Grenadier fails in combat.

Swap the ammos! Grenadiers now fire sticky grenades, and riflemen throw mowtar shells!

 

That Fishman guy is a fish AND plays gren D:

 

Incidentally, Grenadier can also refer to an elite class of soldiers, a specialized engineer or a soldier with a grenade launcher.

 

So we can all agree that the gren needs a name change as well as an RPG that does damage?

 

This man is right!

My suggestion would be to add a unique type of weaponary for the grenadier in close combat - dual wielded sawn off MG-42's, just because it would be so awesome.

 

rofl

Well my suggestion would be either:

1) Make the mortar do more damage the longer its trajectory becomes. This will get rid of those annoying instakills up close, but will still allow for longer-ranged kills. Problem is, you'll still retain one-hit-kills on infantry, but it will be harder to achieve them.

2) Different damage types depending on the enemy unit. This way, you can tweak damage to buildings, vehicles and infantry independently.

 

[HL1 parodied reference]
Don't just stand there, pick up that keyboard and do it!
[HL1 parodied reference]

 

If anything, the rpg damage should be swapped with the mortar damage. or the mortar dropped to 100 damage, so that only a direct hit would be an instant kill.

That would solve many problems, including the one where people shoot a mortar at tanks because the rpg sucks.

 

But then you have people rocketsniping more often.

There needs to be some way of limiting the range of rocket launchers.

Actually I have an alternative proposal. Increase the damage of rocket launchers, but increase reload time. For mortars, reduce damage, and increase rate of fire. Mortars would do less damage than rocket launchers per shot, but are more desirable against static targets due to better rate of fire.

 

mortars splash. that's why they are great for anti turrets. Rockets have to do damage to tanks.

I also think that if you have a barracks some place so out in the open you can't protect it with walls, it deserves to get rocket snipped. you need to place it either around the corner from a choke point, or build walls and place it in a lower section of the map so taht the walls can cover it, in the case of the NF barracks. In isles, this means taking the north west corner completely if you are going to take it, then walling it off.

Honestly, rocket sniping, unless against a target that actually will matter, is a waste of time. first, even with mortar, a person with repair upgrade can keep up with 2 people rocket sniping for at least a minute. 1 person, they can keep up forever.

Also, Grenadiers ahve a limited supply of ammo. Sure you can put an ammo box in front of them, but at that point it's a team effort going into taking something down, and I don't see a problem with that. If someone is rocket sniping your buildings, your best bet is to get out and kill them. If they have a safe place to rocket snipe from, that's not their problem.

 

The rocket has comparatively insane range to the mortar though. Mortars are supposed to be anti-building, but many people use the rocket instead. In many ways actually, the mortar is more like a grenade launcher than an actual mortar. Perhaps the rocket launcher when dumbfired follows a slightly arced trajectory? And at a certain range, guidance gets cut off?

 

Unfortunately, I cannot write C++ code.

 

Cutting off guidance won't help any. the only way to hit a moving object with guidance is to get lucky or for the person to be driving straight, simply because it becomes increasingly difficult to derive the range as the rocket goes on. arcing won't help much either because it's easy to compensate. it also allows people to hit not only targets that you have an LoS to, but also targets taht are slightly out of LoS.

I have no idea what mortars are supposed to be for, but from my experience they are exceptionally good at hitting just beyond an engineers turret to kill the engineer building it for example. also, the splash damage really makes it great for taking out turret farms.

not many people use rockets for anti building because they have a bad damage overall compared to other methods (Riflemen and Engineer grenades).

For the most part, Rockets aren't a problem as long as they are used along with the team rather than a grenadier alone. A grenadier with team support can do about anything, and a grenadier without team support runs out of ammo really quick. If anything, taking away 1-3 rockets would solve any problems, because then the gren wouldn't have enough rockets to actually kill a single building without ammo upgrade. even with it, a gren has trouble killing 1 major building, and it's impossible if even 1 engineer repairs it even a little.

Anyhow, point being, with teamwork, you can do about anything. If you want to balance the weapon, don't think of it as if the gren had an engineer with him all the time. That's teamwork, and it's hard to balance teamwork except by having more teamwork.

 

Rockets are practically artillery though. And with the relative flatness of pretty much all maps and a lack of terrain obstacles they're pretty good at building killing. Plus pretty much everything else has to get closer to do actual killing. Someway or another it has to be fixed. Easiest way IMO is to add in damage fall off.

 

so you should have to get within range of a lvl 3 turret to be able to kill it? I don't think so. Rockets are what they are, get used to it. They aren't as efficient at killing buildings as you seem to think. They can be used to kill buildings when infinite ammo is accessable, but otherwise, not that potent.

 

The point is that, rockets can hit something pretty much half-way across the map, while nothing else can. Rocket launchers are supposed to be anti-vehicle yet they fulfill a pseudo-artillery weapon better than the mortar. Rocket launcher just needs a clear line of view, while mortar needs to be close, and requires some ranging before shells hit the target, and reloads slower than the rocket launcher.

Swap it around. Make rocket launcher do more damage but reload slower, and mortar should fire faster with perhaps slightly less damage than before. Give mortar greater range. Also make it so that mortar cannot be fired while moving, nor perhaps, 5 seconds after moving.

I still feel that all weapons should suffer from some sort of fall-off or maximum range. For one, it would help with balancing scout and engineer weapons so that while they say, could do 30 damage up close and personal, it wouldn't be something like "a light assault rifle" at longer ranges.

 

a bullet hurts just as much up close and personal as it does from a mile away. the difference is it's harder to hit a thimble than it is an elephant.


and give more range to an arcing weapon that can bypass ANY defense?

RPG launches rocket propelled grenades. the range on a rocket is pretty much the size of any of the battle fields anyhow.

you assume that the RPG is purely supposed to be an anti tank weapon, and that the mortar is some sort of artillery piece. In my opinion, RPG and mortar are anti emplacement weapons. My opinion will not change, neither, as I see, will yours. I'm not misunderstanding what you have to say, I just disagree with it, and I gave my reasons as to why. If you have problems with what I believe and think that I should see it in a different way, please say so. Don't tell me that things are supposed to be this way or that way.

A name is an arbitrary assembly of letters on a page, or a group of sounds that represent an object. Language is a collective group of people that use the same sounds and symbols to represent objects in the same way, allowing them to communicate.

It may be called an RPG, and a mortar, because that's the closest thing in our world that those weapons relate to.

In my opinion, they serve a different function. Rockets and mortar are anti armor weapons. Armored units are any unit that cannot be damaged by rifles, smgs, or pistols.

If your reduce the damage of the mortar to 100, it wont be the godly insta kill 5 infantry in one spot hiding behind something weapon, but it will knock them back, do decent damage, and possibly throw them out of their hiding hole. Rockets, having almost no splash, should do major damage to any armored target (120 damage to start, 135 after upgrade one, 150-160 after upgrade 2). They won't be more powerful than HE, and HE cannon can hit just about anywhere on a flat map. Ranged CAN hit anywhere on ANY map that is level to it's position with nothing blocking it.


at any rate, I understand your opinion, I don't agree with it. I hope I gave you enough to understand my opinion.


Now, as half this thread is me and you going back and forth, lets stop this argument, it's getting no where.

 

This will be my last response to Metal Smith on this topic.

A bullet will however, tend to be stopped or deflected by solid objects at longer ranges, and a few hundred meters can mean a world of difference between getting a bullet in the ribs or in the lung.

Okay, maybe not so much range. But the point is that the mortar (what with the crouch and prone thing) should be a static weapon, but it isn't. People tend to run around with it.

RPG stands for anti-tank launcher in Russian, and the inherent range of a weapon, is also dependent on its accuracy. A fin-stabilized projectile is not really as accurate as a spin-stabilized projectile in most cases, and guidance systems for a rocket launcher also have limited range as well.

My main problem with the mortar is the shuffle, crouch, shoot nature of the mortar. In that case, the crouch isn't much of a disadvantage (more like 3 seconds of slowness that can be made up for with some sprinting). It makes the mortar actually a much better short range weapon than the rocket launcher against ANYTHING, counting in the splash.

Hence the ideas I posted previously: Swap damage and reload times around, maybe 120-130 for Rocket launcher at 12-15 shots a minute, and 100 damage for the Mortar at about 20 shots a minute.

To compensate for the Mortar's capability for superior damage over time and splash, usage of the Mortar should lock the user in place or require no movement at all to use. I know this has been suggested countless times already, but the Mortar as it is is more like a grenade launcher than a proper mortar.

Even with say a reduction in damage, the Mortar will be more useful than the Rocket Launcher in close quarters due to its ample ammunition supply.

 

The simplest solution is just to get your pistol skills up to scratch.
Besides it would be very unrealistic for the grenadier to carry any more, it would be simply too much equipment weight.

 

the grenadier probably pops lots and lots of pills


or lol genetic enhancement/nanomachines