Thoughts on Panzergrenadiers
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3260
Is that ability even useful? Because as far as I remember it trashes your cav rifles damage and speed too, even more so than the other squad.
In a 1v1, no, it's not. The idea is you have a second squad with the Cav Rifles to put the damage out.
In practice, USF doesn't have many targets for it: I can't think of many infantry matchups where Cavs aren't more effective pumping damage out.
Put it on an Ost unit and you can use it on Shocks, Rangers and Thompson Paratroopers though.
Posts: 833
Erm you can build them as your fourth unit. Considering they utterly demolish cons etc I think timing is fine
https://youtu.be/8EqdhgfMXSg
Posts: 833
What ever changes PGs get they should have reinforcement (and maybe built time) reduced.
Why should they come any earlier? Watch the timing in the vid I just posted
Posts: 951
But people said pgren rush never works and grens are mandatory...
Erm you can build them as your fourth unit. Considering they utterly demolish cons etc I think timing is fine
https://youtu.be/8EqdhgfMXSg
4 min 18 sec is crazy fast, and it usually doesn't happen that way. 5-6 min is the more usual timing.
As a person who almost exclusively plays T2 rush as WM, Cons are not the issue. The issue is when they are matched up against Riflemen with weapon upgrades, IS with weapon upgrades (bolstered sections alone are difficult to beat), and any of the elite infantry the allies can field.
I would say that timing might be helpful, as it closes the gap between when you can field PGrens (which are supposed to match up against somewhat vetted stock infantry). However, I would say that the main issue is not timing.
Posts: 2358
But people itt said pgren rush never works and grens are mandatory...
Erm you can build them as your fourth unit. Considering they utterly demolish cons etc I think timing is fine
https://youtu.be/8EqdhgfMXSg
Because getting a 4th squad only to trash cons is super useful as OH after min 5.
Yeah, sure.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Why should they come any earlier? Watch the timing in the vid I just posted
Their timing and the time to reinforce and to built are completely different issues.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
Soviet actual unit: For the OKW with their STG-44 volkss and sturm pioneers you should have it, and with the early panzer grenadiers the Soviets have no alternative as soon as the shock troops.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
But people itt said pgren rush never works and grens are mandatory...
Erm you can build them as your fourth unit. Considering they utterly demolish cons etc I think timing is fine
https://youtu.be/8EqdhgfMXSg
If soviet went T1 instead of con memes, the game wouldn't even last 5 minutes as M3 would dominate ost so hard, he'd just be reinfrocing everything at HQ being dried out of resources and cut of off whole map.
Posts: 833
If soviet went T1 instead of con memes, the game wouldn't even last 5 minutes as M3 would dominate ost so hard, he'd just be reinfrocing everything at HQ being dried out of resources and cut of off whole map.
Isn't that the risk of any strategy? Pick Soviet Soviet sniper and Ost player build ostruppen and dominates the map...
Fact is you can rush them pretty damn early when some posters in this thread say they come out the same time as T-70 or vet double BAR rifles
Posts: 833
4 min 18 sec is crazy fast, and it usually doesn't happen that way. 5-6 min is the more usual timing.
As a person who almost exclusively plays T2 rush as WM, Cons are not the issue. The issue is when they are matched up against Riflemen with weapon upgrades, IS with weapon upgrades (bolstered sections alone are difficult to beat), and any of the elite infantry the allies can field.
I would say that timing might be helpful, as it closes the gap between when you can field PGrens (which are supposed to match up against somewhat vetted stock infantry). However, I would say that the main issue is not timing.
If you watch the video you'll see vet 3 pgrens wiping plenty of vet shocks. Which some people on this forum argue are the most OP allied elites.
If they can tear through shocks why can't they deal with commandos or Tommies?
Double BAR vet rifles can fight 1vs1 but why shouldn't they be able to with the muni and upgrade investment? Even then I would argue pgrens are better due to having the commando nuke grenade.
Really why I am posting what I am because I fear you guys will unleash another Jaeger situation on us. And before you know it it's going to be pgren rush and nothing else but this time they will be non doc.
Posts: 833
Because getting a 4th squad only to trash cons is super useful as OH after min 5.
Yeah, sure.
The one squad carried him despite him doing a dumb play and falling for a barbed wire house losing his second pgren almost instantly after he built it.
But hey let's put them in tier 1 what could go wrong
Posts: 3260
If you watch the video you'll see vet 3 pgrens wiping plenty of vet shocks. Which some people on this forum argue are the most OP allied elites.
I did. The Shocks clumped up on a bundle grenade.
Posts: 1392
I did. The Shocks clumped up on a bundle grenade.
We all know that it wasn't because Geballte is so strong, it ws simply bad played by soviet player.
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
The soviet would've been much better off going guards and bleeding the pgrens n' pio army from a distance. Pgrens are quite good against an overly agressive shock player.
Posts: 2358
...
Really why I am posting what I am because I fear you guys will unleash another Jaeger situation on us. And before you know it it's going to be pgren rush and nothing else but this time they will be non doc.
Speaking based on feelings its a bad idea to begin with, add on top of that the bias and voila!
Complete unconstructive comment
Posts: 1527
Permanently BannedPosts: 3053
In a 1v1, no, it's not. The idea is you have a second squad with the Cav Rifles to put the damage out.
In practice, USF doesn't have many targets for it: I can't think of many infantry matchups where Cavs aren't more effective pumping damage out.
Put it on an Ost unit and you can use it on Shocks, Rangers and Thompson Paratroopers though.
I'm all for combined arms and stuff but if you're 2v1 then you might as well just facerush them with thompsons anyway.
That's an interesting point actually. It'd be a pretty potent counter to allied cqb infantry.
Posts: 378
They already have good AI. armour and to the last man relies too much on RNG and that's not what they need they need reliability. A damage reduction would give a straight reliable durability buff without loops and hoops and the possibility that they do nothing entirely. Armour adds another dice to them that can still say fuck you if it wants to. Damage reduction is guaranteed.
I dont like dmg reduction on rangers.
I'd rather less units have it, not more.
Posts: 2243
I was ranked 47 in axis and 64 in allies in 2s, when my 2v2 mate was still alive, but suit yourself.
your last game was in this game status:
blobb sov mgs and you autowin.
play with THE pro mg-spammer and you dont even need clue from this game.
Livestreams
10 | |||||
538 | |||||
79 | |||||
14 | |||||
9 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger