Why don't Shocks require upgrades?

As someone who usually plays Soviets, I'm usually not one to blaspheme against our lord and savior Jesus Christ, but why don't they have some munition requirement gating their full potential? (like say locking some of their ppshs behind a muni upgrade) Guards need 75 muni to be usable, and every other call in elite infantry that comes to mind requires some muni investment, so why are Jesus troops unique? Its not like Soviets are starved of munitions, and Shocks in their unending quest to hug the germans to death are hardly under powered. It just seems a bit weird is all.

For the same reason commandos don't - because its fine and balanced that way.

Its not like Soviets are starved of munitions, and Shocks in their unending quest to hug the germans to death are hardly under powered. It just seems a bit weird is all.

When was last time you've played soviets?
At the moment you pretty much can only move around without paying at least 15 muni for it and even to that there are exceptions.

As someone who usually plays Soviets, I'm usually not one to blaspheme against our lord and savior Jesus Christ, but why don't they have some munition requirement gating their full potential? (like say locking some of their ppshs behind a muni upgrade) Guards need 75 muni to be usable, and every other call in elite infantry that comes to mind requires some muni investment, so why are Jesus troops unique? Its not like Soviets are starved of munitions, and Shocks in their unending quest to hug the germans to death are hardly under powered. It just seems a bit weird is all.

Yo are right. Shocks are OP. A bit like falls or, even more, paras. But it is true they should probably pay munitions to be that good. A good approach would be to make them pay for their body armour, not get it stock. Guards get their ptrs for free. Also an unbalanced idea from the times when guards were weaker.

Yo are right. Shocks are OP. A bit like falls or, even more, paras. But it is true they should probably pay munitions to be that good. A good approach would be to make them pay for their body armour, not get it stock. Guards get their ptrs for free. Also an unbalanced idea from the times when guards were weaker.

You do realize if anything they have would be separate upgrade, initial price and therefore reinforcement cost would need to go down to balance it out, meaning they would be easier to spam?

Because you are completely ignorant to actual balance and stats, that's how they worked in the past, weapons were an upgrade, they had ability like storms that also suppressed and they were spammable monsters.

well.
the upgrades youre talking about are generally for long range combat (dps, brownings, fg42) or free upgrades for close range (mp40, ppsh for Airborne guards)
Thompson being the exception (it basically transforms your squad into shock troops)

shocks dont have access to long range and are complete garbage at any range that isnt close
same for commandos which, if you invest muni, can be decent medium to long range

Because we had Shocks requiring upgrades and that was a far worst concept. Both gameplay and balance wise.

1- 6 PPSH means that they have a consistent DPS decrease with each model down.

2- Armor by default (which is nothing other than received accuracy with another name for 95% of situations) makes them been expensive therefore you can actually bleed someone going for more than 1 or 2 of them.

3- Long range performance units are easier, safer and have greater potential than short range units.

Because we had Shocks requiring upgrades and that was a far worst concept. Both gameplay and balance wise.

1- 6 PPSH means that they have a consistent DPS decrease with each model down.

2- Armor by default (which is nothing other than received accuracy with another name for 95% of situations) makes them been expensive therefore you can actually bleed someone going for more than 1 or 2 of them.

3- Long range performance units are easier, safer and have greater potential than short range units.

A well answered question in only 6 posts? I'm not used to this level of competence on this forum. But then I'd ask how do Thompson Paras and Rangers fit into this dynamic? Is it just because Thompsons Stronk that they have 90 muni upgrade costs?

Para/ranger carbines are already good weapons, with point-blank damage not much lower than shock troop PPShs. The Thompson is very strong: 50% more close range and 100% more mid range DPS than the shock PPSh.

The cost of Rangers and especially Paras at their late timing is a tiny bit too high, in my opinion, but that's not really what the thread's about. Overall, I like the difference between the two squads, one with an upgrade and another without.

A well answered question in only 6 posts? I'm not used to this level of competence on this forum. But then I'd ask how do Thompson Paras and Rangers fit into this dynamic? Is it just because Thompsons Stronk that they have 90 muni upgrade costs?

Thompson are stronger (around 50%) and are equipped on fewer models (better focus fire and less DPS lost) while the basic carbine is already pretty decent. The assault ability is also part of the upgrade. They have more utility and versatility with different upgrades (1919/Bar/Elite Zook).

You do realize if anything they have would be separate upgrade, initial price and therefore reinforcement cost would need to go down to balance it out, meaning they would be easier to spam?

Because you are completely ignorant to actual balance and stats, that's how they worked in the past, weapons were an upgrade, they had ability like storms that also suppressed and they were spammable monsters.

You are ignorant to balance not me imo - I don't understand why they don't ban U for personal attacks like that.

To the point. The whole problem is about making soviets pay munitions for things, not balancing shocks, (which is another story). Unlike other factions Soviets can spam mines and offmaps more, because they need less munitions for basic stuff. Shocks are just an example of a unit that is very potent without upgrades and thanks to it, the faction can accumulate more munitions during an even matchup creating advantage.

I don't think that requiring an upgrade to purchase the shields reducing the damage would be such a bad idea.

Buying a PPSh-41 without an alternative is ridiculous. Then what to add as an alternative? DP-27? Flamethrower? Trophy Panzerschrecks and Panzerfaust?

You are ignorant to balance not me imo - I don't understand why they don't ban U for personal attacks like that.

Because pointing out the fact that you live in your own world and completely disregard balance history is not a personal attack.

To the point. The whole problem is about making soviets pay munitions for things, not balancing shocks, (which is another story). Unlike other factions Soviets can spam mines and offmaps more, because they need less munitions for basic stuff. Shocks are just an example of a unit that is very potent without upgrades and thanks to it, the faction can accumulate more munitions during an even matchup creating advantage.

Why? Why is it a problem? What kind of metric or gameplay replay you base that on?
You just said you do not look for balance, which means your whole argument is irrelevant and void.

Also, other factions can spam mines just as well.
You know why they don't?
Let me share you in on a little secret:
Show Spoiler

I don't think that requiring an upgrade to purchase the shields reducing the damage would be such a bad idea.

That's because all you think of are bad ideas that you don't think are bad, despite it being exactly the case in the past and was proven to not work.
That's literally definition of ignorance.

Stop thinking that your proven multiple times lack of understanding balance and economy is a balance problem of any kind.

Thompson are stronger (around 50%) and are equipped on fewer models (better focus fire and less DPS lost) while the basic carbine is already pretty decent. The assault ability is also part of the upgrade. They have more utility and versatility with different upgrades (1919/Bar/Elite Zook)

I think this pretty much sums it up. And you sortt of already mentioned this by talking about versatility, but rangers also get 3 weapon slots

And obviously paras arrive pretty differently to the map than shocks. There's a handful of differences

Post.

I don't think I'm ignorant. If U accuse anybody of being ignorant it is U who should prove it, not otherwise.

Soviets do float more munitions because of not needing to upgrade some units or pay munitions for healing. The OP idea makes sense as tourneys prove that in 1v1 axis are often inferior. Making shocks pay a bit for some upgrade to become as powerful as they are would make sense. They are really durable and many players complain it is a bit too much. Adding some munition cost would make it just better.

I don't think I'm ignorant. If U accuse anybody of being ignorant it is U who should prove it, not otherwise.

Soviets do float more munitions because of not needing to upgrade some units or pay munitions for healing. The OP idea makes sense as tourneys prove that in 1v1 axis are often inferior. Making shocks pay a bit for some upgrade to become as powerful as they are would make sense. They are really durable and many players complain it is a bit too much. Adding some munition cost would make it just better.

Which SU units not needing muni for upgrades? Cons with 7-th man, maybe ptrs penals? SU have only few doctrinal units that don't need ammo for upgrades: shocks, partisans and ppsh airborne. OH have ass grens, pgrens, jager squad, storm troops mp40; east legioners (yea, they have mg-42, but almost no one make that upgrade for them, they good as cannon fodder).

And i forgot when OH or OKW need ammo for healing? Med bunker - 1 upgrade for endless heealing, OKW med truck - 1 upgrade for endless healing. If you use battle meds or OKW medcrates they are situational. Like SU airborne medcrates.

Shock good only in small maps, or city maps. They can't do nothing against armor. Very costly for reinforce and Merge don't have sense for them, because plate armor don't share. Just kite them, bleed them, harras with armor or long range units and you will be fine.

post

Su is generally OP compared to axis factions (especially visible in 1v1). Introducing munitions cost for shocks body armour would push it towards a more balanced gameplay experience. Such things don't really change much but just make game experience better. Thanks to such change players facing shocks wouldn't get frustrated because of their durability and model count. They will feel it is ok as the upgrade was paid for. Really basics of game design.

I don't think I'm ignorant.

That's ignorance too.

If U accuse anybody of being ignorant it is U who should prove it, not otherwise.

I already did, in every single thread I gave you stats and stat pages and you still ignored them completely and went on babbling incoherently based on "I think I'm right".

Soviets do float more munitions because of not needing to upgrade some units or pay munitions for healing.

Soviets also have much more abilities they have to use that cost munitions, have you already forgot how you wanted to nerf ZiS barrage? That's one of them.
Oorah? 15 muni.
All soviet elites have nades and use them frequently.
Not to mention all the doctrinal abilities and offmaps to boot.

Soviets have as much muni expenses as any other faction, the only REALLY muni starved faction is USF, everyone else is on similar level.

The OP idea makes sense as tourneys prove that in 1v1 axis are often inferior.

And metrics balance team mentioned about win rations prove soviets are weakest faction in game.

Making shocks pay a bit for some upgrade to become as powerful as they are would make sense.

No, it wouldn't, unless you'd want to
a) make them even stronger then they are now
b) make them much cheaper then they are now

That's called balance, but we've already established in this and multiple previous threads that you have no idea about the meaning of this word.

Do you even know shocks stats vs rangers stats in terms of durability per model at vet3?

They are really durable and many players complain it is a bit too much. Adding some munition cost would make it just better.

Yes, we know, we call these players noobs, because they play team games exclusively, blob everything and have 4 digit ranks. We also have actually good people providing feedback to balance team on communications channels thank RNGod you have no access to.

On the topic of rocket science, I'd rather listen to 1 rocket scientists backed by metrics then 1000 dirty peasants who throw a stick in the air and call it a ballistic missile, screaming ballistic missiles need changes.

There is not a single good player who complains about shocks and they were buffed some time ago for a reason.

I needed to write that, I expect you to read and replay to it, but I don't expect you to understand it, so I wont be bothering myself with continuting this with you.

You want to make a point?
Provide gameplay replays, valid tests results, stat based argument.
If you can't, do the only sane thing and drop the subject before you ridicule yourself further.

Oh yes, give infantry with armor long/medium range weapons. That would be sweet. In my sweet Soviet OP build I imagine them with 6 SVTs or 6 Guards Mosin Nagants. Just imagine this type of stuff behind a green cover.