Login

russian armor

pzgren should be wehr's dedicated tank hunters

PAGES (7)down
28 Mar 2018, 05:45 AM
#101
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Mar 2018, 12:33 PMKatitof

Insane compared to what? Soviets? Because that is the only faction in game that does not have 20 non doctrinal ways to burn muni through upgrades.


So is OKW with more expensive Upgrades, USF and UKF with less effective Upgrades, but ability to get 2 per squad for twice the cost.
I will blow your mind with it, but ost does not have it any worse then other factions and only soviets have it better because they lack non doctrinal Upgrades and muni dumps.



Ost can not afford anything when they Need to pay 60 mun per squad, but USF magically affords to pay 120 mun per squad + use abilities + offmaps. Mmmmkay.


the pressure to upgrade is significantly less on the USF, while the UKF typically go for squad upgrade.

While you will want to buy upgrade for your rifleman eventually, they can actually put it off until significantly later.

By comparsion, the wehr their weaker infantry have a significantly greater need to upgrade.

the panzergrenadier +schreck upgrade just doesn't mesh. The USF typically only need one squad with double bazooka, and usually that's the captain by default. The possibility of using Rear echolen for anti-tank duty is a great convenient.

The UKF does a similar by having Sapper + PIAT. The PTRS on the penal is just enough to fight off the weaker axis light vehicle (now that the Luch got nerfed), while sacrificing less firepower on a cheaper unit.

spending 340 mp on an "elite" anti-infantry to convert it to anti-tank unit just doesn't work.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to make pgrens able to put away their shrecks the same way sturmpios do with sweepers? Costing 340mp and 120muni I think it'd be nice to not make your squad useless vs infantry.


being able to swap on the field would be insanely powerful and render the disadvantage moot.

restricting it to HQ sector seems like it would be over complicating the matter.
28 Mar 2018, 09:28 AM
#102
avatar of Sussenka

Posts: 8

Well okay, swapping weapons on the field might be a bit to much.

But are the schrecks really that good to justify the 120 munitions cost over just getting a pak (which is in the same tech building btw).

I thought that the pgrens areso epxensive 340/42mp afaik, beacuase you're paying for versatility. Right now you're locked in into either AT or AI mode and both seem a bit overcosted.

Though if there is a need to buff pgrens it might be best to just do something simple like reducing reinforce cost a bit rather then trying to be fancy.

edit How about: an ability unlocked with schrecks costs 15 muni, 20 seconds, disables weapons, when it ends equip/unequip schrecks

similar effect to only switching at base, pgrens would be a fun unit but not a kill anything it runs into unit. Though again, ost probably doesn't even need buffed pgrens.
28 Mar 2018, 11:23 AM
#103
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



the pressure to upgrade is significantly less on the USF, while the UKF typically go for squad upgrade.

While you will want to buy upgrade for your rifleman eventually, they can actually put it off until significantly later.

By comparsion, the wehr their weaker infantry have a significantly greater need to upgrade.

the panzergrenadier +schreck upgrade just doesn't mesh. The USF typically only need one squad with double bazooka, and usually that's the captain by default. The possibility of using Rear echolen for anti-tank duty is a great convenient.


Against usf, you can go sniper, which negates the need for LMGs asap and allows you to get shrecks against light.

But I am going to say it again - People expect shrecks to replace ATGs, not to support them and that is not going to happen.
28 Mar 2018, 12:02 PM
#104
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The problem starts from the fact that allies have more cost efficient AI tanks and superior AT infantry.

Guards, AT paratroopers, AT Tommies and AT Conscripts are all durable AT infantry with decent AI for the first 3 and lots of AT utility for conscripts.

And in addition AT weapon are available to cheap infantry like Ro.E. R.E. AT partisan.

AT infantry are much bigger threat to a axis armor than axis AT infantry to allied armor that pose a thread mostly to unsupported TDs.
28 Mar 2018, 17:18 PM
#105
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Mar 2018, 12:02 PMVipper
The problem starts from the fact that allies have more cost efficient AI tanks and superior AT infantry.

Guards, AT paratroopers, AT Tommies and AT Conscripts are all durable AT infantry with decent AI for the first 3 and lots of AT utility for conscripts.

And in addition AT weapon are available to cheap infantry like Ro.E. R.E. AT partisan.

AT infantry are much bigger threat to a axis armor than axis AT infantry to allied armor that pose a thread mostly to unsupported TDs.
u might want to look at their reinforce cost
28 Mar 2018, 17:28 PM
#106
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

u might want to look at their reinforce cost

AT partisans are an infiltration unit that has mines snare and camo.

Cost:
AT partisan 270
SPs 300+70 MU
PGs 340+120 MU

Reinforcement cost:
AT partisan 33
SPs 30
PGs 34

Pop:
AT partisan 8
SPs 8
PGs 9
28 Mar 2018, 17:45 PM
#107
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Mar 2018, 17:28 PMVipper

AT partisans are an infiltration unit that has mines snare and camo.

Cost:
AT partisan 270
SPs 300+70 MU
PGs 340+120 MU

Reinforcement cost:
AT partisan 33
SPs 30
PGs 34

Pop:
AT partisan 8
SPs 8
PGs 9
but when u compare them to re and R.E. they are not cheap
29 Mar 2018, 02:00 AM
#108
avatar of Storm Elite

Posts: 246

Since when is reinforcement cost anything of consequence?

The initial purchase cost is the only thing that matters.

If you aren't brute forcing machine guns or something, reinforcement costs means absolutely nothing.

And yes, the whole scenario of buying an "elite" infantry squad only to make it completely unviable in anti-infantry combat remains farcical, especially given the insane cost. You're spending 120 munitions to invalidate a squad you just bought as the match progresses into mid-game and when you need tougher infantry to fight the enemy's fully upgraded baseline infantry and called in elite infantry, while enemy light tanks zip around and obliterate your infantry.
29 Mar 2018, 03:31 AM
#109
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

This is going to blow your mind storm but... Nobody is forcing you to spend 120mu to "invalidate a squad you bought" its called a CHOICE. Do you want 240 damage worth of hip fire laser guided AT guaranteed to pen each and every single allied stock medium or do you want an AI squad? Nobody is puting a gun to your head. Save the munitions and instead lay 2. Anti tank mines that will OHK the enemy light tanks and have 40% saved towards the next one.
29 Mar 2018, 03:49 AM
#110
avatar of dreamerdude
Benefactor 392

Posts: 374

I would like 1 of what ever you are smoking please


I know right.

OP sharing is caring
29 Mar 2018, 05:03 AM
#111
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Mar 2018, 11:23 AMKatitof

But I am going to say it again - People expect shrecks to replace ATGs, not to support them and that is not going to happen.

This is just a completely nonsensical statement.

is the stuart, Aec, bazooka, PIAT, PTRS, and the T70 all replacement for the 57mm/zis? You have long range range atw (ATG) supported by a short range atw (inf atw/vehicle).

That's how it works. Faust + atg alone is not longer sufficient. The wehr need either the puma or a better designed tank hunter.


This is going to blow your mind storm but... Nobody is forcing you to spend 120mu to "invalidate a squad you bought" its called a CHOICE. Do you want 240 damage worth of hip fire laser guided AT guaranteed to pen each and every single allied stock medium or do you want an AI squad? Nobody is puting a gun to your head. Save the munitions and instead lay 2. Anti tank mines that will OHK the enemy light tanks and have 40% saved towards the next one.


except the allies is quite literally putting a cannon to the head of the axis. Saying that it's a choice is idiotic when it's a choice between death or life.
29 Mar 2018, 05:08 AM
#112
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Since when is reinforcement cost anything of consequence?

The initial purchase cost is the only thing that matters.

Must be the reason why obers, pgrens and couple of other axis infantry got reinforcement cost reduction, but not total cost reduction.
29 Mar 2018, 07:59 AM
#113
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

There is no reinforcement cost reduction the rule simply does not apply.

Most of the units that had their cost changed simply do not follow the original rule of reinforcement cost and that includes a number of allied units.
29 Mar 2018, 09:17 AM
#114
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Mar 2018, 07:59 AMVipper
There is no reinforcement cost reduction the rule simply does not apply.

Most of the units that had their cost changed simply do not follow the original rule of reinforcement cost and that includes a number of allied units.


Please do not state your personal opinions as Facts.

Sturm Pioneers
One of the biggest problems the Sturm Pioneers faced was the expensive manpower cost to reinforce. With the overall design changes to the OKW early game we wanted to make reinforcing Sturm Pioneers less penalizing on the player which will encourage their use in various builds.
•Reinforce cost reduced from 40 to 32


Original cost was 320.
320/4/2=40.
Formula checks out.

Panzergrenadiers

We are looking to minimize the heavy attrition cost of this unit. •Reinforce cost reduced by 10%

Original cost was 360.
Original reinforce cost was 45.
Formula checks out, later on squad and reinforce costs were balanced separately.


Fallschirmjäger

We are looking to minimize the heavy attrition cost of this unit. •Reinforcement cost reduced by 10%

This one is bit more tricky, because of opportunity cost of 80mp originally.
360/4/2 is 45, which is their original reinforce cost.
Formula checks out.

Obersoldaten

We are looking to minimize the heavy attrition cost of this unit •Reinforcement cost reduced by 10%

Original cost was 400.
Original reinforce cost was 50.
Formula checks out.

Infantry Sections
We are addressing the heavy attrition costs that infantry sections have. •Reinforcement cost reduced by 10% (28 per model)


280/4/2=35 which is original reinforce cost.
Formula checks out.

Now, if you still sit in disbelief about reinforce cost rules;

Grenadiers:
240/4/2=30 which is their reinforce cost since forever.
Cons:
240/6/2=20 which is their reinforce cost since forever.
Rifles:
280/5/2=28 which is their reinforce cost since forever.
Volks:
250/5/2=25 which is their reinforce cost since forever.

You can apply this to every single squad that does not spawn on field(you need to subtract opportunity cost and then it checks out, as you see on falls example) and you will get correct results, because formula you pretend does not exist actually does.

At the moment squad and reinforce cost are balanced separately, but all were introduced with a hard rule on these costs being tied together.



29 Mar 2018, 09:41 AM
#115
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Mar 2018, 09:17 AMKatitof


Please do not state your personal opinions as Facts.
...

And you are talking about an October 2015 patch.
Now check guards, Shocks and Penals
or hmgs
or ATGs

Since the "community" patches started they started moving away reinforcement cost, reinforcement time or build times rules.
29 Mar 2018, 09:57 AM
#116
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Mar 2018, 09:41 AMVipper

Now check guards and Shocks.
or hmgs
or ATGs

Since the community patches started they started moving away reinforcement cost, reinforcement time or build times rules.


Ok.

Original cost of Shocks is 360.
360/6/2=30.
Original cost of guards is 360 as well.
Do the reinforce numbers I got with formula resemble anything to you yet?

Both HMGs and ATGs have weapon cost on the gun itself, subtract that and you will end up with weapon crew costs.

ZiS3 gun original cost for example is 180 and original cost of gun+crew was 360.
(360-180)/6/2=15

But ZiS have costed 320 for Ages with 15 reinforce as well, right?
That is because the GUN got cost decrease, not the Crew.
Currently gun costs 140.

(320-140)/6/2=15
Would you look at that?
Everything checks out!

Same applies to maxim, but I got not values for old one anywhere.

Quite a bit of exceptions were made, but many current costs as well as pre-mod era costs all check out with the formula.
29 Mar 2018, 10:32 AM
#117
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Mar 2018, 09:57 AMKatitof

Ok.
...

You seem to need some help, so I will help you.

JUNE 21st BALANCE UPDATE

Penal Battalion

Squad cost increased to 300 manpower from 270 manpower. [No Change in reinforcement cost]
Reinforce time from 4.5 to 5.4. Build time from 27 to 32 seconds. [Built time should 30 reinforcement time should be 5]

MARCH 28th UPDATE
Guards
Manpower cost increased from 330 to 360 [No Change in reinforcement cost or time]

Assault Grenadiers
Reinforce cost lowered from 28 to 26 [No Change in build cost or reinforcement time]

APRIL 25th UPDATE
Maxims
* Reinforcement cost from 15 to 20 [No Change in build cost or reinforcement time]

DECEMBER 19th "COMMUNITY" UPDATE
Penal Battalions
Reinforce cost from 25 to 27 [No Change in build cost or reinforcement time]

Sturmpioneers
Build time from 40 to 28
Reinforce time from 10 to 7
[changes do not follow the rules]

Obersoldaten
Cost from 400 to 340
Population from 10 to 9
Reinforce time from 12.5 to 9.
Build time from 50 to 36
[changes do not follow the rules]


Fixed an issue where OKW starting weapon crew stats were superior to other faction weapon crews, and on-par with mainline infantry
[changes do not follow the rules]

Shock Troops
Reinforcement time from 6.5 to 5.5
Reinforcement cost from 33 to 31
[changes do not follow the rules]

Osttruppen call-in ability now starts on cooldown.
Reinforce time from 2 to 3.5
Ability recharge from 10 to 25
[changes do not follow the rules]

Airborne Pathfinders
Reinforce cost from 37 to 30
Reinforce time from 7 to 6
[changes do not follow the rules]

I&R Pathfinders
Cost from 210 to 250
Reinforce cost from 35 to 30
Squad size from 3 to 4
[changes do not follow the rules]

Assault Engineers
Reinforcement cost from 35 to 30
[changes do not follow the rules]

Fallschirmjäger
Cost from 440 to 380
Reinforce cost from 38 to 36
[changes do not follow the rules]

Infiltration Commandos
Cost from 440 to 370
[changes do not follow the rules]

DShK 38 HMG
Reinforcement cost from 15 to 20
[changes do not follow the rules]

Commandos
Reinforcement time from 8.5 to 7.25
[changes do not follow the rules]


In other words the majority of units that had their priced changed in "community" patches no longer follows the rules. That is simply a fact and not my opinion.

Now can we get back on topic instead of you making numerous posts for the sole purpose of trying to prove me wrong?
29 Mar 2018, 11:13 AM
#118
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

And for the quiet reader, who is more interested about the subject that is being discussed and doesn't care about all the personal quarrels (without pointing the finger at anyone), what is the conclusion of these walls of text in a nice single summarized sentence?

Unbiased response, please, without squeezing in any Axis/Allies is advantaged/disadvantaged thing or opinions.
29 Mar 2018, 11:28 AM
#119
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

And for the quiet reader, who is more interested about the subject that is being discussed and doesn't care about all the personal quarrels (without pointing the finger at anyone), what is the conclusion of these walls of text in a nice single summarized sentence?

That Relic is moving away from the rules that tied linearly reinforcement cost, reinforcement time and build time to original cost of a unit.

And that axis faction do not have an advantage because of these differences.

It is also my opinion that these values should be standardized across faction according to unit type and faction design. Type could include auxiliary, mainline, support weapon, elite.
29 Mar 2018, 14:11 PM
#120
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Mar 2018, 11:28 AMVipper

That Relic is moving away from the rules that tied linearly reinforcement cost, reinforcement time and build time to original cost of a unit.

Which also was my point, if you managed to actually comprehend what you have read.

I have said there was a strict formula, which was used for reinforcing costs and after some time it was not as strictly followed as plenty of exceptions appeard, you denied existence of the formula in the first place, I have proven you otherwise.

And that axis faction do not have an advantage because of these differences.

No one ever said a word about this being advantage or not, there was a simple statement that majority of axis infantry are subjects to the exception from the rule.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

567 users are online: 567 guests
0 post in the last 24h
2 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49389
Welcome our newest member, Haruta446
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM