Login

russian armor

Has anyone noticed Grenadiers are really good?

PAGES (8)down
25 Feb 2022, 22:12 PM
#41
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1482

I asked why the Ost MG42 is so OP, while they also have the best mortar, and an amazing AT gun. The response was "Because they have weak infantry, so they need better support weapons". This is a flat out lie. Last time I played as USF, LMG Grens were cutting my riflemen to pieces before they could force the God tier MG42 to retreat. They also have the best snare, best none doctrine LMG, and the best magic grenade that wipes retreating squads. The faction as a whole is overperforming.


Grens are the best mainline unit.... mid to long range. If you can close in to grens without dropping 2 models (eg sight blockers, yellow cover, flanks...), rifles will wipe the floor with them.
Problem is, most maps favor long range engagements and 90% of fights start at long range, meaning that grens can just sit behind an MG42 and camp it out. Best thing to do, if you're playing a large map against grens is to just buy a mortar and use it for smoke. Smoking out the MG42.
26 Feb 2022, 05:41 AM
#42
avatar of TickTack

Posts: 570

Werh feels like the best faction to me. It has all the tools and gets them at a consistent, rapid pace. It seems to act as a backbone of balancing, other factions balanced against it via comparison.

Sovs can outrush them end game with strong counters and combined arms.

I don't think ost is over performing, I think it feels more consistent than other factions which have strengths in different areas, e.g. Brits with extra arty or us with better infantry.
26 Feb 2022, 08:31 AM
#43
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 191

us with better infantry.


You mean the worst mainline infantry? Only paratroopers are actually good lategame
26 Feb 2022, 10:44 AM
#44
avatar of Geblobt

Posts: 211



You mean the worst mainline infantry? Only paratroopers are actually good lategame


+1. On top of that worst support weapons, worst mortar, worst healing, jacksons gets unrightfully nerfed every time thanks to balance team. USF just sucks. Worst faction by far.

Dont ask me why USF has 52% winrate in 1vs1 and 51% in 2vs2 in this patch. Must be visual bug. Them being played (compared to Brits RIP) in tournaments is just an expression of the bad state Rifleman are in atm. Im beggin the balance team to buff this trash unit. Thank you.

And when we are at it, can the balance team pls buff scotts? Idk why their barrage has cooldown and im not sure why a lategame unit has so low HP. Like just compare Brum to Scott and you clearly see the difference in bias. Just cause Axis units have to be all powerful while USF sucks.

26 Feb 2022, 12:20 PM
#45
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 191

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Feb 2022, 10:44 AMGeblobt


+1. On top of that worst support weapons, worst mortar, worst healing, jacksons gets unrightfully nerfed every time thanks to balance team. USF just sucks. Worst faction by far.

Dont ask me why USF has 52% winrate in 1vs1 and 51% in 2vs2 in this patch. Must be visual bug. Them being played (compared to Brits RIP) in tournaments is just an expression of the bad state Rifleman are in atm. Im beggin the balance team to buff this trash unit. Thank you.

And when we are at it, can the balance team pls buff scotts? Idk why their barrage has cooldown and im not sure why a lategame unit has so low HP. Like just compare Brum to Scott and you clearly see the difference in bias. Just cause Axis units have to be all powerful while USF sucks.



Still don't understand why the Brits are considered to be worse than USF on this forum when they have:
T0 HMG
Better infantry
Better TD
Mortar pit with long range HE barrage
Churchill crocodile
Comet
Sexton that does the same as the much more expensive Priest whilst being 90fuel
Hold the Line
Non-doctrinal 17pounder(situational since it's easily countered by static arty/Pzwerfer or Stukas)


They are supposedly "extremely-predictable" but I actually see different build orders as UKF early game, unlike USF which is always riflemen/pathfinder.
26 Feb 2022, 17:00 PM
#46
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 760



Still don't understand why the Brits are considered to be worse than USF on this forum when they have:
T0 HMG
Better infantry
Better TD
Mortar pit with long range HE barrage
Churchill crocodile
Comet
Sexton that does the same as the much more expensive Priest whilst being 90fuel
Hold the Line
Non-doctrinal 17pounder(situational since it's easily countered by static arty/Pzwerfer or Stukas)


They are supposedly "extremely-predictable" but I actually see different build orders as UKF early game, unlike USF which is always riflemen/pathfinder.


Because the ostheer with snipers+222+spearhead doctrine counters the whole faction with all doctrines. i do not make a joke with that. the brits perfrom far better vs the okw however
28 Feb 2022, 17:10 PM
#47
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1183

I asked why the Ost MG42 is so OP, while they also have the best mortar, and an amazing AT gun. The response was "Because they have weak infantry, so they need better support weapons". This is a flat out lie. Last time I played as USF, LMG Grens were cutting my riflemen to pieces before they could force the God tier MG42 to retreat. They also have the best snare, best none doctrine LMG, and the best magic grenade that wipes retreating squads. The faction as a whole is overperforming.


LMAO you are just hardcoping my friend. Here are some tips:

  • MG42 can also be flanked! Yes I know what a breakthrough concept! And what faction was it that heavily depends on a godtier light tank which is perfect for flanking? Maybe something with a red star in it idk.

28 Feb 2022, 21:50 PM
#48
avatar of OswaldMosley

Posts: 62



LMAO you are just hardcoping my friend. Here are some tips:

  • MG42 can also be flanked! Yes I know what a breakthrough concept! And what faction was it that heavily depends on a godtier light tank which is perfect for flanking? Maybe something with a red star in it idk.


Crying cope seems like a coping mechanism my guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiSUjPOsuPg
2 Mar 2022, 07:28 AM
#49
avatar of Mazianni

Posts: 774

I asked why the Ost MG42 is so OP, while they also have the best mortar, and an amazing AT gun. The response was "Because they have weak infantry, so they need better support weapons". This is a flat out lie. Last time I played as USF, LMG Grens were cutting my riflemen to pieces before they could force the God tier MG42 to retreat. They also have the best snare, best none doctrine LMG, and the best magic grenade that wipes retreating squads. The faction as a whole is overperforming.


Somewhere along the people who demanded Ostheer be considered the 'baseline' faction which all other factions are compared and contrasted with decided it needed to also lose all the factional weaknesses that developed from this arrangement, like squishy mainline infantry and vulnerability to premium indirect fire weapons due to the faction's static gameplay. Now, with the Pack Howitzer and ZiS-3 barrages nerfed and Grens essentially 5-man squads in the lategame, people wonder how we got here. Frankly I'm surprised the StuG hasn't been given 60 range main gun attacks by now.
2 Mar 2022, 07:34 AM
#50
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1



Somewhere along the people who demanded Ostheer be considered the 'baseline' faction which all other factions are compared and contrasted with decided it needed to also lose all the factional weaknesses that developed from this arrangement, like squishy mainline infantry and vulnerability to premium indirect fire weapons due to the faction's static gameplay. Now, with the Pack Howitzer and ZiS-3 barrages nerfed and Grens essentially 5-man squads in the lategame, people wonder how we got here. Frankly I'm surprised the StuG hasn't been given 60 range main gun attacks by now.

It seem you have little to no idea what a "benchmark" (not "baseline") is, if you think that a "benchmark" has an advantage.

Claiming that "benchmark" has an advantage is like claiming that a stick of 1 meter will suddenly become op if one switches to imperial and it becomes 39.37 inches...
2 Mar 2022, 07:54 AM
#51
avatar of Mazianni

Posts: 774

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Mar 2022, 07:34 AMVipper

It seem you have little to no idea what a "benchmark" (not "baseline").

Claiming that "benchmark" has an advantage is like saying that a stick of 1 meter is now op because one switched to imperial and it now 39.37 inches...


Hey look, it's the guy I was talking about. Still derailing threads with petty, pointless arguments and semantics when you don't have any substance to offer, I see. This time over two almost synonymous terms.

Of course, I can humor you this once, for old time's sake. The real comparison would be you saying that a stick of 1 metric meter should in fact be longer than 40 imperial inches, because FDR and the New York bankers with the funny little hats ruined Greece - or whatever it was you used to rant about in the shout.

That would be closer to the concept of the Ostheer 'benchmark' argument over the past few years than any idea of it being used to keep other factions in measurement. Indeed - as I detailed in my post, which you likely ignored as you always do - the result of this thinking has only been the removal of Ostheer weaknesses - areas where the meaningful deviation between factions was not in Ostheer's favor. I will not repeat myself in detail as my post is right above yours and you are perfectly capable of reading it, and I will likely not respond to you again unless you decide to contribute meaningfully to the thread topic instead of behaving like this again.
2 Mar 2022, 08:25 AM
#52
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1



Hey look, it's the guy I was talking about. Still derailing threads with petty, pointless arguments and semantics when you don't have any substance to offer, I see. This time over two almost synonymous terms.

Of course, I can humor you this once, for old time's sake. The real comparison would be you saying that a stick of 1 metric meter should in fact be longer than 40 imperial inches, because FDR and the New York bankers with the funny little hats ruined Greece - or whatever it was you used to rant about in the shout.

That would be closer to the concept of the Ostheer 'benchmark' argument over the past few years than any idea of it being used to keep other factions in measurement. Indeed - as I detailed in my post, which you likely ignored as you always do - the result of this thinking has only been the removal of Ostheer weaknesses - areas where the meaningful deviation between factions was not in Ostheer's favor. I will not repeat myself in detail as my post is right above yours and you are perfectly capable of reading it, and I will likely not respond to you again unless you decide to contribute meaningfully to the thread topic instead of behaving like this again.

"baseline" faction and removing faction design weakness are two completely different things.

Now if your argument is that that Ostheer weakness where removed/reduced well that happened to all factions and not just Ostheer.

For instance:
UKF no snares weakness now removed
USF limited access to support weapons now removed
Soviet not weapons upgrades now removed
OKW limited resources now removed

Now can you pls cut the "derail" and personal accusations (especially since you brought "baseline" into this thread) it only indicates a lack of arguments on your part.
2 Mar 2022, 13:07 PM
#53
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 471



Still don't understand why the Brits are considered to be worse than USF on this forum when they have:
T0 HMG
Better infantry
Better TD
Mortar pit with long range HE barrage
Churchill crocodile
Comet
Sexton that does the same as the much more expensive Priest whilst being 90fuel
Hold the Line
Non-doctrinal 17pounder(situational since it's easily countered by static arty/Pzwerfer or Stukas)


They are supposedly "extremely-predictable" but I actually see different build orders as UKF early game, unlike USF which is always riflemen/pathfinder.


If you don't understand it, try it yourself. That would be the fastest way to understand why faction sucks :P

Your list suggests that you never (or barely) played UKF at all.
T0 HMG - you won't see many builds that gets mg before T1 upgrade. Just building one more tommy or UC gives more room for a ealry opening.
Better TD - How on the earth you think firefly is better than Jackson?
Mortar pit - Seriously...? UKF needs commander to pick normal mortar, and there is a plenty of ppl using that instead of mortar pit. What level should I be play to see opponent not countering mortar pit?
crocodile / comet - Indeed pretty decent tanks. Only if UKF didn't suffered from high pop cap.
Saxton - There is a reason for a cheap price. You get what you pay for.
HtL - Highly nerfed in terms of fire power. It's just a buy-me-a-time skill. I mean, who on the right mind would dive in to the territory that are highlighted in green? And stay for half a minute to get struct?
17 pounder - can't penerate w/o skill. Restricting building spot unlinke 88.
2 Mar 2022, 13:56 PM
#54
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 761 | Subs: 1



HtL - Highly nerfed in terms of fire power. It's just a buy-me-a-time skill. I mean, who on the right mind would dive in to the territory that are highlighted in green? And stay for half a minute to get struct?


...Apparently this entire forum
2 Mar 2022, 16:55 PM
#55
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 630


Grens essentially 5-man squads in the lategame


Only to explosions, like every other mainline is capable of. And only at vet 3. They're marginally weaker to small arms fire than before.
2 Mar 2022, 18:00 PM
#56
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 191



If you don't understand it, try it yourself. That would be the fastest way to understand why faction sucks :P

Your list suggests that you never (or barely) played UKF at all.
T0 HMG - you won't see many builds that gets mg before T1 upgrade. Just building one more tommy or UC gives more room for a ealry opening.
Better TD - How on the earth you think firefly is better than Jackson?
Mortar pit - Seriously...? UKF needs commander to pick normal mortar, and there is a plenty of ppl using that instead of mortar pit. What level should I be play to see opponent not countering mortar pit?
crocodile / comet - Indeed pretty decent tanks. Only if UKF didn't suffered from high pop cap.
Saxton - There is a reason for a cheap price. You get what you pay for.
HtL - Highly nerfed in terms of fire power. It's just a buy-me-a-time skill. I mean, who on the right mind would dive in to the territory that are highlighted in green? And stay for half a minute to get struct?
17 pounder - can't penerate w/o skill. Restricting building spot unlinke 88.


I literally main UKF wdym, I have been playing them more than SOV ever since I the COH2 bundle like a year ago.

Whilst you are better off getting more infantry sections/RE or ATG earlier on, it doesn't hurt to get your MG and ATG in a linear teching style unlike Soviets.If you have some form of coordination with a teammate you can benefit from getting a Vickers earlier on to solidify your hold on a sector.

I play better with FF than Jacksons, since they have extra sight with their upgrades and a way to stun enemy vehicles than might try to rush your FF if you are skilled enough to predict where they are going.The FF's amazing alpha damage can also come in clutch to finish off tanks that would otherwise live to fight another day if you have had assistance in dealing with said vehicle.And the high alpha damage being the same as the KT at vet 3(240) can also scare off less experienced opponents.

I just don't see any redeeming things about the Jackson, it seems like the least reliable TD ouf the allied TDs in my experience.

Mortar pit and 17pounder are situational as I have already stated I believe, if the enemy already has tools like massed mortars or static/rocket arty they're not going to last very long despite having brace.But they can also be instrumental in holding the line against heavy TDs or OST support weapon spammers without MHTs.

The Sexton more than pays off it's low price if it survives for long enough to rack up damage, I had like 60+ kills and 20k DMG the first time I used Royal Arty with only 2 Sextons for an entire match, which lasted for about 40mins-1h.

I play top 200 premade 3v3 and still see people walk into the HtL territory zones on the daily.It's a useful tool to help you if your opponent dives your armor with his own, if you're getting pushed across the entire map, or just to keep a stranglehold on the VP points, forcing your enemy to bleed which is all the VP gamemode is about.
3 Mar 2022, 06:25 AM
#57
avatar of OswaldMosley

Posts: 62



Still don't understand why the Brits are considered to be worse than USF on this forum when they have:
T0 HMG
Better infantry
Better TD
Mortar pit with long range HE barrage
Churchill crocodile
Comet
Sexton that does the same as the much more expensive Priest whilst being 90fuel
Hold the Line
Non-doctrinal 17pounder(situational since it's easily countered by static arty/Pzwerfer or Stukas)


They are supposedly "extremely-predictable" but I actually see different build orders as UKF early game, unlike USF which is always riflemen/pathfinder.

Brits are the most easy to counter faction. UKF is supremely vulnerable in the early game.
Insta detonate grenade shots and flame grenades can keep Tommies out of Green cover, and Tommies aren't good unless green cover.
-Better TD, debatable.
-Mortar Pitt, useless when there's mortar half tracks and that one OKW commander. There's no way for the Brit player to keep his emplacements alive.
-Churchill Croc is locked behind commanders.
-Sexton, locked behind commander
-Comet, easily countered and wrecked by the superior Panther
-hold the line? What about all the insane powerful abilities that some Wehr commanders have, like dropping a nuclear bomb that automatically makes an enemy capture point neutral, or close the pocket?
4 Mar 2022, 13:48 PM
#58
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1183


Brits are the most easy to counter faction. UKF is supremely vulnerable in the early game.
Insta detonate grenade shots and flame grenades can keep Tommies out of Green cover, and Tommies aren't good unless green cover.
-Better TD, debatable.
-Mortar Pitt, useless when there's mortar half tracks and that one OKW commander. There's no way for the Brit player to keep his emplacements alive.
-Churchill Croc is locked behind commanders.
-Sexton, locked behind commander
-Comet, easily countered and wrecked by the superior Panther
-hold the line? What about all the insane powerful abilities that some Wehr commanders have, like dropping a nuclear bomb that automatically makes an enemy capture point neutral, or close the pocket?


I don't disagree with what you say, just a note:

Close the Pocket and Stuka Strike (the one you said neutralize a point) are really situational and doomed to failure if the enemy builds a cache or if the map has many cutoffs. Otherwise it's insta gg yes.

Just a note.
4 Mar 2022, 14:45 PM
#59
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Still don't understand why the Brits are considered to be worse than USF on this forum when they have:
T0 HMG
Better infantry
Better TD
Mortar pit with long range HE barrage
Churchill crocodile
Comet
Sexton that does the same as the much more expensive Priest whilst being 90fuel
Hold the Line
Non-doctrinal 17pounder(situational since it's easily countered by static arty/Pzwerfer or Stukas)


They are supposedly "extremely-predictable" but I actually see different build orders as UKF early game, unlike USF which is always riflemen/pathfinder.


Because the Vickers is the worst HMG in the game, Sections need racks + bolster + 90 munis per squad to become equal to 240mp + 60muni Grenadiers, the Firefly is slow af and dies when rushed/flanked, the Pit always dies when your line gets pushed and it's exposed or dies to double leig, Sexton is niche and needs to get wipes asap to be worth so not much different to say werfer or Sturmtiger.


On the other hand, Brits have absolutely crippling weaknesses. Their core infantry cannot win fights out of cover unless you blob BRENs, they have the worst MG in the game, worst engineer unit without flamer stock, no mortar, no early light vehicle stock that can fight infantry, their early game crutch unit gets smoked by Ostheer because of 19 range fausts, sprint + camo docs, 222, etc. They get absolutely crushed by Ostheer because you are always one unit behind, Ostheer's Panzer IV is better than Cromwell when they hit the field due to better AI than Cromwell, Ost sniper is better, Ostheer docs are better with like frag bombs, cmd P4, scopes, etc, Ost 222 at vet 1 detects your sniper while you need to go assault officer or cmd vehicle and get air recon which is less subtle and more expensive. Vs OKW you do a lot better, but JLI absolutely wreck your face and since your tanks don't have pintles if your opponent goes Overwatch you can get absolutely REKTED by a single push with skillplanes.

Overall, I think UKF is a bit better than OKW if you go lend lease and assault sections but definitely not as good as USF.
4 Mar 2022, 16:13 PM
#60
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13267 | Subs: 1


... worst engineer unit without flamer stock, ...

Ro engineer are far from the worst engineer unit especially if upgrade with the heavy sapper.
PAGES (8)down
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

246 users are online: 1 member and 245 guests
digitalkora
16 posts in the last 24h
127 posts in the last week
585 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36300
Welcome our newest member, rubibphillips
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM