Riflemen need a buff or Volks need a nerf?

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:49 PM13greed47

that a crap argument where only the soviet have 6 man at gun and only 1 of them is viable and cost 320mp vs the low cost of a raketen that can just camo and scout and since allies armor isnt great i dont see the problem with the fact it miss a little more after all usf need to pay ammo to make there at work at peak performance

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:11 PMDoomlord52

No?

At maximum range (35), the Rifle's Garand has ~1.7dps, the M1919 has 8.76dps
4 x 1.7 + 8.76 = 15.56dps at 35 range

At maximum range (35), the Gren's K98k has ~2.26dps, the LGM42 has 8.93dps
3 x 2.26 + 8.93 = 15.71dps at 35 range

Riflemen have 5x 80hp, or a 400hp effective pool
Grens have 4x 80hp, or a 320hp effective pool

400hp/15.71dps = 25.4sec
320/15.56dps = 20.6sec

Rifles at max range w/ M1919 are 19% stronger than Grens w/ LMG42.

This doesn't take into account that for each model lost, grens lose 33% of their K98k damage, vs. 25% for Rifle's Garand. Also note that this becomes more in favor of Rifles the closer you get: The LMG42 stays around 0.2-0.3dps ahead at all ranges, but the 4x Garands fill in that DPS difference at range 25. On top of that, Rifle's have far, far better vet bonuses.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:56 PMHannibal

Honest question:
Are these corrected for RA? I thought that vet0 Grens had a bit less than 1.
Not that it completely changes the outcome, but that's an easy correction to do.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:49 PMHannibal

First, this thread is about the Riflemen/Volk balance. This topic will touch other mainlines, but it has been fully derailed into a Grenadier discussion with MG42 and 50 cal comparisons, while you now try to go for IS for some reason. Far off the mark. If you want to discuss Grenadier balance, open another thread.

So I will just adress these points very briefly.
As OST you can't skip T1 unless you play call in infantry which are assault grenadiere (they get a nade) or Osttruppen (they get a faust after T1 or T2 is build). Previous discussion was about USF, not UKF. Comparing to UKF as a faction with balance issues is a good way to create more balance issues. Still my argument holds true. There's also issues with your argumentation, just a few: Side tech delays your medium, regardless of when it would usually come out. If your opponent rushed a medium, there is no reason for you to get T2. UKF is designed that they need to side tech their infantry and they need it to stay competitive infantry wise mid/late game. Cromwell is by far worse than the OST P4 for 10 fu less and can be controlled more easily due to the availability of OST snares.

50 cal:
The 50 cal has decent stats (not sure about accuracy though, I will assume it's similar) and I never doubted that. Also the DhsK has the best MG stats in the game, even before the buff. Still it was not build due to bad arch. The most important thing is that the MG42 will usually suppress in one single burst. More suppression than that is initially not needed for area controll. But what is needed is a bigger arch to also suppress the squad that tries to flank. I'm not saying that the 50 cal has no merits, but the majority of players (including me) would gladly give up any MG for an MG42. Also the 50 cal needs some minor AT options because otherwise USF has next to no vehicle control beside AT rifle grenades on vetted Riflemen, one single bazooka on the officer and shitty 10 mun light mines. Literally that's it. Unless you side tech and delay your medium (see above).

Putting words in anyones mouth is shady and horrible discussion style. It's still no excuse for insults. Call him out on that bullshit and I'm all in for some reasonable mockery and fun on the forums, but there's a fine line between mockery and insult and in my opinion you and some others crossed it or are too close to crossing it here. Keep things civil.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:56 PMHannibal

Honest question:
Are these corrected for RA? I thought that vet0 Grens had a bit less than 1.
Not that it completely changes the outcome, but that's an easy correction to do.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:52 PMJilet

No it is not. Survivability is a key factor in every single unit. I didn't meant it is underpowered/overpowered etc. Just saying it.

So keep your "crap" mouth to yourself.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:01 PMStug life

i asked if he smoked or was drunk, cause he was writing thing that were not here in the thread, is it an insult now ?

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:49 PM13greed47

that a crap argument where only the soviet have 6 man at gun and only 1 of them is viable and cost 320mp vs the low cost of a raketen that can just camo and scout and since allies armor isnt great i dont see the problem with the fact it miss a little more after all usf need to pay ammo to make there at work at peak performance

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:08 PM13greed47

like i said apart from 2 at gun all the others are 4man aswell and dont have retreat or cloak baseline so sorry but rak as way better surviability than the other at gun imo

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:12 PMJilet

It doesn't have the "reverse" either tho thus it needs to take a full turn for soft retreats or repositioning. For soviets 6 man , for usf 5 man, for ukf 5 man which all help survive a grenade and prevent your precious at gun to be stolen yet you are right about this is a small issue (no jokes).

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:14 PMStug life

no dude do actually play the game ?

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:11 PMDoomlord52

No?

At maximum range (35), the Rifle's Garand has ~1.7dps, the M1919 has 8.76dps
4 x 1.7 + 8.76 = 15.56dps at 35 range

At maximum range (35), the Gren's K98k has ~2.26dps, the LGM42 has 8.93dps
3 x 2.26 + 8.93 = 15.71dps at 35 range

Riflemen have 5x 80hp, or a 400hp effective pool
Grens have 4x 80hp, or a 320hp effective pool

400hp/15.71dps = 25.4sec
320/15.56dps = 20.6sec

Rifles at max range w/ M1919 are 19% stronger than Grens w/ LMG42.

This doesn't take into account that for each model lost, grens lose 33% of their K98k damage, vs. 25% for Rifle's Garand. Also note that this becomes more in favor of Rifles the closer you get: The LMG42 stays around 0.2-0.3dps ahead at all ranges, but the 4x Garands fill in that DPS difference at range 25. On top of that, Rifle's have far, far better vet bonuses.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:24 PMRiley

Send me a video where the grenadiers against rifleman with lmg. Without a vet and with a vet. Also consider veteran requirements. Who gets the vet faster?

Even if the arrows win, leaving behind one living model. This will be considered at least a fair, or acceptable result. Because m1919 is more expensive, and it is in the doctrine. In any case, it should be better.

But it turns out, weapons are more expensive - but worse.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:56 PMHannibal

Honest question:
Are these corrected for RA? I thought that vet0 Grens had a bit less than 1.
Not that it completely changes the outcome, but that's an easy correction to do.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:03 PMStug life

they have 0.91 but rifle have 0.97 pretty much even if we hard trslate it in 6% less dps for rifle it would still be rifle advantage

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 21:24 PMRiley

Send me a video where the grenadiers against rifleman with lmg. Without a vet and with a vet. Also consider veteran requirements. Who gets the vet faster?

Even if the arrows win, leaving behind one living model. This will be considered at least a fair, or acceptable result. Because m1919 is more expensive, and it is in the doctrine. In any case, it should be better.

But it turns out, weapons are more expensive - but worse.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 20:49 PMHannibal

50 cal:
The 50 cal has decent stats (not sure about accuracy though, I will assume it's similar) and I never doubted that. Also the DhsK has the best MG stats in the game, even before the buff. Still it was not build due to bad arch. The most important thing is that the MG42 will usually suppress in one single burst. More suppression than that is initially not needed for area controll. But what is needed is a bigger arch to also suppress the squad that tries to flank.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2019, 22:03 PMSerrith

Prior to the latest nerf, the DSHK was built a ton. It was the main reason land lease was picked so much even after the 76mm shermans were locked behind tech.
Part of that was the fact the maxim was/is underperforming and part of it was how ridiculous the DSHK was despite it's even worse arc.

[...]

-on a serious note it's more situation dependent mg42 is only better if its camping a spot covering as many points of entry as possible. Since my multitasking and unit management are crap that can be useful to me but less so in the hands of someone more capable.