101s should be Tier C infantry

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I think that the recent vet. changes made it even more unfair for AB. All infantry oriented docs can enjoy this buff due to the numbers of inf they are able to deploy:

1) Unlimited gebirgs and falls for Luft.
2) Marines + Commando + SAS for RAF
3) Different kinds of storms in BK, including quite capable Officer unit.
4) Unlimited rangers + infiltration rangers.

At the same time AB has almost no impact from this change, as you can have max 2 82nd squads while 101s are still absolutely lame units for being a core of the doc.

They deserve tier C like the rest of the special inf. Their HP and damage output is low, yet 385 MP is almost the same you pay for reg.5/Sas/Storms that have double of their perfomance.

UPD: I am also keen on collecting the player's feedback after this tiers introduction. In my opinion extra bonuces for elite inf works fine, but penalty to the basic inf is a very bad idea. They were weak in the late game anyway, now if you lose volks\pzgrens\rifles there is no sense in rebuilding them, because without vet. they will be completely melted by Tier B/C Infantry. Scoring vet. levels for those units was already hard enough, therefore when you manage to do so it should be rewarded, not punished. I think getting rid of Tier A completely will be good for the gameplay and for the balance.

[Warhawks97]

fully agree with that post.

[Consti255]

Gebirgs are Tier B tho not C.

First of all. Yes a remove of A-Tier is actually a good call. It made in my opinion the cheaper rifles CP upgrade absolute trash for 2 CP and also prop doc recieved a huge hit in the face with that change. Overall i am a big fan of the vet changes but i think it was a little bit too much for Volks,Vsturms and rifles. Not to mention that CW didnt even had a main combat unit in this tier, which is one of the reason CW is so dominant right now.

i know the mod tend to go away from expenisve infantry and thats in my opinion a good change. But i think SAS are WAY WAY WAY to cheap. They come early as heck, Are 7 men and every mediums nightmare. The price should definitely be increased in my opinion. I played some beta again with my brother and after the smoke changes they are still absoulute bullshit in terms of cost/use factor.
The thing with the smoke is they pop it, wait out the HE shot from the tank and leave the smoke and still hit all their at shots.
I am a big fan in general from SAS, but seriously you need nothing else than these dudes playing RAF with a little bit of commando piats,Comando snipers or other support weapons.

[MEFISTO]

Gebirgs are Tier B tho not C.

First of all. Yes a remove of A-Tier is actually a good call. It made in my opinion the cheaper rifles CP upgrade absolute trash for 2 CP and also prop doc recieved a huge hit in the face with that change. Overall i am a big fan of the vet changes but i think it was a little bit too much for Volks,Vsturms and rifles. Not to mention that CW didnt even had a main combat unit in this tier, which is one of the reason CW is so dominant right now.

i know the mod tend to go away from expenisve infantry and thats in my opinion a good change. But i think SAS are WAY WAY WAY to cheap. They come early as heck, Are 7 men and every mediums nightmare. The price should definitely be increased in my opinion. I played some beta again with my brother and after the smoke changes they are still absoulute bullshit in terms of cost/use factor.
The thing with the smoke is they pop it, wait out the HE shot from the tank and leave the smoke and still hit all their at shots.
I am a big fan in general from SAS, but seriously you need nothing else than these dudes playing RAF with a little bit of commando piats,Comando snipers or other support weapons.

Plus they can drop on your defenses 2 gliders and this 2 CP SAS with zookas an a pia all at the same time in the blink of an eye LOL I love it, yes they may have to increase the price to 500 or the CP cost at least 3 so they don’t come that early, what I do as RAF is go 2. CP SAS unlock the captain and LET THE CIRCUS play on enemies defenses and go straight for air support.

[MEFISTO]

But any ways I don’t wanna a big NERF to them or RAF in general it is too fun to play as it is now!

[Consti255]

But any ways I don’t wanna a big NERF to them or RAF in general it is too fun to play as it is now!

When normally somehting is too fun, its too strong

[MEFISTO]

But any ways I don’t wanna a big NERF to them or RAF in general it is too fun to play as it is now!

When normally somehting is too fun, its too strong

Well Sparrow is one of my cuban friend, he made a post about SAS and everyone here said “they are good” they are no broken etc… the thing is, Crow (Cuban player also) play that Doctrine all the time and he he a good player, so we have seen already how good this doctrine can be.
In my opinion SAS are good, what make them so strong is instant smoke but I am against to change it, that is what make them special, may be increasing their CP cost by 1 and make them 500mp.

[Consti255]

yeah, i would not touch their combat stats. Just price and maybe even CP.

[Warhawks97]

If anything i would go a bit up in CP cost. I cant remember when anyone using Commandos at all since the change was made.
I know Fallis 2 CP, 101st 2 CP etc. But RAF doesnt need to be the same.

Also i am not sure as we are speaking about Vsturm. What prop doc actually gets for 2 CP to handle it. I can only think of the 0 CP Ostwind and Pumas.

Anyway, i am not an RAF player. But what i see is always the same: SAS asap and then airstrikes. I am not sure if that change was so good.
But i am against an inf Squad again that costs 500 MP or more which translates into "this unit must be super good" syndrom.

[Consti255]

When it is not a price increase, it HAS to be CP or tiering in my opinion.

Either 450-500MP or CP increase is my opinion on them. RaF should atleased have a state where they build some commandos, first i was mhh i like commandos still and SAS wont replace them. But actually they do in every aspect. So there have to be cost investments for the better unit.

[MEFISTO]

If anything i would go a bit up in CP cost. I cant remember when anyone using Commandos at all since the change was made.
I know Fallis 2 CP, 101st 2 CP etc. But RAF doesnt need to be the same.

Also i am not sure as we are speaking about Vsturm. What prop doc actually gets for 2 CP to handle it. I can only think of the 0 CP Ostwind and Pumas.

Anyway, i am not an RAF player. But what i see is always the same: SAS asap and then airstrikes. I am not sure if that change was so good.
But i am against an inf Squad again that costs 500 MP or more which translates into "this unit must be super good" syndrom.

Yes that is also true no need for another 500 mp super unit, cp change is the best idea and not 4 or more I think 3 is enough.

[Krieger Blitzer]

They deserve tier C like the rest of the special inf. Their HP and damage output is low, yet 385 MP is almost the same you pay for reg.5/Sas/Storms that have double of their perfomance.

All i know is that this is a clear exaggeration in my opinion, 101st with Thomspons eat FJR for breakfast.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I don’t see those problems with SaS, every tank is fast enough to drive backwards an kite them. Once they leave smoke they die very fast if un upgraded. I think that players got too used to the fact that basically any tank obliterates even the best inf. Hence one proper tank buster unit irritates them.

You guys haven’t played back in the days, when smoke made units invisible. Sas with 4 zooks + Schreck was very fun to play back then.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

They deserve tier C like the rest of the special inf. Their HP and damage output is low, yet 385 MP is almost the same you pay for reg.5/Sas/Storms that have double of their perfomance.

All i know is that this is a clear exaggeration in my opinion, 101st with Thomspons eat FJR for breakfast.

You only need to look at Corsix and compare the stats of 101s with reg.5, as well as Thompson with FG42. The bubble will burst then. Don’t forget to multiply reg. 5 vet bonuses by 1.5.

[MarKr]

1) Unlimited gebirgs and falls for Luft.

They are not unlimited and as already said, Gebirgs are B tier.

At the same time AB has almost no impact from this change, as you can have max 2 82nd squads while 101s are still absolutely lame units for being a core of the doc.

They deserve tier C like the rest of the special inf. Their HP and damage output is low, yet 385 MP is almost the same you pay for reg.5/Sas/Storms that have double of their perfomance.

I guess they could go to C. Not because they "deserve it" but because weapon upgrades are sort of mandatory for them so the invenstment could pay off in veterancy.

In my opinion extra bonuces for elite inf works fine, but penalty to the basic inf is a very bad idea. They were weak in the late game anyway, now if you lose volks\pzgrens\rifles there is no sense in rebuilding them, because without vet. they will be completely melted by Tier B/C Infantry. Scoring vet. levels for those units was already hard enough, therefore when you manage to do so it should be rewarded, not punished. I think getting rid of Tier A completely will be good for the gameplay and for the balance.

With this way of thinking units such as Stuarts should at Vet3 get +1000HP and x30 penetration vs everything so that they can go against late game units because...when getting this high vet in late game with this unit, you "should be rewarded, not punished".

What sort of "punishment" are you talking about? I haven't noticed units in A-tier getting nerfs with each vet level, they get bonuses, only lower than other units.

It is a question of unit tiers. Ofcourse that basic units that are cheap and available from the start of the game to all docs will get their ass ripped by late game units. These units do their job in early game during the first infantry fights but later on you get doctrine specific units that replace them for most activities - it can be vehicles and tanks in Armor doc, or different types of infantry in AB/Inf docs but you get stuff fight enemy infantry. The tiers are similar as with tanks/vehicles:
Light tiers are halftracks/armored cars/light tanks - for infantry it is A-tier
Medium tanks are Shermans/PIVs/Cromwells etc. - for infantry it is B-tier
Heavy tanks are Pershings/Tigers/Churchills etc. - for infantry it is C-tier

If you ask for vetted A-tier to be at least decent vs C-tier, it is the same as asking for vetted 57mm HT to be at least decent vs heavy tanks. We can do that but then people will complain that "it is bullshit that they lost their expensive heavy tank to such a shit unit" and so the change will diminish the value of heavy tanks in general. The same way it is with infantry, the better the A-tier performs vs the C-tier, the lower the value of C-tier.

So if A-tiers are no match for vetted C-tiers in late game, then the system works as intended.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I am not asking for some superb Tier A inf, Mark. You are over complicating things too much. The fact is that basic inf was ok before the patch, their performance was spot on and elites inf with CP upgrades still could melt them in the late game.

Idk why you took this to “then basic inf replaces elites”. It just doesn’t, I started the whole elite inf debate because they were overpriced for their early game performance and just as weak against tanks as basic inf. You found a decent solution to solve it, but at the same time basic inf got hit for no reason. Literally no one ever said that pzgrens, rifles or volks were OP.

I call it a punishment, because they may not have their starts nerfed, but when the rest of the inf has high vet levels they become obsolete even with vet levels.

What do you think about making a poll about getting rid of Tier A infantry? I am confident that no player in the community has reasons to keep this feature.

“If tier A inf is a no match for tier C inf in late game then it works as intended”

It was already that way, so if it worked as intended, maybe this change wasn’t needed?

[MarKr]

Oh yeah...absolutely nobody EVER said that "Grens in Def doc are pointless because Volks are strong enough and are cheaper", never have I ever heard anyone say the same about Storms vs Volks in BK doc. There have never been anyone saying that "Rangers are crap because Volks with vet and LMG shred them in seconds". The vet system change was a result of these types of complaints that have been reoccurent for years.

I already said that the infantry is intended to be replaced later on by doctrine-specific units. Give me some good reasons why and in which doc you NEED Riflemen, Pgrens or Vgrens from mid-game till late game.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

It’s not like I need them, it just killed the game variety a bit. Someone liked to play with more expensive elites, other enjoyed cheap volks/rifle spam. Both options were viable and fun. Now basic inf is out of the late game.

Complaints about “volks bit Rangers” aren’t relevant anymore because elite inf is cheaper than before AND get more bonuses with vet. Answer me one question as well please. Do you truly think that if Tier A infantry becomes Tier B it will jeopardize the elite inf position somehow?

It would be great to hear an opinion of other players as well.

[MarKr]

Answer me one question as well please. Do you truly think that if Tier A infantry becomes Tier B it will jeopardize the elite inf position somehow?

In the current state? Probably not. Even if the change happened and they proved to be problematic, we can increase the XP requirements for vet levels and so make them vet up slower or something.

If you're trying to play the "it won't change much, so why not do it?" angle, I have to ask "if it doesn't change much, why bother with it at all?".

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I already gave the main reason. More viable units in late game = more diverse and fun gameplay.

One of examples would be the one that Consti mentioned. Getting 2 CP unlock in Inf doc is pointless as you rifles are deemed to die out anyway, hence it’s better off with Rangers right away.

A bit same for Panzer Support, I really enjoyed playing with masses of cheap panzergrens. After patch it doesn’t work out so well.

[MarKr]

And then you asked me "Do you truly think that if Tier A infantry becomes Tier B it will jeopardize the elite inf position somehow?". I said "no" and so I presume that actual performance difference between B-tier Volks/Riflemen and C-tier infantry will be pretty much the same. If it will be more or less the same, what does it matter if they are A or B tier?

Do you think that shifting them to B-tier will jeopardize the position of elites?

[Warhawks97]

I agree with sukin here. Basic inf was on spot. It was usefull as mainline inf as intended but super squishy. In late game they were usually overruned by elites when they had their buffs.

The issue with elites quite often was that they got easily countered by tanks. So players had to make a choice to spend CP for tanks or inf. Usually tanks was the way to go. So it took very long till elite inf could start to shine. But when the matches lasted long enough, they did so very well, esspecially when backed by friendly armor.

On top of that elites dropped in cost and loadouts got changed.


I would also remove that A-tier inf system and only have "normal" (B) and "elite" (C).




Comparing armor with infantry warefare is the wrong way to go. They have nothing in common. Infantry soldiers dont have armor that can bounce bullet inf. On the other hand tanks dont get cover bonuses. And the cost difference between basic and elite inf is rather small. Like 100 MP in build cost if even. Some elites are even cheaper that other factions basic inf. *looking at CW* I think you dont want to make me believe that a KT costs only 100 MP and 10 fuel more than a Stuart, dont you?

[Consti255]

All i know is that this is a clear exaggeration in my opinion, 101st with Thomspons eat FJR for breakfast.

Ehh. It depends on the map and how you can approach each other.
Thompsons upgrade give the 101st iirc 4x Thompsons and 2x M1A1 Carbines.
Fallshirms drop with 2x FG42 and 4x MP40s.

Just acording to raw battlestats, FsR5 should eat 101st alive. They have more HP and obviously the better loudout, without even spending 50 ammo into them. (While both costing 2 CP and nearly the same 400MP FsR5 and 385 101st)

You can argue yeah Thompson are better in close range and they are, but normaly before you getting there the 2x FG42 alone did there damage.
Also keep in mind that the FG42 is damn accuarte while on the move aswell and the M1A1 carbines suck on the move.


Just from experience and i played A LOT Airborne the last month, that the one scenario 101st shine is in direct close range and the hard part is to get there. Also even winning then isnt a 100% thing. FsR5 still have all automatic weapons aswell.

I also forgot the abilitys... FSR5 has a way higher grenade throw range, which can be take casualtys before even open fire oppon, or maybe even pinning which makes it even harder for the 101st to get close. They can also used very effectively against flanking attempts.



In conclusion, i would support a change for the 101st that they should get C-Tier vet stats, with the reason Markr already brought up. You have to invest into them mostly 100% of times to make them worth. So the ammo should be making up for the lesser MP price and slower scaling via CP.

[MEFISTO]

FSJ with no upgrade weapons and no CP investment are weak, I don’t know about CORSIX but FSJ HP I am sure is less or the same as 101st ( no cp investment in FSJ) after the upgrade FSJ become in what they used to be, a strong unit.
Also FSJ weapons upgrade are still expensive compare with SAS that only pay 30 ammunition for a full weapons upgrade.
Luftwaffe drain ammunition, weapons upgrade should cost 50 instead 75 and after the 2cp weapons price reduction it should cost 30 instead 50 for each FG42.

[kwok]

FSJ with no upgrade weapons and no CP investment are weak, I don’t know about CORSIX but FSJ HP I am sure is less or the same as 101st ( no cp investment in FSJ) after the upgrade FSJ become in what they used to be, a strong unit.
Also FSJ weapons upgrade are still expensive compare with SAS that only pay 30 ammunition for a full weapons upgrade.
Luftwaffe drain ammunition, weapons upgrade should cost 50 instead 75 and after the 2cp weapons price reduction it should cost 30 instead 50 for each FG42.

I think the perception of FSJ are weak is because people are still clearly using them as if they were space marines. Can they hit that level of strength? Yes but only late game. I still watch idiots dropping FSJ randomly in back lines assuming they'll survive and wipe everything they land behind. It's true FSJ are dying faster than 101st, but that's because people use FSJ more recklessly than 101st. It's almost like people expect 101st to suck so they use it more conservatively and they live longer.

As for tiers in general, it's a really annoying thing to keep balancing.... 3 tiers were added for a reason. Players complained both about the lack of difference AND drastically difference in regular vs elite infantry at the same time way too often. Including a 3rd tier (if/when executed correctly) allows for clearer expectations of infantry roles. Your C tier will almost always kill A tier for simple play. Your A to B tier and B to C tier is where you have expression of skill to outplay higher tier of infantry. It's not a clear A < B < C scenario, this isn't starcraft where more HP wins.

I absolutely laugh at these "inf balance was good" claims.... don't pretend the whole garand, k98, lee enfield, storm troopers, never ending cycle of debate and complaints never happened.

Sukin, I'm a little frustrated at this comment:

I am not asking for some superb Tier A inf, Mark. You are over complicating things too much. The fact is that basic inf was ok before the patch, their performance was spot on and elites inf with CP upgrades still could melt them in the late game.

Idk why you took this to “then basic inf replaces elites”. It just doesn’t, I started the whole elite inf debate because they were overpriced for their early game performance and just as weak against tanks as basic inf. You found a decent solution to solve it, but at the same time basic inf got hit for no reason. Literally no one ever said that pzgrens, rifles or volks were OP.

I call it a punishment, because they may not have their starts nerfed, but when the rest of the inf has high vet levels they become obsolete even with vet levels.

What do you think about making a poll about getting rid of Tier A infantry? I am confident that no player in the community has reasons to keep this feature.

“If tier A inf is a no match for tier C inf in late game then it works as intended”

It was already that way, so if it worked as intended, maybe this change wasn’t needed?

This whole path of differentiating infantry started here:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4091

You've had more posts between then and now that flip opinion but my point is these concepts that are created are meant to create more nuance to handle all your concerns (not just you but all players).

The debate here seems to be more about 101st and not infantry as a whole. Are we here to debate 101st or tiers in general?
If we're talking about 101st, which we've more or less decided would be the B tier, and we hear conflicting reports on their performance against A and C tier... based on how tiers have been designed I'd say it's pretty good. Sounds like those who say 101st are too strong are the skilled and the ones who say theyre too weak need to practice. We've said this multiple times... 101st are not intended to be elite/C tier. That was more reserved for 82nd. Otherwise what's the difference between 82nd and 101st if 101st are going to be C tier?
If we're talking about tiers, well... make a new topic. But a lot of thought has been put in this concept already. We're not going to revert it back just for some old players who can't get use to the changes. Come with reasons