My defunct Pgren buff idea
Posts: 789
Why I, a rank 1500 player, thought Pgrens sucked.
They come late. If you only get 3 grens so that you can get Pgrens and so that your first 222 is on time you lose so much map control
If you get 4 grens into Pgrens, you have no AT to kill that m20/UC/M3 that has been harassing you
They lose so much DPS dropping 1 model
So I wanted to have 2 of the Pgrens have MP40s, with a 30 % damage reduction compared to their current STG 44s,, and their stg44s get a 30% damage increase. That way dropping 1 model doesn’t kill their dps.
The can now put away 2 of their weaopans and take out 2 PzB 39 AT rifles, like how Sturmpioneers can take out/put away their sweeper. This allows them to counter light vehicles.
Schrek upgrade would replace the AT rifles and they wouldn’t be able to be put away
Posts: 783
Seeing as Pgrens got a nice buff in the commander mod, this is pretty pointless, but here goes anyways.
Why I, a rank 1500 player, thought Pgrens sucked.
They come late. If you only get 3 grens so that you can get Pgrens and so that your first 222 is on time you lose so much map control
If you get 4 grens into Pgrens, you have no AT to kill that m20/UC/M3 that has been harassing you
They lose so much DPS dropping 1 model
So I wanted to have 2 of the Pgrens have MP40s, with a 30 % damage reduction compared to their current STG 44s,, and their stg44s get a 30% damage increase. That way dropping 1 model doesn’t kill their dps.
The can now put away 2 of their weaopans and take out 2 PzB 39 AT rifles, like how Sturmpioneers can take out/put away their sweeper. This allows them to counter light vehicles.
Schrek upgrade would replace the AT rifles and they wouldn’t be able to be put away
Maybe it should be an upgrade.
A purchase that provides them damage reduction and 2 MP40 (which sacrifices range capabilites). Would be a nice approach I would say.
At least there would be alternatives for the player. Either I stick to 4 STG or say "I would like a change" upgrade to what you have mentioned. I think it should cost 45-60 ammo, maybe.
Posts: 731
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
30%damage reduce too OP...1.5 to 2 armor is enough...
"30% too op, lets make it 50% or 100% more EHP instead!"
(psst, the name comes from the being a mechanized infantry, not walking tanks)
Posts: 731
"30% too op, lets make it 50% or 100% more EHP instead!"
(psst, the name comes from the being a mechanized infantry, not walking tanks)
ShockTroopers EHP at Vet2 is about 864
If PG got 1.5 armor,at vet2,PG EHP is about 867,but infantry armor only work when they face small arms,30% damage reduction is real walking tank
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
ShockTroopers EHP at Vet2 is about 864
If PG got 1.5 armor,at vet2,PG EHP is about 867,but infantry armor only work when they face small arms,30% damage reduction is real walking tank
And why a 4 man squad should have 8 man worth of durability?
I mean, sure, if we up their price to 500mp we can go with it.
Posts: 731
And why a 4 man squad should have 8 man worth of durability?
I mean, sure, if we up their price to 500mp we can go with it.
Because PG cost 340/34 manpower and they are close combat infantry
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Because PG cost 340/34 manpower and they are close combat infantry
No, they are not close comabt infantry.
They are mid range infantry.
They are also 4 men squad that is most certainly NOT meant to frontally assault anything.
That's what assault grenadiers are for.
No wonder 99% of threads fail to identify any kind of balance issue, when players are completely oblivious to how the unit is supposed to function.
You want shock troops?
You play soviets.
Posts: 783
And why a 4 man squad should have 8 man worth of durability?
I mean, sure, if we up their price to 500mp we can go with it.
And why a 6 man Shocks squad will be 12 man worth of durability? guess Shocks will be now 750 manpower. Pretty much the same argument.
Anyway. I do not think it is a bad idea for them to get "armour upgrade". Shocks get armour to engage closer range engagements and they are an elite unit although doctrinal. It would be fair to the extent that Pzgrens get some "body armour protection" upgrade (so it will cost around 60 ammo, will lock out Pzshreks) since it is an elite unit, it is meant to carry engagements.
Panzergrenadiers, so it will have either the choice of carring AT or AI engagements.
Reasoning being, the fact that Wehrmacht is highly unlikely going to get non-doc 5 man squad is due to 2 reasons. They will excel in firepower and survivability destroying balance.
Their main issues is survivability overall because they have a hard time maintaining firepower in mid late game.
Just increasing their overall survivability will decrease their chances of being wiped will be thinner if they have the alternative to purchase armour upgrades.
I think the armour value should be around 1.5 max. Anything higher makes it like Wolfenstein unit upgrade or Iron man.
Maybe grens should have something similar but maybe around 1.1-1.3, but as you said, they are not meant to carry engagements, so no armour for Grens.
Grens should maybe get "defence training", where their received accuracy behind cover multiplier is improved. Nothing OP, nothing too strong but to help improve their style of defensive play and improve their suvivability.
Posts: 731
No, they are not close comabt infantry.
They are mid range infantry.
They are also 4 men squad that is most certainly NOT meant to frontally assault anything.
That's what assault grenadiers are for.
No wonder 99% of threads fail to identify any kind of balance issue, when players are completely oblivious to how the unit is supposed to function.
You want shock troops?
You play soviets.
If you say so,Shock troopers is mid range infantry too,ShockTroopers 6xPPsh at mid range is same as 4xStg44
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
And why a 6 man Shocks squad will be 12 man worth of durability? guess Shocks will be now 750 manpower. Pretty much the same argument.
Because they are very intended to go up frontally and ACTUALLY WEAR BODY ARMOR.
Anyway. I do not think it is a bad idea for them to get "armour upgrade". Shocks get armour to engage closer range engagements and they are an elite unit although doctrinal. It would be fair to the extent that Pzgrens get some "body armour protection" upgrade (so it will cost around 60 ammo, will lock out Pzshreks) since it is an elite unit, it is meant to carry engagements.
Panzergrenadiers, so it will have either the choice of carring AT or AI engagements.
Shocks are frontal assault troops with actual steel armor plates on them.
PG uniforms aren't made from ubermenschium and will never be.
Shocks are doctrinal AI specialist squad.
PGs are not.
Shocks have no strong long range supporting troops able to snipe models.
PGs do.
No idea why I'm even wasting breath on you here.
We both know that any stock survivability improvements for PGs are fantasy, regardless how you'll word it out.
Posts: 203
Posts: 783
Because they are very intended to go up frontally and ACTUALLY WEAR BODY ARMOR.
Shocks are frontal assault troops with actual steel armor plates on them.
PG uniforms aren't made from ubermenschium and will never be.
Shocks are doctrinal AI specialist squad.
PGs are not.
Shocks have no strong long range supporting troops able to snipe models.
PGs do.
No idea why I'm even wasting breath on you here.
We both know that any stock survivability improvements for PGs are fantasy, regardless how you'll word it out.
Shock troops armour makes no sense to repel any bolt action or assualt rifle or even STG44. It was only meant for counters against SMG small caliber like MP40 max. The whole idea shocks repelling all small arms in this game is definitely a joke.
Why waste your breath on trying to justify Shocks having that good of a fantasised armour. Armour was not meant to repel huge/ intermidate calibres. Only for SMG's
Posts: 203
Shock troops armour makes no sense to repel any bolt action or assualt rifle or even STG44. It was only meant for counters against SMG small caliber like MP40 max. The whole idea shocks repelling all small arms in this game is definitely a joke.
Why waste your breath on trying to justify Shocks having that good of a fantasised armour. Armour was not meant to repel huge/ intermidate calibres. Only for SMG's
Hey, let me tell you a secret.
It's a game
Anyway I don't see any point in giving them armour, they already get lower RA, which works better than armour anyway, since it doesn't get less effective against light vehicles and MGs.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Why waste your breath on trying to justify Shocks having that good of a fantasised armour. Armour was not meant to repel huge/ intermidate calibres. Only for SMG's
Why waste your breath talking about irl in a balance thread. You also wanted armour for Grenadiers so this is a strange take
Posts: 783
Hey, let me tell you a secret.
It's a game
Anyway I don't see any point in giving them armour, they already get lower RA, which works better than armour anyway, since it doesn't get less effective against light vehicles and MGs.
It is a game. So it should not be a problem.
Why not say that about Tommies too!
New fix for Tommies according to logic balancing theories as stated about Received accuracy being better. Since they have same received accuracy as Pzgrens by (0.8). They shall longer have 5 man "Bolster Squad" since received accuracy terms are better!
Read this in a sarcastic tone. Sounds a lot more funny, lol!
It is what is called "Breaking News"
Posts: 5279
Basicly we have the damage now being (gunna use arbitrary round numbers)
10 x 4 = 40
Losing a model brings it to 30
Another to 20
Ops idea is (13x2)+(7x2)=40
Losing the first model brings it to 33
Another to 26
They want to preserve some of the dps via losses
Posts: 783
The damage reduction comment chain is a failure anyways because using Context the OP is talking about reducing the dps on the mp40 by 30% not incoming damage. THE OP wants to mitigate damage loss when dropping models by stacking 2 models and having 2 lesser models that when full health would deal she same damage.
Basicly we have the damage now being (gunna use arbitrary round numbers)
10 x 4 = 40
Losing a model brings it to 30
Another to 20
Ops idea is (13x2)+(7x2)=40
Losing the first model brings it to 33
Another to 26
They want to preserve some of the dps via losses
Yes, exactly.
Somehow a concept that some misinterpreted!
Posts: 177
They come late. If you only get 3 grens so that you can get Pgrens and so that your first 222 is on time you lose so much map control
If you get 4 grens into Pgrens, you have no AT to kill that m20/UC/M3 that has been harassing you
To start off these are not balance issues. Losing map control or going for the pgren first after 4 grens when you should have gone for the 222 or pak40 are gameplay issues.
The buffs that you suggested are just ridiculously OP: The 1,3x1,3 stat buffs would enable them to have "forcy-fun-time" with the shocks at close range. Imagine a blob of these bad boys. Oh and when faced with a vehicle just press a magic button on your keyboard to GTA few ATs outta their cavities.
The removal of T2 Structure as a requirement is going to buff pgrens enough as an early-mid option without breaking late game.
Posts: 1162
You don't need armour for a unit in cover.
Livestreams
46 | |||||
2 | |||||
721 | |||||
26 | |||||
22 | |||||
18 | |||||
10 | |||||
3 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.624225.735+2
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.919405.694+3
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Cummings
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM