Are Osttruppen OP or Underpowered ?
Posts: 3
Should they not have access to MG 42 LMG's or do they deserve grenades?
Please write your opinion.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Panzerbusche on the other hand might actually work for the unit.
Or an upgrade to "Ost-Bataillone" (?) for manpower with T4 that removed the cover mechanism. Could provide access to grenades, merge...
Posts: 3031 | Subs: 3
Lmgs should not be available to 6 men sqauds.
I think the Osttruppen lmg42 has same weapon stats like DP1928
Posts: 3
I think the Osttruppen lmg42 has same weapon stats like DP1928
Does that make it too good
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I think the Osttruppen lmg42 has same weapon stats like DP1928
The mg is the same the unit has penalties to all weapon it pick up making thing even more confusing.
"Captured slot items now suffer from a -50% accuracy penalty, and +300% accuracy bonus in cover no longer applies to them"
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
Lmgs should not be available to 6 men sqauds.
Panzerbusche on the other hand might actually work for the unit.
Or an upgrade to "Ost-Bataillone" (?) for manpower with T4 that removed the cover mechanism. Could provide access to grenades, merge...
Agreed on the Panzerbusche. It's problematic when they're garrisoned and there's a vehicle outside since you need to actually get them in the line of fire to launch off a Panzerfaust which in any other unit's case it would be fine but since they're so fragile...
Posts: 3
Lmgs should not be available to 6 men sqauds.
Panzerbusche on the other hand might actually work for the unit.
Or an upgrade to "Ost-Bataillone" (?) for manpower with T4 that removed the cover mechanism. Could provide access to grenades, merge...
So you are basically saying that they should become conscripts when you reach T4 and upgrade them. Right?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
So you are basically saying that they should become conscripts when you reach T4 and upgrade them. Right?
well one could it a try. The lmg is a bad solution imo.
Posts: 5279
Lmgs should not be available to 6 men sqauds.
Panzerbusche on the other hand might actually work for the unit.
Or an upgrade to "Ost-Bataillone" (?) for manpower with T4 that removed the cover mechanism. Could provide access to grenades, merge...
so better, cheaper cons in a faction with crewed weapons that work.....
Posts: 1979
Posts: 3053
Agreed on the Panzerbusche. It's problematic when they're garrisoned and there's a vehicle outside since you need to actually get them in the line of fire to launch off a Panzerfaust which in any other unit's case it would be fine but since they're so fragile...
Wait but they're least fragile against vehicles since they're 6 men and target size doesn't matter for scatter right? The vehicle's mgs will do that much more damage but tank guns will be less effective against them than they would be against grens as long as you don't let them clump up at the door.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
so better, cheaper cons in a faction with crewed weapons that work.....
Read more carefully pls.
I suggested an upgrade cost manpower when T3 is researched. That would not make cheaper nor better.
It would simply make them remain relevant in late game.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Id say the lmg42 is good for ostruppen... now cons need nondoc ppshs
Pls focus on ostruppen.
Posts: 3053
Read more carefully pls.
I suggested an upgrade cost manpower when T3 is researched. That would not make cheaper nor better.
It would simply make them remain relevant in late game.
I think he means they are already significantly cheaper. Aren't they like 15 to reinforce?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I think he means they are already significantly cheaper. Aren't they like 15 to reinforce?
reinforcement cost could go up with the upgrade, it would make sense
Posts: 5279
Read more carefully pls.
I suggested an upgrade cost manpower when T3 is researched. That would not make cheaper nor better.
It would simply make them remain relevant in late game.
I read. Unless the tech is far exceeding the 205mp and 35 fuel cons need to begin to function, ostroppen will be cheaper, better cons with proper support and a weapon upgrade. The lmg42 already puts them far ahead in combat, they are cheaper to start, don't take build time, can build cover, no additional cost for their snare (well, their snare is included with teching instead of delaying it and you have the choice of which tier you want to unlock it...) and then you want to make it so they can capture ground (grenade and removing the cover debuff) and give them the SOLE unique thing cons have left? Which following the trend they would do more efficiently due to cost per squad and reinforcement costs as well as the means to create a forward reinforcement area....
I often agree with you but in this case a fail to see any logic in this change except to deliberately spit in the face of already ineffecient conscripts by creating a better and more versatile version for cheaper.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I read. Unless the tech is far exceeding the 205mp and 35 fuel cons need to begin to function, ostroppen will be cheaper, better cons with proper support and a weapon upgrade. The lmg42 already puts them far ahead in combat, they are cheaper to start, don't take build time, can build cover, no additional cost for their snare (well, their snare is included with teching instead of delaying it and you have the choice of which tier you want to unlock it...) and then you want to make it so they can capture ground (grenade and removing the cover debuff) and give them the SOLE unique thing cons have left? Which following the trend they would do more efficiently due to cost per squad and reinforcement costs as well as the means to create a forward reinforcement area....
I often agree with you but in this case a fail to see any logic in this change except to deliberately spit in the face of already ineffecient conscripts by creating a better and more versatile version for cheaper.
Let me get his right you are comparing the BP1, BP2, BP3 cost with AT grenade Molotov cost?
In the end of the day the idea here is ostruppen viable during at end of the game not solve the conscripts problem.
Posts: 5279
Let me get his right you are comparing the BP1, BP2, BP3 cost with AT grenade Molotov cost?
In the end of the day the idea here is ostruppen viable during at end of the game not solve the conscripts problem.
Making ostroppen conscripts but cheaper and better supported and batter armed would certainly make them more viable but regardless of timing it's a matter of bloody balance. It's bad enough that OKW shit on the face of Conscripts with Volks for only 10mp more but you want to give to Ost the chance to do the same but cheaper?
Their viability is their uniquely durable and cheapness in a faction with expensive and squishy units. They just got a bloody lmg given to them for late game scaling if that's not enough for engineer priced troop then idk what. They are exclusively for holding ground effeciently and manning weapons and they do that EXCEEDINGLY well, probably better pound for pound than anybody. They don't need added utility on top of being able to build a multitude of cover and Bunkers and have a snare too.
They have a defined role that they fill and is not supported by all playstyles they are unique and fill a niche which is what call in infantry should do.
Being able to effectively hold ground while supported by powerful team weapons and then transition into lmg defensive infantry AND durable ground grabbing troops that can merge into the likes of pgrens and grens is Ludacris to even think of from a balance perspective as these are units that are balanced around not staying on field to dish out damage for long and thus do so effeciently. Being able to top them up in an instant would be game breaking. Not to mention that a 6 man squad COULD top up 2 whole 1 man Ost squads. You would lose the squad but depending on the squads it could be very worth it. (50mp premium for on field and instant reinforcement of 2 gren squads? Yes please! Let alone pgrens...)
Posts: 1392
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Making ostroppen conscripts but cheaper and better supported and batter armed would certainly make them more viable but regardless of timing it's a matter of bloody balance. It's bad enough that OKW shit on the face of Conscripts with Volks for only 10mp more but you want to give to Ost the chance to do the same but cheaper?
You are missing the time factor. Even if osttruppen become identical to conscript but available around minute 20 they would hardy had much of an impact.
Their viability is their uniquely durable and cheapness in a faction with expensive and squishy units. They just got a bloody lmg given to them for late game scaling if that's not enough for engineer priced troop then idk what. They are exclusively for holding ground effeciently and manning weapons and they do that EXCEEDINGLY well, probably better pound for pound than anybody. They don't need added utility on top of being able to build a multitude of cover and Bunkers and have a snare too.
Osttruppen are good at stealing weapon, if you want to man weapon pioneer are far better.
Giving LMG to 6 men squads is bad option because of the the DPS drop does not follow the entity lost, imo it should be removed.
They have a defined role that they fill and is not supported by all playstyles they are unique and fill a niche which is what call in infantry should do.
Being able to effectively hold ground while supported by powerful team weapons and then transition into lmg defensive infantry AND durable ground grabbing troops that can merge into the likes of pgrens and grens is Ludacris to even think of from a balance perspective as these are units that are balanced around not staying on field to dish out damage for long and thus do so effeciently. Being able to top them up in an instant would be game breaking. Not to mention that a 6 man squad COULD top up 2 whole 1 man Ost squads. You would lose the squad but depending on the squads it could be very worth it. (50mp premium for on field and instant reinforcement of 2 gren squads? Yes please! Let alone pgrens...)
The idea is to remove the LMG upgrade not keep it, the upgrade would just to remove to cover mechanism, less firepower more utility.
Livestreams
28 | |||||
1766 | |||||
196 | |||||
182 | |||||
41 | |||||
27 | |||||
22 | |||||
8 | |||||
5 | |||||
4 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.830222.789+36
- 2.561204.733+3
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.916404.694-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.721440.621+3
- 8.14758.717+1
- 9.17046.787-1
- 10.1019662.606+4
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM