Login

russian armor

Assault Grenadier spam - every, single, game. What gives?

31 May 2020, 14:12 PM
#61
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1

Well I think to problem is more the power of the Thompson Upgrade which is incredible, according to https://coh2db.com/stats/#, close range (lower than 10), Thompson (took from rangers squad since they are 5 man squad) has 24 DPS while de MP40 has 15, plus the MP40 has bigger reload time and smaller burst. For comparison, a squad of Panzergrenadier with STG44 has only 15 DPS close range.

While this upgrade was only on paratroopers/rangers/assault guard there was no problem because it's performance fit the elite-infantry role, but such upgrade is now on Assault section (UKF) which are the british counterpart of Assaultgren and therefore outscale them hard.

there are at least 3 versions of the Thompson:
One for officers
One for Cav riflemen
One for Ranger/paras
31 May 2020, 14:13 PM
#62
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

Well I think to problem is more the power of the Thompson Upgrade which is incredible, according to https://coh2db.com/stats/#, close range (lower than 10), Thompson (took from rangers squad since they are 5 man squad) has 24 DPS while de MP40 has 15, plus the MP40 has bigger reload time and smaller burst. For comparison, a squad of Panzergrenadier with STG44 has only 15 DPS close range.

While this upgrade was only on paratroopers/rangers/assault guard there was no problem because it's performance fit the elite-infantry role, but such upgrade is now on Assault section (UKF) which are the british counterpart of Assaultgren and therefore outscale them hard.


Im fairly sure the thompson upgrade only gives 2 thompsons instead of kitting the whole squad so not really a fair comparison there. All the DPS calculations on Coh2db factor in reload and burst.

You are also comparing the max vet thompson to the vet 0 panzergrenadier stg which is misleading since the PGren stg has 23 dps at max vet. The para Thompson has 18.4 dps at vet 0(not 24).
31 May 2020, 15:00 PM
#63
avatar of Darkpiatre

Posts: 282

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 14:13 PMSerrith


Im fairly sure the thompson upgrade only gives 2 thompsons instead of kitting the whole squad so not really a fair comparison there. All the DPS calculations on Coh2db factor in reload and burst.

You are also comparing the max vet thompson to the vet 0 panzergrenadier stg which is misleading since the PGren stg has 23 dps at max vet. The para Thompson has 18.4 dps at vet 0(not 24).


Oups my bad, I tried to overlap those 2 but apparently failed.
The point is that STG DPS start with lower value and drop faster than thompson (starting from 5 range which is strange but ok). Same system was applied to PPSH/MP 40 but has lower DPS from the get go to compensate.IMO the problem lies here.

And yes the kit gives 2 thompsons, but with the approximation that Sten=MP40, my idea remain the same.

But I don't know which "thompson" is given to AS.
31 May 2020, 15:11 PM
#64
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1



Oups my bad, I tried to overlap those 2 but apparently failed.
The point is that STG DPS start with lower value and drop faster than thompson (starting from 5 range which is strange but ok). Same system was applied to PPSH/MP 40 but has lower DPS from the get go to compensate.IMO the problem lies here.

And yes the kit gives 2 thompsons, but with the approximation that Sten=MP40, my idea remain the same.

But I don't know which "thompson" is given to AS.

Main difference between Ranges/PAras Thompson and MP40 is the high DPS of Thompson at MID range which closer to that of an assault rifle.

Although some SMGs like shocks PPsh have also seen the MID DPS increase.
31 May 2020, 15:35 PM
#65
avatar of Darkpiatre

Posts: 282

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 15:11 PMVipper

Main difference between Ranges/PAras Thompson and MP40 is the high DPS of Thompson at MID range which closer to that of an assault rifle.

Although some SMGs like shocks PPsh have also seen the MID DPS increase.


regarding to the curve of the PPsh, if the starting point is lower, increasing it's midrange DPS doesn't make it quite comparable to the thompson and therefore is not a big issue.

I don't know if STG is a bit weak or Thompson a bit too powerfull, but IMO the ratio between these 2 shows the problem among CQ units and "Assault unit".
The difference between submachine gun (MP40,Thompson,sten,PPsh) / Assault Rifle (Bar,STG44) / LMG (mg42,bren,M19..) in terme of DPS Curve isn't clear.
31 May 2020, 15:53 PM
#66
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1



regarding to the curve of the PPsh, if the starting point is lower, increasing it's midrange DPS doesn't make it quite comparable to the thompson and therefore is not a big issue.

I don't know if STG is a bit weak or Thompson a bit too powerfull, but IMO the ratio between these 2 shows the problem among CQ units and "Assault unit".
The difference between submachine gun (MP40,Thompson,sten,PPsh) / Assault Rifle (Bar,STG44) / LMG (mg42,bren,M19..) in terme of DPS Curve isn't clear.

I agree and I would rather see more distinguished weapon profiles curves.

The reason about the original Thompson profile thou had some merit.

The carbine was already a great weapon at all ranges so Relic buffed "elite" Thompson profile at mid range so that it was a downgrade from the carbine.
31 May 2020, 16:13 PM
#67
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 14:12 PMVipper
there are at least 3 versions of the Thompson:
One for officers
One for Cav riflemen
One for Ranger/paras


There's only two, Cavalry Riflemen use the Paratrooper Thompson.
They just get two of them rather than four.
31 May 2020, 16:26 PM
#68
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1



There's only two, Cavalry Riflemen use the Paratrooper Thompson.
They just get two of them rather than four.

well the weapon list says a different story:
cavalry_m1_thompson_mp 16.2/16.2/2.2/0.4
captain_m1_thompson_mp 14.3/14.3/2.6/0.6
paratrooper_m1_thompson_mp 18.7/18.7/6.2/0.9
ranger_m1_thompson_mp 18.7/18.76.2/0.9
31 May 2020, 17:08 PM
#69
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

31 May 2020, 17:15 PM
#70
avatar of Darkpiatre

Posts: 282

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 15:53 PMVipper

The carbine was already a great weapon at all ranges so Relic buffed "elite" Thompson profile at mid range so that it was a downgrade from the carbine.


What a stange logic.
31 May 2020, 17:23 PM
#71
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1


My mistake, I guess I assumed that if one would go into the trouble of creating a weapon profile called "cavalry_m1_thompson_mp" one would actually use that profile for unit called cavalry riflemen.

It would also make more sense to be different weapons since Para Thompson is an elite weapon (with specific reason for a non smg profile)and Cav riflemen/AsIS are not.
31 May 2020, 18:22 PM
#72
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783



regarding to the curve of the PPsh, if the starting point is lower, increasing it's midrange DPS doesn't make it quite comparable to the thompson and therefore is not a big issue.

I don't know if STG is a bit weak or Thompson a bit too powerfull, but IMO the ratio between these 2 shows the problem among CQ units and "Assault unit".
The difference between submachine gun (MP40,Thompson,sten,PPsh) / Assault Rifle (Bar,STG44) / LMG (mg42,bren,M19..) in terme of DPS Curve isn't clear.



Well I wouldnt say PGrens are dedicated close range, the damage curve of the (pgren)StG implies medium range specialist. If you compare it to the thompson, you'll notice that while the Thompson has an edge out to around range 16, the STG has the edge from there to max range. Between the two, that long range capability makes the StG far more ubiquitous and a superior weapon if you could equip a bunch of squads with either.

While the Thompson does have a better damage curve and dps then the MP40, it exists on units with either a limited number of them(assault IS, cav rifles) or exists on expensive elite infantry coupled with a hefty upgrade cost.

I think both have a decent place at the moment, and if the mp40 is underpowered or the Thompson is overpowered, it's only by a very small margin if at all.
31 May 2020, 18:59 PM
#73
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 13:24 PMSerrith


What a coincidence, assault grenadiers DID receive a similar buff to rifles.

Wehrmacht - Strategic Reserves

Assault Grenadiers
.....

MP40 Changes

MP 40s are having their mid-range power increased to match SMGs like the M3 Grease gun used by Assault Engineers. This change also affects Assault Officer and Volksgrenadier MP 40s, but not other MP40 variants.

MP 40 Mid range cooldown from 1.25 to 1
MP 40 Mid accuracy from 0.24 to 0.375
MP40 reload frequency from 4/5 to 6
MP40 reload from 2.8/3.5 to 2.8



Essentially you have an increase of about 40% DPS at range 17. Rifle buff was an increase to near range of 3 which increased their dps at range 6 by about 10%, dropping off as it reaches the midrange of 16(shorter then the mp40).

Combined with the stock buff to RA+a previous buff to vet RA, and reduction in reinforcement cost, assault grenadiers have been solidified as a very decent early game CQC squad.
And yes, like most other SMG infantry, they do fall off in the late game, though the 6man upgrade does help them scale and retain their usefulness more then most other SMG infantry.




:)

Thanks for the info. But maybe that is the point. Instead of adjusting close range performance, mid range was adjusted, which is not where imo they should excel. Pzgrens are midrange guys. I'd make close range threshold a bit later and see what happens. Generally, the change should be rather small but may save them against those spread out models of the opposing squad.

Another route could be giving them a snare so that they can replace grens and the player would decide if they prefer long range grens or short range assault grens.
31 May 2020, 19:05 PM
#74
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3386 | Subs: 1


Can't agree here I'm afraid. They received pseudo-buff. The buff is meant to make them more viable lategame,


No they also recieved other buffs, as Serrith pointed out to you. Ass grens are fine

They are meant to be strong early and fall off late. That's how they're designed
31 May 2020, 19:06 PM
#75
avatar of Darkpiatre

Posts: 282

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 18:22 PMSerrith



Well I wouldnt say PGrens are dedicated close range, the damage curve of the (pgren)StG implies medium range specialist. If you compare it to the thompson, you'll notice that while the Thompson has an edge out to around range 16, the STG has the edge from there to max range. Between the two, that long range capability makes the StG far more ubiquitous and a superior weapon if you could equip a bunch of squads with either.

While the Thompson does have a better damage curve and dps then the MP40, it exists on units with either a limited number of them(assault IS, cav rifles) or exists on expensive elite infantry coupled with a hefty upgrade cost.

I think both have a decent place at the moment, and if the mp40 is underpowered or the Thompson is overpowered, it's only by a very small margin if at all.


After some test I think you're right for those unit, but I really find Panzergrenadier are in a weird spot since the proliferation of CQC units, a rushing ranger thompson always win against a stationary Panzergren, which shouldn't be the case IMO.
31 May 2020, 19:22 PM
#76
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



No they also recieved other buffs, as Serrith pointed out to you. Ass grens are fine

They are meant to be strong early and fall off late. That's how they're designed


I understand. Still, a much better buff would be a snare that could carry them lategame by simply making the ost player not needing to buy regular grens. Sometimes players just want to get rid of them because they need a snare unit rather than an early game cqc unit that will lose against elite squads or vetted/upgraded mainlines lategame anyway.
31 May 2020, 19:28 PM
#77
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3386 | Subs: 1


I understand. Still, a much better buff would be a snare that could carry them lategame by simply making the ost player not needing to buy regular grens.


That is a HUGE buff and there's no reason for it. Vehicles are a main counter to ass grens and you want to change that completely


Sometimes players just want to get rid of them because they need a snare unit rather than an early game cqc unit that will lose against elite squads or vetted/upgraded mainlines lategame anyway.


Then don't build assgrens. The entire point is for you to make a tactical choice. It's your job to make their early game strength pay off
31 May 2020, 19:42 PM
#78
avatar of Aarotron

Posts: 563

I love assault grens as they give me way to play really offensove on otherwise defensive faction. Honestly they are good as they are, although i wish their upgrade was more creative than just one plus body.
31 May 2020, 19:42 PM
#79
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



That is a HUGE buff and there's no reason for it. Vehicles are a main counter to ass grens and you want to change that completely

There is a reason as they are not really chosen to play with. To have a snare you need to build tier 1 or 2 building, which means that there is some investment to be made and those snares are present only when a player decides to invest some resources into it. I also believe that snares are a soft counter and light could still kite and bleed them. The only difference would be that some more effort would be required on the allied player's end. Maybe even a similar effort that has to be made by the ost player to actually make them close in and be effective at their preferred range.

Then don't build assgrens. The entire point is for you to make a tactical choice. It's your job to make their early game strength pay off

They can be strong when there is more than one. Very often you just can;t build more of them if you plan to have a snare later. Another argument is that now most units have been adjusted to basically be useful through the whole length of the game to promote vetting them and unit preservation. I feel assgrens were rightly buffed but since they are not too popular probably means that a bit more adjustment could be risked.
31 May 2020, 20:38 PM
#80
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2020, 17:23 PMVipper
My mistake, I guess I assumed that if one would go into the trouble of creating a weapon profile called "cavalry_m1_thompson_mp" one would actually use that profile for unit called cavalry riflemen.


I believe that weapon is part of the Ardennes Assault Cavalry Riflemen, which is a different unit.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Diversity Cup Isi vs. Inca

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

269 users are online: 1 member and 268 guests
gunther09
18 posts in the last 24h
128 posts in the last week
588 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36287
Welcome our newest member, planehistoria
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM