I haven't seen a Soviet AT gun in at least six months.

can someone tell my why guards have 4 weapon slots (2ptrs + 2 dps)? while mostly every other infantery has only 2?

let them get only 2 weapons. choose one: AI or AT or a mixed 1 ptrs + 1dps

I'd take pure AI guards over current guards any day.

I think many of us saw ocassions when players decided to not pick up dropped PTRSes just to have that extra Mosin rifles.

"Specialist" isn't a some sort of special rank, it's a statement of function. You've got generalist units which do a bit of everything, and specialist units that are very good at one or two things and are not good at anything else.

Take the OKW Panzer IV and the Jagdpanzer IV. They cost almost the same. The Jagdpanzer IV is far better than the OKW P4 at fighting armour, but the OKW Panzer IV can fight infantry too. Specialist versus generalist.

Obersoldaten are anti-infantry specialists: they can't do anything to armor. Guards are generalists: they've got solid anti-infantry performance and some light anti-armour weaponary.

Therefore Obers should probably outperform Guards in infantry combat, and they usually just about do.

I understand this^. My point still stands.

I'd take pure AI guards over current guards any day.

I think many of us saw ocassions when players decided to not pick up dropped PTRSes just to have that extra Mosin rifles.

Mosin has only better DPS below 10 meters and can fire on the move. Not sure why one would not pick up a guards PTRS.

Mosin has only better DPS below 10 meters and can fire on the move. Not sure why one would not pick up a guards PTRS.

Check the stats. Guard Mosin has more DPS than guard PTRS at any range.

Check the stats. Guard Mosin has more DPS than guard PTRS at any range.

What is your source of stats? Because you are wrong.

u dont realize that that guards only so strong because of well AT dmg?

no one would have problem with an only AI unit...like an ober. one light tank can push it away....try this vs guards and u will lose it fast.

or only AT....pgrens are a fear for armor..right. but laughable vs other infantery

We are not going offtopic with memes here. Keep these out of this thread.

u dont realize that that guards only so strong because of well AT dmg?

no one would have problem with an only AI unit...like an ober. one light tank can push it away....try this vs guards and u will lose it fast.

or only AT....pgrens are a fear for armor..right. but laughable vs other infantery

That is where you are wrong. It was suggested a long while back to try having guards call in without PTRS or DP-28s. This would require the squad to invest in munis to achieve a generalist squad.

This was even back when PTRS were very effective AI weapons. The idea that guards would no longer be panic PTRS and also have a high muni investment was deemed laughably OP and unbalanced. (Even though at the time it was an AI nerf. I remember the notion that a guards squad with dp28s would have slots to steal lmg42s was what killed the idea.) The decision was to instead focus all resources on penal battalions.

And so we saw the short lived ppsh+flamethrower version of Penals... which set the landscape for penal PTRS.

Guards without PTRS are essentially the infantry squad Soviets have always desired, but always denied.

That is where you are wrong. It was suggested a long while back to try having guards call in without PTRS or DP-28s. This would require the squad to invest in munis to achieve a generalist squad.

This was even back when PTRS were very effective AI weapons. The idea that guards would no longer be panic PTRS and also have a high muni investment was deemed laughably OP and unbalanced. (Even though at the time it was an AI nerf. I remember the notion that a guards squad with dp28s would have slots to steal lmg42s was what killed the idea.) The decision was to instead focus all resources on penal battalions.

And so we saw the short lived ppsh+flamethrower version of Penals... which set the landscape for penal PTRS.

Guards without PTRS are essentially the infantry squad Soviets have always desired, but always denied.

What makes you think that Guard's PTRS are not effective AI weapons?
Do you consider the Gaurd's mosins an effective AI weapon?

What makes you think that Guard's PTRS are not effective AI weapons?
Do you consider the Gaurd's mosins an effective AI weapon?

You do remember guards PTRS had the same accuracy they have now, but dealt 40 damage instead of 27 to infantry?

Guards PTRS was always effective AI weapon, it simply used to be much more effective then it is now.

You do remember guards PTRS had the same accuracy they have now, but dealt 40 damage instead of 27 to infantry?

Guards PTRS was always effective AI weapon, it simply used to be much more effective then it is now.

That is incorrect. It use to be bad vs infantry because it had 0.03/0.0425 /0.055 accuracy.

Then they relished it was op as hell with new accuracy and the damage was reduce from 40 to 27.

That is incorrect. It use to be bad vs infantry because it had 0.03/0.0425 /0.055 accuracy.

Then they relished it was op as hell with new accuracy and the damage was reduce from 40 to 27.

I'm having trouble following here -- so they realized it was bad against infantry and nerfed it's AI ability anyway?

The point still stands. Where's the line between how much value in resources a "specialist" title is worth? 50mp? 100mp? What factions get to use them? who doesn't? etc

Specialist is more of a role, there isnt really a "cost" with it but what the unit does, Obers, Falls, Shocks, Commandos, Rangers, Paratroopers, etc are all AI specialists. While Shrek Pgrens, AT Penals or Cons, AT Tommies etc are all AT specialists. Guards are special because they are a generalist good AI but weak but still notable AT. An AI specialist of the same cost or greater shouldn't lose to Guards. Falls lost pretty handily in my experience and Obers lose with a vet advantage Guards have which is likely considering how late Obers come out compared to Guards.

Guards are a tough nut. They are expensive to start with, coming with slightly weaker AI in favor of slightly weak AT. They they buy an expensive AI upgrade that all but disables fire on the move. No they shouldn't be beating Obers, but should certainly give grens and volks a thrashing shouldn't they?

Guards should easily give Grens and Volks a beating. But other comparable AI specialists should do better against them (IE Falls and Obers).

Well, if you look at guards weapons, you'll notice that they most certainly are AI specialist with limited AT capability(they will chase off light, but medium will stomp them).

They do not have anything AT specialists have, no burst AT weapon, no AT snare and most certainly, no reliable AT weapon.

They are also fitting the soviet theme of units doing multiple roles at once, like ZiS and SU-76.

I agree that Guards should favor the AI role compared to the AT role, but still I think Axis AI specialists should be able to beat them since these AI specialists bring a lot less Utility to the table. Even if Guards do peanut damage to medium tanks (as it should be) They still have that button which can be great in certain situations along with being able to do AT damage. That still gives them a Generalist role compared to other AI or AT specialists.

Which Axis AI specialist unit loses to Guards? I am really curious.

Falls lose pretty handily, obers will likely lose early considering the vet difference.

I'm having trouble following here -- so they realized it was bad against infantry and nerfed it's AI ability anyway?

PTRS use to have very little AI due to low accuracy, even lower than the one Penal now have.

"Guard Troops
Our team determined that as one of the worst rifles/AT in the game, changes to the PTRS were necessary in order to make it a bit more sufficient at its role. Its damage profile remains the same, so damage will still be relative to current values.

PTRS Accuracy increased from 0.03 / 0.0425 / 0.055 to 0.22 / 0.50 / 0.60"

Then typically Relic over buffed

"PTRS rifle

Damage reduced from 40 to 27
13 Bonus damage added vs vehicles"

Then they had to nerf again.

Ah, I see.

Now I'm curious to try the SVT Guards rifle squad from lend lease. Though I think they are a bit gimped by normal standards since they get PPSH instead of DPs.

What is your source of stats? Because you are wrong.

cruzz data sheet... it isn´t wrong

Falls lose pretty handily, obers will likely lose early considering the vet difference.

You made one massive oversight.

You did not specified distance.

Falls will lose at long range, because they are NOT long range infantry - their weapon profile, similarly to volks, allows them to position themselves at distance they would have advantage as their DPS is very good at all ranges, but not excellent at any given, like Obers long range with LMG or shocks short range.

Falls will beat without much effort guards at close range, if you test it at any other range, you put guards at favorable position.

PGs at CQC will eat guards alife while having similar menpower cost(or is it same already? I stopped keeping up with 50 guards cost changes a year), but won't stand a chance at long range.

If you are including vet for one, but not equal vet for other, you also put a bias into the comparison, sure guards will have higher vet when obers arrive, but that isn't how you should test them against each other and even if, if you go for IR STGs, Obers will roflstomp guards at CQC even at vet0.

cruzz data sheet... it isn´t wrong

The sheet is not wrong but you are reading wrong. The sheet is using the base 14 damage. They actually do 27 to infantry.

Multiply the value by around x1.93 to get the correct DPS.

Value should comparable to these (0--10--20--30--40):

guard_troop_ptrs_41_mp------------------3.87--3.55--3.23--2.32--1.42
guards_troops_mosin_nagant_rifle_mp---4.73--3.66--2.57--1.72--0

Ah, I see.

Now I'm curious to try the SVT Guards rifle squad from lend lease. Though I think they are a bit gimped by normal standards since they get PPSH instead of DPs.

They have lesser DPS far but better mid close and better on the move.