Login

russian armor

Gren 42 and G43 combo

13 Jan 2016, 23:53 PM
#21
avatar of F1sh

Posts: 520

But what do Conscripts get :snfQuinn:
13 Jan 2016, 23:54 PM
#22
avatar of Jackas4life
Benefactor 115

Posts: 486 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jan 2016, 23:53 PMF1sh
But what do Conscripts get :snfQuinn:


PPSH's :snfCHVGame:
13 Jan 2016, 23:58 PM
#23
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1191 | Subs: 1

The issue with giving grens G43 and LMG42 together, is that it would make them shit ALL over conscripts.

Cons only beat grens with regular rifles because they have more members. With the lmg42, they have a worse chance because they usually lose a model on closing. With G43s, cons would lose at all ranges.

I would support this idea if the G43 upgrade gets adjusted for this possibility, and if cons get a nondoc upgrade to increase their versatility (or make penals have a different, useful role).
14 Jan 2016, 00:01 AM
#24
avatar of Jackas4life
Benefactor 115

Posts: 486 | Subs: 1

The issue with giving grens G43 and LMG42 together, is that it would make them shit ALL over conscripts.

Cons only beat grens with regular rifles because they have more members. With the lmg42, they have a worse chance because they usually lose a model on closing. With G43s, cons would lose at all ranges.

I would support this idea if the G43 upgrade gets adjusted for this possibility, and if cons get a nondoc upgrade to increase their versatility (or make penals have a different, useful role).


Personally I always wanted to give cons PPSH without a commander, and swap it for DP28s on Penals and maybe cons.
14 Jan 2016, 00:28 AM
#25
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

this is just going to turn the meta into g43+lmg42 vs double m1919a6/bren gun.

I would rather limit the lmg on allied troops insteads. The Para and guards are fine due to price and performance. (for clarification, I don't counter the bar as lmg)


Combining lmg42 and g43 sounds good in theory. In practice, this is going to be even worse than the Tommy vet3 bug:

- Grenadiers will turn into weapon pinatas the moment they drop to 3 models or below (kiss your lmg42 goodbye)
- What's worse, sometimes grenadiers will prefer using their g43's over their lmgs
- What's EVEN worse is that you will not be able to predict that behaviour; the performance of your grenadiers is going to be completely inconsistent the moment they drop to 2 models.

It all boils down to the fact that there are no weapon preference profiles in the game.
Read more about the Tommy vet3 bug here:

http://www.coh2.org/topic/46847/vet3-tommy-squads-dropping-weapons-bug-fixes

Be careful what you wish for!


To both +1
14 Jan 2016, 00:28 AM
#26
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

Commanders with g43s are among best ones right now (apart from one of them), doing such a change would couse even worse disparity, these would be the only used commanders. If you want a buff for wehr, buff sth nondoctrinal or even better, sth in underused commanders. Same applies to soviets.
14 Jan 2016, 00:36 AM
#27
avatar of Skabinsk

Posts: 238




So by your logic the PPSH upgrade on cons should only be 2 weapons? instead of 4,


I know you're playing devil advocate but you know that is a completely different thing. close range and short weapons vs and LMG and G43 good at all ranges?

Don't be a jerk...
14 Jan 2016, 01:15 AM
#28
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 745 | Subs: 2

Why are soviets supposed to suffer because of the better performance of their allies? It's always better to nerf something instead of buffing it first.
14 Jan 2016, 04:19 AM
#29
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Jaeger Infantry Tactics master race, +1 to teh op
14 Jan 2016, 04:49 AM
#30
avatar of Kamzil118

Posts: 455

.......At some point, I did try to mention an idea of Penal squads being a damage-dealing squad while the conscripts get this sort of...meat shield for infantry units.
14 Jan 2016, 06:05 AM
#31
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

I'd rather nerf terminator rifles than buff grens to terminator level. Their DPS with LMG42 and G43 is going to be insane, and if your infantry isn't rifles you might have a tough time (conscript lives matter too! somewhat.).

Besides, Ostheer is now in a very good spot, I would be leery of any buffs to them. MG42 + upgraded grens still can handle anything short of giant LMG rifleblobs, and the Pwerfer is here for that.
14 Jan 2016, 06:11 AM
#32
avatar of RedDevilCG

Posts: 154

I'd rather bring things up or down to Ostheer levels personally. I think it's almost the best feeling faction at the moment.
14 Jan 2016, 06:16 AM
#33
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

I'd rather bring things up or down to Ostheer levels personally. I think it's almost the best feeling faction at the moment.


It definitely feels like the most solidly designed faction. It has no OP units (save the Pwerfer) and very few mediocre/useless ones (222 could use a slight buff, PGrens a slight cost decrease and Brumbar more accuracy, but nothing major). Its playstyle is clearly defined, but doctrines allow you to go outside the box if you want to.

And they are still very strong. In the right hands, they are easily among the strongest faction in all play modes.
14 Jan 2016, 06:29 AM
#34
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

Not sure it's a good change. I would rather revert G43's profile to what it was before - a long range, accurate weapon and keep this interdiction (squads cannot field both lmg and G43s). The current G43 profile (a middle range weapon, similar to SVT, and good for shooting while moving) does not fit to ostheer army profile which favours efficiency at long range related to almost all weapon it uses. And, in addition, grenadiers are not good at flanking. They are 4, and drop models fast.
Combining the current G43 with lmg42 it's weird, because the squad must chose a different behavior in the fight, depending on what weapon they want to use in the first place. If they want to use G43, and shooting while moving, the lmg42 cannot be used. If they want to use lmg 42, they better engage at distance, where the current G43 it's not so good at....

P.S. You used "However" to much in your post... :)
14 Jan 2016, 11:38 AM
#35
avatar of sorryWTFisthis

Posts: 322

Why fix something which is not broken (Grens single upgrade), instead of fixing broken stuff(2xbren/19191)?
14 Jan 2016, 12:24 PM
#36
avatar of Durabo
Donator 11

Posts: 24

I agree with OP but i want to go one step further. I propose that grens get to upgrade their lmg42 to a lmg34 when you tech T4. In late game, rifles and cons with their new vet3 are very strong leading to some problems. These are especially severe aganist 2x 1919 rifleman, 2 x g43 and a lmg42 might not suffice, they might still lose red cover aganist green so grens should get a lmg34 allowing them to win over at any range regardless of cover. Since you have to tech T4, you have to sink a lot of fuel, let alone munitions for these upgrades so it shouldnt be a balance problem. This will help underutilized ost T4 too, since brummbar is shitty and panthers are not as effective aganist infantry as comets. I didnt even talk about the sorry state panzerwerfers are in aganist armor, calliope's do more damage aganist armor compared to pwerfers. Krupp steel is , afterall, superior. So german infantry should be able to win 1v1.
14 Jan 2016, 12:28 PM
#37
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17619 | Subs: 9




So by your logic the PPSH upgrade on cons should only be 2 weapons? instead of 4,

Cons get 3 ppsh, which are inferior then shocks ppsh and ppsh upgrade is even remotely usable exclusively because vet3 buff, that buff doesn't help vs LMG grens at all.

And sure, allow the combo, the very moment cons get stock weapon upgrade, LMG makes them irrelevant enough.
14 Jan 2016, 12:47 PM
#38
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

We don't want more ultra DPS infantry.

If anything, nerf double 1919, Paras, obers, dobule brens etc. instead of making Grens ultra DPS.

It's like saying that Katy is weaker that pzwerfr so let's make it OP just like pzwerfer.
No, we need to nerf werfer and calliope, not buff katy.
Same issue here.
14 Jan 2016, 13:00 PM
#39
avatar of RiCE

Posts: 284

While i hate the close-mid range G43 as an upgrade (especially on panzerfusiliers), i think mixing it with mg42 is a bad idea. As someone said it before, the units performance would be totally random.

I would rather see other double upgrades nerfed instead changing single upgrade grens...
14 Jan 2016, 13:36 PM
#40
avatar of IIGuderian

Posts: 128

and due to (in my opinion) USF powercreep, vet 3 Rifles with double weapon upgrades crap on all Ost infantry
You forget the panzergrenadier , which are amazing stock AI units. And when they reach vet2 , they become monsters. panzergrenadiers are actually even better than obers in a way
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

South Africa 1
unknown 1
Canada 3
unknown 1

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

190 users are online: 2 members and 188 guests
PatFenis, Crecer13
8 posts in the last 24h
162 posts in the last week
759 posts in the last month
Registered members: 37473
Welcome our newest member, AquaGlam
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM