This is mostly incorrect. A close range Conscripts have 3.4 DPS per model and Grens have 5.9 DPS per model. A Gren squad at point blank range loses to a Con squad because the Con squad has better survability with 6 men, not because the conscript squad has better DPS. When Cons are upgraded with PPSH and thus have 9.6 DPS at close range they can lose several more models in closing and still win be it at Vet 0 or Vet 3.
The big issue becomes when later on in the game you are dealing with squad wipes from explosives as Ostheer because of your smaller squad sizes, AND now you have to deal with the fact your squads are also more fragile to small arms.
I decided to run some tests on it to ensure my thesis is correct, results were quite informative!
-At vet 3 a riflemen squad with 1 BAR can charge across a field at max range and win against a Vet 3 LMG Gren squad with a reliability of 68.4%, additional BAR's or a flamethrower or 1919's brings this up to 93.4% (well adding them all together 1919 Rifles don't need to close to beat Grens)
-At vet 3 a riflemen squad with no upgrades can close from max range and beat a Vet 5 Volks squad with no upgrades 1 on 1 with 97.5% (only had the riflemen lose once due to insane RNG  )
-Addition of upgrades to Vet 3 Riflemen give them basically a 100% chance of beating Vet 5 Volks even at mid to far range.
-A vet 3 conscript squad with no upgrades can close from max to close against Vet 3 LMG Grens and win 49.2% of the time (wins were often insanely close, with 1 member always being left on each side with almost no health left)
-A vet 3 PPSH Conscript squad can close from max to close against Vet 3 LMG Grens and win 68.87% of the time.
-A vet 3 conscript squad with no upgrades can close from max to close against Vet 5 Volks with no upgrades and win 62% of the time. RNG jesus holds a lot of say here.
-A vet 3 conscript squad with PPSH's can close from max to close against Vet 5 volks with no upgrades and win 83% of the time. RNG matters a lot less with the more accurate and less RNG dependent PPSH's.
Conclusion: Hard to really say that LMG Gren's are just "A-move to win" when almost every Vet 3 Allied equivalent squad can literally run up to them and win with often 60%+ reliability 
I'd say the conclusion is: Inconclusive, because you'd need to run these tests a lot more times than you probably ran them to get close to the right numbers. Also, you're only testing this one specific 1v1 combat scenario, which doesn't really asses the value of each squad completely, since there are any other scenarios in which units would engage each other.
It doesn't really address the point of the OP, which is, should grenadiers get another model while keeping their current DPS, to increase their survivability against explosives/tank shells? |
It means they rely on direct hits, like infantry small arms instead of scatter hits, like tank guns.
Ah ok, makes sense. Thanks! |
Before they were attacking like pre patch OKW T4 truck.
Now they attack like pre patch Bofors.
Right, but what does that mean? If they weren't attacking using accuracy, then how were they attacking? visually it looks the same to me, but I'm more curious about the under the hood specifics. |
Desalinated enough to stop raging about the patch, I guess as I already looked this stuff up on patch day I might as well post it...
Luchs, FlakHT and FlakHQ changed into accuracy based attacks like centaur with less aoe than before. They're all somewhat better against stuff in buildings.
FlakHT is generally better at suppressing but seemed worse at killing. (penetration nerfed from 20/25/30 to 20/20/20)
Luchs around the same against spread out models and worse against clumped up ones. (penetration buffed from 15/20/25 to 25/25/25)
FlakHQ is just insane against infantry again
Can you clarify what this means? How were the flak weapons attacking before if they weren't using accuracy? |
.91*.77=0.7007
You're right. My mistake. For some reason I thought they got .71 at vet3. Maybe because I had falls stats open at the same time and looked at the wrong thing. |
I never said that the rifles are fine, what I said was that you can't use a replay like that to justify your opinion.
Rifles NEED to be great, because they are USFs ONLY infantry unit. They were terrible before, and they are probably too strong this patch, but they definitely need to be at the level of elite infantry when they hit vet3 with 2x BARs, because you are investing a lot more into them than any other baseline infantry squad (with the exception of Brits).
But anyways, you are derailing this thread. The point of this thread was to talk about blobbing.
Tanks still work great against rifles, as do mgs. The point of this thread was to talk about blobs, and that is an issue that does not exist, since blobbing is just as effective now as it was last patch.
Also, panzerwerfers are a lot stronger now. They will punish rifle blobs pretty hard. Not to mention LeIG being really damn good with the changes they made to it's suppresion so that it's more consistent. I had a mortar team get pinned in one shot from the LeIG. |
Dude we didn't lose the game, did you even watch the replay 
This also doesn't address any of my other points about Riflemen having vet that's more powerful than units with smaller model counts that cost much more per individual model. You said in another thread IS pay for their good vet in cost, but here you seem to be saying the opposite?
No 5 man squad that costs less per model than many 4 man squads should not have superior received accuracy to those 4 man squads
Like, this has nothing to do with "I played a game, I lost tearstearstears", this is a legitimate problem you are dismissing out of hand for unknown reasons. Do you have some sort of argument for why Rifles should cost 280 MP and have superior scaling to more expensive units as well as retaining excellent versatility?
Effective Health Against Small Arms = Cumulative Health of Unit/Received Accuracy Unit or Chance to Bounce Shots with Armor
Vet 3 Grens have 457 effective health (4*80)/.7007
Vet 3 Rifles have 714 effective health (5*80)/.56
Vet 3 Fallsch have 581 effective health (4*80)/.55
Vet 5 Sturms have 627 effective health (4*80)/.51
and so on and so forth, can you see what the issue is here or do I need to make it even more explicit for you?
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe your grenadier numbers are incorrect. They have .646 received accuracy at vet3. Maybe you forgot that they start with .91? |
I would honestly like to see the replay where an OKW HT beat the M5(with Quad upgrade), it's not possible unless the other person is afk or spamming the stop command on it.
I had it happen to me. The flak HT was already deployed when I approached it, and since people were saying how easily it wins, I figured it'd be fine, but I ended up losing it. Unfortunately, this happened a while ago so I don't have the replay. Might have been one of those rare occurrences.
EDIT: I'll do some tests with the cheatmod and post results if you want. |
OKW Flak HT (55 Fuel), USF AA HT (60 Fuel). Both vehicles serve the same purpose like the M5 while being outclassed by it. The OKW flak HT looses in a 1vs1 against the M5. And of course the M5 can reinforce. They all have the same hp.
You don't compare units with their counters, like you did with the puma, but with units that serve the same role.
Munition costs for the upgrade can be neglected. They don't delay your tech and you don't have crucial upgrades or munition sinks that you need to spend the munitions on.
Comparing them in a one on one fight doesn't make one better than the other. I've also seen a okw flak HT beat a M5, so it's not as one sided. It's like saying the Zis is OP because it can beat a pak40 one on one.
That being said, I think the quad cannon upgrade should be gated behind T4. The main issue is the timing of it, and since soviets float more ammo, it's really easy to get the upgrade almost immediately when it's built. |
You have literally never used the MG34, I don't think those are good credentials for judging it's performance.
I steal it all the time from OKW players. It's great.
MG34 is fine as is.
He plays as okw.
well both side says their argument already not much can really add to. just see if Jason or Brad see this and if they want to change anything or not is really up to them. so really no point to bring any heat into this.
Agreed. I've made all my points, he's made his. I will consider this discussion closed on my end. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
