Login

russian armor

Cyanara's Wehrmacht Overhaul

9 Jan 2015, 04:59 AM
#1
avatar of Cyanara

Posts: 769 | Subs: 1

Hey all,

Now, it may come as a shock to you, but some people have quietly voiced occasionally that Wehrmacht is perhaps not quite as robust and flexible as it could be. No, no, it's true, I assure you.

People often get drawn into how a single unit should be buffed in these situations, and I encourage you to visit and contribute to the issue tracker where I spend much of my time curating such suggestions. I recently undertook an overhaul of it that I hope you'll find a substantial improvement if you found it getting too cluttered recently.

The tracker has helped me develop a more wholistic view of Wehrmacht's various shortcomings, and I'd like to present them to you here, complete with links for you to voice any support. So without further ado:

Grenadiers

Designed as long-range units, they are unfortunately prone to being rushed easily by conscripts that have oorah and molotovs, and riflemen which just have outright superior firepower.

A big part of this problem is with the HMG42 underperforming, which I'll address next. However, I feel there is one simple suggestion that could improve grenadiers in the early game without affecting their long-range role: Give them the ability to build sandbags like volksgrenadiers. This would give them more flexibility in their defensive early-game role and allow them to more effectively punish those who attempt to rush them.

It might also be an option to swap LMGs and G43s as doctrinal/standard upgrades. This would grant grens more affordable, close range flexibility earlier on.

Vote here

HMG42

Let's not mince words here: You fix this, you fix almost everything. This is obviously meant to be a critical and powerful early-game unit for Wehrmacht by preventing Allied troops from closing in on grenadiers.

The only problem is that it doesn't.

The rate at which it suppresses often allows conscripts to oorah straight at it and throw a molotov. Small riflemen blobs can walk up to it head on and just shoot it to death before being pinned. They scarcely even have to use their excellent smoke grenades. This is also another area where sandbags might help.

The numbers of ways in which the HMG42 could be improved is not small, but here are my preferences. Both Allied teams have a number of early-game counters to flank them, so why not just make them suppress very quickly? A fast swivel/traverse time to reward manual targeting would also force Allied players to use intended abilities. The MG42 also has a pathetic vision cone. If it were larger, even current suppression values would be far more effective (although probably still not enough). I'm not concerned about setup/packup times. With its wide cone of fire any rapid micro for this unit should be while set up.

Yes, a powerful MG42 would make it the meta, but the point is that it is never enough alone. It enables effectively every other early game unit to function as it is supposed to. It's actually without it that you get the boring metas of one unit type. Make it good enough to buy some breathing room for once and Wehrmacht players will be much less stressed by light vehicle rushes as well.

Vote here

222 Scout Car

One of the big problems with fighting USF as Wehrmacht is that you're scrambling so damn hard to just to stay alive and cling to some basic map control against rifles that sending your pioneers back to base and teching up to tier 2 is easily overlooked in those first 5 minutes compared to the rapid ease with which you'll find yourself facing a very effective USF light vehicle.

Panzerfausts are a waste of ammo, since USF vehicles can repair crits so easily, and you need every scrap of ammo to upgrade your grenadiers to LMG42s anyway. For that same reason, panzergrenadiers with schreks are way too expensive to bother with. A pak40 is invaluable, but can only be used defensively, and one more thing easily crushed by riflemen. Teller mines are not only a very limited defensive option that also consume precious ammo, and are very cheaply found by REs, but usually require some skilled baiting (great if it works though!).

This leaves the scout car for affordability and tactical options. However, the first thing you have to do is spend 55 ammo on it before it can do anything remotely useful. Even then, it takes some decent micro to kill an m20. Against a slightly competent flak HT or stuart, it's utterly useless. It doesn't damage infantry much either. It will also die quite easily to small arms fire, and you can kiss it goodbye if it gets within AT nade range.

So, suggestions are any mix of increasing HP/armour/cannon DPS, and making the unit come with the cannon as standard. A slight increase in cost, particularly fuel, would probably also be important to limit spamming. It would still need to be highly vulnerable to proper AT weapons.

Vote here

Sniper

Compared to its Soviet counterpart, I do like the German sniper's fire rate. However, people comment on its highly fragile nature. Once again, I think this has much to do with HMGs not doing their job and keeping Allied forces at a safe distance. However, given that it has only one entity per squad, it could perhaps do with a slight improvement to received accuracy, or HP, and perhaps an ability on par with the Soviet sniper sprint.

Vote here

Panzergrenadiers

As discussed, riflemen are pretty hard to beat with anything Wehrmacht have. The obvious solution would be the more expensive panzergrenadiers, and on tight green-cover maps they can be quite devastating if they get in close.

However, for the cost of 340MP the fact is that they die way too easily, especially compared to 390MP shock troopers. They also seem to love to move in an elite, tight formation I like to call 'The Suicidal Sheep'.

When faced with an armada of heavily and mobile armoured t34/85s, panzergrenadiers should play a key role in providing flexible anti-tank damage for a steep investment (340MP/120M). Instead, the entire squad immediately gets one-shotted and you find yourself paying for a new monitor. The panzerschrek upgrade severely undermines their anti-infantry capabilities, so there's no reason they should be so vulnerable to standard tanks.

Vote here

Flame Half-track

The half-track is currently pretty indispensable as grenadier blobs are the only effective tactic to survive currently. The half-track reinforce ability keeps them on the field, despite their low entity count.

Apparently due to devastating rushes, the flame upgrade was pushed to tier 3. Unfortunately this is the same tier as medium armour which is not only better at handling infantry, but also makes 120 ammo on such a light vehicle a very risky and hard decision to justify, especially as such a munitions intensive faction.

Tier 2 is when it is needed and justifiable. If rushing is still likely to be an issue, then the effectiveness of the flames should be reduced, or the vehicle made a bit slower. Neither USF nor Soviets lack numerous counters at this level though.

Vote here

Ostwind

This is a tricky one. It's not that it's ineffective, but 100 fuel is steep investment which means you can't build a real tank for some time. By comparison, the luchs and t-70 are highly effective for much less fuel. You need to have some decent AT on the field to support it for a while.

The real issue is that it's hard to justify building since a panzer IV will do the same job quite effectively for slightly more fuel, and also counter medium armour. Although, in that sense Wehrmacht start to have an advantage in that they don't actually have to make a choice about what to build. One unit does everything.

Vote here

Stug G

This guy should be more common. A cheap tank destroyer? Goodbye meta, hello options! Ostwind might be viable, suddenly. Unfortunately it dies very easily. Given its inherent vulnerability to flanking (an excellent promoter of enjoyable micro), it should probably have improved frontal armour to limit the effectiveness of head-on attacks, and maybe a bit more HP. Making its gun more effective against armour, and weak against infantry would help promote a specific role.

Vote here

Panther

What's a panther? You mean tiger, right? Big cats. Very similar. Understandable to get confused.

Ok, this isn't really about the panther (a pretty good tank, actually) so much as it is the call-in meta invalidating t4. Basically, it's pretty rare to build t4 because it's a substantial fuel investment to get panthers, which are only particularly effective against tanks, while many doctrines will allow you to call in the much more versatile tiger at about the same time. Building t4 would just waste fuel that could buy more tigers.

Neither the brumbar and panzerwerfer have quite the wow factor to make t4 worthwhile either. Often the only time you'll only see them built is by the more skilled and unconventional streamers :) The panzerwerfer is currently one of the all-round weaker mobile arty weapons. Brumbar got some love with the removal of shot blockers, but probably needs to be *the* go-to weapon for dealing with late-game vetted infantry blobs. Something that inspires fear in a similar manner to the sturmtiger. It may actually already do this, but it's hard to tell when no one ever goes t4 :p

The obvious solution, in my humble opinion, is to make heavier tanks cost a few extra CP. This way players are forced/allowed to spend more time getting a return on investment for medium tanks, much like when the infantry early-game was extended, encouraging more interesting and tactical infantry play rather than a rush to vehicles.

Vote here for call-in meta overhaul
Vote here to improve the panzerwerfer

105mm Howitzer

No one builds this thing because despite costing the same as the Soviet equivalent, it is significantly inferior in apparently every way. A bargain at twice the price!

I recall it being a pretty awesome area denial tool in the early days when its barrage would go for so long that it was ready to fire again immediately afterwards. I can imagine there were probably good reasons that got changed, but still, buff time!

Vote here

Tiger Ace

One of the few OP weapons in the Wehrmacht arsenal. Mines are your best bet in stopping these guys in their tracks, FYI, but people still frequently get caught out by it. This is probably because it costs no fuel. Sure, the resource slowdown limits the support available to it, but opposing players should really be able to delay its arrival by controlling the fuel. It's hard enough just preventing a normal tiger from hitting the field. Increased CPs for heavy tanks once again would also play a significant role here. It would be nice if getting a Tiger Ace out was an achievement in a game, not a guarantee.

Vote here

Got some suggestions? Feel free to leave them below, or on the issue tracker. I'll be sure to incorporate them if I agree.

Edit: I've created a card that groups these issues under Broad Design Issues as a means of highlighting that they are not necessarily separate. You can vote for it here. If you agree with the overall sentiments described here, you may wish to check that one out. It links to the individual components to show how it's all connected.
9 Jan 2015, 05:11 AM
#2
avatar of AssaultPlazma

Posts: 300

read the whole thing heres m 2 cents (never played OST so take my word with a grain of salt)

Grenadiers-would be nice to see a MP increase along with a buff along with rifles getting a MP decrease and nerf(I have my own idea of how to overhaul USF)

HMG 42-agreed

222-Agreed

Panzer Grenadiers-Agreed

OStwind- OST teching and the jackson basically rendering OST t3 for all its cost I feel is the problem(again in my vision the Jackson would be doctrinal and replaced with M10 as stock along with tech cost adjusted)

Panther- Again teching cost seems to be the issue along with Doctrines that make it more attractive to just skip it and wait out a Tiger. Would require Doctrines to overhauled which probably wont happen so I feel even if teching cost get adjusted this unit will still suffer.

105mm howitzer-agreed
9 Jan 2015, 05:40 AM
#3
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

im a big fan of you cyanara. i think you have made some good points here
9 Jan 2015, 06:13 AM
#4
avatar of computerheat
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 117

Posts: 2838 | Subs: 3

9 Jan 2015, 06:44 AM
#5
avatar of Khan

Posts: 578

Great points, well made. I sincerely hope Relic is working on a BIG balance patch that addresses these issues (among others) and makes Wehrmacht viable to play again.
9 Jan 2015, 08:55 AM
#6
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

Well written post.

I agree with most of the changes, and as you said OSTheer needs an overhaul instead of NERF DIS BUFF DAT.

Only things that I think are worth mentioning are:
1. LMG grens need a slight nerf, at vet 3 they destroy everything. If you give them early game utility (sandbag) or even buff them a bit, they are gonna survive and vet. So a slight nerf to LMG42 (or maybe all other LMGs) is needed
2. Increase scout cars Fuel and MP cost and increase its armor, HP and give it the autocanon as stock gun. Also reduce its scouting abilities a bit specially at higher vets. It's a map hack.
3. With these changes, I don't think Ostwind needs a buff. It is very potent against aircrafts and it does good damage against infantry (It uses explosive shells so it bursts reduce the damage of all models instead of sniping).
4. What you said about Ostheers T4 is true, but instead of increasing Tiger's CP, make T4 affordable. Brumbar is fine IMO but Panzerwerfer needs huge changes. This way you are free to chose T4 or call-ins.
5.Pzgrens are hard to balance I think, cause the are multi-role units. But I think they need some buffs or great price reduction.

Thing that I think should be considered:
1. Flame HT is worthless.
2. MP40s need slight damage or accuracy buff (both on Pioneers and Assgrens). You have to shove your gun up their a** to do some decent damage.
3. I don't know what to say about sniper.
9 Jan 2015, 09:06 AM
#7
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2015, 08:55 AMRMMLz
LMG grens need a slight nerf, at vet 3 they destroy everything. If you give them early game utility (sandbag) or even buff them a bit, they are gonna survive and vet. So a slight nerf to LMG42 (or maybe all other LMGs) is needed.


You want Grenadiers to have less sight than every unit in the game? ;)
9 Jan 2015, 09:22 AM
#8
avatar of Cyanara

Posts: 769 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2015, 08:55 AMRMMLz

Thing that I think should be considered:
1. Flame HT is worthless.
2. MP40s need slight damage or accuracy buff (both on Pioneers and Assgrens). You have to shove your gun up their a** to do some decent damage.
3. I don't know what to say about sniper.


Ah, cheers. I forgot about the flame HT. I've chucked it in. Not sure why Relic ever changed that to t3. Soviets usually have AT guns available within 30 seconds, not to mention their amazing mines.

You also have a valid point with the MP40s. Their DPS really does seem to drop off with even the tiniest bit of distance. It's not so bad with Assault Grens, since they have sprint to compensate, but pioneers do suffer without a flame thrower.

Snipers have a good fire rate. I think their issue is largely the same as grens. They can't stop Allies rushing them, unless you've got some pretty nice micro going on (or better than mine, at any rate :p ). With a functional HMG to suppress, snipers would probably have a stronger role.
9 Jan 2015, 09:40 AM
#9
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2015, 08:55 AMRMMLz

Only things that I think are worth mentioning are:
1. LMG grens need a slight nerf, at vet 3 they destroy everything. If you give them early game utility (sandbag) or even buff them a bit, they are gonna survive and vet. So a slight nerf to LMG42 (or maybe all other LMGs) is needed


They don't destroy everything. Double Bars Rifle can run up to Grenadiers and force retreat/wipe the squad.
They win against volks & vanilla rifles and against units that were designed for mid-close combat, but then again, why shouldn't they?

Right now they can't even sneeze if they are outside the arc of fire of an HMG42
9 Jan 2015, 09:41 AM
#10
avatar of l4hti

Posts: 476

Do you remember when Wehrmacht meta was all about rushing flammen ht? It could come in 8 minutes and kill almost everything. I use it sometimes, with a pak or Puma protecting it. I suggest flame ht nerf, cost reduction to 90 muni and back to T2.
9 Jan 2015, 09:58 AM
#11
avatar of CasTroy

Posts: 559

You made some good points here, Cyanara. Especially I agree with Grens (slight buff and/or giving them cover abilities) and making HMG42 suppress more quicklier.
9 Jan 2015, 10:42 AM
#12
avatar of somenbjorn

Posts: 923

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2015, 09:41 AMl4hti
Do you remember when Wehrmacht meta was all about rushing flammen ht? It could come in 8 minutes and kill almost everything. I use it sometimes, with a pak or Puma protecting it. I suggest flame ht nerf, cost reduction to 90 muni and back to T2.


This caused the following:

Soviets usually have AT guns available within 30 seconds, not to mention their amazing mines.



In all seriousness I agree with everything, BUT, and there is a but. The problems you outline I wouldn't rank as simple balance issues, but rather results of some less then optimal design choices made in the game.

The problem with grens is because of infantry combat being too heavily focused on ranges instead of say cover.
Scoutcars are only effective with muni, well relic tries to avoid seeing 4-6 of them.
Pzgrens getting wiped, well we all get wiped. In my humble opinion I suggest this is a design choice to prevent infantry snowballing into the lategame. And give users ability to "come back" as Relic seem to be focused on.

FHT, see top and well there was a time when you as soviets got a quick Zis, and either killed the FHT or GG. That wasn't fun.

Agree with Ostwind, the unit is superfluous at best. But again more of a poor design choice in my mind. The Ostheer getting shipped with the OKWs AA halftrack would be a better choice for design.

Panther, yeah you said it. Call-in meta is garden.

105mm? Sure add some too it, maybe not CONSTANT barrage but yeah it isn't getting used enough. Altough I wonder if that is thanks to the unit being bad at what it is supposed to do, or if it just to easy to counter?

'105mm meet 203mm Precision striking B-4, his little brother the Precision striking ML-20, their cousins the IL-2 Bombstrike and Katyusha (also precision) as well as their foreign friends the Priest and USF artillery. Play nice now!'


TL:DR I agree with the perceived symptoms but perhaps not with the cause and the fixes.
9 Jan 2015, 10:51 AM
#13
avatar of Rollo

Posts: 738

Flame halftrack is fine as is, it has an AI upgrade like the Sov HT to keep it useful mid game and at T3 unlock it's perfectly balanced. Seeing these thing built every game as soon as T2 went up just ruined the infantry meta a few patches back.
9 Jan 2015, 12:03 PM
#14
avatar of Cyanara

Posts: 769 | Subs: 1


Scoutcars are only effective with muni, well relic tries to avoid seeing 4-6 of them.


A good point. I wouldn't be opposed to an increase in cost to compensate for whatever buffs they received though. A reasonable fuel cost would make spam a risky choice, and like all light vehicles, they should have a weakness.

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2015, 10:51 AMRollo
Flame halftrack is fine as is, it has an AI upgrade like the Sov HT to keep it useful mid game and at T3 unlock it's perfectly balanced. Seeing these thing built every game as soon as T2 went up just ruined the infantry meta a few patches back.


Ok, definitely some residual hate for the flame HT from a few people :p I genuinely don't recall when they were the meta, and can't even remember when they were last useful, so I am confused as to how AT guns, mines, and AT nades couldn't handle them. If it was a problem, it sounds to me like the flame damage should have been nerfed rather than the t3 solution.

I've personally never found a use for such an expensive upgrade on such a weak unit at T3. The soviet version at least has range with its upgrade. At any rate, it probably wouldn't matter so much if either of the other 2 T2 units were a bit better at their roles. It's most likely a concern at this point because Wehr players just wish *something* was effective against infantry and flame HTs seem like an intuitive solution. At any rate, halftracks really do serve a useful purpose anyway as mobile reinforcement points kept just behind the frontlines. Flames are probably best as a defensive feature to help keep the fragile unit alive. I can't really picture a situation where 120 munitions wouldn't be better spent elsewhere by that point of the game though.

9 Jan 2015, 12:12 PM
#15
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2015, 10:51 AMRollo
Flame halftrack is fine as is, it has an AI upgrade like the Sov HT to keep it useful mid game and at T3 unlock it's perfectly balanced. Seeing these thing built every game as soon as T2 went up just ruined the infantry meta a few patches back.


Flame halftrack should stay in battlephase 2 but researching that battle phase shuld be very cheap. Some of the cost taken can be transfered to T3 building but not all of it as getting T3 is quite expensive right now. That way both tiers and especially T4 would be much more accessible in 1v1 and it is some kind of answer to call in meta.
9 Jan 2015, 12:25 PM
#16
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

@FlameHT: What Cyanara says.
Flame HT indeed was borderline gamebreaking a few patches back, but it is far from "perfectly balanced" now in tier 3. 120 (!) munis in the most muni-dependant faction in the game to give some offensive capability to a vehicle that has little survivability and whose main purpose it is to serve as a mobile reinforcement platform? On balance, there is zilch utility gain in this upgrade.

The 105 plain sucks in its role, it is too inaccurate to begin with and has too little lethality even if it connects. To illustrate the difference, if a 105 shell lands in your conscript/rifle blob, you might lose a few models at worst, and can then just proceed on, or if you feel uncomfortable, hoorah collectively out of the way. If an ML20/Priest shell lands in your Grenblob, you'll likely lose a squad and need to hardretreat ASAP. If a B-4 shell lands in your Grenblob, you don't need to bother anymore...
Plus, US and Soviets are not remotely as dependant on support weapon play as OH is.
9 Jan 2015, 12:35 PM
#17
avatar of tybo

Posts: 12



Ok, definitely some residual hate for the flame HT from a few people :p I genuinely don't recall when they were the meta, and can't even remember when they were last useful, so I am confused as to how AT guns, mines, and AT nades couldn't handle them. If it was a problem, it sounds to me like the flame damage should have been nerfed rather than the t3 solution.

I've personally never found a use for such an expensive upgrade on such a weak unit at T3. The soviet version at least has range with its upgrade. At any rate, it probably wouldn't matter so much if either of the other 2 T2 units were a bit better at their roles. It's most likely a concern at this point because Wehr players just wish *something* was effective against infantry and flame HTs seem like an intuitive solution. At any rate, halftracks really do serve a useful purpose anyway as mobile reinforcement points kept just behind the frontlines. Flames are probably best as a defensive feature to help keep the fragile unit alive. I can't really picture a situation where 120 munitions wouldn't be better spent elsewhere by that point of the game though.



T2 flame halftrack was one of few solutions to the old godmode shocktroops (and a deeply satisfying one) but yeah, I agree with Rollo it's in a good place now. It's still very useful at roasting stray squads, or quickly forcing off people harassing flanks. Munitions cost might be too high for how late it comes though.

As for other suggestions:

Grenadiers
Sandbags would be nice (I would say for Pioneers but they are overworked as it is) at the very least it gives Grens something to do whilst capping.

I think LMG is a tad too strong, whilst unupgraded Grenadiers are pretty tame so it just becomes an essential crutch. I'd like to see LMG42 nerfed slightly, cost reduced, whatever, and vanilla Grens performance increased slightly to compensate. Would this make them too strong early game? I don't know.

HMG42
I think it's good. Really good. If I steal one as allies it's a happy day for me. But that said - as Ostheer, I find it's not always that good at staying the allied horde be it conscripts or riflemen, even when supported. The problems I see are:
- Vanilla Grens don't offer much disincentive to flanking squads, so supporting infantry don't do much beyond maintaining suppression on squads already caught by the MG.
- Either target acquisition speed or tear down/set up could use a tweak
- Halve grenade range for suppressed units (would also go some way to keep grens from wiping maxims at long range easily)

222 Scout Car
Kind of meh compared to M20. I think the autocannon got a little overnerfed when they reduced cost - 55 munitions is a lot for what you get (especially when your grens are in need of their 60muni crutches at the same time). Otherwise it's a cute little unit, the main problem is that it needs to be kept at range from infantry, but it's weapon isn't that good for ranged damage.

Panzergrenadiers
Have never seemed to justify their cost/reinforce cost. Panzershrecks are nice but again, munitions cost and not so great on your most expensive infantry. If only you could get them on a durable 5 man unit that costs half as much to reinforce....nah, that would be a terrible ide-

Oh.

Flame Half-track
I said stuff about this. It's good, maybe a little too expensive at 120 munitions for the time that it comes. Definately not the ultradoom death shock unit it once was, but frankly I don't miss units like that.

Ostwind
Not sure what can be done for this. It's nice I guess if you see an AA halftrack or T70 and have a fuel lead (when would this ever be the case?) but if you're playing for keeps there's not much reason not to get a Panzer 4 instead.

Panther
T4 has sadly passed on into myth and legend, never to be seen again. There's always team games I suppose.

105mm Howitzer
Before artillery got nerfed, it fired twice as many shots with half the cooldown and could basically sustain a constant barrage with veterancy. This was bad, but it has now been nerfed to the point of being useless, so does need a buff. Any buffs would have to be mirrored on the Soviet ML-20 which is also kinda crappy.

Ps. Teching costs.

I often find Ostheer a chore to play early game on many built up maps, which is a shame that the faction with the least restrictive teching is at more of a handicap in very specific circumstances, but you can't really do much about it despite the inherent flexibilty in the faction's design.
9 Jan 2015, 12:36 PM
#18
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

I agree with everything.
And yes there was a time where everything revolved around the Flamerht. Soviets HAD to go Guards. But since then, it was nerfed in a many ways. Too many.

I would also do something about the Sniper. First of all the vet 1 ability. Oh what joys I could have with sprint.

Maybe he gets more usefull when MGs are better, but I doubt it. Then people will just build more MGs :D

He could get a bit sight range back, atleast enough to match his range.
To keep in theme and asymetry, I would suggest a vet 1 ability that allows the sniper for a short time to go invisible undependent of cover (5-7 seconds?) or become invisible on activation while standing still and not shooting. Or give him the ability to plant bushes :D
Or if we want to keep the current one, just buff it... -_-
Or general survivability buffs.
9 Jan 2015, 12:38 PM
#19
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1



You want Grenadiers to have less sight than every unit in the game? ;)


Read my post again dear sir.


They don't destroy everything. Double Bars Rifle can run up to Grenadiers and force retreat/wipe the squad.
They win against volks & vanilla rifles and against units that were designed for mid-close combat, but then again, why shouldn't they?

Right now they can't even sneeze if they are outside the arc of fire of an HMG42


That's the point, if there is gonna be a MG buff as OP suggested, LMG grenadiers at higher vets (specially ver 3) need a slight nerf.
9 Jan 2015, 12:43 PM
#20
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

3 things that would allow me to fight USF even is:

1) Gren - SANDBAGS

2) MG42 12% increase rate of fire (as 3 bullitens +4% rate of fire)

3) 222 - Same amount of armor as for M20



And return flame upgrade for 251 to tier 2
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

738 users are online: 738 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
37 posts in the last week
137 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45064
Welcome our newest member, edmond2003s
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM