We're talking about Ostheer's Jaeger Command Squad, not OKW's Jaeger Light Infantry squads. Furthermore, the Allied elite infantry have bigger target sizes because they have more models.
Funny you should say that, because Jaeger Light Infantry are not at 3CP, not at 2CP, but at 1CP since the December Commander Revamp patch. And they are fine there since the tweaks.
Did you ever happen to hear about Shocktroopers? Or Guards?
Their target size is 0.91 (0.7 with vet) and they don't even get Panzergrenadier G43s but just the worse Grenadier G43s. The only difference with Grenadiers is one extra model and one extra G43 (and some abilities obviously). Sure, we could call that elite, but that is not Paratroopers/Rangers elite.
I repeat to everyone. This is an elite infantry, on the 5th vet they get from 0.8 to 0.47 Tagget size. The allies have no elite infantry with a target size of 0.5. And even 0.6.
If you want a Jagers for 2 cp, then adjust the cost with its performance and target size. This is not just grenadiers with g43. You of course are very gynius with such requests.
The Jaeger Command Squad is just a G43 Grenadier squad with an extra G43 model. Every other combat stat is the same as Grenadiers. They would get slaughtered every time by actual elite infantry like upgraded Paratroopers, which is exactly the problem of why they arrive too late.
If 2 CP timing would mean a cost increase, I'm all in for that.
No, they are too strong for 2 cp. Look at their high DPS and low target size. This is an elite infantry.
Paratroopers and Rangers are elite infantry, the Jaeger Command Squad is a beefed up mainline infantry unit. My point being that the command squad is not strong enough to justify 3 CP.
Not sure where the comparison with Pathfinders came from, considering both squads serve a different role, with Pathfinders having a damage crit, making them good supporting units. Pathfinders actually win at long range against the command squad because of said crit.
On second consideration, 1 CP would be too low for the command squad, considering the G43 upgrade comes at 2 CP. So 2 CP would fit them perfectly.
NO. If we want Jeager to 1-2CP. WE ALSO NEED PARATROOPERS to 1-2CP. U want buff for JEager. Otherwise, the riflemams will lose any fight
Are these hot discussions on the balance forum read by developers? Or they only read the forum coh2beta? I think that only two people work in the balance team.
It seems to me that the developers only look at the results of the tournaments. And after the tournaments they make patches.
At maximum range (35), the Rifle's Garand has ~1.7dps, the M1919 has 8.76dps
4 x 1.7 + 8.76 = 15.56dps at 35 range
At maximum range (35), the Gren's K98k has ~2.26dps, the LGM42 has 8.93dps
3 x 2.26 + 8.93 = 15.71dps at 35 range
Riflemen have 5x 80hp, or a 400hp effective pool
Grens have 4x 80hp, or a 320hp effective pool
400hp/15.71dps = 25.4sec
320/15.56dps = 20.6sec
Rifles at max range w/ M1919 are 19% stronger than Grens w/ LMG42.
This doesn't take into account that for each model lost, grens lose 33% of their K98k damage, vs. 25% for Rifle's Garand. Also note that this becomes more in favor of Rifles the closer you get: The LMG42 stays around 0.2-0.3dps ahead at all ranges, but the 4x Garands fill in that DPS difference at range 25. On top of that, Rifle's have far, far better vet bonuses.
And what about vet3?
3.369 х 3 + 13.588 (mg34) = 23,695 (max range 35)
2.371 х 4 + 12.291 (m1919) = 21,755 (max range 35)
400/23,695 = 16,8 s
320/21,755 = 14.7 s
The difference in DPS - 14.29%
How much more expensive is the unit = 16.67% mp
How much more expensive m1919 = 16.67% muni
At the same time, m1919 is a weapon from the doctrine.
Given the fact that 1 vet is bad for the rifleman
Given the fact that the target size is very poor 0.97 vs 0.91.
This speaks of large losses at an early stage of the game, and the grenadiers, due to cheap and quick access to mg34, can be much more effective. So the grenadiers gain vet faster. And only on the 3rd Vete, there is a chance to win. Because vet 3 Grens - 0,7 target size, Rifle - 0,64.
Grenadiers are in a better position. Especially when at the beginning of the game they are covered by the best mg42 in the game.
And using your math, you will not hide the fact that the USF is the worst fraction in tournaments. This is the main reason why I discuss it here.
At maximum range (35), the Rifle's Garand has ~1.7dps, the M1919 has 8.76dps
4 x 1.7 + 8.76 = 15.56dps at 35 range
At maximum range (35), the Gren's K98k has ~2.26dps, the LGM42 has 8.93dps
3 x 2.26 + 8.93 = 15.71dps at 35 range
Riflemen have 5x 80hp, or a 400hp effective pool
Grens have 4x 80hp, or a 320hp effective pool
400hp/15.71dps = 25.4sec
320/15.56dps = 20.6sec
Rifles at max range w/ M1919 are 19% stronger than Grens w/ LMG42.
This doesn't take into account that for each model lost, grens lose 33% of their K98k damage, vs. 25% for Rifle's Garand. Also note that this becomes more in favor of Rifles the closer you get: The LMG42 stays around 0.2-0.3dps ahead at all ranges, but the 4x Garands fill in that DPS difference at range 25. On top of that, Rifle's have far, far better vet bonuses.
Send me a video where the grenadiers against rifleman with lmg. Without a vet and with a vet. Also consider veteran requirements. Who gets the vet faster?
Even if the arrows win, leaving behind one living model. This will be considered at least a fair, or acceptable result. Because m1919 is more expensive, and it is in the doctrine. In any case, it should be better.
But it turns out, weapons are more expensive - but worse.
There's some pretty good reasons as to why they're like that, but you seem to have missed those posts. And nobody actually "wants" 2x LMGs on grens, it would be fun, but horrendously overpowered. There's a difference between 'silly fun' and 'actual balance suggestions'.
But when the grenadiers (240 mp and lmg 60 muni) and the Riflemans (280 and doctrine lmg 70 muni) meet against each other, the grenadiers more often win.
Canada
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
