Profile of A table

''If anything, volks got a buff when shreck got removed because of 2 STG's and a nondoctrinal snare.

With that said, the Raketenwerfer is quite powerfull but is prone to dying rather easiliy(hence the camo) and Pzershrecks on sturms are just a waste of that AI firepower early- game and the repair upgrade, the latter of which is needed later in the game with your high- health tanks.

Perhaps an solution is to give the Sturmpioneers 2 shrecks in the upgrade, remove the cold weather immunity bonus(Who TF left that? Cold weather is not even in automatch anymore, lmao) and increase price to 120 accordingly to match wehr Panzergrens.''

Copypasted this from my comment on another post discussing the exact same topic: OKW AT infantry. I think it is still relevant.

While I understand your point (the current allied blob is slightly less powerful than the OKW blob from 18 months ago), but how does that justify allied blobbing?

Blobbing from any faction is an issue that needs to be address. Blobbing breaks the core game-play principles of COH; cover, positioning, and strategic unit use.

With regards to the whether or not the OKW needs better AT infantry - no, they need a better AT gun.

I spit out my tea because of that gif, 10/10.

Regardless, i never said that allied blobbing is justified in any way.

The main power and issue with blobbing comes from 2 things:

1. The ''shock value'' of a blob when it is first encountered and the damage that it causes in that time- period;

2. The opposing player that doesn't(or can't, in some cases) put enough effort and/or recources to gather the required units to counter the enemy blob.


The first one speaks for itself, once a blob is first seen it can often do some, or large amounts of, damage to the opposing player because he could not prepare for it properly(aside from lucky recon aircraft that just happen to spot them before they are at the frontline, and even then more often than not the required counters aren't always there or available).

Once the blob is seen, any good player knows that he must spend a portion of his recources into counters for it, like heavy (rocket)artillery, or a dedicated AI(flame) tank, or perhaps even blob himself with dedicated AI- units. Obviously all of these must be supported with Heavy machine gun teams, or other forms of suppression, in order to suppress the advancing blob.

Once the tools are in place, the power of the blob vanishes over the course of several engagements. This means that there are often more losses to be replenished by the blobber, which makes MP- income rather tedious and lacking for him. That is the main weakpoint of the blob: A large consumption of MP that could have been used for caches, tanks, team weapons etc.

As for the second point, all of the above can only be applied if the player that wants to counter the blob is using those tools and weapons properly. This is why blobbing is only seen as succesfull in the lower level pools, where there are alot of players that simply don't have the skill yet to use those tools to their best effect. This is also why there are alot of blobbers around in the lower skill levels, as they don't nearly require as much micro(and thus skill) rather than keeping an eye on every unit on the map.

Once those players reach higher levels though, they more often than not get stomped upon by more skilled players who know what to do when a blob appears.


As for OKW needing an better AT gun, i couldn't agree more to be fair. The raketen has its niches like optical stealth technology which combines with the gun's good rate of fire at vet to utterly wreck any unprepared or unexpecting player, but its crew is extremely likely to perish to RNG mortar rounds or HE shells from the sherman. So far i can manage myself with panzerfausts on the volks to prevent them, but in the end i'd rather steal AT guns from the other factions if i have the chance.

Clamin that mortars and esp. Atg are solid counter pto bunkers is insane.

It's not insane, it is basic strategy and the way it should be handled in the early- game.

Just like british emplacements, they cost quite alot of valuable MP in the early- game(that you could be using for another infantry squad, weapon team or even caches in teamgames), take time and preperation to set up which is risky if it gets discovered, and are utterly sh!t upon by basic tools available from the start like(mechanized) mortars and Anti- tank guns, or they can be avoided entirely by just walking around a flank or different part of the map.

Though german bunkers can be annoying indeed, they are far from gamebreaking as some people would like to state.

you are totally wrong....yes---satchel do much dmg...to much when you compare other fausts versions.

3 stachels kill one panther...on a infntery unit which is very strong vs infantery too

if you would look the whole replay...you would see many situration where 2 or 3 guards do so much dmg with the ptrs....it not funny...

and than compare it with the dmg from 2 or 3 st pios with their fasut---the do nearly no dmg vs armor.

this is hillorous

The main issue is that the german player ALLOWS said penals and guards to close the distance with the panther, obviously making it a very nasty combo. The same would apply otherwise when allied armor closes in against grenadiers/volksgrenadiers, but then it would be the allied players fault right?


You're also leaving out the fact that satchel charges are considerably more expensive than panzerfausts for each use though the satchel is obviously more powerfull in return.

''if you would look the whole replay...you would see many situration where 2 or 3 guards do so much dmg with the ptrs....it not funny...''

Boo hoo hoo. try the same with panzershrecks at medium distance. 1 Volley of 6 panzershrecks from a PZrgrenadier squad would devastate a allied medium, yet with the PTRS it merely takes away less than half of the HP.

''and than compare it with the dmg from 2 or 3 st pios with their fasut---the do nearly no dmg vs armor.''

Not an suprising statement coming from you: Blatant misinformation.

''this is hillorous''

The fact that you can't even spell hilarious correctly, alongside your inept attempt at the english language, is hilarious.

Because bunkers are static buildings that any mortar or AT gun can smash in a few shots or multiple shells.