I'll give the usual disclaimer - too many ppl (balance team included) have PTSD from the 'heavy tank era'/Tiger stalls. This sabotages possible buffs to even the IS-2. At this point I think it's more likely you'll see a KT buff than an IS-2 buff.
KT is in a very strong meta state in both teamgames and 1v1 atm, ovewatch is literally meta to be as cancerous as possible, including getting double jaegers at 1cp and stalling for p4.
Then getting a KT and if they don't have dedicated AA, you autowin because of quad stuka planes eviscerating any allied armor
PTRS is meant as an upgrade to keep penals threatening vs LVs and PzIVs (+AT satchel). It has never been a counter all Axis armour weapon and it's a bad Axis player who lets themselves get satcheled barring some fantastic plays.
With penals you get a very powerful 6 man, almost grenadier level dps squad that can outmuscle any inf squad 1v1 except SPs. You trade this for weak scaling lategame, including in the AT department. The PTRS has been buffed to make it much more responsive and require less 'set up' time before each shot, now comparable to other AT inf weapons.
PTRS has 40 range already, matching Pz IV/Luchs.
And it's actually not threatening at all, literally all you have to do is kite at max range with P4 and watch as his manpower bleeds like the Niagara Falls.AT guns do the same PTRS penals but it's obvious why they are all-around better, they're simply not effective because Inf-based AT weapons need high-burst damage, something the PTRS clearly lacks even with three of them, doing with 3 rifles as much DMG as a single PZshreck, with slow ROF to boot.
In the campaign it's actually modelled correctly, PTRS guards for example have a insane ROF and will take half a P4's health pool off in less than 7 seconds.I'm not saying it should be a "counter to all Axis armour" as I've stated in the OP, CE often times do nothing but plant mines and repair late game, they can't actually assist in a armor battle and giving them 2xPTRS would solve that whilst also giving them faster vet just because they plinked some rounds at a 222 or P4 from max range.
Even with the 23% received accuracy, in any prolonged fight PTRS penals had against any armor that wasn't a light tank, if they aren't behind some heavy cover they'll just get shredded and be forced to retreat within seconds.They don't work well as a AT squad, atleast if CE got those PTRS they would have a sustainable amount of MP bleed.
After playing them for a few months I think their main issue is VET. At Vet2 you have pretty much unlocked all of their performance. An extra 20% acc and cheaper satchel is pathetic for VET3. On top of that their Vet does not really give them any performance enhancement as an AT squad. They don't get extra damage/gun range/satchel range/re-enforce cost with vet. Extra acc means little due to PTRS acc and vehicle target size.
If there is another patch it will most likely be small so I would assume a small change for the unit. My suggestion would be a 10% rec acc buff as part of the upgrade so that they could be more aggressive and dont bleed you dry when they are.
My wish would be the ability to stow the upgrade away similar to minesweeper. That way if a vehicle is no longer around you don't have a useless unit around. It would also allow for some creative flanks and dives.
Thread is already going offcourse, the main point of the thread was whether giving CE 2xPTRS a good idea or not, Penals are a side tangent.
Penals should have been removed from T1 long ago and done something like Osttruppen. Give SVT-40 to conscripts as an upgrade. Penals have the dog's fifth paw, they had no place in the tiers from the very beginning and always overlapped the role with another infantry unit.
They were call-in inf in the campaign, little better than cons.They have no idea what to do with them in the multiplayer tho.
Now, I already do know no major patches for this game will be released further down the line, but I think it's something fun to think about.As it stands, Penals are a terrible choice to be lugging 3xPTRS due to their high reinforce+large squad size at the same time.Their large squad size doesn't even prevent vehicles like the OKW/OST P4s bullying them with their low scatter monster shots that often force even the largest squad size infantry to retreat after a single shell has been fired at them, Ostwinds can be forced to retreat provided you are behind heavy cover/garrisoned, but Brumbars will shit all over you with their nuke shells even if they miss due to the gigantic AOE of the shell.
Making TH cons into a non-doctrinal upgrade also might make cons way too favourable compared to Penals than they already are.
Sov CE seem like they are better suited for this role as cheap(21mp reinforce), AT-support infantry that could supplement your army with more AT defenses without sacrificing all of your 290MP 27reinforce squad's AI power.Due to the way the game functions and the low vet requirements for all the Engineering squads in this game giving them 2xPTRS would make them vet faster, in this way also being more useful as repairing squads due to faster vet gain.
I wouldn't give them more than 2xPTRS though to prevent them just being used in place of actual AT guns, you would be investening way too little for too much payoff in that way, sweepers would not be an upgrade that gets locked out by the PTRS upgrade because the balance team already seems to have made their mind up with Sturms being able to have sweepers and a pzshreck.Being that a single PTRS at maximum does 40DMG, 4x2=80 you won't be able to just a-move at their tanks and win like pzshrecks can do in low ranked matches, they're purely a defensive upgrade that could make the difference if, for example during repair-downtime your T-34 gets rushed by a Panther/P4 etc.
They are, in the sense that Penals are not a good squad template to be lugging around AT rifles.Their reinforce is too high at 27 and mobilize reserves doesn't help them at all in this regard.It would make more sense to give the soviet CE 2xPTRS instead or Cons PTRS non-doctrinal.
Probably for the same reason why a SU-85 can get more sight than UHU but that does not seem strange to you and does not even seem to bother you.
More sight for OKW please, my KT hasn't sniped a squad from max range in 4 minutes!!
SU85 has a reason to get that much sight, if even a Puma get's within 25m the SU85 is dead, it relies more on sight than any other TD due to it's sluggish mobility/top speed even at vet 3.Care to tell me why Panthers and STUGs can get SS?
Not everything should be as strong as p4 or tiger to be impactful, especially when 222 becomes available. it is only 30 fuel and very low popcap, so if you lose it, it is not a big deal. If it survives and gets vetted, you have a spotting LV. I remember watching Luvnest playing as OST in a tournament and picking elefant with scope commander. He vetted 222 to vet 3 and put scope on it. He saw almost whole map lmao.
TLDR; 222 is OP for it's low cost and investement value, it does everything well except in the health department.
You are unlikely to lose it early game if you properly micro it and avoid short-range allied snares, you vet it up to vet 2-3 and then just have it spot for your entire army from your backline, you don't even need SS but they are a huge bonus.
Also removing SS from Elefant did literally nothing, you can just build a P4 at the 12-15min mark, have it survive with SS till your Elefant arrives and then just spot and screen your Elefant's flank the whole game, extremely braindead easy strategy even someone with 700 hours can do.
In addition spotting scopes provide stationary vision while T-70 can move in reckon mode (can also cloak with AT doctrine).
So explain to me then why a P4 with SS has more sight than a VET3 T-70 in recon? Nobody cares about the second part lmfao, it such a negligable difference because you're gonna be standing still whilst trying to get sight anyway.
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
