Why Soviets are OP

First of all i would like to ask you (answer base on 1v1)

1- If they are OP, why is it that the performance across automatch, both in high ranking and average across the board and during tournaments is poor.

2- IF the whole answer revolves around OH META, then wouldn't that mean that UKF/USF/OH are OP or stronger as the former 2 factions can deal with OH?

List of soviet nerfs

List of compensations

Now i'll reply adding teamgames into consideration.

I think what you try to address doesn't solve the discrepancy between 1v1, teamgames and inherent Soviet design problem.
I'll argue that Soviets for 2v2 and up is fine, as the game plays differently and there's a higher chance to make it into the late game. Most weakness are mitigated by the gamemode or complementary faction.


Regarding nerfs which would give room to buff other aspects, i only agree with 2 (Zis barrage, but not necessarily in that way + T70 power) and i'll add Ram needing a rework to be more interactive (problem is when combined with offmap). As for compensations i think you are just addressing superficial issues without dealing with core problems.

The nerfs to OH still miss AG based strats (or any T1 skip at all) and PG main problem is not their effectiveness in the mid to late game as to warrant vet 2/3 nerfs. If you revert their timing change then you basically made them have the same problems they had before (aka been mostly irrelevant). PG ties the gap in AI, specially when OH early muni is key.

FHT nerfs would be only because Soviets get access to T3 based units really late and they don't have the same flexibity to tech infantry AT without losing all AI (Penals) or having mp available to call Guards. I don't think the FHT is OP on the USF/UKF match ups.

In the same way OKW needs some early tech flexibity and healing, Soviets mp tech expenditure early on and T3 timing needs a look out, specially if you plan on nerfing the T70. Maybe take a look at M5 timing if T3 arrives earlier.

Well, then just disagree with others mate. In my opinion, I disagree with you too, and I agree with other lads responses in this thread. A lot of things you said don't line up. The only valid thing is the T70, but every faction has some cutting edge unit perfect for a short time. If you don't like the responses or if the responses are not top notch to your demands, you can always try to get your point across in other communities. What else do you feel we can do? We're not gonna change the game just to accommodate your wishes.

Ok man, I'll actually make the effort to explain this. There's 2 main problems with CoH2.org. 1. Any balance discussion gets turned into an axis vs allied fanboy battle. I admit I provoked it with my polemic title but a more diplomatic title just doesn't attract any attention whatsoever precisely because everyone is looking for these fanboy battles.

2. Most people in this forum are not very good at the game. That's just fact. Now this wouldn't be a problem if people were a bit more modest. Scroll back and check out how some people have accused me of sucking at the game, speaking from emotion etc. Guess what? I actually play the game at a reasonably high level. I'm not a great player by any means but noone in this thread would even have a slight chance of beating me (exception being the one person who actually gave valuable input).

Does being relatively bad at the game disqualify somebody from having opinions? No. But it does disqualify you from accusing people of not knowing what they're talking about when they're a million times better than you. You can make counter arguments but you can't dismiss someone like in this thread without being utterly ridiculous. I'm not at all a fanboy. Check out my playercard. If anything Im a US fanboy. My balance opinions fluctuate from patch to patch. Most of the things I posted are talked about between people who play the game regularly all the time. But none of these people post here because they know they'll be shout down by the likes of Katitof.

Cheers mate for telling me using fancy words that I suck at the game. That's not cool.

I don't think elitism should be part of our lovely community. If you disagree with others, don't rub your playercard in people's faces. You can be wrong. Actually, you're wrong on endless points, despite your classy playercard. Even elchino says you are. You need to accept that, mate.

Cheers mate for telling me using fancy words that I suck at the game. That's not cool.

I don't think elitism should be part of our lovely community. If you disagree with others, don't rub your playercard in people's faces. You can be wrong. Actually, you're wrong on endless points. Even elchino says you are.

It's a video game with a few thousand players it really shouldn't offend you. And btw I don't even know whether you suck at it, I was talking about the average coh.org population.

Edit: Calling this community lovely? Okay...

Yeah, mate, don't insult the whole community at once if you disagree with them or if they're not top notch agreeing with you.

First of all i would like to ask you (answer base on 1v1)

1- If they are OP, why is it that the performance across automatch, both in high ranking and average across the board and during tournaments is poor.

2- IF the whole answer revolves around OH META, then wouldn't that mean that UKF/USF/OH are OP or stronger as the former 2 factions can deal with OH?



Now i'll reply adding teamgames into consideration.

I think what you try to address doesn't solve the discrepancy between 1v1, teamgames and inherent Soviet design problem.
I'll argue that Soviets for 2v2 and up is fine, as the game plays differently and there's a higher chance to make it into the late game. Most weakness are mitigated by the gamemode or complementary faction.


Regarding nerfs which would give room to buff other aspects, i only agree with 2 (Zis barrage, but not necessarily in that way + T70 power) and i'll add Ram needing a rework to be more interactive (problem is when combined with offmap). As for compensations i think you are just addressing superficial issues without dealing with core problems.

The nerfs to OH still miss AG based strats (or any T1 skip at all) and PG main problem is not their effectiveness in the mid to late game as to warrant vet 2/3 nerfs. If you revert their timing change then you basically made them have the same problems they had before (aka been mostly irrelevant). PG ties the gap in AI, specially when OH early muni is key.

FHT nerfs would be only because Soviets get access to T3 based units really late and they don't have the same flexibity to tech infantry AT without losing all AI (Penals) or having mp available to call Guards. I don't think the FHT is OP on the USF/UKF match ups.

In the same way OKW needs some early tech flexibity and healing, Soviets mp tech expenditure early on and T3 timing needs a look out, specially if you plan on nerfing the T70. Maybe take a look at M5 timing if T3 arrives earlier.

It's complicated because it's really only a question of whether Soviets can survive the early mid game imo. Ostheer relies on cheese to delay the T70 in order to win the game. Now I guess in a way you could call that a balanced state but in my mind it's not. Is there a way to look up the recent tourney stats? I understand your claim that UKF and USF can deal with Ostheer better considering recent tourneys but I'm starting to doubt whether it's true. I can't really comment on UKF at all but USF is extremely hard to play vs 5men and double pak play.

It's complicated because it's really only a question of whether Soviets can survive the early mid game imo.

-soviets are op
-but they are only op if they somehow survive

Ostheer relies on cheese to delay the T70 in order to win the game. Now I guess in a way you could call that a balanced state but in my mind it's not.

Cutting your opponents fuel while holding your own is not cheese, its literally how the game is supposed to be played to get an advantage/take it from enemy.
You should be aware of it at your rank.

In fact, after all the community balance patches now, there are singular crutch units, like T-70 holding all of soviet mid game on its shoulders single handedly without heavy doctrinal involvement, but the only exclusive cheeze left in the game at this point is osttruppen/AG T1 skip for ost.

It's complicated because it's really only a question of whether Soviets can survive the early mid game imo. Ostheer relies on cheese to delay the T70 in order to win the game. Now I guess in a way you could call that a balanced state but in my mind it's not. Is there a way to look up the recent tourney stats? I understand your claim that UKF and USF can deal with Ostheer better considering recent tourneys but I'm starting to doubt whether it's true. I can't really comment on UKF at all but USF is extremely hard to play vs 5men and double pak play.

the T-70 isnt an auto win for the soviets... the T-70 just makes up for the fact that soviet infantry cannot compete against upgraded enemy infantry... its the glue that sorta holds the faction together

also the soviets and OKW are prolly the worst factions at the moment for solo play... and it is mostly because of the horrendous life of trying to survive against infantry that absolutely body you with teamweapons that are worse than the enemy`s counterparts...

nerf the T-70 sure but conscripts better get 7 man or some better upgrade before T3 and the maxim better be a strong machinegun or the soviets are gonna stink even more

It's complicated because it's really only a question of whether Soviets can survive the early mid game imo. Ostheer relies on cheese to delay the T70 in order to win the game. Now I guess in a way you could call that a balanced state but in my mind it's not. Is there a way to look up the recent tourney stats? I understand your claim that UKF and USF can deal with Ostheer better considering recent tourneys but I'm starting to doubt whether it's true. I can't really comment on UKF at all but USF is extremely hard to play vs 5men and double pak play.

There's a thread by Syphon which gathers data for like 2 months post patch and the only faction with a heavy discrepancy in performance is Soviets been "UP". As far as tournaments and scrims goes, i don't think there are stats. But it's not hard to realise most people pre patch were playing Soviets and now most people just migrated to USF/UKF. With T1/T2 strats mostly been suicide to use against OH.

You've said it, IF and only IF, Soviets survive the early/mid game they have a strong gameplay. The solution is not nerfing everything OH is doing atm, cause team game wise, i don't think things are too far off.


While you might bring overall valid arguments or points of discussion, i think at the end of the day the final results are completely different. Whether you look at automatch or tournament performance. For all that is "imba" from Soviets, it's not enough to make them win equally across the board as the other factions.

"I challenge anyone in this thread to beat my soviets. "

Obviously most of the users won't be able to beat you. First of all good players (judging by you ranks you are one of them) win not because of OP units but having good micro skill, decision making and game sense. Secondly it doesn't lie on our shoulders to prove that Soviets are OP so beating you doesn't mean anything.

If you could show us replays of Soviet OP'ness deciding a tourney game or your game with your explanation that would be actually a discussion. Right now you are throwing points with no games to back them up.

It all looks like you do is just list strength of the soviets. Nothing OP

There's a thread by Syphon which gathers data for like 2 months post patch and the only faction with a heavy discrepancy in performance is Soviets been "UP". As far as tournaments and scrims goes, i don't think there are stats. But it's not hard to realise most people pre patch were playing Soviets and now most people just migrated to USF/UKF. With T1/T2 strats mostly been suicide to use against OH.

You've said it, IF and only IF, Soviets survive the early/mid game they have a strong gameplay. The solution is not nerfing everything OH is doing atm, cause team game wise, i don't think things are too far off.


While you might bring overall valid arguments or points of discussion, i think at the end of the day the final results are completely different. Whether you look at automatch or tournament performance. For all that is "imba" from Soviets, it's not enough to make them win equally across the board as the other factions.

It comes down to this:

I think there can be little doubt that Soviet vs OKW is skewed towards soviets.

Soviet vs OH is harder to judge and I don't doubt for a second that in automatch Osttruppen and maybe even AssGrens dominate. But imo wehr is forced into closing the game early on otherwise they're fighting an extreme uphill battle due to the reasons mentioned in op. This goes beyond reasonable asymmetrical balance imo.

1. Merging Flamethrower - Insanely strong vs OKW because it doesnt have early suppression
2. Sandbags - Cons behind sandbags are the most cost efficient unit in the game, you need at least two close range infantry squads to dislodge them
3. Mines - the wide availability of mines due to low ammonution needs and cheap engineers requires axis to sweep all their attack routes and doesn't let them cap freely on the flanks without risking wipes, sufficient sweeping is almost impossible when you only have one sweeper as OKW, a second Sturmpio ruins the army composition due to terrible OKW pop cap
4. ZIS Gun - two of these combined with mines, at nades and t70 vision keep any realistic amount of medium armor away, they also severely limit Axis ability to use support weapons aggressively and offer significant late game wipe potential both thanks to the broken barrage ability
5. T70 - Super reliable Anti Infantry, very high wipe potential, insanely strong vision ability, only weakness is timing
6. Trip Wire Flares - with ammunition barely playing a role for soviets these can be spammed everywhere, kill+vision is too cost efficient
7. Pop Cap - 100 Pop soviet army straight up beats 100 pop OKW army, 100 Pop Soviet vs 100 Pop Wehr is at least equal in strength and way easier to play
8. KV1 - Insanely strong combined with ZIS
9. KV2 - Wipe machine, unbeatable on certain maps (Brummbär is similar in that he excels on certain maps like Elst in 2v2 or Bayeux Assault in 1v1, but Brummbär is much harder to use)
10. T34/76 - Way cheaper than P4 but does the exact same thing, direct battles between the two rarely ever happen anyways and even then T34 isn't much weaker, very easy to reach critical mass with these
11. T34/85 - Strongest medium in the game?
12. Dshka - Broken
13. Ram + AT Arty/AT Strafe - obviously op
14. 7men cons - nobrainer update that can be easily afforded most of the time and has no real trade offs and makes it almost impossible for Soviets to lose infantry late game

I'll demonstrate the same thing with OST. (not OP just like soviets)


1. Osttruppen that are insanely strong vs SOV because it lets you save resources and tech up early wrecking soviets with early PG and 222\FlameHF.
2.Mines that delete light vehicles and great AI mines that can wipe full health squads
3.Best ATG
4.5 men grens and MG grens eat cons for breakfast until late game when upgraded to 7men
5. Brummbar - Super reliable Anti Infantry, very high wipe potential,only weakness is timing
6.Best MG in T0 that allows to cheese your way to victory.
7. Panzerwerfer that stops any attack since everyone get pinned even if they just get scratched.
8. Skill planes that don't even need you to ram or do anything fancy and just obilitrate any vehicle in sight.

I am pretty sure there's something else that I missed but you get my point.

It comes down to this:

I think there can be little doubt that Soviet vs OKW is skewed towards soviets.

Soviet vs OH is harder to judge and I don't doubt for a second that in automatch Osttruppen and maybe even AssGrens dominate. But imo wehr is forced into closing the game early on otherwise they're fighting an extreme uphill battle due to the reasons mentioned in op. This goes beyond reasonable asymmetrical balance imo.

Then why don't you make the same thread for UKF? They are also favoured against OKW.

Sorry for double posting

It comes down to this:

I think there can be little doubt that Soviet vs OKW is skewed towards soviets.

Soviet vs OH is harder to judge and I don't doubt for a second that in automatch Osttruppen and maybe even AssGrens dominate. But imo wehr is forced into closing the game early on otherwise they're fighting an extreme uphill battle due to the reasons mentioned in op. This goes beyond reasonable asymmetrical balance imo.

Ost does much better vs sov too with T1 skip and brummbar does not give a flying fuck against 7 man cons, maxims or ZiS, while T-70 can be OHK-d by teller or zoned by dual PaK, but we don't see anywhere a thread similar to this one based on that.
Why?

Hi

Soviets ARE OP - a fact imo

A list of my favourite absolutely ridiculous counter arguments:

1. T70 has to be OP because Soviets are weak - who the hell came up with that nonsense first?
2. CE has to be the cheapest because it is so weak.
3. Conscripts have to be 7 men because they suck (while grens have to be 4 men because that was the original sacred design).
4. Guards must have ptrs package for free.
5. Penals AT satchels are weak because they have small range.
6. Shocks are meh because work only close range.
7. ZiS needs to have the ridiculously potent (due to range and number of shells) and dirt cheap barrage because soviets don't have grenades.
8. Tripwire should stay the way it is because nobody uses it.
9. ZiS is bad at its AT role and that is why it should have the largest crew.
Show Spoiler

Soviets ARE OP - a fact imo

Good that you have said "imo".
Otherwise you would actually have to provide a proof that would magically contradict the data Syphon collected for couple of months, compiled and provided in a thread and prove exact opposite to what he has presented.
And with that "imo" of yours, its just another, completely irrelevant, random opinion of yours.

Soviets just have few clearly overperforming units and stupud mechanics.
1) KVs are awaible way too early, they have timings of sligthly delayed medium
2) T-70 in general. I understand that it covers some holes of soviet balance, but still its just a toxic unit, which doesnt fit the game, considering how easily it can chase and delete squads without any counterplay.
3) ZiS arty barrage is BS, which has no reason to be in. Comparaded to PaK zis have like slightly slower ROF and I belive thats its. Being able to destoy\deny cover with a deducted AT unit, which for some reason is able to act like a mini howi is unreasonable. Even if it was nerfed. It should have had AT ability like all other AT guns in the game do.

I only do agree that T70 is somewhat needed powerspike, but its very cheaply and poorly made. Meaning that bad players will lose it to mine\AT wall and potentually lose the game, while good players will rape the shit out of the opponent with it, with almost no counterplay.

Regarding lack of inf upgrades and so on, its true. But at the same time only soviets are the faction that is based around commanders.

Someone might say, that they lack of strong stock units\upgrades, but you shoudnt forget that almost every single commander has either upgrade\elite inf\armor or mish mash of it.

So I dont consider this an aurgument that stock soviet units suck, because they are not ment to be played only with stock units to begin with.

Also soviets are the best faction to just showcase OKW\Ost problems, because they have so many oppening options, good players will just abuse the shit out of opposite faction weaknesses, meaning that players who are not experienced will be again obliterated by some soviet strats.

Why Soviets Brits are OP

Other than 6 man support weapons soviets are a generally rounded faction with strong late game that relies on superior numbers or tank destroyers/kv-2.

Also soviets are the best faction to just showcase OKW\Ost problems, because they have so many oppening options, good players will just abuse the shit out of opposite faction weaknesses, meaning that players who are not experienced will be again obliterated by some soviet strats.

What openings are there for soviets in 1v1? Penals aren't useful. You can only use cons reliably.

Okw has following oppenings - fusiliers, volks, kubel, Sdf 221 (Jagers at 1CP, so not really an opening)
Ost has oppening - AssGren, Osttruppen, Pio\MG

And don't tell me about low rank. At low rank you can just go all in with CE, Sturmpios, RE and so on.

What openings are there for soviets in 1v1? Penals aren't useful. You can only use cons reliably.

Okw has following oppenings - fusiliers, volks, kubel, Sdf 221 (Jagers at 1CP, so not really an opening)
Ost has oppening - AssGren, Osttruppen, Pio\MG

And don't tell me about low rank. At low rank you can just go all in with CE, Sturmpios, RE and so on.

I'm not saying what is more reliable, I'm saying overall. Not pin pointing the specific ranks or gamemodes, to begine with, because it differs.

But regarding oppenings:
Full cons, full penals, Flame M3, sniper(s), Maxim spam and mix of mentioned.