Login

russian armor

Are rangers overpriced?

19 Aug 2021, 22:46 PM
#1
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1238

So I've just tested some realistic scenarios:
Number of tests: About 5-6 of each scenario

Two sets of Rangers:
1) 3x BAR rangers
2) Tommies + 1x BAR

vs

3) OKW Obers infrared
4) Obers MG34

Rangers always vet3 and Obers vet5

I used 10 calliopes to carpet bomb the area (full of yellow cover). Both units were constantly in yellow cover. FOW removed, even before the engagements, both units are in yellow cover and charge over yellow cover. That is realistic for teamgames. Not gonna comment on 1v1 as I do not play that mode nor does that mode have carpet bombing and generally no war crimes are committed there.
3v3+ is where the fun begins and war crimes are left and right and the Geneva convention goes out the window.

I've tested the following things:

First I was testing the 3X BAR rangers

Infrared obers are in yellow cover and Rangers charge in:
Obers lose 0 models and wipe Rangers.



Then I swapped.
Now Rangers are in yellow cover and Obers charge in.
Obers on average lose, but Rangers are left with 2 models on average and very low HP.

Third scenario is where Obers do not charge and Rangers do not charge, but engage at medium distance both inside yellow craters.
Obers eat 3x Bar rangers with max 1 model drop.

Then I started testing 3x BAR rangers vs MG34 Obers.
Here Obers win on long range engagements in yellow cover AND when Rangers charge in.
Edit here: Forgot to mention. 3x bar rangers charging into mg34 obers is not a clear win for obers. they win with 1 model on average and quite low hp...Pyrrhic victory
If Obers go charging in with MG34 into 3x BAR rangers, Obers lose hard (only once did a ranger model drop). But that is just plain stupid for MG34 obers to charge in when you know they will win the long range engagement.

So I've tested 3x BAR rifles vs 2 specific weapon upgraded Obers.
________________________________________________________________________________




Then I've done the same but was testing tommies + BAR rangers vs Obers.


So now I've tested what happens when tommy + BAR Rangers run into infrared Obers:
Rangers running into infrared Obers. Obers dropped 2 models only once, rest were only 1 model dropped. 3 rangers go down even during the charge, 2 go down instantly close range but manage to take down one model before biting the dust.

Now I've tested what happens when Rangers run into MG34 Obers. Here Obers lose. They do take down a model or two during the charge, but once the tommies are up close and personal, the obers get wiped. Once Obers almost survived (1 model low hp left on Rangers).

This one is funny. MG34 Obers driving up to the Rangers asking for some Sausages yields 1 ranger model drop and a wiped Obers.
Of course, MG34 obers long range vs tommies + BAR rangers.... Obers only once dropped one model.

I didn't test the standing engagements of tommies + BAR rangers as they are only ever useful in close quarters. Don't expect them to win anything vs infrared yellow cover or MG34 long range yellow cover.
Point is, unless vs infrared, you need to charge in with tommies.




Which brings me to the following question:
Compared to the Obers, which are stock, should the Rangers get a price buff? They are doctrinal, 350 MP and 10 pop. Rifles are superior to volks but once obers arrive and get vet2, rifles pretty much don't stand a chance. Infrared Obers are monsters if the cover is plentiful.
Not only that, but the abilities of Rangers are quite poor. Except for the great 3x zook, they only have a nade. Obers have 2 nades. One toxic smoke and one bundle, which do not share CD (you can smoke, slow down the enemy and then nuke them). Booby trap and with infrared, the suppression.

Are rangers overpriced?


19 Aug 2021, 22:56 PM
#2
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 546

At the very least they should have a smoke nade - their scouting options are low in both docs
20 Aug 2021, 02:28 AM
#3
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5272

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Aug 2021, 22:56 PMKoRneY
At the very least they should have a smoke nade - their scouting options are low in both docs

USF has so much smoke it's not even funny. We don't need one squad army infantry. If you tech to tanks, you will have 3 squads of infantry with the capability to smoke without actually having to try and get em.
20 Aug 2021, 06:20 AM
#4
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

Maybe just cut some reinforcement cost so they can take losses.
20 Aug 2021, 11:04 AM
#5
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 84

Other than losing to obers, how good are 2XBAR rangers?
20 Aug 2021, 11:15 AM
#6
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12567 | Subs: 1

Other than losing to obers, how good are 2XBAR rangers?

Rangers have 3 slots and can equip up to 3 BARs.

The Thompson unlike other SMG remain good at mid ranges.

Generally speaking the unit can use a number of different type of weapons from long range rifles, to far to mid weapon likes BARs, Mid to close like Thomspons, Superior AT weapons or combination of these weapons.

The unit is not overpriced.
20 Aug 2021, 11:27 AM
#7
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 84

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Aug 2021, 11:15 AMVipper



The unit is not overpriced.

LMFAOOO
20 Aug 2021, 11:59 AM
#8
avatar of Geblobt

Posts: 197

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Aug 2021, 11:15 AMVipper


The unit is not overpriced.


The cost is fine. The popcap not. 9 popcap like other elite infantry is the way to go.
20 Aug 2021, 12:40 PM
#9
avatar of Eisernes Kreuz

Posts: 4

Rangers' problem is not combat power but lack of util skills to support their activities. Urban Assault has a cover to cover skill, but it is not good for individual squads.

And it's limited to fully harnessing the USF's strengths of weapons. At least if they had a smoke grenade, Satchel or Sprint, it could be used in a different way from Paratroops. There is little need to use the Ranger now that the Paratroops is perfectly compatible with the Rangers.
20 Aug 2021, 12:46 PM
#10
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 797

You point them at the enemy, move them close and use their ober-level 0.73 RA and shoot. Unit is very simple and can be extremely difficult to get rid of. You should not expect them to easily beat infantry that come later than them and have a gift basket for you.

A test vs Pzgrens would be more appropriate imho and rangers beat those guys hands down easily with weapon upgrades.

Thanks for the data though, cleared up some misgivings I had regarding the matchup. Will definitely improve my late game play in OKW vs USF, been seeing rangers a lot more.
20 Aug 2021, 12:53 PM
#11
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 546


USF has so much smoke it's not even funny. We don't need one squad army infantry. If you tech to tanks, you will have 3 squads of infantry with the capability to smoke without actually having to try and get em.


You still have to tech smoke. Rangers arrive without need for that.

But sure, something something about tanks and other stuff.
20 Aug 2021, 13:10 PM
#12
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 2569 | Subs: 4

Rangers are fine. Thompson Rangers are strong enough, and 3x bazooka Rangers with calliope is already a common cheese strat
20 Aug 2021, 13:21 PM
#13
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 487

Rangers were great back when they had damage reduction.

Then the damage reduction was removed with the reasoning being that nothing should be allowed to have damage reduction.

Fair Enough....

Then they gave damage reduction to Grenadiers the following patch. While Rangers were never given anything to compensate.

The issue with Rangers is not so much the combat performance which in itself is fine but the fact that USF needs to have 2-3 Rifleman on top of Officers and just adding Rangers on top of that will bitch slap your manpower into non existence.

Either Rifleman need a Reinforcement Cost Reduction, or Rangers need a reinforcement reduction.


Meanwhile when I play OKW, I am swimming in infinite Manpower while having just as many or more squads than a Comparable USF army due to how efficient they are.
20 Aug 2021, 13:21 PM
#14
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1238

Rangers are fine. Thompson Rangers are strong enough, and 3x bazooka Rangers with calliope is already a common cheese strat


I can vouch for ranger zooks. Haven't played them with the calliope all that much but 3x zook, albeit expensive, is a real mobile AT platform that can chase. Having a mobile AT is great in teamgames where the war-crime units like werfers and stukas are plentiful. However, being doctrinal and quite expensive, I do think they are too pricey for going toe to toe against other elites. I'd give them some utility OR decrease the price by 10 MP and 1 pop. Their combat performance is great, and Obers are the crème de la crème of elite units and there is nothing wrong with that. All that said, I still think rangers should get something little extra. Something unique.

I'm going to test them vs PGrens to see where they stand against the weaker elite unit.

One must also take into consideration that full upgraded rangers cost 150/180 munitions. And to invest such large sums of ammo AND to get absolutely sh**wrecked by a stock elite unit in MOST scenarios (eg. MG34 obers are only really good at medium to long range static engagements, whereas infrared shred, giving not two fu*** about cover)

EDIT: And as Kurobane said. 3x rifles + echelon + 2x officer really leads to infantry saturation. One one hand, if you go for less rifles and directly into an officer + ambo, you lose field presence that might get compensated (might being the key word) as the rangers arrive.
20 Aug 2021, 13:27 PM
#15
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12567 | Subs: 1

Rangers were great back when they had damage reduction.

Then the damage reduction was removed with the reasoning being that nothing should be allowed to have damage reduction.

Fair Enough....

Then they gave damage reduction to Grenadiers the following patch. While Rangers were never given anything to compensate.

...

There some thing that are inaccurate in this post.

A) The reasoning behind Damage reduction removal from rangers was it was not communicated to players and not that "nothing should be allowed to have damage reduction".

B) Ranger had their target size reduced so their durability vs small arm remained about the same so they did get something back.
20 Aug 2021, 13:28 PM
#16
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1238

You point them at the enemy, move them close and use their ober-level 0.73 RA and shoot. Unit is very simple and can be extremely difficult to get rid of. You should not expect them to easily beat infantry that come later than them and have a gift basket for you.

A test vs Pzgrens would be more appropriate imho and rangers beat those guys hands down easily with weapon upgrades.

Thanks for the data though, cleared up some misgivings I had regarding the matchup. Will definitely improve my late game play in OKW vs USF, been seeing rangers a lot more.


No problem.
And I never said "easily beat obers". I expect them to lose vs obers generally. But they do not just lose most engagements. They get shat upon by infrared's and you need to charge MG34. You will lose models but Obers will lose (if they don't use nades). Problem with charging is, Obers won't be alone, and a decent OKW player will always focus down the charging infantry, leaving the BAR rifles that supported the rangers, easy pickings for the obers + volks. BARs ofc being only good close to medium range, static.
20 Aug 2021, 13:34 PM
#17
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12567 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Aug 2021, 11:59 AMGeblobt


The cost is fine. The popcap not. 9 popcap like other elite infantry is the way to go.

Reducing the pop to 9 would probably be fine.

One could also try to move them away from commanders with other unique units like Calliope/Pershing and somehow redesign them.
20 Aug 2021, 16:25 PM
#18
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 707

Other than losing to obers, how good are 2XBAR rangers?

wasteful considering they can get 4x to thompsons, but it is much better then before, just don't expect elite infantry level DPS from them. Although they do become quite cost effective from it, unless they are fighting lmg obers. 3x BARs not recommended, because they will drop them way to often.
20 Aug 2021, 18:59 PM
#20
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 707


USF weakest faction confirmed

I bet obers won't say that when those guys will flank then with 4 thompsons lol. It straight up has better DPS then BAR at ranges close 18ish meters, while costing fraction of it.

Also 1 Ranger has better RA characteristics then 1 Stormtrooper.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

Board Info

121 users are online: 1 member and 120 guests
serg_codmod
11 posts in the last 24h
116 posts in the last week
616 posts in the last month
Registered members: 28426
Welcome our newest member, reagantaylor88
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM