Profile of Hannibal

the USF privilege of actually complaining about needing an engineer to heal the tank is unbelievable... an engineer that can get AT or BARs to support no less. most factions do that actually, and less than half the others can slap guns onto their engineers to make them more than repair bots. and as DREADFUL as it is to take 30 whole seconds to heal 320 damage, that's actually kind of the point of dealing damage...

I think the issue is that you still need 1-2 Jacksons to fill the AT department regardless of the situation because the Pershing alone won't cut it. USF also has relatively few snares (usually 3 RM but late game might need replacements due to wipes + it is by far the worst snare in the game), practically no mines or late game stun abilities plus a ATG that does not help much against late game armor (unless you spend all your munis on it). USF is prone to being pushed and overrun because there is not much back up.

Your build for team games at least would likely consist of 2 Jacksons + Pershing + 2 RET for repairs. That was possible when the Pershing carried the AI department so the remaining 40 POP of Riflemen and team weapons don't have to do all the lifting. With the AI nerfs though I feel the Pershing is incredibly hard to fit into the build. Better just get a Sherman on HE shells and PaK Howie/Calliope instead. Saves resources, population and micro since your Sherman can crew repair. That's why it dropped out of favor in my opinion.

Regarding a similar Axis setup with Tiger, P4, 2 ATGs and 2 Pios (1pio plus base repair for OKW) it is slightly heavier on MP I think, but way better on fuel and especially popcap.

Simply because claiming that soviet do not have stock grenades is misleading. They have molotovs and satchels.

In addition I read allot more post of people cosplaying about the VG incendiary grenade than I have read about people complaining about bundle grenade or rifle-grenade.

Generally some people like to list the difference of faction and try to use them as argument. Mentioning a difference does not consist of argument unless that leads to unfair advantage.

Again: Molotovs and Satchels are not fast fuse burst weapons that regularly wipe half the squad if your reaction is even only half a second late. You don't throw them on a squad expecting and insta wipe just like you don't shoot a rifle grenade at a mortar pit expecting heavy damage.

UKF grenades have the same relevance as ostheer grenades in a thread about grenades. Both riflegrenade and bundle grenades can be dodge and the "luck of burst damage does not really means much.

You started this thread because you were unhappy of comparing ZiS barrage vs Axis grenades. That point is obviously debatable, but a grenade of UKF on one single squad has absolutely nothing to do with the ability of Soviet's ATG being able to burst infantry in the early-mid game. All grenades can be dodged as part of good game design and "lack of burst damage" still means exactly what it means.

One can claim Ostheer, UKF, USF do not have stock DOT damage does that mean they should incendiary round in their mortars?

Ostheer has pio flamer + 251
UKF has WASP
USF is the only one that does not have an early game DOT/anti garrison unit. That's why the community commander update gave them molotovs (just like every faction got something it was lacking via a commander during that time. UKF got a mortar etc). But still, all of this is a "what about" argument. This thread spawned from a comparison of Axis grenades against the ZiS barrage of Soviets.

My point was simply that claiming that Soviet do not have grenades while ignoring molotvs and satchels is simply misleading.

And imo Penal should have grenade instead of satchel. It should be locked behind tech.


If Soviet should "have similar" tools then other faction should also have incendiary grenades, satchels and barrage in their ATGs.

As above.

Contrary to a grenade a Zis barrage can frontally and from 60 dislodge a HMG so it faction is not to for "putting in burst damage in infantry-infantry" combat. Actually it is rather bad into that role.

But once more the suggestion was never to removed the barrage but to increase its CD.

Exactly. The role of the barrage is to deal damage and kill a couple of models for munitions. To force a retreat if your opponent does not react in time. It is not as versatile as a grenade because one single shell does not burst as well as a single grenade, but can be thrown from distance against further away targets. It is Soviets only non-mortar way of softening up defense positions because the T70 is quite far away and a flanking Conscript is barely able to ensure heavy damage on an at leasat partially supported flanked unit.

I am not sure what the point of this thread is, but let's see where it goes.

HE Grenades don't really create any meaningful disadvantage.

This is a mere statement. A grenade has high wipe potential if the opponent acts late or if you can cut into the retreat path. Of course they give a meaningful advantage.

Well that is technically incorrect since molotov are grenades and satchel can also work as grenades.

I don't want to argue semantics, but the whole point clearly revolved around the "standard" HE and the bundle nade. So nades that have short fuses, high burst damage and force quick reactions. Especially the molotov has not much to do with it, and the satchel can't hit even semi-mobile units like ATGs.

One could even argue that Ostheer/USF/UKF lack stock incendiary grenades.

Yes, and that was the point of Aerohank:
Single abilities are not that important, but the factions should have similar tools. SOV does not have many abilities to win infantry fights by putting in burst damage like other factions can do with grenades. Therefore they need an edge in artillery units, and that's where this comes back full circle to the ZiS barrage: This ability is the only burst ability that Soviets have non-doc until they get a Katyusha.

One question, is it possible to get rid of the pershing 1 second wind down? I know other tanks like the panther have it but between the 3 heavies, why does the pershing have it? Thinking about it this makes the reload bonus (in general) not really the full bonus.

It's probably needed to synchronize animations.
The only way around it is to reduce the base reload and increase the reload vet bonus accordingly. But the effect currently is true: e.g. -30% reload is worth less for units with wind up/down, since part of their ROF is in these values and they are balanced around it.

Please don't necro, this thread is 4 years old. At this point just open a new thread

/Locked