[WM] Stormtrooper MP44 Overpriced

[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

[EliteGrens]

Im talking about assault grenadiers, which you said get 1-2 Kars.

[EscforrealityTLS]

Assault grens have always gotten 4 unless 2 of them are just stand in like the Volk and Gren squad leaders.

[Tymathee]

I'm looking at the module right now, there are 2 slots for the mp44, unless it is somehow different in game, what I'm looking at says there are 2 slots for the mp44 and 1 for the kar98.

when i said 1-2 kar98's, that was meant for 3 or 4 mean swquads.

3 man = 1 kar98
4 man = 2 kar98

but its possibly that they get an  extra mp44 when you upgrade to 4 hence the reason why it costs muni.

Ok yes, no matter what, its only 1 kar98 and 2 mp44's for 3 and 3 mp44's for 4 man squad.

Assault grens have always gotten 4 unless 2 of them are just stand in like the Volk and Gren squad leaders.

yes, the kar98 is squad leader.

http://coh-stats.com/Infantry:Assault_Grenadier_Heavy_Infantry

look at the assault gren page for coh-stats, why would there be a listing for the kar98 if at least one didn't get it?

[EscforrealityTLS]

It is different in game though. I'm going to check back in 15min.

Okay in retail Tym Assault grenadiers 4 MP44s by default and Panzer Grenadiers upgraded to MP44s also get 4.

http://img27.imageshack.us/gal.php?g=relic00108.jpg

First time uploading so it might not work.

[AmPM]

Ok, Stormies get cloak...

Thats it. PE Assault Grens have the same HP, FJ have more.

Rangers get better armor and 6 men, and 2 need to die before they start to lose firepower.

Stormy weapons have been overpriced since they never got a meaningful change in price since the days that you could retreat to spawn, heal and go back, and at vet 3 move at full speed while cloaked.

4 MP44 (exact same gun) for PE = 140mu
4 FG42 = 140mu
4 Thompson = 140mu

vs

2 MP44 on Stormy = 120mu

Oh, and Storm troopers get suppressed easily and take forever to unsuppress, they could be considered more fragile in that manner than any other assault infantry.

I'm not including units that come with them by default.

[CafeMilani]

actually, ranger smgs are much better than a stormtrooper squad with 2 mp44 upgrades (280[!!!!] munitions)

ok they can cloak but usually that doesnt help much bacause ur going for a mortar and after u killed it, ur stormies get pwned by BARs or whatever...

100mun each is ok

[TheDeadlyShoe]

No. Mp44s are better. Rangers are about as tough on a per man basis (counting their elite armor) and have 2 more men.

Oh, and Storm troopers get suppressed easily and take forever to unsuppress, they could be considered more fragile in that manner than any other assault infantry.

Again: Stormtroopers were buffed. They suppress the same as any other unit.

***

A Stormtrooper squad with 2 mp44s has about 2/3 the firepower and 2/3 the toughness of a Ranger/Thompson squad. The flip side is that it is cheaper in manpower/munitions, and can camo. Leverage your advantages.

[nugnugx]

mp44 should be 80  2nd 90

mp40 55

[CafeMilani]

storm are faster suppressed and pinned than any other infantry! tats their weakness.
to counter storms, use BARs.


100 or 90 mun per upgrade would be ok

a single mp44 upgrade is such a bullshit atm, it unbelievable..the reload time is huge = fail

double upgraded storms are quite nice but 280 mun for 1 unit?! forget it
i rather buy 4 lmgs for it

[Mgallun74]

apparantly from what i read, the storms were buffed to not suppress so fast??? why do people keep saying they are suppressed the easiest?

[Tymathee]

because they remember pre change and they're bias. The storms were changed to match basic infantry. Again, the reason why storm weapons cost so much is 1. their cheap initial price and 2. they can cloak and 3. they have a lot of health. I see very effective storm usage, you want them to be cheap so that they can always have upgrades, but dont you think that's a bit unfair? smgs and zooks are expensive and storm unupgraded > ranger unupgraded in usefulness. maybe not in offensive ability but in what they are suppoesd to be used for. You have kch for a reason, those are your assault troops, storms are ambush troops and are really really good at it, use t hem that way and you'll be successful, if you are using them as your front line and trying to be a mainline combat troop, unless you're realaly good at using them like i've seen some people, you are using them the wrong way.

[AmPM]

I must LULZ at Tymathee commenting on people being biased.

Oh, and Storms have no more HP than FJ or PE Grens.

[Schultz]

Stop compairing stormies to rangers thats fucked up.
1 mp44 stormy will die to smg rangers allways.

I'm using stormies from the start of EIRR and i've never seen them more innefective. And if mp44s seized to be as effective as they were, mp40s are even more worthless now, at 75 munition. Volks have devalued into nothing but remaning food.

You should have without doubt noticed that battle now is conducted from a distance, long range or mid range. Bars, Brens, piats, rifle nades they all deny assault weps. The blob eats them up even before they actually engage.

Especially stormies suffer so much from not having regeneration any more. I would trade being less prone to suppression, or even pay pp to get that back. Especially for units that consume such a high amount of munitions.

[Tymathee]

i'm comparing rangers and storms because rangers cost more than stormies and its what I'm used to, and also, they're the only special infantry other than fsj and airborne that dont cost muni and the rangers is the only allied special unit that gets a close range weapon, thats why I compare them.

and ampm, I"m not bias, I try my best to be fair, I usually am just defending things that people say are op or up. I'm the first to report on the howie bring broken at vet 3, i could've just let it go and used it and been a cheat but no i didn't. If I feel like something is weak on any side, I've commented on it, if I felt like something is too strong for its price, I have made a comment. I'm all for game, not sides, but the thing that makes me look bias is that I play allied and I usually defend the allies and thats manly because most of the threads based on balance are for axis especially wehr units and from playing 500+ games in eir, I have a lot of experience with the ami and wehr units. So, whatever.

[31stPzGren]

I have used stormtroopers more than some of the people here and I have used a pure stormtrooper army back when they still cost 330MP.

The power of stormtroopers lies constant usage, not a one off "4 availability" use. They are simply unable to do enough damage consistently with 2 tries (2 call-ins of 2 storms).

Bear in mind the randomness of combat conditions changes the performance of these troops DRASTICALLY at small numbers, but when given larger numbers, they will perform more consistently over time as sheer bad luck do not occur all the time.

On top of this, let us remember now that 2000 munitions is the norm. The stormtroopers are no longer the "king" of the battlefield back at 10000 MP and 1250 MU (If I'm not wrong), where arming them with a single MP44 means tons and tons of chewed up rifleman + weapon support teams.

Since the Developers has decided that MORE WEAPONS are a brilliant idea, the game play has changed significantly. Every odd unit you meet will have some anti-infantry weapon that can easily beat back the MP44.

Even if you uncloak and ambush, at most you'll kill half the squad before a response force comes cracking down on your storm troopers.

The basic comparison which people have always used, are head to head such as Volks Pricing vs Rifle Pricing etc etc. Hence the reason why people use Storms to compare with Rangers and likewise, their respective assault weapons.

There's no such thing as rangers being better than storms or vice versa. They are meant for two different purposes. Storms sneak around, scout and act as skirmishers. Rangers work better as shock troopers due to their fire up and grenades. Rangers appear more vulnerable because they are a bullet magnet. Once anyone sees a ranger, they'll usually target them as first priority.

Personally I find an unupgraded ranger to be better than an unupgraded storm. This is because they can fire up and use grenades where as the storm can only cloak and throw bundled nade. The ability to ignore suppression and take out key infantry targets with grenades should never be underestimated.

The simple argument of proper pricing has always been, if an item is properly priced, it will be used frequently enough. Currently, the combination of availability system paired with certain pricing inconsistencies simply make units un-viable.

Reducing the pricing of the MP44 to 90 is hardly unfair, based on the comparisons and calculations used. At least drop the price to 95 munitions. Even KCH nowadays are more cost effective than stormtroopers.

[SaintPauli]

The pricing on the assault rifles just isn’t balanced: 

2 MP44 on Storm = 120mu = 60/gun
3 MP44 on KCH = 110mu = 36.7/gun
3 MP44 on PZgren = 110mu = 36.7/gun
4 MP44 on PZgren = 140mu = 35/gun 
4 FG42 = 140mu = 35/gun
4 Thompson = 140mu = 35/gun 
6 Sten SMG = 160mu = 26.7/gun + free smoke


Stormtroopers:
Most assault weapons cost 35mu/gun. The same should be the case for the MP44s on the stormtroopers. The question is how big a premium should you pay for the cloak and how big a premium should you pay for being able to buy them 2 at a time? The extra cost of a cloaked panzershreck is 30mu. If we also set the cloaking cost on the MP44s at 30mu the total for 4 guns should be 170mu. It is however an advantage that you can buy them two at a time. Therefore I propose that we make a price difference of 10-20 between the first and second pair while keeping the total at 170. This could be 90/80 or 100/70.

Rangers:
The pricing is ok for the Thompsons. The problem is that if you allow the rangers to buy Thompsons without bazookas they will have a 2 man buffer before they start to lose firepower. My suggestion is that we raise the price on Thompsons with 10-20mu (the same as the difference between first and second set of MP44s).

Commandoes:
The commandoes have just received a health buff and the price on their machineguns is way lower than other assault weapons + they get “free” smoke. They do however loose firepower as soon as a single man dies so they probably only need a small price increase.

[31stPzGren]

Rangers:
The pricing is ok for the Thompsons. The problem is that if you allow the rangers to buy Thompsons without bazookas they will have a 2 man buffer before they start to lose firepower. My suggestion is that we raise the price on Thompsons with 10-20mu (the same as the difference between first and second set of MP44s).

I think we should leave thompsons as they are. They have hit a good price equilibrium in my opinion. They are expensive enough to warrant careful usage but not so cheap that they are spammed.

[gamesguy2]

Not all SMGs are created equal, thompsons and stens are worse than mp44s.

[Tymathee]

Storm gets 2nd mp44 = all 4 get mp44. Proof




so the price of the 2nd is well worth it.

[SaintPauli]

Not all SMGs are created equal, thompsons and stens are worse than mp44s.

Rangers > All other assault infantry

Storm gets 2nd mp44 = all 4 get mp44. Proof
so the price of the 2nd is well worth it.

Yes Tim. They get 2 MP44 for 120. And we all know 2x2=4.
And no 4 MP44s are not worth 240mu