Grenadier potential: Fighting fire with fire

nullist, support weapon crews are supposed to be vulnerable when flanked.

the problem here is, when you flank an soviet mg with a grenadier squad it doesn't do much.

buffing the armor for the german mg42 crew is not going help with that, and it doesn't solve the problem since it only adds another problem.

True enough.

Also true that since its a priority that Supoort crews are supposed to be vulnerable when flanked, why the hell are Sov Support Teams 1/3 more resilient against not only small arms, but everything else that can be thrown at them?

The problem is however that Maxim can still be rifle naded in the face. You don't have to be in close proximity to do so. 4 man Maxim will be more vulnerable than 4 man MG42. And what about German mortar?

The problem is however that Maxim can still be rifle naded in the face. You don't have to be in close proximity to do so. 4 man Maxim will be more vulnerable than 4 man MG42. And what about German mortar?

What about it? Are you kidding me right now? What about the 6-man soviet mortar that is more precise and at vet 1 gets precision strike? I don`t see you giving a shit about a support unit from ostheer side.The fact that Soviet mortar can rape anything with its ver ability in 1 shot while the Ostheer mortar has a fcking useless vet ability and is 4 models, makes your whole argument invalid.
Also I have never seen a riflenade kill 4 full hp models... Have you seen that? If you did show me a screenshot or a replay.

What about it? Are you kidding me right now? What about the 6-man soviet mortar that is more precise and at vet 1 gets precision strike? I don`t see you giving a shit about a support unit from ostheer side.The fact that Soviet mortar can rape anything with its ver ability in 1 shot while the Ostheer mortar has a fcking useless vet ability and is 4 models, makes your whole argument invalid.
Also I have never seen a riflenade kill 4 full hp models... Have you seen that? If you did show me a screenshot or a replay.

Do you really want to compare German and Soviet mortar? How about you try them cos right now you don't have a clue.

The problem is however that Maxim can still be rifle naded in the face. You don't have to be in close proximity to do so. 4 man Maxim will be more vulnerable than 4 man MG42. And what about German mortar?

Yes, that is a very valid point.

Especially a 4man Maxim would be very vulnerable to RNades from outside its arc.

German Mortar I already commented on eaelier, if you missed it, on my part.

If Ost teams are to remain 4man, and Sov Teams to remain 6man, then atleast give Ost Support Teams the armor they deserve for equal cost.

It means nothing vs anything except small arms, and in terms of small arms, it only makes them equal against them to what a Sov Support team is for the same cost. Nothing more, nothing less. Molotovs still work as before. Nades still work as before. Explosives ordnance still works like before.

The only thing it would change, is small arms dmg.
Cons have Molotov.
Guard have Nades.
Shocks have Nades.
Penals have Satchel.
Every Sov infantry has an exlposive to bypass the armor (except for CE, so what).

Ost support teams will STILL be as vulnerable to early game counters, as well, and in particular, later game explosive AoE ordnance. They will still be 4man for cost as compared to 6man for cost on Sov, that can soak that with less reinforce cost too.

4 man soviet support weapon crews would be rather useless. At least with conscripts you still need to flank and close the distance in order to push support weapons off the field. It still requires you to use superior tactics against your opponent as charging straight in will result in taking too many casualties, if you even make it that far without getting pinned.

With grenadiers you could just assault straight into the line of fire and de-crew any support weapon at long range with rifle grenades. It does not require much tactical genius to charge into a maxim and getting of one or two rifle grenades.

What about it? Are you kidding me right now? What about the 6-man soviet mortar that is more precise and at vet 1 gets precision strike? I don`t see you giving a shit about a support unit from ostheer side.The fact that Soviet mortar can rape anything with its ver ability in 1 shot while the Ostheer mortar has a fcking useless vet ability and is 4 models, makes your whole argument invalid.
Also I have never seen a riflenade kill 4 full hp models... Have you seen that? If you did show me a screenshot or a replay.

Soviet mortar is shit at vet 0 and really really great at vet 1 with its precision strike (which drains a lot of ammo if you abuse it).

German mortar is amazing clearing garrisoned houses with its barrage, but it doesn't have useful abilities when vetted as the soviet one. In paper its precision is lower but ingame it doesn't make much difference.

German mortar seems more useful at first, but a vetted soviet mortar is slighty OP.

And, yes, riflenades can kill 4 full health men, and sometimes 0. I think is the ability more RNG dependent in the whole game.
I will provide screenshot next time it happens to me.

The problem is that rifle grenades allow a Gren to frontally walk right up to a soviet maxim and kill 1/2 the crew. If the maxim had a crew of 4, absolutely no one would use them. Maxims are already underused as is.

Why do people want to "balance" maxims vs mg42s and soviet mortars vs german mortars isolated in a vacuum? Balance is far far more complex than that.

The GOAL of balance is give people incentive to use a broad variety of units. A unit that is rarely used is a hint, although not conclusive, that it may be underpowered.

@Aerohank, Link, Greeb:
(@Greeb specifically, check my comments on Mortar eaelier in thread)
(@Link specifically, underuse of a unit or ability can also indicate that something else is too effecrive and taking presedence)

Yes, reducing Sov Support Crew has already been eliminated as an option.
RNades alone are enough to quash that proposal due their non-flanking and ranged use, as well as the chances of catastrophic wipes due to model spacing,

4man Sov Support Teams is off the table, gentlemen.

Focus instead on 1.5 armor on Ost Teams.

The only thing it affects is small arms, and as I pointed out, every single Sov infantry unit (except CE) has a Nade ability to deploy anyways.

What is the rational reasoning behind Ost Support Teams being categorically 1/3 vulnerable to small arms, early game explosives and late game ones?

Hell, they even cost more to reinforce per model lost.

All a armor increase would do, is take the edge off of small arms.
And even then, as I demonstrated, each Sov infantry flanking unit can deploy a Nade ro force it out of positioning to which the armor is irrelevant.

Why do people want to "balance" maxims vs mg42s and soviet mortars vs german mortars isolated in a vacuum? Balance is far far more complex than that.

This sentence should end this pointless discussion.

@Aerohank, Link, Greeb:

Yes, reducing Sov Support Crew has already been eliminated as an option.
RNades alone are enough to quash that proposal.

(@Greeb specifically, check my comments on Mortar eaelier in thread)

Focus instead on 1.5 armor on Ost Teams.

The only thing it affects is small arms, and as I pointed out, every single Sov infantry unit (except CE) has a Nade ability to deploy anyways.

While overall this would bring the support weapons of the two factions more in line, it might be detrimental to the overall gameplay experience.

I think that everyone agrees that:
1: Soviet infantry units have a proper risk/reward against german support units; flanking pays of but charging straight in isn't very effective.
2: Things like sniper/mortar ROF are balanced between the two factions taking into account squad sizes.
3: German infantry units don't have a proper risk/reward against soviet support teams; the risk/reward of straight charges are balanced but flanking is not efficient.

In my opinion, point 1 should not be changed, but rather point 3 should. In order to not mess with point 2, maybe the soviet support weapons could use another damage taken bonus against small arms fire only. Currently they have +25% damage taken, maybe they could change this into +25% damage taken against explosives, +33%(?) damage taken against small arms fire.

This would leave most of the unit-balancing, like mortars, rifle grenades, molotovs etc, that we have so far intact, but will make german infantry flanks better against soviet support weapons.

This sentence should end this pointless discussion.

No, it shouldnt. Because it states that the other participants in discussion have presented their arguments in a vaccuum.

That is neither true, nor fair. Ive written close to several thousand words in this thread alone. Why? Cos its fun? No, its because thats how long it takes to try and include as many considerations as possible so as to SPEFICIALLY avoid a vacuumed argument.

I have SPECIFICALLY taken effort to include as many variables and considerations so as to SPECIFICALOY avoid making a vacuumed argument.

I think Link was addressing others however, or alteast, I hope so.
I tries to cover as many angles and to "air" the discussion as comprehensibly as possible to all possible variances.

If I missed some, feel free and by all means express them and include them in the discussion. I will include them in my consideration for sure.

I've recently noticed grens have become more lethal than previous patch(or cons have become even weaker), seems they've been ninja'd.

@Aerohank: Sounds like a viable alternative, and your explanation of it I mostly agree with.

I've recently noticed grens have become more lethal than previous patch(or cons have become even weaker), seems they've been ninja'd.

Its possible. This patch is riddled with unlisted changes.

Well have to wait for stat wizards to delve through all of that, if they even bother anymore.

Dunno man. Its pretty pathetic that nobody took the time to write all that shit out to the thousands in the community. If I was one of the guys who digs these stats uo after every patch, Id just say fuck it by now. If Relic cant be bothered to take the time to type the changes, why should I do their job for them.

I have to say Ive heard similar observations about Gren/Con after every single patch from different streamers. So I have to take that with peaked spoon of salt. (Nothing personal).

The point here however, is Support Weapon survival differential. Even if Gren/Con balance has somehow been upset, the Support Weapon issue is distanced enough from that to warrant consideration in and of itself.

In my opinion, point 1 should not be changed, but rather point 3 should. In order to not mess with point 2, maybe the soviet support weapons could use another damage taken bonus against small arms fire only. Currently they have +25% damage taken, maybe they could change this into +25% damage taken against explosives, +33%(?) damage taken against small arms fire.

Then a flanked maxim will be insta-raped by PGrens without having the possibility to pick up and flee.

The overall game gren/cons against maxim/mg42 seems fine. You summarized very well, one faction got more rewarded flanking maneuvers while the other got less punished if they charge straight forward.
And riflenade is a perfect way to start your engagement against a maxim with half the crew.

I've recently noticed grens have become more lethal than previous patch(or cons have become even weaker), seems they've been ninja'd.

Yes, VonIvan I had the same feeling but you are the 1st one to agree with me.
I guess I am not paranoid after all

Then a flanked maxim will be insta-raped by PGrens without having the possibility to pick up and flee.

And? Successful flank is successful flank.
And they did it without Oorah too.
L2reposition early. Not like its hard with the faster setup.

Are you trying to tell me you are getting flanked by PGrens?

The overall game gren/cons against maxim/mg42 seems fine.

Surely you mean an MG42 flanked by Cons seems fine.
Try what happens when you flank a Maxim with a Gren.
Oh wait, you havent. Cos 2 Ost games.

You summarized very well, one faction got more rewarded flanking maneuvers while the other got less punished if they charge straight forward.

What exactly is the reward for charging a Maxim straight forward with Grens?
What is this "reward" of that charge that you refer to?
Are you trying to say that Grens can charge a Maxim straight forward?

You do realise that Maxims still suppress almost 1s before MG42s?
Not to mention Grens have no OOrah to force charge half the distance of the arc in that second?

Seriously, this is beyond ridiculous. WTF am I reading?

And riflenade is a perfect way to start your engagement against a maxim with half the crew.

This part finally, and solely, is true of what youve said.
Yes, thats what RNade is for. Here, have a cookie for stating the obvious.

And riflenade is a perfect way to start your engagement against a maxim with half the crew.

I thought we were discussing support units in their full force? I guess I was wrong.

Do you really want to compare German and Soviet mortar? How about you try them cos right now you don't have a clue.

I tried them... And maybe its the RNG God or something else but for me Soviet mortar feels much better( not the 120mm) Sure you will struggle a bit until you vet it up but as soon as you do that look what you got a long range sniper that kills support squads with 1 shot.