penals. Penals get stronger as they lose models and pretty much wreck face at 2man.

Yellow cover reduces incoming fire accuracy by 50%.
Green cover reduces accuracy AND damage from incoming fire by 50%.

If cover is matched, then yellow cover actually works against axis squads. Reduction of accuracy impacts small numbered squads relying on fewer, stronger hits far more than weapons like SVTs and Garands (or BARs for that matter).

Green cover, however, is what gives Axis the real advantage. They need that damage reduction bonus to survive the onslaught. But to keep in mind they have to somehow stay in cover and stay at range.

The fact that cover is negated at less than 10 meters is also HUGE. Damage and accuracy reduction go out the window. Penals or Rifles in a group can afford to take losses and even have a squad retreat, but once closed in, their damage output just can't be matched.

This is why MGs are so important to this game. They are what prevent the enemy from charging out of cover and into point blank range.

Protip: Don't use MGs on the frontline to fight enemy infantry. Use your MGs to cover your infantry.

since alli have so much arty..its more dangerouse to stay in cover...than move your units and lose models...i lost so much squads with the first arty shell...its horrible..

Protip: Don't use MGs on the frontline to fight enemy infantry. Use your MGs to cover your infantry.

And then we're back to square one, because countering Allied infantry requires much more resources and micro than Ostheer infantry. At the same time, the enemy also has all the necessary tools to completely negate your micro and resource investment, because mortars just wait for your units to stay still for more than a second.

Of course that also holds true for Brits, but there is a significant difference at play here: Tommies can actually do something at range instead of uselessly plinking away at far away units with no discernible effect.

Kind of back to square one. This usage of MGs has always been a component of the game. But strong t0 units and powerful mortars have not.

The USF mortar is indeed a critical error being t0. The availability of strong indirect fire without having to make a strategic decision is what makes USF, and somewhat Brits just problematic by default.

Soviets at the very least have to make the choice between their first 2 tiers. However with T2 having maxims and ZiS, (and with Guard Motor having the 120mm), Soviet access to mortars is really not lacking at all.

Allies having larger squad sizes and superior infantry are supposed to be comparable to the superior suppression platforms of the MG42. But the MG42 is typically pre-countered by any Allied build or strategy.

And this means Ostheer typically has to get a mortar themselves, which is also available early, to try and counter the mortars/draw mortar fire from infantry/MGs.

(And OKW is just lulz with a late MG34 and no mortar at all.)

But I think it's worth pointing out that I would argue that "Soviets v Ostheer" is an entirely different game than "USF v OKW" or any matchup involving the Brits.

Other stuff

But I think it's worth pointing out that I would argue that "Soviets v Ostheer" is an entirely different game than "USF v OKW" or any matchup involving the Brits.

I agree with everything you said and especially the last part. Soviets V Ost is an enjoyable and fair match up, even when considering how cheese from both sides can drag that down. Ost vs USF and UKF isn´t really fun or fair, since USF dominates Ost and UKF can get raped early game by Ost but Ost can get raped mid and late game by UKF. OKW isn´t really that much of a bright star vs any of the allied factions. It suffers vs maxim spam, if suffers to USF rifle spam as it has no early supression platform, and it sufers vs UKF since it can´t do anything against the superior and spammy indirect on map and off map fire from the UKF. Doesn't mean OKW has no cheese, but far less strong than UKF or USF.

Was watching a Propagandacast and was reminded of this thread...



Wounded 4-man USF squad wanders over, picks up an enemy MG, and walks away before the next wave of enemy squads arrives on the spot.

Hmm, I guess I should do that too, since it gives such a great tactical advantage and will surely help w--oh, wait, I CAN'T, because as soon as my squads lose ONE MODEL (instantly), they can't grab setup weapons anymore.

And I remember someone saying something like, "4-man squads are a disadvantage, deal with it."

Amazing reasoning. Just perfect. People should just deal with being at an inherent disadvantage for no apparent reason. And no, the blatantly manufactured "defensive/offensive faction" classification that Relic put out in their pathetic attempt to do less redesign work is not a valid reason.

Try G43/relief infantry spam for unbeatable infantry scaling.

Was watching a Propagandacast and was reminded of this thread...



Wounded 4-man USF squad wanders over, picks up an enemy MG, and walks away before the next wave of enemy squads arrives on the spot.

Hmm, I guess I should do that too, since it gives such a great tactical advantage and will surely help w--oh, wait, I CAN'T, because as soon as my squads lose ONE MODEL (instantly), they can't grab setup weapons anymore.

And I remember someone saying something like, "4-man squads are a disadvantage, deal with it."

Amazing reasoning. Just perfect. People should just deal with being at an inherent disadvantage for no apparent reason. And no, the blatantly manufactured "defensive/offensive faction" classification that Relic put out in their pathetic attempt to do less redesign work is not a valid reason.

well, technically, picking up support weapons is even possible with only 2 squad members left, and sometimes sacrificing a pio or gren squad to grab a pak from your opponent is very well worth it. although of course i get where you're coming from.
still, it's a design feature inherent to the game just as so many other asymmetric elements of the coh series - and instead of going on a crusade against this and relic in general with every post you make i'd suggest: deal with it!

Well..from the side as alli..u can easy say: deal with it..it is a asymmetric element..

BUT:

it´s is such a a huge disadvantage...in late game, vs indirect hit, wiping potencial etc, take team weapons etc..

why should it be wrong to get a 5model if u tech and build t4?

t4 is crap and u will not really rewarded for it...so ur grens should get a 5model to deal in endgame...cause endgame means: lot of arty, lot of wipeing maschine like shermans, comets, t34 etc, abbandon teamweopnas etc


so: don´t be a alli-lover and tell BS

Allied infantry isn't the problem really, it's the calliope/landmattress that wipes OH infantry with ease (that you find nearly every game)

Allies can comfortably go these doctorins and units because AXIS as a WHOLE has no shock tanks

As I keep repeating myself, allies tanks have excellent AI, so busting out a Medium most of the time isn't for the AT, it's for the AI.

So instead of looking to buff OH units, buff the fucking p4 or the oswtind or the panthers AI so allies don't blindly rush the damn tanks with double LMG blobbs. Backed by AT support.

You wouldn't dare to rush a Cromwell/Comet/Sherman/t34/is2/isu152 with a gren squad, or a gren LMG blobb at that so why should you be able to rush the axis counter part knowingly your chances of even getting his is minimal

Also, i think 1919s are fine due to the unit having to be stationary, bars are a problem because it's legit walk and shoot with easily the best stalk unit in the game.

You guys need to start looking at the obvious here

Oh and on another note, how often do you see a undoctorinal panzerwerfer vs landmattress/calliopes? Even katushas at that. Pin point accuracy/suppression (which the panzerwerfer Claims to have both) isn't what is wanted or needed. It's multiple rocket salvos with high damage and wide area of impact. Because your chances of wiping a squad or purely causing havoc on the enemy lines is common. Smh come on people

Reminder that due to giving Wehr more Openers they put the MG42 a tier zero, which eventually led us to US having a T0 mortar to counter that, such actions always have consequences.

Reminder that due to giving Wehr more Openers they put the MG42 a tier zero, which eventually led us to US having a T0 mortar to counter that, such actions always have consequences.

yeah....where is the early counter on OKW side vs MG spam?