Login

russian armor

Conscript 7th men too much?

PAGES (10)down
19 Oct 2020, 23:14 PM
#181
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



do OKW players have to tech up before getting fussies thus impacting their map control? i may have missed that in the patch notes but im fairly sure thats not the case, in which case it still requires 460mp for your first penal and 560 for your 2 fussies. thats an entire extra squad to cap and 3 combat squads for okw compared to 1 for soviet (sturm, fussie, fussie vs CE, penal)

We are talking about G43 PF, vanilla PF are inferior to conscripts while costing 20 manpower more.

G43 upgrade requires a set truck and 80 munition bringing the total cost of the units to 295/80 vs 300 for penal. It also make the G43 PF available at later time especially if one is talking 2-3 squad as the post I responded did.

If one wants capping power with T1 one can build 1-2 engineers first and then build T1.

But this thread is about conscripts so lets not talk about Penal and PF here.
19 Oct 2020, 23:17 PM
#182
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2020, 22:56 PMSerrith

That's my point. You don't get it because it slows the rush down. Plus you get it for free. If you purchased it you would have 7 man conscripts up to 4 minutes earlier then if you were just to wait for tier 4. But nobody does because it slows your actual power spike(t70/t-34).


Right well I have no problem with that idea if the reserves unlock fuel cost is removed. I think it should get the cooldown bonus back when t4 is built. I believe someone suggested this earlier, splitting up the bonuses and making some of them get added back when t4 is built
19 Oct 2020, 23:56 PM
#183
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2020, 21:59 PMVipper

Strangely in the test I did 7 men conscripts vet 3 in cover beat in some cases 5 men grenadiers vet 3 in cover at ranges close to 30...


Liar.

I just did 12 fights.

Conscript 7 man vs G43 grens. Both vet 3. Around max range.

Both Conscripts and Grens behind conscript sandbags => Large sandbags where all conscript models can be behind. Grens even more. Grens won 12/12 ---> 0 F-ing lost engagements.

Then I created a bunch of regular IS british sandbags and put both conscripts and grens behind them. Conscripts lost even quicker. I believe due to the size of the squad so it's always one or two models that hug the sandbags "out of cover" (sides).

Then I created a somewhat realistic scenario where conscripts were behind their sandbags, and grens were behind IS sandbags. Grens won 11/12.

So to sum up, grens vet 3 with 5 man squad easily beat conscripts.

In ALL of those tests, the conscripts took the first model. So it was 7vs4, but after that grens pretty much burst fast from 7 to 4 and then it was a slow slug fest and grens won with 2 models in most engagements.

There is no way in hell that conscripts with 7th man win vs G43 grens. Both vet3. Not behind normal, nor conscript sandbags.

Liar, shame on you.
20 Oct 2020, 01:32 AM
#184
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Kinda funny to see PF to Penals comparison, because every single sain person, would agree that 140mp+300mp early semi-elite inf, which is locked in tech consisting pretty much exclusively this expensive inf, is at best bad chose overall.

PF design works (OPOKW PLZNERF, has good mainline inf for ones), while penals dont.
20 Oct 2020, 02:52 AM
#185
avatar of C3 TOOTH

Posts: 176

Gren is long range squad, Cons may beat some squad at long range, but vs Gren is always a charge in close (thats why Oohra & PPsh go in pack). You dont test an all range generalist squad vs long range specialist.

20 Oct 2020, 06:43 AM
#186
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Liar...Grens won 11/12...There is no way in hell that conscripts with 7th man win vs G43 grens...

You come to the conclusion that I am liar because you did 12 test in some of which according to your own admission there were conscript entities out of cover where grenadiers where down to 2 models and even lost a match.

When according to your own test conscripts manage to test when all entities where in cover even at range 35 and I was taking about range 30.

How exactly there is no way in hell for conscripts to win even if your test they did win at least once?

I would suggest to more careful before calling people liars.

(the test I did where with pioneer sandbags at range 30 and in my tests conscripts managed to win very close being down to 1 model)

20 Oct 2020, 07:40 AM
#187
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2020, 23:14 PMVipper

We are talking about G43 PF, vanilla PF are inferior to conscripts while costing 20 manpower more.

G43 upgrade requires a set truck and 80 munition bringing the total cost of the units to 295/80 vs 300 for penal. It also make the G43 PF available at later time especially if one is talking 2-3 squad as the post I responded did.

If one wants capping power with T1 one can build 1-2 engineers first and then build T1.

But this thread is about conscripts so lets not talk about Penal and PF here.

Umm, no, you are talking about G43 PFs.
He CLEARLY talks about first minutes of the game and massive PF advantage over penals that isn't combat, but snowballs into very early luchs/puma.

And the capping power you're suggesting here leads to situation where OKW has 3 combat squads on field and Soviets have 1 and 2 engineers, leading to a loss of every engagement and following loss of map control.

Stop playing on excel sheets and check the reality once in a while, where more then your exclusively vacuum chosen stat matters.

This is why PFs are playable and used despite their early game weakness, while penal meta is completely and utterly DEAD.
20 Oct 2020, 08:04 AM
#188
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 07:40 AMKatitof

Umm, no, you are talking about G43 PFs.
He CLEARLY talks about first minutes of the game and massive PF advantage over penals that isn't combat, but snowballs into very early luchs/puma.

Stop jumping in other people debates without even reading what has been posted. This started by my response to stromjager who was talking about 2-3 g43 PF and that is simply not available at 2-3 minutes

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 07:40 AMKatitof

And the capping power you're suggesting here leads to situation where OKW has 3 combat squads on field and Soviets have 1 and 2 engineers, leading to a loss of every engagement and following loss of map control.

And here we go again using fancy names like combats squad as arguments. As you are well aware soviet engineers are called Combats engineer and they can fight. CE spam is even a viable tactic.

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 07:40 AMKatitof

Stop playing on excel sheets and check the reality once in a while, where more then your exclusively vacuum chosen stat matters.

Stop fighting in the forum and try fighting in game.

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 07:40 AMKatitof

This is why PFs are playable and used despite their early game weakness, while penal meta is completely and utterly DEAD.

Source and stats pls.
20 Oct 2020, 08:24 AM
#189
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 06:43 AMVipper

You come to the conclusion that I am liar because you did 12 test in some of which according to your own admission there were conscript entities out of cover where grenadiers where down to 2 models and even lost a match.

When according to your own test conscripts manage to test when all entities where in cover even at range 35 and I was taking about range 30.

How exactly there is no way in hell for conscripts to win even if your test they did win at least once?

I would suggest to more careful before calling people liars.

(the test I did where with pioneer sandbags at range 30 and in my tests conscripts managed to win very close being down to 1 model)



You can't read, can you?
Conscripts behind conscript sandbags, full cover, still lost vs G43s behind normal sandbags. You put pio, I put IS sandbags, same s***.

In every scenario, conscripts lost. Every. Especially if they were behind IS sandbags since the squad size demands that 1-2 models will be next to the cover and not behind it.
I did it at a normal max range. Clicked on conscripts to attack without fog of war, and where they stopped to attack I made 10 sandbags, separated so that the squads don't attack each other. The test was done fairly quickly. If they had lost 5-6 times only, then the test would be inconclusive and 20-50 more test would be needed. but since they lost 35/36 engagements (12*3 if you can't multiply). Both con sand, both IS sand, con sand vs IS sand.
20 Oct 2020, 08:32 AM
#190
avatar of Antemurale
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 951

Let's do more of the reasoning and less of the ad hominem.

Consider this a warning.
20 Oct 2020, 09:00 AM
#191
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



You can't read, can you?
Conscripts behind conscript sandbags, full cover, still lost vs G43s behind normal sandbags. You put pio, I put IS sandbags, same s***.

In every scenario, conscripts lost. Every. Especially if they were behind IS sandbags since the squad size demands that 1-2 models will be next to the cover and not behind it.
I did it at a normal max range. Clicked on conscripts to attack without fog of war, and where they stopped to attack I made 10 sandbags, separated so that the squads don't attack each other. The test was done fairly quickly. If they had lost 5-6 times only, then the test would be inconclusive and 20-50 more test would be needed. but since they lost 35/36 engagements (12*3 if you can't multiply). Both con sand, both IS sand, con sand vs IS sand.

Nothing of this contradict what I have posted (not in full cover/range 35):

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2020, 21:59 PMVipper

Strangely in the test I did 7 men conscripts vet 3 in cover beat in some cases 5 men grenadiers vet 3 in cover at ranges close to 30...


Once more I suggest you use the word like "liar" and "shame on you" more carefully.
20 Oct 2020, 13:31 PM
#192
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

i feel this discussion does not deserve to exist... were talking about nerfing the weakest mainline infantry in the weakest faction in the game... this discussion does not make any sense at all...
20 Oct 2020, 14:41 PM
#193
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 09:00 AMVipper

Nothing of this contradict what I have posted (not in full cover/range 35):



Once more I suggest you use the word like "liar" and "shame on you" more carefully.


"Some" among other things can imply quite a large number, an unexpectedly large number, or an unknown number. As you "did" the test, you should know what this "some" stands for. Is it 12/10000, or 14/20 or whatever. Your usage of the word "some" is shady at best. The only thing you were doing past couple of threads is sow discord and confusion. Your posts are seldom sound and convincing. Mostly they rely on "I am the authority, balance team used my prepositions before, I am above you". So yes, I stand behind my "shame on you". Just take a look at your post history and tell me I'm wrong. Of course, you probably wholeheartedly believe you are completely in the right.

Conscripts will beat any type of gren if close range, I don't think that needs testing to prove. However, since engagements where conscripts and grens are vet 3 upgraded, are usually in a crater-y map, most engagements are long range since nobody will risk running across the BF to close in (Pgrens, shocks and the such can do that, but main-battle infantry can not). So testing such scenarios for grens and cons and the likes is warranted and quite sound and logical.
(Cons probably can rush with the motherland anthem behind them but that's another thing).



And I agree with @gbem. This whole thread, like the soviets OP and nerf falls and a lot of other, are complete and utter BS and should not exist
Pip
20 Oct 2020, 14:46 PM
#194
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

I'm not quite so sure it's as easy to say that Conscripts are the "Weakest mainline" in the game. Their combat prowess may not be fantastic early, but their veterancy bonuses are great, and this lets them fight reasonably well late, particularly when combined with 7man. Primarily they're used as a delaying unit to support other soviet gear.

This is, of course, combined with the fact they've got the most utility of any mainline going. Best sandbag in the game, Cheap and powerful (Albeit slow until vet) incendiary, Snare, and a surprisingly strong mine. The two throwables are also combined with the only nondoc mainline sprint in the game, which is an absolutely fantastic ability.

Then they have the unique "Merge" ability, allowing them to consolidate squads, and keep Elite/Veteran infantry, as well as team weapons on the field much longer.

You get all that for 240mp. I think wanting Conscripts to compete directly with other mainlines in combat terms is a little silly.

Really, a Penal rework to turn them into a viable "Combat squad" for the Soviets would be preferable. That, or giving them Guards (Or a similar unit to guards) nondoctrinally as an alternative option might be better. You'd then choose between extreme utility, or combat potential, or a combination of both in seperate units.

I'd suggest Nondoc "Guards" not have PTRS, nor Button. Perhaps being unlocked with T3, or even straight away if they can be somehow balanced for that. Probably the latter, OKW have the same sort of "idea" with the choice between Volks and Obers, but the fact Obers come so late means you have to do weird army comps till the Schwere, or rely on losing a Volk squad or two.

I know this sounds like a lot of work, given that we may or may not even be getting another patch, but SOV kind of needs a lot doing to it.
20 Oct 2020, 15:14 PM
#195
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



"Some"...

Simply learn to read before starting to call people liars.

And if you want to recreate test check the parameters and do not use your own parameters.

As for range range 25-30 are far more probable to happen in game then exactly 35.

Finally check how many times I use imo in my post which stand for "in my opinion" and that is what I am posting my opinion.
20 Oct 2020, 15:50 PM
#196
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 14:46 PMPip
I'm not quite so sure it's as easy to say that Conscripts are the "Weakest mainline" in the game. Their combat prowess may not be fantastic early, but their veterancy bonuses are great, and this lets them fight reasonably well late, particularly when combined with 7man. Primarily they're used as a delaying unit to support other soviet gear.

This is, of course, combined with the fact they've got the most utility of any mainline going. Best sandbag in the game, Cheap and powerful (Albeit slow until vet) incendiary, Snare, and a surprisingly strong mine. The two throwables are also combined with the only nondoc mainline sprint in the game, which is an absolutely fantastic ability.

Then they have the unique "Merge" ability, allowing them to consolidate squads, and keep Elite/Veteran infantry, as well as team weapons on the field much longer.

You get all that for 240mp.
I think wanting Conscripts to compete directly with other mainlines in combat terms is a little silly.


You actually don't get all that for 240mp. You need an extra 205mp and 20 fuel to get all that. Meaning a con heavy build of 4 cons makes each squad 291mp it makes a clearer picture of why people get frustrated that they lost handily with no chance at all ever to beat 260mp volks.

Nobody expects cons to be on par with rifles, but such a heavy investment deserves to scale. That's what 7 man allows for. Cons utility is indeed great, but good luck utilitizing your enemy to death while they have obers and panzer grens and upgrades that make losing models less impactful. Cons were power crept to shit and the power of utility stopped having trade offs. I remeber when cons combat performance was legit justifiable because they had sandbags which is a force multiplier because otherwise you had to use the map for cover. See also ostroppen. Utility USED to be a role in the game, but the game has been "streamlined" so that if your unit doesn't build, snare, concentrate firepower on a few models and fire on the move you are out matched. Utility only has no place in the game anymore.
Pip
20 Oct 2020, 16:26 PM
#197
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

Yeah, actually that's a fair point Armadillo. I think that might be better for SOV if they unlocked Molotovs and Snares through a method other than being forced to actually buy those upgrades. Perhaps being able to buy them... OR having them unlocked along with particular tier buildings? Somewhat like OST and OKW does it. They're both very powerful when combined with Oorah, though, and their other pieces of utility still can't be discounted, nor the Soviet force multipliers. There's a bit of a balancing act here.

Regarding your point on Volks: Cons and Volks are reasonably comparable early, aren't they? I'm not sure Cons are totally rolled over by the Vgrens, though I have admittedly not done extensive testing. Volks definitely get a spike when they get STGs, but this isn't an immediate upgrade, and i'd presume it should factor into their "cost". (plus, like, Volks kind of suck lategame as a combat unit. Aren't Cons significantly stronger when 7manned and vetted?)

Volks don't do so well against Allied elite infantry either, nor against US and UK mainlines arguably. Not in combat terms, unless they get extremely favourable engagements.

As I say, the other part of it is that we can't merely compare a mainline vs a mainline. Both OKW and SOV need some work to be turned into "real" factions. OST, USF, and UKF(somehow) are close to being there.

I agree that Utility has been a little downplayed, but I still think giving Sov another option, rather than trying to make Cons "better" in combat terms might be good. Perhaps giving Oorah a defensive bonus (Unlocked through vet, or through a tech), and/or giving them some inherent survivability bonus in cover might be better for them. I'm sort of just spitballing in some parts of this post.
Pip
20 Oct 2020, 16:42 PM
#198
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

As an aside, and you alluded to this yourself, but utility isn't quite dead as a primary unit strength. Ostruppen.

Ostruppen are objectively terrible combatants, even when vetted, and with their weapon upgrade. Their strength lies in their utility, and the fact they can be supported with Elite infantry like Pgrens.

I think making Cons a little closer to the use-case of Ostruppen might be a good shout. Cons already have the advantage in terms of both combat ability and utility, but not in affordability, and possessing a non-doctrinal elite infantry unit to support them. Perhaps consider reducing Con costs somehow, and introducing (better) Penals, or nondoc guards.
20 Oct 2020, 19:27 PM
#199
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 13:31 PMgbem
i feel this discussion does not deserve to exist... were talking about nerfing the weakest mainline infantry in the weakest faction in the game... this discussion does not make any sense at all...

Well, threads like this, from people who prefer to put the blame on balance then their very own lack of skill and awareness.

Unless you want to restrict access to balance discussion from common "bad", we'll allways have the "bads" making them on a daily basis and then doing everything in their power to prove their "point", regardless how insane theorycraft it'll get.
21 Oct 2020, 04:11 AM
#200
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 16:26 PMPip

Regarding your point on Volks: Cons and Volks are reasonably comparable early, aren't they? I'm not sure Cons are totally rolled over by the Vgrens, though I have admittedly not done extensive testing. Volks definitely get a spike when they get STGs, but this isn't an immediate upgrade, and i'd presume it should factor into their "cost". (plus, like, Volks kind of suck lategame as a combat unit. Aren't Cons significantly stronger when 7manned and vetted?)


1. volks are slightly superior to cons off the bat but the fight isnt unwinnable...
2. volks will bash cons to the ground once they get the stg while the soviets have to fight tooth and nail to survive till T-70/7 man
3. as mentioned before conscripts need to upgrade to get their molotov and snare while volks get their incendiary and panzerfaust FOR FREE with tech
4. vetted volks can beat vetted cons in close range but will lose at longer ranges
5. all of this is the reason why despite having an OP powerspike of a light tank, a top tier AT gun and a complete vehicle roster along with some of the strongest heavy tank callins the faction still has the lowest winrate in the game at all levels of ladder... the faction simply has an unworkable mainline (unless airborne is used)
jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2020, 16:26 PMPip

Volks don't do so well against Allied elite infantry either, nor against US and UK mainlines arguably. Not in combat terms, unless they get extremely favourable engagements.


no but conscripts are worse in all respects... and USF kinda struggles against a bit buildings due to the lack of incendiary... in certain maps it can be pretty easy to punish USF unlike UKF...
PAGES (10)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

572 users are online: 572 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49184
Welcome our newest member, Eastman04
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM