Login

russian armor

Thoughts on Panzergrenadiers

PAGES (21)down
19 Mar 2019, 13:29 PM
#81
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2019, 23:54 PMKatitof
Do you axis fanboys deal exclusively with absolutes?
2 grens/3 osttruppen and 2 PGs very early or HMG42 and PGs very early would be pretty much IWIN combination, suppress anything, mow it with PGs, rinse and repeat.

PGs biggest problem lies with their usability and difficulty to approach targets frontally without cover(which they shouldn't do, they aren't shock troops), not stats and changing timing to earlier pretty much warrants nerfs to performance.

They also are -NOT- a squad that should open the fight, grens or other unit should and get behind the cover, then PGs should move in.


Take a look at my playercard if you think I'm a faction fanboy.

2 Gren, 2 PGren + Pioneer = (100 (T1) + 200 (T2) + 240*2 + 340*2) = 1460 MP
3 Ostruppen + 2 PGren + Pioneer = (200*3 + 200 + 340*2) = 1380 MP

4 Infantry Section + 1 Universal Carrier + 1 Vickers MG = (260*2 + 280*3) = 1360 MP

UKF starts with a combat capable unit and isn't spending 300 MP on teching straight away, which gives them a strong manpower advantage. I honestly don't think it'd be that different from the Volks vs Penals dynamic: Penals win 1v1, Volks have the numbers advantage.

If anything, it's USF and T2 Sov I'd be concerned about.



I believe that would be too soon. Their deployment at earliest could be around anywhere from 3-5 minutes into the game that doesn't include skipping T1 builds. They already have a number of counters also available before they arrive and at least they have to fight at mid-short range to be effective.


I think everyone's in agreement that if you stuck them in T1 they'd be far too strong.

My thinking on opening with T2 is it's a tradeoff of firepower for field presence. In the fights you take, PGrens are going to be strong: they're a 340 MP squad.

But with an extra 100 MP on teching off the bat and 100 extra MP per PGren squad, you're going to have a much smaller army. If you split them all up, the enemy can defeat you in detail. If you keep them together, you lose a lot of map control.

It'd be a lot like the Soviet T1 opening, just without the highly mobile clown car to drive off enemy capping squads.


Your Headquarters after Battlephase idea could also be very interesting, although ironically there you'd be deploying Panzergrenadiers to skip the light mechanized T2.
19 Mar 2019, 13:38 PM
#82
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

One should also consider lowering the time to research BP1 which takes too long, and does not award CP contrary to USF officers.
19 Mar 2019, 13:53 PM
#83
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 13:29 PMLago


Take a look at my playercard if you think I'm a faction fanboy.

2 Gren, 2 PGren + Pioneer = (100 (T1) + 200 (T2) + 240*2 + 340*2) = 1460 MP
3 Ostruppen + 2 PGren + Pioneer = (200*3 + 200 + 340*2) = 1380 MP

4 Infantry Section + 1 Universal Carrier + 1 Vickers MG = (260*2 + 280*3) = 1360 MP

UKF starts with a combat capable unit and isn't spending 300 MP on teching straight away, which gives them a strong manpower advantage. I honestly don't think it'd be that different from the Volks vs Penals dynamic: Penals win 1v1, Volks have the numbers advantage.



You have to take UKF Tech as well in account into the calculation to have the equal amount of manpower used for a similar force on the field and tiering. That 180 manpower more for UFK.
19 Mar 2019, 14:08 PM
#84
avatar of Farlon

Posts: 184

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 13:53 PMEsxile


You have to take UKF Tech as well in account into the calculation to have the equal amount of manpower used for a similar force on the field and tiering. That 180 manpower more for UFK.

Why? UKF doesn't need tech for any mentioned units there.
19 Mar 2019, 14:32 PM
#85
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 14:08 PMFarlon

Why? UKF doesn't need tech for any mentioned units there.


Because Teching provides new abilities and units. With the same amount of manpower Ostheer is able to field the same amount of unit + teching progression while UKF still need to tech to reach the same level of opportunities.

Similarly we could argue that it would be perfectly fine vs USF since USF can field as many riflemen squads for the same price.
19 Mar 2019, 14:42 PM
#86
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

PGS with smoke will probably solve most of the problems.
19 Mar 2019, 14:48 PM
#87
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

PGS with smoke will probably solve most of the problems.

Not is allies keep fielding "semi elite" infatry earlier and cheaper. Either all faction need strong infatry early or these infantries should come later.

Else this unit should start weaker and upgrade with weapons about the same time mainline infatry does.
19 Mar 2019, 15:26 PM
#88
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

Some forms of this idea seem already here, but maybe have them start with 2 stgs and 2 kar98ks? Then they can upgrade to all stgs (and maybe a 5th man?), or stay at 4 men and replace the kars with shrecks.

Maybe make the grenade exclusive to the stg upgrade, and give some kind of AT ability to the shreck upgrade too. Some costs would need adjusting, but specialising the two options even more seems like it would be good for the game
19 Mar 2019, 15:29 PM
#89
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 14:32 PMEsxile
Because Teching provides new abilities and units. With the same amount of manpower Ostheer is able to field the same amount of unit + teching progression while UKF still need to tech to reach the same level of opportunities.

Similarly we could argue that it would be perfectly fine vs USF since USF can field as many riflemen squads for the same price.


The difference between USF building a ton of T0 and UKF building a ton of T0 is UKF heavy T0 is the dominant strategy right now and USF heavy T0 is so bad the faction was reworked to avoid it.

You're right in that UKF will have to pay a teching cost Ostheer's already paid with a T2 opening, but by that point upkeep and reinforcement cost have muddied the waters.

Who has the advantage at that point is down to map control and manpower bleed, and that's much harder to assess and predict. I think you'd need to playtest it to really get a feel for the dynamic beyond the initial build order.
19 Mar 2019, 15:30 PM
#90
avatar of Farlon

Posts: 184

Smoke grenade and increased speed&damage reduction next to vehicles. No need to delve deeper into it, smoke will fix the problem of closing in and the passive will make them even more attractive.
19 Mar 2019, 15:48 PM
#91
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3

What about giving them a Panzerfaust (Schreck upgrade removes the panzerfaust) and giving them 1 or 2 Pathfinder types of sniper rifle (G43) with the Jaeger Inf upgrade. JLI G43 would be too strong
19 Mar 2019, 15:50 PM
#92
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 15:29 PMLago


The difference between USF building a ton of T0 and UKF building a ton of T0 is UKF heavy T0 is the dominant strategy right now and USF heavy T0 is so bad the faction was reworked to avoid it.

You're right in that UKF will have to pay a teching cost Ostheer's already paid with a T2 opening, but by that point upkeep and reinforcement cost have muddied the waters.

Who has the advantage at that point is down to map control and manpower bleed, and that's much harder to assess and predict. I think you'd need to playtest it to really get a feel for the dynamic beyond the initial build order.


Well since you made in on paper, I thought it would be important to keep it in line on paper. Now from a realistic point of view, its all depend on what you get with that early T2. You can't reasonably think that with such a big change the meta will still be the same.
19 Mar 2019, 16:44 PM
#93
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



I believe that would be too soon. Their deployment at earliest could be around anywhere from 3-5 minutes into the game that doesn't include skipping T1 builds. They already have a number of counters also available before they arrive and at least they have to fight at mid-short range to be effective.

And Katitof, none of those early units can deal with the UC or MGs outside flanks and your idea requires a back-tech to T1 so there is cost and time involved there. If Sturms and Volks cannot take on a UC in the first 2-3 minutes of the game, I doubt stock PGs would either as you need snares to be effective versus a well-microed one until AT or 222s hit the field. I don't see fanboyism in the post.

From what I gather, though, utility and abilities, such as the Infantry Doctrine's PG Training, seem to be the way the go such as their passive when near armor which gives them bonuses or more things to do that isn't just 'More DPS' which is their main purpose at the moment and all they do.


I wouldn't call it "backtech" in ost case as I don't consider ost viable without it.

These 10 seconds and symbolic resource payment to put it up isn't really a problem.
19 Mar 2019, 17:52 PM
#94
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 15:30 PMFarlon
Smoke grenade and increased speed&damage reduction next to vehicles. No need to delve deeper into it, smoke will fix the problem of closing in and the passive will make them even more attractive.


I'm sorry and how much are we increasing the price?

When you say increased speed do you mean sprinting? Or they're just walking faster while firing? Because I don't think there's a single squad in the game that has the latter. And damage reduction isnt that common either, for good reasons

I think they need a buff but that seems like far too much IMO
19 Mar 2019, 17:55 PM
#95
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

When you say increased speed do you mean sprinting? Or they're just walking faster while firing? Because I don't think there's a single squad in the game that has the latter. And damage reduction isnt that common either, for good reasons



GERMAN INFANTRY

[…]

Veteran Squad Leaders (New Ability)
[…]
-Panzergrenadiers can be upgraded with the Support Package.
[…]
-Combined Arms ability: Passive ability. Panzergrenadiers gain -10% received accuracy and +20% speed when near vehicles.

Commander Revamp Patch patchnotes, https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/67/coh-2-changelog/p5
19 Mar 2019, 18:03 PM
#96
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 15:50 PMEsxile


Well since you made in on paper, I thought it would be important to keep it in line on paper. Now from a realistic point of view, its all depend on what you get with that early T2. You can't reasonably think that with such a big change the meta will still be the same.


Agreed.

My line of thinking is, if Ostheer deploys an early T2 with either Assault Grenadiers or Ostruppen to support, what can UKF field in response with the same amount of resources?

The answer's a larger force of T0 units, even with the 5-man upgrade. If OST goes all in on PGrens, UKF has the UC to bleed then. If Ost mixes in HMGs, Osttruppen and/or Assgrens, they'll have fewer PGrens. If they build T1 and Grens, they'll be spending even more up front on tech.

With more squads, UKF can match for firepower in a army vs army battle, and can gain more map control if they spread out, especially with faster Infantry Section capping. It'd be like going up against a Penal Batallion build with a decent HMG but no car.

If they only deploy one Panzergrenadier, that's setting them back 540 MP at the start of the game. They'll get it back later when they don't have to build the T2 they've already built, but is one PGren worth 2 Grens?

The balance of a T2 opening hinges on the higher manpower cost translating into reduced field presence relative to building a lot of Grenadiers.
19 Mar 2019, 18:05 PM
#97
avatar of Farlon

Posts: 184



I'm sorry and how much are we increasing the price?

When you say increased speed do you mean sprinting? Or they're just walking faster while firing? Because I don't think there's a single squad in the game that has the latter. And damage reduction isnt that common either, for good reasons

I think they need a buff but that seems like far too much IMO

It's just the same bonuses they get from support package in infantry commander. And it's still better than meddling with them too much and ending up with JLI 2.0
19 Mar 2019, 18:30 PM
#98
avatar of murky depths

Posts: 607

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2019, 11:48 AMFarlon

They need either T1 or T2. Grenadiers need T1 to be up to pfaust.


Wait, what?

How would you even get Grenadiers without T1?
19 Mar 2019, 18:33 PM
#99
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Wait, what?

How would you even get Grenadiers without T1?


If the enemy blows up T1 the Panzerfaust is disabled.

As for why, iirc Grenadiers used to be T0. They got swapped with the MG42 when USF came out.
19 Mar 2019, 18:55 PM
#100
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Wait, what?

How would you even get Grenadiers without T1?

Well, there is that 250 call-in with LMG grens in german mechanized or infantry doctrine, one of the two.
Or at least used to be.
PAGES (21)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Livestreams

unknown 12
United States 11

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

518 users are online: 2 members and 516 guests
seoworld20, donofsandiego
3 posts in the last 24h
15 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49893
Welcome our newest member, Kevindale46387
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM