Shrek price

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[AmPM]

Baine, because an Infantry company will only be able to field 4, if they don't have any jeeps or halftracks, Airborne can have 5 if they have nothing else as well.

So yes, vastly reduced from the 7+ that everyone can easily have right now.

[gamesguy2]

140 mun for one schreck. 120 mun for 2 piats. I take piats.


Discuss.

should threads like this be closed, get stats and numbers ...
you do know that a schreck has almost double the amount of damage of a single piat/rr/zook, its why they have 2.

so the "ONE" thing dosent matter

A single, one, uno, piat does more damage than a shrek.

It gets a large damage bonus towards most axis tanks.

[DasNoob]

Piat 90.
Shrek 120.

Straight up base damage.

[Armfelt]

140 mun for one schreck. 120 mun for 2 piats. I take piats.


Discuss.

should threads like this be closed, get stats and numbers ...
you do know that a schreck has almost double the amount of damage of a single piat/rr/zook, its why they have 2.

so the "ONE" thing dosent matter

A single, one, uno, piat does more damage than a shrek.

It gets a large damage bonus towards most axis tanks.

Doesn´t matter if the PIAT won´t hit, it is almost too easy to avoid it. Piats is (almost) only good behind obstacles as an ambush.

Or if the vehicle is crippled.

*Oh, I miss the PIAT mariokarts*  The clowncars can still hunt down allied vehicles, though.

Overall i think the price increase of hand held AT is good, as long as ATGs is effective.

[gamesguy2]

Piat 90.
Shrek 120.

Straight up base damage.

Thats irrelevant, since piat gets a 1.6 damage modifier vs most axis tanks starting with the P4.

Base damage means nothing without taking modifiers into account.

[fallensoldier7]

Too expensive at 140, imo. Discuss.

Arguements:

- Light vehicle spam is rampant currently, and become even more viable with availability change. You need shreks to protect paks since wehr has no quick-response vehicle disabler.

- Wehrmacht has no equal retaliation to the way light vehicles are being employed. Getting short range against tommies or rifles is a death sentence. Piats hit from point blank, stickies and button own the most at short range. Staghounds, m8's and t17s are being literally pounded up the wehr infantry anus.

Problem with light vehicle spam in general or shrek cost?  I think it's more of a problem with light vehicle spam. 

My defensive company runs with 0 shreks, 4 paks, and 4 pivs.  I get an upgunned puma if I know I'm going against a light vehicle spammer, and so far I haven't lost because of light vehicle spam.  Since I always have a PIV on the field, my paks (if I have any on the field) will always be protected.  Plus, the PIV acts as a durable platform that can ward off/block flanking vehicles and help other infantry push.

Light vehicle spam is a huge problem against infantry heavy wehrmacht companies, which makes it seem like a price decrease is justified. However, I'm of the opinion that panzer micro wins games for wehrmacht, and that panzers should be the center of every wehrmacht army, which is why I usually don't have problems against light vehicles.

Shreks are already very effective vs shermans and allied armor.  If you decrease the cost of shreks to help wehr players combat light vehicle spam then those sherman companies will have an even harder time due to an increased number of shreks on the field.

[Armfelt]

Too expensive at 140, imo. Discuss.

Arguements:

- Light vehicle spam is rampant currently, and become even more viable with availability change. You need shreks to protect paks since wehr has no quick-response vehicle disabler.

- Wehrmacht has no equal retaliation to the way light vehicles are being employed. Getting short range against tommies or rifles is a death sentence. Piats hit from point blank, stickies and button own the most at short range. Staghounds, m8's and t17s are being literally pounded up the wehr infantry anus.

Problem with light vehicle spam in general or shrek cost?  I think it's more of a problem with light vehicle spam. 

My defensive company runs with 0 shreks, 4 paks, and 4 pivs.  I get an upgunned puma if I know I'm going against a light vehicle spammer, and so far I haven't lost because of light vehicle spam.  Since I always have a PIV on the field, my paks (if I have any on the field) will always be protected.  Plus, the PIV acts as a durable platform that can ward off/block flanking vehicles and help other infantry push.

Light vehicle spam is a huge problem against infantry heavy wehrmacht companies, which makes it seem like a price decrease is justified. However, I'm of the opinion that panzer micro wins games for wehrmacht, and that panzers should be the center of every wehrmacht army, which is why I usually don't have problems against light vehicles.

Shreks are already very effective vs shermans and allied armor.  If you decrease the cost of shreks to help wehr players combat light vehicle spam then those sherman companies will have an even harder time due to an increased number of shreks on the field.

Well said, I hear ye.

[Smokaz]

Panzer Micro wins games, thats great and all but panzer 4's and panthers dont do very well against AP rounds tank destroyers. Thats where shreks come in, and you get 1 shrek for every 2 tanks equipped with AP rounds currently.

As for your company I see it getting raped by light vehicle spammers who understands that paks cant be everywhere and that p4's dont have very good accuracy on the move against light armor trying to get your pak.

Shrek is important for wehr as it is their most mobile type of AT on a unit somewhat resistant to supression. Right now the AT gun balance is also skewed in favor of 57mms owning paks in the at gun snipe war as well.

I think shreks should go back to 120 munitions.

[pqumsieh]

@ smokaz; arguing that an armor company that specializes in taking out tanks (getting T4 AP rounds) is causing imbalances because the shrek is too expensive and needed as wehr since their tanks are negated is a bad argument. That’s like me arguing that because my armor is totally raped my PE tank destroyers I should get a price decrease on the RR and zook.

shreks are extremely powerful; if your infantry are being destroyed by light vehicles then that’s more of an issue of light vehicle spam rather then shrek price decrease. Furthermore, most of this can be countered by simply using shreks as support weapons and keeping them guarded with tanks/paks/mgs. I think we're seeing a lot of light vehicles because wehr are pulling out a lot of support weapons. Its all part of a bad cycle...that changes but continues at the same time.

However, with that in mind, I think that standard grenadier shreks should get a cost reduction to 120; whereas, storm trooper shrek prices should INCREASE further or remain the same. That said, I argue this because currently storm troopers can recloak despite the fact that they are suppressed and continually being fired on. If this is fixed, there is no need for a price modification. As it stands, they are getting way too many kills primarily because they are able to recloak and hide; forcing you to get a jeep in there (which is easily raped in 2 seconds) to finish them off.

PQ

[Smokaz]

That you can't fight buffed armor with your own axis armor, is just one of the premises of why I think the shrek should go down to 120. There are several others, pointed out in the thread. Its not like anyone have said that its merely the possible presence of super-penetrating and damage stacking tank destroyers that alone neccessitates a 120 munition shrek.

And to avoid further confusion it has always been about the wehr grenadier shrek, not about stormtrooper or fsj shreks.

[pqumsieh]

my last response was in response to your response above my last response. In that response you responded by stating that your armor was being negated; therefore, lower the price of the shrek so I can effectively counter this counter.

So it was not in response to your other arguments; simply commenting on that one specific argument.

PQ

[wildsolus]

That you can't fight buffed armor with your own axis armor

german steel t4, german engineering t4, fatherland t4

[VERTIGGO]

140 mun for one schreck. 120 mun for 2 piats. I take piats.


Discuss.

should threads like this be closed, get stats and numbers ...
you do know that a schreck has almost double the amount of damage of a single piat/rr/zook, its why they have 2.

so the "ONE" thing dosent matter

lol failpost.

Schreck vs sherman      
120 dmg                      
scatter of 20
            
@ close range: gets run over for his determination


PIAT vs P4
144 dmg
scatter of 12

@ close range: can't miss and hits rear armor constantly for 5.9 penetration

I'm sick of hearing this crap about schrecks overpowerdness. Wehr spends 300 munitions, and it takes 3 volleys to kill a sherman (provided 5 out of 6 penetrating hits). Brits spent 1/3 that and kill a P4 in barely over 2 volleys... from behind 4 story buildings and hedgerows, or from impenetrable tank chassis. The only HHAT that is not on par is the bazooka, and that's like 50 mun or something.

[Smokaz]

As for pricing..

There's no point in talking about volkfaust + pak as the faust has no stopping power at all and adds a incredible amount of pop for its utility as a AT platform. So we use what I imagine is the most used combo: Pak + Shrek. Wehrmacht pays 280 munitions for this basic at package: damage-dealing anti circle weapon and their long range AT option.

Does anyone think 57mm + AB is equal to this for 280 munitions? I sure as hell consider RR+57mm a superior at package to a single shrek and a pak. Lets look at the allied options.

Sticky + 57mm = 170 munitions.
Ranger zooks + 57mm = 190 munitions.
Ranger zooks + 57mm + sticky (the whole shebang you could ever need) = 250 munitions.

Adding 40 MUN AP rounds here who barely refrains from making the 57mm 2-shot a stug still leaves the allied player with much much more AT weaponry for a very comparable price.

Can someone please explain to me why shrek + pak is worth around 100~ munitions more than these options, in terms of their ability to defeat attacking armor? Cause it really looks like to me that wehr is ever so slightly boned munitions-wise in terms of being able to field munitions based AT compared to americans.

Even brits field a comparably good at options for less munitions:

Bren + 6pounder = 200 munitions
Piats + 6pounder  = 230 munitions.

Hell, if they were really smart they could even field this:

Bren MMG w/ap rounds + Piats + 6pounder = 295 munitions.

For 3 more pop and 15 more munitions than the basic wehr package, they can disable and AP round a light vehicle flanking a 6pounder while the piats and the 6p opens fire on another heavier target. Thats a lot of versatility and ability to resist armor attacking you compared to what wehrmacht gets for their munitions-based AT.

PE of course comes very well out of this comparison, best of all. They have no need for any buffs to their at capability atm. Looking at this, I think even the pak should come down slightly in price to 120 munitions.

The bottom line is that all the other factions get way more bang for their buck than wehr gets currently because of the price of the pak and the grenadier shrek, with the latter probably being the most crucial to restore to a acceptable price because it is the only mobile AT support that wehr has.

[VERTIGGO]

Basically, it comes down to who's side is the majority opinion.

In vCoH, 1 schreck or 1PIATs cost 75mun. This was supposedly reasonable, because the schreck can deal 120 dmg, and the PIATS up to 288 per volley, but the schreck was a bit more capable at range.

However, in EIRR, we jack the schreck up to 140mun and increase the PIAT slightly to 110 for two, because (and it can only be because) more complaints were heard from victims of schreck than victims of PIAT.

End of story.

[sgMisten]

......Looking at this, I think even the pak should come down slightly in price to 120 munitions.

I don't think Pak needs a price drop. It's deadly enough as it is and has cloak which gives it a free 1st strike bonus that the 57mm has to pay to get.

[Smokaz]

57mm pays 10 more munitions for this, its 30 munitions cheaper to begin with. Against most targets AP rounds are not needed and also risky to purchase because of the recrew issue. If this was to be made equal, recrewed paks should not get cloak.

[VERTIGGO]

......Looking at this, I think even the pak should come down slightly in price to 120 munitions.

I don't think Pak needs a price drop. It's deadly enough as it is and has cloak which gives it a free 1st strike bonus that the 57mm has to pay to get.

150 mun for 188 dmg several times or 120 mun for 147 dmg once. Hmm... I'd say there's no real difference

Either way, this is another example of one-sided "balancing". Instead of vcoh, where the wehr AT gets several free ambush strikes because even with the bonus they are weaker than the 57, we get the exact same US AT gun, and our paks nerfed twice (one ambush shot, not cloaked movement without doc, and the near impossibility of retreating the crew because the last man just stands there like a moron after de-crewing. Oh in case that wasn't enough, lets just throw some icing on that cake and give the brits moveable 17s (with regenerating health after movement) and an AT that's cheaper than the PaK, can camo during combat, and does 40% more damage on all shots. Hmm.

[DasNoob]

lets just throw some icing on that cake and give the brits moveable 17s (with regenerating health after movement)

How about not.

[Pak88mm]

the light armor spam is where wehr gets hurt. so far thats what i have the most issues with. and light armor with at guns backing them up is even more of a problem.