Login

russian armor

Rifle grenade=dodge BUT allied grenade=MP bleed

6 Aug 2020, 15:33 PM
#41
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351


I agree allied nades are more cost effective but they use nades far less then axis. This cuz they are either tech or doctrinaly locked. Also sections and rifles are very expensive to upgrade. This in turn leads to less midel losses overall and probably evens out the bleed across factions.
(Edited)

Not really. This grenade sidetech is not always used only because allied players prefer to get AEC, T70, or generally armour as soon as possible. They also prefer not to spend resources (fuel, monpower, munitions) on nades because they can be dodged (to many players weapon upgrades or offmaps are better in the long run). Having a vehicle faster usually will bleed the enemy more reliably and will save munitions on the mentioned upgrades or offmaps. Plus elite infantry units get grenades irrespective of extra tech premium. So what happens is that extra tech can be skipped to have vehicles faster (axis can't really do that) and elite infantry squads will have their grenades anyway.

Footnote: with UKF grenade tech is actually recommended instead of weapon upgrades early game (probably due to their grenade great cost/power efficiency)
6 Aug 2020, 18:07 PM
#42
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289


Not really. This grenade sidetech is not always used only because allied players prefer to get AEC, T70, or generally armour as soon as possible. They also prefer not to spend resources (fuel, monpower, munitions) on nades because they can be dodged (to many players weapon upgrades or offmaps are better in the long run). Having a vehicle faster usually will bleed the enemy more reliably and will save munitions on the mentioned upgrades or offmaps. Plus elite infantry units get grenades irrespective of extra tech premium. So what happens is that extra tech can be skipped to have vehicles faster (axis can't really do that) and elite infantry squads will have their grenades anyway.

Footnote: with UKF grenade tech is actually recommended instead of weapon upgrades early game (probably due to their grenade great cost/power efficiency)


I cant comment on the aec, i dont play brits much.

The t70 however is not a preverence, it is a must and is used because its the only reliable way they put the pressure on the enemy. As soviets have no nades or upgrades stock. Unlike all other armies, they cant put out as much bleed let alone wipe until the t70 arrives. They dont scale as well towards the mid game without it.

It also arrives very late. Giving ample time to prepare for it, you know its coming regardless of how well its going.

Skipping the extra cost leaves you without nades snares or upgrads for inf depending on the faction. This will put even more importanc/pressure on that lv. Its a risk you take.
7 Aug 2020, 01:42 AM
#43
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Not reading the whole thread but my 2¢: rifle nades really are not bad but require crafty usage for best results. Being able to shoot them from so far without any indication but an animation means shot blockers into enemies in cover are devistating. They are not necessarily worse but are different and that's OK especially since they are included in the cost of one of the cheaper mainlines around and I'd argue work well with grens main role of long range infantry based around supporting their mg42 as it can be combined with the slowing effect of suppression and the natural player instinct to get their infantry in cover to either fore retreat or render the enemy squad inert.

Allied nades have more raw power but less flexible application and an additional cost in both resources and time afd allied squads that use the nade (excluding brit tommies who have cannons instead of arms) generally have to expose themselves to more danger to make use of them.

Tldr. Different but not neceshsarily worse.
7 Aug 2020, 06:34 AM
#44
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289



Tldr. Different but not neceshsarily worse.


Yeah indeed. I did not say its the worst nor the best. Juat that in certain situations its very deadly. And can occasion wipe full health bunched up squads.
7 Aug 2020, 07:25 AM
#45
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Similar grenade use skills will lead to similar number of models killed for both allies and axis. This will usually transfer to more manpower lost for the axis, especially ostheer. Different model count for squads affects the grenade balance. It is also one of the reasons why osttruppen doctrines are popular.
7 Aug 2020, 10:39 AM
#46
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

Similar grenade use skills will lead to similar number of models killed for both allies and axis. This will usually transfer to more manpower lost for the axis, especially ostheer. Different model count for squads affects the grenade balance. It is also one of the reasons why osttruppen doctrines are popular.


Check the aftermatch grahps. It tends to show allies lost more models, lost more tanks, more damage taken due to the overall but not every case higher dps and mostly more durable tanks. This is mostly the case unless axis where dominated that game.

The higher reinforce cost for inf and pricier tanks for axis even it out at the end.
7 Aug 2020, 14:03 PM
#47
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



Check the aftermatch grahps. It tends to show allies lost more models, lost more tanks, more damage taken due to the overall but not every case higher dps and mostly more durable tanks. This is mostly the case unless axis where dominated that game.

The higher reinforce cost for inf and pricier tanks for axis even it out at the end.


But it has nothing to do with that. What matters is the cost of models. With osttruppen builds ostheer will probably lose more models. With elite infantry builds it will be fewer.

Grenades kill 80hp entities. The manpower cost is different for different models but grenades treat them the same. So killing an obersldaten model will cost okw 40 manpower while killing a shocktroop or guards model will cost much less. Grens will lose 30 manpower per model while cons will lose much less, etc. Same for UKF and USF infantry.
7 Aug 2020, 14:12 PM
#48
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289



But it has nothing to do with that. What matters is the cost of models. With osttruppen builds ostheer will probably lose more models. With elite infantry builds it will be fewer.

Grenades kill 80hp entities. The manpower cost is different for different models but grenades treat them the same. So killing an obersldaten model will cost okw 40 manpower while killing a shocktroop or guards model will cost much less. Grens will lose 30 manpower per model while cons will lose much less, etc. Same for UKF and USF infantry.


It has everything to do with it.

Say conscripts loose 50 models in a game. For simplicity take them at 18mp reinforce after the upgrade. Thats 900mp for reinforcing.

Grens loose 30 models x 30 reinforce thats also 900 mp.

Soviets loose the most models by far. Hence cheap reinforcing is a trait to stem the bleed.

Cons have about 30% more losses but the mp spent on reinforcing is about the same.

Rifles also drop more models then grens overall. Hence their slightly cheaper reinforce cost.

It all evens out about equally in the end.
7 Aug 2020, 14:17 PM
#49
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



It has everything to do with it.

Say conscripts loose 50 models in a game. For simplicity take them at 18mp reinforce after the upgrade. Thats 900mp for reinforcing.

Grens loose 30 models x 30 reinforce thats also 900 mp.

Soviets loose the most models by far. Hence cheap reinforcing is a trait to stem the bleed.

Cons have about 30% more losses but the mp spent on reinforcing is about the same.

Rifles also drop more models then grens overall. Hence their slightly cheaper reinforce cost.

It all evens out about equally in the end.


That is a very wrong way of thinking I'm afraid. Grenades don't differentiate whether the squad is a con or obersoldaten squad. If they kill two models on each that is 80 vs 40 manpower and the cost of the grenade was the same. That means that grenades can be more effective pricewise for the allies.

Your concept of allied players losing more models is just very arbitrary. Very often it depends so much more on types of infantry a player uses than on the faction itself. Why do you say that conscripts will lose 50 models for the 30 models lost on the gren squads? That probably means that the Soviet player just retreats too late.
7 Aug 2020, 14:26 PM
#50
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

Grenades don't differentiate whether the squad is a con or obersoldaten squad.

Funny you say that, because with recent vet changes they actually do.

Vet3 grens can't be killed by nade as long as they have more then 80% health.
Earlier something similar applied to Rangers as well, but it got removed and replaced by rec acc.

Also, you're both completely wrong on reinforcement costs.

Basic old formula is (total squad cost/model count/2), there are exceptions and vast majority of these exceptions come from axis units that have cheaper reinforce(like aforementioned obers who used to have 50mp reinforce cost) or penals who reinforce for more then the formula would indicate as a result of balance tweaks.

To understand all the tweaks and changes, you'd have to go through 7 years of patch notes, but that's general formula.
7 Aug 2020, 14:39 PM
#51
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351


Funny you say that, because with recent vet changes they actually do.

Vet3 grens can't be killed by nade as long as they have more then 80% health.
Earlier something similar applied to Rangers as well, but it got removed and replaced by rec acc.

Also, you're both completely wrong on reinforcement costs.

Basic old formula is (total squad cost/model count/2), there are exceptions and vast majority of these exceptions come from axis units that have cheaper reinforce(like aforementioned obers who used to have 50mp reinforce cost) or penals who reinforce for more then the formula would indicate as a result of balance tweaks.

To understand all the tweaks and changes, you'd have to go through 7 years of patch notes, but that's general formula.

None of this changes the general pattern. One situation with vet 3 above 80% health gren squad changes nothing tbh. Just an exception from the rule which does not change the rule.

How mp per model is counted changes nothing in this discussion, either.
7 Aug 2020, 15:35 PM
#52
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289


None of this changes the general pattern. One situation with vet 3 above 80% health gren squad changes nothing tbh. Just an exception from the rule which does not change the rule.

How mp per model is counted changes nothing in this discussion, either.


You look at the one thing that is how effevtive every grenade type is. That is limited to a handfull of cases throughout the game.
You give a very short sighted perspective esp when you use the 30 mp per model vs 18/20 per model.
With grenades larger squads are easier to hit with grenades cuz of models jumping in all directions.

The p4 killing 3 models in a single shot is not uncommon. This has to do with the spacing again. The t34 will almost never do this vs ost because of fewer models that can clump or jump together.

I will leave it here. I dont think you can move past everything is worse for axis period. Good luck with that.
7 Aug 2020, 15:38 PM
#53
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289


Funny you say that, because with recent vet changes they actually do.

Vet3 grens can't be killed by nade as long as they have more then 80% health.
Earlier something similar applied to Rangers as well, but it got removed and replaced by rec acc.

Also, you're both completely wrong on reinforcement costs.

Basic old formula is (total squad cost/model count/2), there are exceptions and vast majority of these exceptions come from axis units that have cheaper reinforce(like aforementioned obers who used to have 50mp reinforce cost) or penals who reinforce for more then the formula would indicate as a result of balance tweaks.

To understand all the tweaks and changes, you'd have to go through 7 years of patch notes, but that's general formula.


I wasent talking about the reinforce formula. I was talking about damage done and taken by soviet and ost. How soviets mostly take much more damage but cuz of lower reinforce cost loosing about 30% more models is same in costs of mp.
7 Aug 2020, 15:56 PM
#54
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



I wasent talking about the reinforce formula. I was talking about damage done and taken by soviet and ost. How soviets mostly take much more damage but cuz of lower reinforce cost loosing about 30% more models is same in costs of mp.

But it just does not have to be like that. Cons, like most larger squads, often will first lose health and then will start losing models. Because they have more health than smaller squads they will usually start losing models later. If you retreat in time and don't charge them into stronger units they won't bleed you much. Generally, there is little value in this logic when it comes to discussing grenade power.
7 Aug 2020, 18:33 PM
#55
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289


But it just does not have to be like that. Cons, like most larger squads, often will first lose health and then will start losing models. Because they have more health than smaller squads they will usually start losing models later. If you retreat in time and don't charge them into stronger units they won't bleed you much. Generally, there is little value in this logic when it comes to discussing grenade power.


You dont need to explain the game to me. I know when to retreat and when not to engage. Dont worry.
Larger squads tend to have less firepower then simaler priced smaller squads, esp at long range. (Sections being sections i know)
More dps means more killing power, more hp inevatably leads to taking more damage. Esp if you dont get nades or upgrades or both and the enemy does get one or both.
Thats the tradeoff you know.

Ost has 2 nades stock, soviet has none stock. The other factions have 1 stock. Usf is the most muni intense faction and most people dont tech their nades. Ukf does use it more often.

So how does this translate to ost suffering more? They dont just differently because of the high mp for reinforcing.
7 Aug 2020, 19:04 PM
#56
avatar of DerKuhlmann

Posts: 465

With usa nade bulletin and vet 3 riflemen can throw the same distance as a rifle grenade

same with brits

same with conscripts molotow

ostheer just get the nade range first
7 Aug 2020, 19:33 PM
#57
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8


None of this changes the general pattern. One situation with vet 3 above 80% health gren squad changes nothing tbh. Just an exception from the rule which does not change the rule.

How mp per model is counted changes nothing in this discussion, either.

Did you even accepted the rule?
You know, the ACTUAL rule I have brought up?
Or are you saying that in context of that bullshit you have regurgitated earlier about reinforcement costs?
7 Aug 2020, 21:11 PM
#58
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

With usa nade bulletin and vet 3 riflemen can throw the same distance as a rifle grenade

same with brits

same with conscripts molotow

ostheer just get the nade range first


7% out of 15 range for the molly added ontop of 15 range does not make it into the 30 range of the rifle nade.

The molly vet allows it to be thrown faster not further. Its throw time is no longer in sssllloooowwww mmmooottttiiiiooonnnn. Lol
8 Aug 2020, 01:18 AM
#59
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351


Did you even accepted the rule?
You know, the ACTUAL rule I have brought up?
Or are you saying that in context of that bullshit you have regurgitated earlier about reinforcement costs?

All above is for moderation imo.

The rule You quote (how manpower per model is counted) is irrelevant to the discussion we were having. Axis usually pay more per model - that is important. How it is calculated does not really matter in the context of models killed by a grenade.

The fact that full health vet3 gren model will not be killed by a standard nade does not change much here.
8 Aug 2020, 08:09 AM
#60
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

The reinforcement cost rule no longer applies.

Imo the rule should actually return with some changes to unit categories. For instance CQB units should have a discount in reinforcement cost.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

642 users are online: 2 members and 640 guests
Nickbn, Crecer13
22 posts in the last 24h
51 posts in the last week
105 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44659
Welcome our newest member, Yourcounselling
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM