|
4-model squads combined with more health per model AND veterancy that was universal rather than specific to the squad meant that they were less likely to go down, and even if they did you didn't lose vet. Neither of these things carried over to CoH2, which makes the small size much more of a liability than it was in CoH1. |
|
I think wongtp makes a good point about weapon racks. Even though I still have concerns about small squad sizes, when they were going up against soviet conscripts, before WFA, they were more or less fine. But with the weapon racks, two things happen; not only are now up against opponents that outnumber them, but also at least equal them in firepower.
On top of this, all the LMG's radically speed up the pace of the engagement, which means the player has less time to react to a situation going bad. And realistically, you have hit retreat when down to 2 models, in case you lose one on retreat. So the grens end up having no staying power, little field presence, and feed vet to the opponent while gaining little themselves.
All of that, combined with the fact that one bad mortar round, or an unlucky mine, or a tank shot while bunched at a doorway, can wipe them, means it seems increasingly difficult for Ost infantry to gain and retain veterancy, and I think it is this ultimately that undermines them. |
What I'd really like to see though is a Con buff, make them less squishy from the start and give them some nice upgrades, cuz right now, they are close to useless in the late game, except for countering garrisons and snaring vehicles.
...and capping points, and providing vision, and screening for tanks etc. |
|
A "support" weapon should provide support to main line infantry, not displace them. Maxim spam does not look like a design intent, and probably needs to be tackled in some manner. |
|
I don't think penals were supposed to replace cons any more than panzergrendadiers replace grens. They are a utility unit that adds something to your composition; as such, a little more manpower cost for rifle flamers and the satchel charge seems entirely reasonable to me.
If Wehr bunker play was more present, penals would have an important function to fill. But bunkers are so soft that even a T-70 can clear them out relatively quickly, and the Zis even more so. |
|
Kubels don't stand up to rifles for very long. On to of that, this seems to be rather missing the point; your one unit is now occupying both your opponents first units, while they aren't even capping. Strategically, you're winning this. Even better, if you damage the kubel, which you will, then both units are also out of action for longer. By the time this resolves, even if it means you have to retreat a squad that's drop a few models, your opponent has achieved nothing at all while you gained map control. |
How do you counter sturms rushing in your base when you just started?
The only way is to blob 2 cons, or 2 penals, then imagine when they shelter in houses.
I asked about map presence; I'm suggesting you ignore them and cap the map. I did not argue that cons could easily take them down. |
|
Whether or not the Molotov is as good as the incendiary grenade is neither here nor there. I'm just pointing out that this is an expensive, slow to build unit, that is more exposed to this danger than grens or volks would be. And in the early game, DoT that reduces the health of the squad, even without killing a model, is still a big deal before the battlegruppe comes up.
I'm just quite sceptical that a heavy sturm build will work out well, and will remain so until I see it done. |
|
[unnecessary snark removed] |
|
Sturms have both long build times, and long reinforce times. How much map presence would you really get out of a heavy sturm build? And they have to get fairly close, which makes them rather more easy to Molotov than grens. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
