Profile of darkerdayzud

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2014, 21:26 PMTetley

The only issue i find with a heavy gren build is that a well managed Sherman using HE rounds will mess you up big time and then the riflemen come storming in with bars and mop up.

Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2014, 20:00 PMBryan

I pretty much wing it most games with a loose game plan as I like to try out a variety of units/strats. 99% of the time i'll incorporate support weapons into a build as combined arms is the reason I find Ostheer the most fun faction to play

But saying that, heavy gren builds, into t2 stuff and waiting for call in's, particularly the tiger, whilst not original at all and pretty boring to play, is effective imho. It is simple enough that you can concentrate on your capping orders and positioning+mining, the rest is down to your micro.

Against rilfes, I feel Grens are pretty equal these days in the early game if you play it right, it is more a map dependent thing then a unit balance, as some maps favour short engagements (Rifles), others long range (Grens). Still, stick to cover, get in the important buildings 1st and keep compact, you'll do okay.

As an aside, veto as many bad Ostheer maps as you can, Semoskiy winter for example is pretty hard as Ostheer.

Edit: I should add, that you don't have to take that build too literally. For example, on Crossing the Woods, 4 grens, 2 HMGS, 2 Paks and a halftrack into tiger is a pretty solid build. Each map has their own quirks, but 5 grens into some t2 stuff and Tiger would also work on Crossing the woods. It might be best to learn one build pretty well and then start incorporating new stuff, which is where the solid gren spam into t2 into tiger is a decent starting point if your having issues.