You see that 2nd unit in your T0 HQ? the MG42?
Click it, it does wonders for that kind of problem.
Until it gets BTFO by US space laser mortar.
The imbalance created by the USF mortar for Ostheer can only be solved by buffing grenadiers to be able to make up for the uselessness of the MG42. and go against the ubiquitous mortar spam + rifleman squads. |
Oh my god this thread...
So many ppl whining about Wehrmacht, how on earth do you play this faction? Are you one of these "I build 1 MG, then I get 3 grens and put them all in a blob. And that pretty much explains my whole early + mid game " people?
Ostherr is fine, there is just no unit that can be used effective with 0 support.
Just combine mg with 1, max. 2 grens, AT gun, pzgrens, reinforcement halftrack, 222, and either snip or mortar at the front(depends on map) as BASIC army and there you go
Oh and just a little secret: If you abandon the idea that OST can be played like the other factions, then you are on the right way
If you have like every t1+t2 unit on the field (WITHOUT SPAMMING ONE OF IT LOL) ostheer is pretty dominating the majority of the games if the player has much micro knowledge
A variousity of units on the field combined with the right building order to counter the enemy (predicting what the enemy is going to build next) is the key
Ostheer is not "fine". Currently, the faction underperforms severely and the faction has a lack of late game infantry to combat the heavily buffed Western front infantry, in addition to shock troops and the new buffed penal battalions.
The main issues are the terrible investment that t4 is, the infantry situation, and the imbalance the USF mortar brings to the field in that it will wipe support weapons off the field in seconds. |
Why do you replying to me and not to that guy, who used these poll results as an argument?
I am pointing out how that Ostheer still had the most votes for "no" there is significant when considering the fact I mentioned in my previous post. |
44 out of 84 voters is hardly a "whole commuinty"
One must realize that poll is rather skewed to begin with, owing to the fact that people can vote yes to factions they do not care for out of spite. |
Then how about this:
You want grens to stand up to rifles and tommies.
They are NOT supposed to, because if they did, we'd have grenspam meta all over again, not to mention the broken balance relations vs every single allied infantry unit.
Most of the buff gren suggestions would make them easily outperform all of allied core infantry, its pretty clear that will never happen for the faction with early access to best supporting units.
Grens will never be buffed, because that is against their design, they perform well for the cost and within the role they have, they win vs what they are supposed to win, they lose vs units they are supposed to lose, you want to win vs units they are losing? Add HMG or sniper to the mix and there, you're now winning, because this is how the faction is intended to be played.
If you're focusing exclusively on grens, which about every single axis fanboy goal here is, you'll have a bad time, because again, the faction is NOT supposed to be played like that.
Because USF mortar is fine and balanced
That is NOT an argument, that is an excuse, poor one as well.
Which again boils down to mortar, which is a balance issue.
Tone that down and you won't have issue. Period.
If a singular unit is overperforming, you nerf that singular unit, you don't buff all units it counters, because then you'd end up in buff loop for everything.
You can't see that, I can-thats why I work with game design and you don't.
Once again, your arguments amount to a whole lot of nothing. Buffing grenadiers to prevent the incessant squadwiping and late game tendency to get smacked around would not somehow by default make them superior to opposing squads.
A balanced change can be done wherein grenadiers survivability can be increased to prevent them from just becoming a totally wasted investment. This does not mean that they must be superior to the various allied infantry squads.
For someone claiming to work with game design you really seem quite clueless! |
Snipers and Mg's.....USF has no proper counter...GG
Snipers are not always viable dependent on the map, and USF mortar is the best counter in the game currently to the MG42. |
Ost always had high micro tax, but recent changed gave it many indirect buffs, mine change alone is HUGE as there are not longer random squad loses, while s-mines still wipe squads with 2-3 mines.
The moment you will finally realize that grenspam is dead and combined arms is the ONLY way to go will be the moment you'll stop thinking that.
Don't play 4v4?
There are no blobs in 5th minute, unless you play that scrubfest.
Well, it wasn't supposed to be a doomsday, it still is incomparably better and much more deadly then katy.
Ostheer has smoke option from the very first building they can get, they have it doctrinal on the tanks and as off-map plane. Their smoke options are enough, but the only single player I've ever seen utilizing them was StephennJF.
British are designed to fight heavy tanks with ease.
You might want to consider that next time you'll want to get a tiger against them.
You might want to check Pershings HP, armor and cost.
Because it was batshit OP, eliminated need for scouting, allowed for pretty much map hack with spotting scopes and rewarded no skill.
Same thing happened to ISU.
Now I'm 100% positive that you're mental or at the very least under the influence of some serious hard drugs.
The strong point of ost is combined arms, if you will constantly keep ignoring the options you have, you will always feel weak, because you yourself are limiting your options, despite having everything you need.
Repeating the mantra that "grenspam is dead" is not a legitimate argument against buffing grenadiers to make them a more worthwhile investment. Combined arms are used by the vast majority of Ostheer players, yet due to the recent patch we are seeing MG42s get wiped within literally seconds against the USF mortar.
The combined arms capacity of Ostheer is not that remarkable compared to its counterparts. The one build order fits all playstyle of USF right now is what hurts Ostheer the most, and it is quite evident in matches with the ubiquitous mortar+rifleman into stuart combination that creams any combined arms combination that Ostheer puts together in the early portion of a match. |
Not in favor of banning a myself, but a faction veto option in lieu of administrative action when there's a serious exploit like this would be nice. |
While the guy is possibly a troll trying to make people advocating ostheer buffs look dumb by an appeal to ridicule, there is a good reason players are complaining about many of these various units. When the British came out and steamrolled everything and people whined they were accused of just being axis fanboys, but the proof was in the numbers and they got fixed and now British are ironically the most balanced faction. |
Grenadiers need work, no question about that. Conscript buff is fine to compensate, since conscripts aren't the endgame death blob problem and still wouldn't be to be even with buffed grenadiers.
Tier 4 is pretty weak. More worthwhile to spam stugs than make panthers really, gimmick tier. Mg42 would be fine without supreme usf mortar destroying it in 5 seconds, or 10 seconds if in a building. Panzer 4 has such low penetration it is pretty risky to make and waste resources on, if it's AT weren't in the dumps it would be decent.
Panthers AI is horrible comparatively to the comet. Reload takes forever as well, pigeonholing the economical player to just make stugs in a close match. Regardless, tier 4 is just not worth the cost. Infantry death blobs are ridiculous late game, mg42 isn't quite viable when you've got vetted upgraded tommies and riflemen running around creaming stuff with tank and USF mortar support to blow MGs back into the Stone Age. Ostheers infantry problem has been present for awhile, but the new usf instapwn mortar that comes out every single match has amplified the problem multifold |