Login

russian armor

Conscript PPSH assault package

PAGES (13)down
2 Nov 2020, 01:14 AM
#41
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979


Laughs in obers and air landing officer.


obers are actually powerful squads once they get the LMG34... no stock squad can stand up to the firepower of an LMG34 ober for too long and it takes doctrinal elites to survive it... granted there are some doctrinal elites that outclass them like falls and paratroopers... but falls and paras may be considered OP

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 00:07 AMPip

for Fallschirmjager nerfs.


falls are OP though... theyre basically an obers squad that paradrops comes earlier and has more firepower without the upgrade... and they also have stealth....
2 Nov 2020, 04:16 AM
#42
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 01:14 AMgbem


obers are actually powerful squads once they get the LMG34... no stock squad can stand up to the firepower of an LMG34 ober for too long and it takes doctrinal elites to survive it... granted there are some doctrinal elites that outclass them like falls and paratroopers... but falls and paras may be considered OP


Wait, you're saying that an upgraded elite infantry unit (which hits the field so late it's basically past the LV-phase) can defeat stock unvetted mainlines, assuming the enemy squad takes an engagement at a range which is optimal for the Obers?

2 Nov 2020, 04:31 AM
#43
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

Wait, you're saying that an upgraded elite infantry unit (which hits the field so late it's basically past the LV-phase) can defeat stock unvetted mainlines, assuming the enemy squad takes an engagement at a range which is optimal for the Obers?



with the exception of double bar rifles and double bren IS in cover i dont think there is any mainline that can defeat LMG obers at any range 1v1....

in any case this thread isnt about comparing obers to X unit but about conscript PPSH being underpowered/outclassed by upgrades such as assault package for volks and other CQC squads...
Vaz
2 Nov 2020, 06:23 AM
#44
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158

I don't see why it makes sense to have conscripts target size set higher than 1
2 Nov 2020, 06:53 AM
#45
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 06:23 AMVaz
I don't see why it makes sense to have conscripts target size set higher than 1


while conscripts are kinda bad i think theyre mostly balanced against grens without weapon upgrades... honestly i think LMG and PPSH/7man alike need to come earlier to balance these units out against IS and rifles which greatly outclass cons and grens alike...
2 Nov 2020, 07:21 AM
#46
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

It was just kinda hypocritcal literally next patch they then gave grens their damage reduction after saying they just wanted to remove it from the game.

We wanted to remove hidden modifiers from the game. Rangers' DR was not communicated to the player in any way and neither was it necessary for balance/gameplay. The average player did not understand why Rangers could survive certain explosives that all other infantry couldn't.

Vet 3 Gren DR is communicated with the veterancy description and it serves an important balance goal. It's the same with HTD's DR. KV-1 and Kubel DR do not affect their durability and only the time it takes to repair them, so that hidden modifier is considered harmless.


jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 06:23 AMVaz
I don't see why it makes sense to have conscripts target size set higher than 1

It's to help balance Merge, because merged models keep their original target size.
2 Nov 2020, 07:44 AM
#47
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1389 | Subs: 1


Vet 3 Gren DR is communicated with the veterancy description and it serves an important balance goal.


This one is a bad example, because Grens share vetdescription with Jaeger Command Squad. Now, when they have different bonuses, it’s not informative anymore.
P.S. It’s one of many issues with shared textstrings in the game.
P.S.S. Sorry for offtop
2 Nov 2020, 08:10 AM
#48
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 01:02 AMgbem


That makes no sense when the number of PPSH41s made outnumber every other submachinegun of ww2... the mp40 doesnt even come close...

From a game balance perspective ppshs for conscripts also make sense since theyre supposed to have alot of close range firepower

Whole soviet roster makes no sense, including T34/76 and SU-85, when T34/85 replaced both at the time MP happens.
2 Nov 2020, 08:20 AM
#49
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

I think that in the conscript PPSh-41 assault package Molotov should be replaced with a regular grenade.This is the minimum that should happen if the PPSh-41 remains doctrinal and should justify its cost and CP.
2 Nov 2020, 08:31 AM
#50
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979


Whole soviet roster makes no sense, including T34/76 and SU-85, when T34/85 replaced both at the time MP happens.


i feel the T-34-85 should just be an upgrade for the T-34-76 tbh... it could use a few stat reductions but i feel it could be doable... the SU-100 could take the place of the T-34-85 in doctrines imo...

still design wise i feel that the PPSH is more appropriate for conscripts than 7 man.... 7 man gives conscripts defensive potenal instead of increasing the units offensive potential and close range damage...
Pip
2 Nov 2020, 17:14 PM
#51
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 08:31 AMgbem


i feel the T-34-85 should just be an upgrade for the T-34-76 tbh... it could use a few stat reductions but i feel it could be doable... the SU-100 could take the place of the T-34-85 in doctrines imo...

still design wise i feel that the PPSH is more appropriate for conscripts than 7 man.... 7 man gives conscripts defensive potenal instead of increasing the units offensive potential and close range damage...


Ideally a faction has both offensive and defensive infantry options stock. OST have Pgrens and Grens, UKF have IS/(Anvil)RE and now the Assault Officer, OKW have Volks and Obers, USF rifles sort of pull double duty, though the LT and CPT are a bit more "Assaulty" thanks to the Thompson, bit more ambiguous in this case.

7Man cons are very good defensively, and still have oodles of utility. SOV should have both 7man, and another option stock. Im still saying Frontoviki.
2 Nov 2020, 17:19 PM
#52
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 17:14 PMPip


Ideally a faction has both offensive and defensive infantry options stock. OST have Pgrens and Grens, UKF have IS/(Anvil)RE and now the Assault Officer, OKW have Volks and Obers, USF rifles sort of pull double duty, though the LT and CPT are a bit more "Assaulty" thanks to the Thompson, bit more ambiguous in this case.

7Man cons are very good defensively, and still have oodles of utility. SOV should have both 7man, and another option stock. Im still saying Frontoviki.


id like to see frontoviki replace the meme penal battalion unit... ironic that soviets got penals when the original (and most common) user of shtraftbats (and the origin of the term shtraftniki) was always germany... id guess relic had to go into the enemy at the gates meme though huh?
2 Nov 2020, 17:31 PM
#53
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 17:14 PMPip


Ideally a faction has both offensive and defensive infantry options stock. OST have Pgrens and Grens, UKF have IS/(Anvil)RE and now the Assault Officer, OKW have Volks and Obers, USF rifles sort of pull double duty, though the LT and CPT are a bit more "Assaulty" thanks to the Thompson, bit more ambiguous in this case.

7Man cons are very good defensively, and still have oodles of utility. SOV should have both 7man, and another option stock. Im still saying Frontoviki.


If you dig deeper, the very name "conscripts" is not entirely correct. First, all the armies of the world at that time were conscripts. Why do we not name the grenadiers - conscripts?
Secondly, in 1943 (conscripts have shoulder marks, which were introduced in 1943), the recruits did not create divisions in haste and were sent to the front. From the conscripts they collected "reserve regiments" in which they could be up to a year. And later they were poured into the front-line troops. I still think that conscripts are not a correct name that needs to be replaced with "Strelki" - rifleman. Standard riflemans troops emblem:

Give the PPSh-41 as an upgrade for the rifleman, and instead of the PPSh move the DP-27 upgrade.
2 Nov 2020, 21:14 PM
#54
avatar of WAAAGH2000

Posts: 732

If PPSH package could reduce reinforcement cost too or be default upgrade still could be good......
Maybe could change Cons upgrade---
PPsh be default weapon upgrade
DP replace PPSH package,also with “hit the diry”,allow Penal upgrade 2xDP
Reinforcement cost reduce like Ost all out war,after build T4 will have this buff,worked on weapon squad and Cons and Peanl
2 Nov 2020, 21:35 PM
#55
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2020, 06:23 AMVaz
I don't see why it makes sense to have conscripts target size set higher than 1

Helps offset the bonus of merge.
2 Nov 2020, 23:05 PM
#56
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

If PPSH package could reduce reinforcement cost too or be default upgrade still could be good......
Maybe could change Cons upgrade---
PPsh be default weapon upgrade
DP replace PPSH package,also with “hit the diry”,allow Penal upgrade 2xDP
Reinforcement cost reduce like Ost all out war,after build T4 will have this buff,worked on weapon squad and Cons and Peanl


I think perhaps a reduction in RA. 5-10% maybe. Other upgrades like volks mp40s or Tommy assault upgrade do this. Would make sense for ppsh cons.
2 Nov 2020, 23:19 PM
#57
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



I think perhaps a reduction in RA. 5-10% maybe. Other upgrades like volks mp40s or Tommy assault upgrade do this. Would make sense for ppsh cons.

Problem with that is, they would be way too durable at vet3.

As I've said, at vet3 ppsh cons are fine, any weapon on vet3 cons is fine, so whatever ppsh needs, its not raw stats.
2 Nov 2020, 23:53 PM
#58
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

ive thought previously about having oorah give some sort of offensive bonus (like cooldown) i wonder if removing the cooldown from 7 man and putting it on oorah by default would be enough to make both stock cons and ppshs a bit better. yea its a constant muni drain, but it really plays to the idea of cons not getting anything they dont pay for. maybe if that alone isnt enough the assault package could give a muni reduction to oorah as well?
3 Nov 2020, 01:33 AM
#59
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979


Problem with that is, they would be way too durable at vet3.

As I've said, at vet3 ppsh cons are fine, any weapon on vet3 cons is fine, so whatever ppsh needs, its not raw stats.


when a unit is fine at vet but sucks outside vet its a sign that its vet bonuses should be moved to unvet...
3 Nov 2020, 02:19 AM
#60
avatar of Partisanship

Posts: 260

While I don't know if the fellas ever plan to give updates until they push out the 64bit for all, I do agree that the current implementation for PPSh upgrade is something I find myself less than attracted to when picking infantry upgrades. The reason is probably due to the way the upgrade doesn't really commit to the side-grade, so the squad becomes an awkward in-between of being both standard rifles and also close quarter combat. The hit the dirt upgrade is nice but far more attractive with a 7-man upgrade rather than with PPSh, which requires mobility rather than staying still.

Conscripts do have great veterancy bonuses, so any rework of their tools need to account for the fact that they could easily become oppressively good if given the opportunity. Or rather, I think that goes for any main-line infantry, but conscripts are especially dubious given their low cost and high durability.

I think an easy fix and one I would be curious to see in future updates is having the upgrade commit to the new roll by allowing all squad members to have PPSh-41. However, the caviat is that the PPSh stats need to be changed, as prior patches have attempted to give it better stats at mid-range to compensate for its awkwardness. So, in exchange for the full squad PPSh, I think the solid move would be to also nerf the overall performance it has in conscript hands, so that it only truly excels as cheap shock infantry on flanks and point blank.

As for hit-the-dirt, I think the only thing really awkward with it is absolutely zero movement. What would be nice is allowing units to crawl move like they were moving while suppressed. This means you can still slightly reposition or make headway in a combat situation, but still vulnerable to grenades, mortars and tanks.

PAGES (13)down
3 users are browsing this thread: 3 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

594 users are online: 594 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49874
Welcome our newest member, Howden
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM