Patch APB 3.0.4.0 Changelog

[TeamWolf]

 

 

I was pointing out how secondary fires that you can't tell are different from the primary are a bad idea. This is regardless of what game does it. Reborn just conveniently happens to be a W3D mod that does it so I can use it as a comparison. You are now the one bragging about actual unit role differences between the two games.

 

 

Well you're the one comparing the grenadier to spy, engineer, or whatsoever. Let's compare it to it's actual counterpart then

 

 

He did, the diskthrower.

[devilslayersbane]

You're going to have to bear with me with me here, but let's look at it like this:

 

Comparison to other infantry roles in APB:

Grenadier (old):

Small splash

low damage

only good in really tight spaces

hard for new players to really get on to (not such a bad thing, but I've never used a grenadier effectively)

Not really worth the money on any map that has a ref larger than 100m², because other units do what he does better

cheap

Good against 2-3 infantry (alone)

 

Grenadier (new):

Large splash

large damage

good in medium sized spaces and open ground

needs to lead a target well.

Useful inside larger building (I.e. ref, wf)

more expensive

Good for early infantry rushes if used right

Still provides a decent challenge for new players (veteran players get this challenge as free DLC).

Good against 3-4 infantry (potentially)

 

Kapitan:

Good against 1-2 infantry

poor at most CQB

cheap

Large ammo per mag

stays after barr death

 

Sergeant:

CQB expert

Decent at medium range engagements due to slugs

good against 1-3 infantry

stays after barr death

cheap

 

Flamethrower:

Medium splash

Medium damage

more expensive

explodes on death

fire retardant

Good on all maps

Good against 3-4 infantry (basically a better old grenadier)

 

So, if that's not enough, let's take some inspiration from real-life:

F1 grenade (old grenadier)

Can be thrown super far

Can be thrown up close

no kill radius

damage radius small

 

F1 grenade (new grenadier):

Can be thrown relatively far (for a handheld grenade)

High damage

3 second timer

Large radius (still no guaranteed kill radius)

 

F1 grenade IRL (soviet):

3.5-4 second fuze (generally)

30m effective radius, 200m possible damage radius (the latter is a bit extreme for a game not based on simulation)

Thrown up to 30-45m out away from the user

 

Overall the new grenadier has more use (imo) and is more believable

Impact grenades did not see very wide use until more modern times in our timeline and older models often ended up causing more harm than good (see the T13 Beano)

While you may have to limit somethings usefulness in order to get more use out of it in another area, lets see how this plays out.

Talk is cheap. We need an effective script that can log kill messages on the server so that we can see how often grenadiers are used and how effective they are.

I'm interested in seeing results.

[Pushwall]

Well you're the one comparing the grenadier to spy, engineer, or whatsoever. Let's compare it to it's actual counterpart then

 

But according to you that means mud-slinging and avoiding issues. So since that's not in my interest, I'll get back to issues:

Which is false if you consider that he was actually nerfed in his role, not buffed.

 

That only makes sense if you see the previous grenadier's role as what it was intended to be - "close quarters splash guy". But since the flamethrower had the exact same role but also did it better in exchange for costing very slightly more, the grenadier never got used, except on Fissure where you can't take a step without running into an enemy so being able to buy a splash unit the instant the game starts actually matters. So outside of Fissure his role was actually deemed "looks pretty in the purchase list" by the meta. Considering that his new intended role of "long range building harasser" is only shared with an infantry that costs 1000 credits more and isn't available on every map either, there's got to be more situations that he can be applied to than the old grenadier, so it should be a lot harder to shove him into "looks pretty in the purchase list" again.

 

Basically, he is now a much cheaper version of Volkov with much less power against vehicles, instead of being a marginally cheaper version of the flamethrower with less power against everything. So the Grenadier is still a unit that borrows another unit's role, but instead of being worse at that role in every way, he's damn near equal to Volkov in that role, but worse at other things. Also the price gap between him and his superior version is big enough that you might actually care about saving the money. 1000 is much more likely to matter than 140 when it comes to providing for impoverished late-joiners, getting a bigger vehicle or saving for later because you lost a ref/silo and need to make sure you can actually get something after you die.

 

I suppose I could have made the grenadier free and nerfed him a little because even in his previous state he was not appropriate for being actually free, and that would mean there are situations where he gets bought instead of the flamer, but that also means when both teams have no barracks or no money to get a good infantry to put in their vehicle, the Soviets' options are much better and much more varied than the Allies. Not to mention it would mean instant grenade rushes could be a thing without worrying about not being able to get a HT when you die (and then you can of course put a free grenadier in that HT) and depending on how cramped the map is, that may well be uncounterable until medics/snipers are available. But once the Soviets actually have money he would suddenly be a joke compared to the 160 grenadier, because paying the extra 300 for the flamethrower is still nothing compared to now paying the extra 1000 for Volkov.

[OWA]

In all fairness, I never pick the Grenadier because other infantry do what he does way better. Shaking the balance of this unit up with these changes might actually make him worth buying. We should really stop theorycrafting and play a few matches with the changes before dismissing the new nader as a terrible direction. I'm definitely going to give it a go when I get back to my PC.

 

If you compare the Nader to the Disc Thrower, it's not really fair. The Disc Thrower is GDI's cheap anti armour guy, but he's also pretty effective against infantry too. The Nader was pretty shit against tanks in Red Alert considering that both teams had Rocket Soldiers. This wasn't a problem for the Disc Thrower though because GDI had no Rocket Soldiers. So it's not really fair to compare the two units side by side.

 

tl;dr, eager to see what kind of beast the nader has become.

[VERTi60]

Right now after playing the grenadier I would really suggest to reduce the splash at least in half (the big splash radius is un-intuitive, most of the players will kill themselves before even attempting to learn how the big range is), lose the makarov and make him cost 250 max. So to at least make him a viable option compared to other infantry. Then we'll see.

 

I still think the one unit which should be improved in range is the flamethrower though while keeping the grenade close to mid combat (artillery mode option-able).

In all fairness, I never pick the Grenadier because other infantry do what he does way better. Shaking the balance of this unit up with these changes might actually make him worth buying. We should really stop theorycrafting and play a few matches with the changes before dismissing the new nader as a terrible direction. I'm definitely going to give it a go when I get back to my PC.

 

If you compare the Nader to the Disc Thrower, it's not really fair. The Disc Thrower is GDI's cheap anti armour guy, but he's also pretty effective against infantry too. The Nader was pretty shit against tanks in Red Alert considering that both teams had Rocket Soldiers. This wasn't a problem for the Disc Thrower though because GDI had no Rocket Soldiers. So it's not really fair to compare the two units side by side.

 

tl;dr, eager to see what kind of beast the nader has become.

 

Well said.

[Pushwall]

Half seems like a bit too much. Bear in mind that his current radius is 10, same as the flamer/kovnades, and 5 puts him equal to a shocky, who has been described as "has to hit between someone's feet to splash them". And the shocky doesn't even have to worry about a 3 second delay on his attacks . The radius of 10 combined with the "if you're in the radius you take full damage" feature is meant to allow him to stand some chance of splashing infantry in the field while also making him harder to use non-suicidally in super-close quarters, making it much lower than that kind of undermines that. Maybe a bigger explosion effect would help with the "intuitive" aspect?

 

As for removing the pistol, maybe, though to prevent him from suddenly dying to techies I'd also have to remove the "disarmable" effect from grenades - that was another thing to discourage use in interiors but it's probably not necessary; the high chance of self-harm probably already does a good job of that.

 

Not sure how getting rid of his pistol and dropping his splash radius down to "nigh unusable except on things the grenade sticks to" levels makes him "viable" even with the price drop though, compared to his current state?

 

The flamethrower is meant to be used in buildings and has trouble hitting people in the field even when they're in range anyway, I'm not sure how more range could really help with that, so maybe he could just use more accuracy or a faster projectile? Most people who use him probably couldn't care less if he had his current 80 range or 40 because that's still just enough to fire from one end of the WF interior to the other (of course this is all hypothetical, he certainly doesn't need a range nerf, and he uses a fireball-thrower which would be silly to have such a short range for anyway.)

[harvester]

An engineer costs 500, can demolish building but suck against enemies fighting him. No one seems to complained about them.

 

The grenadier now costs 500, can harass building from a distance (no repair tools like the engineer but his unlimited grenades is a good trade off) and also suck against enemies (he is no longer suitable to fight now). I think he's alright now considering he's an anti-building-only artillery infantry unit.

 

If we want a splash damaging unit at close range, we have flamethrowers and shotguns. I see now that the soviets have a new infantry class with a different role from others. Now all 4 volokov's weapon's role have its own individual infantry class. Who cares if can't fight vehicles or could kill himself at close range, his specialized role is anti-building.

[SarahNautili]

I like the new grenadier. I'm already seeing a few interesting uses for him - clearing out the WF from Tanyas in a way Flamers never safely could, and clearing engies off allied defenses to allow killing the defense. Kinda a golden wrench counter. Plus the building harassing, and hell, even infantry harassing as long as he stays far enough away.

 

He does need a bigger explosion effect. The current one is way too small for his explosion radius, and makes it kinda hard to see where you're hitting - or at least does for me on my laptop. Especially important since he can't get hit markers.

[Pushwall]

clearing engies off allied defenses to allow killing the defense.

 

In a similar vein I believe he can also be used to disrupt mechanics that are trying to repair a vehicle while it's attacking. Which flamers aren't as good at because of their slower running and damage falloff, and the delayed explosion aspect of nades isn't as great a deal there because the explosive follows the vehicle around anyway so the mech has to get away from IT (or get in if it's multi-seated) to be safe.

 

I think I will make them undisarmable since that lets them do the anti-building/anti-repair job better against anything that has to be repaired from outside (like defenses). Granted, if you're at the appropriate range, it's basically a non-issue right now because the grenades explode in 3 seconds after being thrown and take 1 second to disarm with the normal tool. So if it's in the air for more than 2 seconds it's not getting disarmed. I'll have to look up the wrench rate though.

 

Will probably give his 60 health back too. He'll still die in the same amount of self-harm mishaps since it's a fixed 15 damage through armour

 

Of course, the last match I got to use them in (where I got to get some pretty good use out of them) someone was gem farming and left me with 10000 credits anyway so I *could* have just used a Volkov instead and done more when I wasn't pummeling buildings - but as I mentioned before this isn't always going to be the case, and being able to reasonably afford a Grenadier but not a Volkov when you want him for long-range building hunts is far more likely than being able to reasonably afford a older Grenadier but not a Flamethrower (not to mention you're certainly not getting a Volkov on the 7 maps that aren't TL5... or rather 6 because one of those is Hostile Waters where there really is no place for grenadiers to artillery buildings from. But that's still a lot of maps.)

Now all 4 volokov's weapon's role have its own individual infantry class.

 

This is kind of what I was going for. Volkov's status as a "jack of all trades" was dubious when there was nobody else in the "artillery man" trade to compare him to. Now that the Grenadier is that, Volkov no longer has any weapons that stand out, he just stands out by having a wide variety of them and being hard to kill, which is about as much distinction as he needs.

[Ice]

He does need a bigger explosion effect. The current one is way too small for his explosion radius, and makes it kinda hard to see where you're hitting - or at least does for me on my laptop. Especially important since he can't get hit markers.

What did you have in mind exactly? Keep in mind that real-life grenade explosions look pretty much the same; A loud pop and a spray of shrapnel.

[GeneralCamo]

Honestly, any discussion on what to do with the new grenadier should wait at least a month for people to learn it, use it, and make it part of their game. Otherwise this will go on a back-forth patching which will get nowhere.

[OWA]

As for removing the pistol, maybe, though to prevent him from suddenly dying to techies I'd also have to remove the "disarmable" effect from grenades - that was another thing to discourage use in interiors but it's probably not necessary; the high chance of self-harm probably already does a good job of that.

 

No techy is quick enough to switch to their repair tool, disarm the nade, the switch back and fire off a few shots before the next nade is thrown, so I doubt the Granadier has anythign to worry about when coming up against a single Techy.

 

That being said, making grenades disarmable doesn't seem like the best choice to me. I guess C4-type weapons carry the stigma of "this needs to be disarmed somehow" which, in the case of the Grenade, isn't needed. It's a different kind of weapon that requires new rules, much like the velocity changes that have already been applied to it.

 

I haven't had a chance to play yet, but does the countdown timer appear above Grenades to indicate to the enemy how much longer they have to get the hell out of the way?

 

Edit: Also I agree that the explosion should match the splash radius so that it is is more readable to players.

[VERTi60]

Those are the main issues. You don't know when it explodes and if you are in safe distance. Now as for the techie argument, If I wanted to fight techies, I would bring captain or starshina into the building, not the current grenadier. Why would I want to use pistol if I could use something better. And if somebody likes to use grenadiers on hills or something as artillery, he can expect something more "tough enough for the job" to come after you than a lonely techie. Preferably in a vehicle or a copter. So there, the gun is useless (unless you're a pistol pro and you want to prove it with every infantry which has a sidearm).

 

 

Honestly, any discussion on what to do with the new grenadier should wait at least a month for people to learn it, use it, and make it part of their game. Otherwise this will go on a back-forth patching which will get nowhere.

 

I've tested the grenadier on AOW maps, he's not worth the price tag at all. Any other infantry unit could inflict more damage or at least they are better of defending themselves.

Maybe on infantry only maps it could be a good choice to harass enemy barracks or silos from far - although that's nothing new.

 

 

The flamethrower is meant to be used in buildings and has trouble hitting people in the field even when they're in range anyway, I'm not sure how more range could really help with that, so maybe he could just use more accuracy or a faster projectile? Most people who use him probably couldn't care less if he had his current 80 range or 40 because that's still just enough to fire from one end of the War Factory interior to the other (of course this is all hypothetical, he certainly doesn't need a range nerf, and he uses a fireball-thrower which would be silly to have such a short range for anyway.)

 

Look the Flamethrower should be the highest tier anti infantry unit in the game (for soviets, excluding hero units) - it shouldn't be limited to close range but also mid range. The projectile speed and accuracy could be improved, splash could be set higher, maybe slower ROF as trade-off (aka the changes grenadier got instead). I'm not saying the flamer needs an overhaul though but if we need an overhaul than it would be more logical for flamer than grenadier (which was meant to be low tier anti infantry/splash damage guy).

[des1206]

Up nader's damage to buildings the same as RPG's, then I think it will be fine. When I want to shoot tanks and attack buildings externally, I buy RPG (even better than Kov/Shock vs non-MCT). When I want more anti-infantry and range, but care less about tanks, I buy nader.

 

Imagine 2 - 3 Grenadiers plumetting your building from/over a hill, but when you try to go take them down with infantries you meet a fiery death. Grenadiers - Allied artillery on foot.

Edited March 28, 2016 by des1206

[SarahNautili]

Verti, I've got a feeling you've got no idea what the new gren's job is. It's not to clear buildings (although it can do that role admirably in the larger buildings), it's pure artillery support. From range. The flamer doesn't need to be more powerful, and there's almost no way to balance the old style grenadier that's not either useless (why buy him when you've got a flamer as an option) or too powerful (why buy a flamer when the grenadier's cheaper). He needs his own new niche, stop trying to force him back into his old, useless niche.

[VERTi60]

Have you actually tried that? I know what is being advocated here, but in reality you won't achieve much with it - on AOW maps you can get better things to destroy buildings, and getting inside is essential sometimes to clear out repair crews or get bonus damage via MCT. Hence Engineer for the same price could actually kill the building, kapitan/starshina on the other hand would have advantage over defenders. On darker maps you don't even see your grenades and the explosion is also small. The damage you do can be easily out repaired.

Also since when do soviets need a 500$ squishy 50 HP building artillery (where you can just use v2 or any better infantry), which is now completely useless in all other areas where the old grenadier was actually useful.

[des1206]

The damage you do can be easily out repaired.

But this is the same for any vehicles attacking since they can't get inside to the MCT.

 

Also since when do soviets need a 500$ squishy 50 HP building artillery (where you can just use v2 or any better infantry), which is now completely useless in all other areas where the old grenadier was actually useful.

I don't know, V2s are easily spotted in the field and clunky to use. Couple of Grenadiers (if given decent damage vs. buildings) on foot/supply truck/chinook/minelayer can offer an stealthier/cheaper/faster-to-put-together rush than a couple of V2s driving in a chain to the enemy base. I guess you can also just use other infantries to go inside.....but going inside takes time, there are base defenses in the way, and nader can use hills/walls to his advantage.

Edited March 28, 2016 by des1206

[SarahNautili]

I have used it to good effect, yes. The grenadier may not match a V2 for sheer damage, but it does have several advantages. It's better at clearing golden wrench engies off defenses, it's a lot harder to pinpoint since it's a hell of a lot harder to see a grenade in the air than it is to see a V2 rocket, and two or three grenadiers can kill a building decently quickly. Maybe not as quickly as someone getting inside, no, but the range advantage does count for something, since it makes an enemy have to run out of the base and hunt you down, and unlike a V2 you don't die instantly the second a rocket trooper wanders up, and you can fight back against infantry responders better than a V2 can. We actually did manage to kill the Refinery on Guard Duty with it. Also there's been a couple times I managed to use it in a support role against an enemy mech med to keep them suppressed and unable to mech while someone else broke past their armor and finished them off, or against a pillbox or turret to allow it to be finished off despite engineer spamming trying to save it from a kaptain rush.

 

And, again, the old grenadier was *literally useless* because its role wasn't unique and there was an infantry for less than double the price that did literally everything it did more than twice as well. And anywhere the Flamethrower wasn't available, the Starshina or Kaptain still did the anti-infantry role far better.

Edited March 28, 2016 by SarahNautili

[Pushwall]

Look the Flamethrower should be the highest tier anti infantry unit in the game (for soviets, excluding hero units) - it shouldn't be limited to close range but also mid range. The projectile speed and accuracy could be improved, splash could be set higher, maybe slower ROF as trade-off (aka the changes grenadier got instead).

 

The flamethrower already only gets one shot every 3 seconds. There really is no reason for it to be any longer than that. The higher it goes, the more crippled he becomes in the open (which I thought you wanted him to be better in?) and the more overpowered he becomes in any situation with lots of cover for him to hide behind while reloading (like Fissure or certain building interiors).

 

(if given decent damage vs. buildings)

 

A few patches ago Volktillery had about 25% more DPS and it rendered raiding buildings from within mostly obsolete. And even then he was still doing "merely" 60% the DPS of a V2.

 

I'm considering raising the grenadier's range a little instead, because the range gap between a Grenadier and the more damaging RPG is actually not that significant.

 

Also since when do soviets need a 500$ squishy 50 HP building artillery (where you can just use v2 or any better infantry)

 

When do Allies need a squishy 250$ machinegunner when they can just use a ranger? When do Allies/Soviets need a squishy 300$ rocket guy when they can just use a medium/heavy tank? When do Soviets need a squishy 900$ shock trooper when they can just use a tesla tank? Vehicles are not fit for all the situations that infantry are (and vice versa). Vehicles cannot get to all the places that infantry can. Vehicles are really easy to hit. Vehicles leave infantry behind when they die. A grenadier+V2 combo actually seems like not a bad idea because you're not going to bring your V2 close to the enemy base anyway (unless you have a pretty damn robust escort that also wants to attack things), it's going to be pretty hard to stop sneaky flankers from destroying your V2 even if you hop out with a shock trooper or something, and the more time you spend sprinting to the enemy base to continue attacking when your V2 inevitably dies, the more time the enemy has to start repairing.

 

Also I hear MPRA2 is basically trying to get people to boycott the grenadier now because it is underpowered in his hands (just like, you know, the old one which was also underpowered in his hands). Unfortunately I don't negotiate with terrorists so this is not going to get me to do anything that reasonable people aren't requesting.

[harvester]

Personally, I like the old grenadier better as the lighter (faster,weaker and cheaper) version of the flamethrower (mainly because of RAlism) but let's face it, nobody uses them but me ( I use them to chase retreating enemy infantry or flush out snipers camping in towers), I rarely seen people using them, even in Fissure, the cheaper starshinas are far more common and people would rather play as rifle soldier to save money for flame soldiers.

 

The old grenadier wasn't common because there is very little reason to buy him (only for his speed usually). I'm not sure how common this new grenadier is (he's still new, people need to get along more) but I definitely see more reasons to buy him. Maybe 500 is a bit much.

[Alstar]

Honestly, as a person who was used to old grenadier, i cannot find myself with using new version properly. For now only efficient usage for him which i found was clearing out building interiors like barracks, refinery, dome from enemy infantry. In my hands i couldnt be able to fight against someone in open terrain, as he was simply evading my (now timed) nades. Maybe its just a question of skill (which i lack), but i'll try giving this guy a bit more attention in game - and maybe master him. Just to prove MPRA wrong

 

I like the facts that he no longer explodes when dying (making him decent at raiding buildings as a anti-infantry support) and have Makarov for short range combat.

[des1206]

 

(if given decent damage vs. buildings)

 

A few patches ago Volktillery had about 25% more DPS and it rendered raiding buildings from within mostly obsolete. And even then he was still doing "merely" 60% the DPS of a V2.

 

I'm considering raising the grenadier's range a little instead, because the range gap between a Grenadier and the more damaging RPG is actually not that significant.

 

I guess my question is: If the RPG trooper does more DPS to building exterior than the nader, why wouldn't I just by the RPG when I want to attack buildings from the outside? Especially since the point of attacking any building is speed - trying to kill it as fast as possible before defenders have time to repair.

Edited March 30, 2016 by des1206

[Pushwall]

Same reasons people use volktillery? Being able to hit buildings without having to get through the defenses first? Being able to hit buildings/defenses from certain well-defended spots in the field whereas RPG troopers would have to stand closer in the open and get dunked by artillery? Having a better chance at self-defense if infantry come your way, which they will if you're in a place vehicles can't reach?

[VERTi60]

 

Also since when do soviets need a 500$ squishy 50 HP building artillery (where you can just use v2 or any better infantry)

When do Allies need a squishy 250$ machinegunner when they can just use a ranger? When do Allies/Soviets need a squishy 300$ rocket guy when they can just use a medium/heavy tank? When do Soviets need a squishy 900$ shock trooper when they can just use a tesla tank? Vehicles are not fit for all the situations that infantry are (and vice versa). Vehicles cannot get to all the places that infantry can. Vehicles are really easy to hit. Vehicles leave infantry behind when they die. A grenadier+V2 combo actually seems like not a bad idea because you're not going to bring your V2 close to the enemy base anyway (unless you have a pretty damn robust escort that also wants to attack things), it's going to be pretty hard to stop sneaky flankers from destroying your V2 even if you hop out with a shock trooper or something, and the more time you spend sprinting to the enemy base to continue attacking when your V2 inevitably dies, the more time the enemy has to start repairing.

 

Also I hear MPRA2 is basically trying to get people to boycott the grenadier now because it is underpowered in his hands (just like, you know, the old one which was also underpowered in his hands). Unfortunately I don't negotiate with terrorists so this is not going to get me to do anything that reasonable people aren't requesting.

 

250$ machinegunner - is cheap, great for clearing up buildings, good range, excellent at clearing low defences such as FTs from range or cover. Compared to Grenadier more useful overall. Compared to ranger, they are not that easily detectable, can enter buildings, don't have large hitbox, they feel like they have bigger TTK than ranger. I was able to kill the ranger with kapitan btw. Then again you use ranger as a fast transport, so roles are quite different here.

300$ rocket guy - once again more useful as grenadier as he can also fight vehicles other than hit buildings form a far. Not to mention only viable AA in game. Compared to the tank - well tank has highest TTK in game, so you use tanks to fight other tanks or vehicles. Once again different roles.

Also the Shock trooper should be anything but "squishy". He seems to hold and take more than the TT, while the TT has better firepower and range. So in this case I would say I would say while roles are very close, it depends on situation (why not use both )

 

Regarding V2 - it's much better choice on AOW maps than the grenadier (which costs 200 less but is more than 300% less efficient than a vehicle in this case). V2 can travel faster. V2 can clear repair crews with splash, while grenadier needs to go inside (oops he is not suppose to). Skilled players can use V2 to take out vehicles, infantry and even longbows to a degree. Can grenadier do that? No. Grenadier can't do more than a V2, nor any other unit for that matter. He's basically obsolete in his role now unless, once again, you put him on infantry only map where he has a chance at least.

 

 

Same reasons people use volktillery? Being able to hit buildings without having to get through the defenses first? Being able to hit buildings/defenses from certain well-defended spots in the field whereas RPG troopers would have to stand closer in the open and get dunked by artillery? Having a better chance at self-defense if infantry come your way, which they will if you're in a place vehicles can't reach?

I agree here but once again V2 is much better choice. You can't kill a building with one grenadier hitting it from outside, while V2 has better chance. Even kovtillery isn't a thing anymore, kovs are better off going inside and causing more trouble while they are better protected.

[Isaac The Madd]

What was kov short for agian?

[Ice]

Personally, I like the old grenadier better as the lighter (faster,weaker and cheaper) version of the flamethrower (mainly because of RAlism) but let's face it, nobody uses them but me ( I use them to chase retreating enemy infantry or flush out snipers camping in towers), I rarely seen people using them, even in Fissure, the cheaper starshinas are far more common and people would rather play as rifle soldier to save money for flame soldiers.

I actually enjoyed using the old grenadier a lot. It was a fun unit to play as and was good (in the right hands) as a low-tier siege unit.

 

What was kov short for agian?

Volkov, Hero of The Soviet Union.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Ice