Login

russian armor

[Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (66)down
3 Dec 2020, 08:27 AM
#361
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

I can still imagine a timeline on which T1 received the 45mm AT gun and PTRS Penals were not a thing, only receiving the sticky satchel.

Trying to balance PTRS as an AT weapon is a nightmare. Cause it's either inconsequential or it achieves critical mass and it becomes stupid and viable.


It's a nice idea but I think giving PTRS Penals more late game scaling (with a second +2x PTRS upgrade at T4) is better because then Soviets have good mobile infantry-based anti-tank. Dealing with Elefant/Jagdtiger + Panzerwerfers/Stukas in team games is so obnoxious because Ziss guns die to the Rocket Artillery and and SU-85's die to the heavy TD's. All Soviets can really do was ram cheese but now that's been heavily nerfed. Whereas both USF and British have much easier times with Bazookas and Piats as well as turreted Tank Destroyers that can flank. Having mobile squads with AT on Soviets gives a lot more potential and opens strategic options. A second PTRS upgrade at T4 allows for late game scaling without being too strong against LV's or Mediums in the mid game.
3 Dec 2020, 08:40 AM
#362
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

nvm
3 Dec 2020, 08:53 AM
#363
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



It's a nice idea but I think giving PTRS Penals more late game scaling (with a second +2x PTRS upgrade at T4) is better because then Soviets have good mobile infantry-based anti-tank. Dealing with Elefant/Jagdtiger + Panzerwerfers/Stukas in team games is so obnoxious because Ziss guns die to the Rocket Artillery and and SU-85's die to the heavy TD's. All Soviets can really do was ram cheese but now that's been heavily nerfed. Whereas both USF and British have much easier times with Bazookas and Piats as well as turreted Tank Destroyers that can flank. Having mobile squads with AT on Soviets gives a lot more potential and opens strategic options. A second PTRS upgrade at T4 allows for late game scaling without being too strong against LV's or Mediums in the mid game.

A unit that has great AI then can retain some of that AI and upgraded to Anti light and then to Anti super heavy is bad design.

If there is a need for an Anti vehicles unit in T1 it would much better if a "new" seperate anti vehicles infatry was created in T1.
3 Dec 2020, 08:56 AM
#364
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 08:53 AMVipper

A unit that has great AI then can retain some of that AI and upgraded to Anti light and then to Anti super heavy is bad design.



This is exactly what Panzer Grenadiers are. Except way more since Shreks are better than PTRS and the Bundle Grenades allow tankhunting PGrens to get devastating squad wipes. How about Sturmpioneer with a Shrek? Or Panzerfusiliers with shreks?

Regardless, how is it bad design if the Penals lose their anti-infantry in order to get anti-tank? A Penal squad with 4 PTRS and 2 SVT Rifles is going to be awful anti-infantry, much more than PGrens. With 2 PTRS as it is, Penals already suck against infantry for their cost. If 4x PTRS are doing too much anti-infantry damage then that is a trivial change to make in the target-tables. (which can nerf only infantry damage.) It's not bad design, it's flexible design that allows for interesting choices.
3 Dec 2020, 09:02 AM
#365
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...
Regardless, how is it bad design if the Penals lose their anti-infantry in order to get anti-tank? ...

A unit that is available at the early stage of the game and then adapt to all stages of the game becomes spam-able and leave little use for other units to bring something to the table.

The solution does lay in making Penal able to do everything but to have different units do different things so the army composition is diverse.

Why in you opinion adding a separate anti vehicle infatry in T1 is a worse solution?
3 Dec 2020, 09:08 AM
#366
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 09:02 AMVipper

A unit that is available at the early stage of the game and then adapt to all stages of the game becomes spam-able and leave little use for other units to bring something to the table.


Like Riflemen, Infantry Sections, Panzer Grenadiers and Rangers? There is nothing unusual about this. I don't see how a dedicated anti-tank 4x PTRS penal squad is spam-able. They'd counter Tank Destroyers and Panthers, and trade as well against Mediums as Bazookas. They'd lose to infantry, and they'd get devastated by Tigers which heavily splash them for large manpower bleed. I'm not asking for anything new, I just want Soviets to have access to the same strategic options that every other faction enjoys: mobile infantry-based AT that works past the first few minutes in the game, and on a unit that is underused and limited in its utility since it's current 2x PTRS upgrade sucks with no scaling.

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 09:02 AMVipper

Why in you opinion adding a separate anti vehicle infatry in T1 is a worse solution?



Because then you have a bunch of rigid one-dimensional units that only fill a single or limited role. That's not interesting. There is elegance in quality over quantity.
3 Dec 2020, 09:11 AM
#367
avatar of Elaindil

Posts: 97





Because then you have a bunch of rigid one-dimensional units that only fill a single or limited role. That's not interesting. There is elegance in quality over quantity.


There's no elegance in giving one unit all the tools. I agree with Vipper.

IS and Riflemen never carry AT unless you are desperate or bad. And PG with schrecks is also very rare sight and mostly it's just one PG.
3 Dec 2020, 09:12 AM
#368
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 09:02 AMVipper

A unit that is available at the early stage of the game and then adapt to all stages of the game becomes spam-able and leave little use for other units to bring something to the table.

Like.... panzergrenadiers?
Or... Panzerfusiliers?

The solution does lay in making Penal able to do everything but to have different units do different things so the army composition is diverse.

Guards PTRS for penals it is then.

Why in you opinion adding a separate anti vehicle infatry in T1 is a worse solution?

Because it fixes problem that isn't there, creates more unit clutter, impacts manpower vs muni balance, requires additional work on vet and whatever would be invented here, you still wouldn't be happy, unless it was some shitsquad to the letter by how you imagine it.
3 Dec 2020, 09:13 AM
#369
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Like Riflemen, Infantry Sections, Panzer Grenadiers and Rangers? There is nothing unusual about this. I don't see how a dedicated anti-tank 4x PTRS penal squad is spam-able. They counter Mediums, Tank Destroyers and Panthers. They'd lose to infantry, and they'd get devastated by Tigers which heavily splash them for large manpower bleed. I'm not asking for anything new, I just want Soviets to have access to the same strategic options that every other faction enjoys: mobile infantry-based AT that works past the first few minutes in the game, and on a unit that is underused and limited in its utility since it's current 2x PTRS upgrade sucks with no scaling.

This is available to riflemen because the whole faction was designed around them.
Ranger and Panzer grenadiers are not mainline infantry and it is difficult to be the core of one's army.



Because then you have a bunch of rigid one-dimensional units that only fill a single or limited role. That's not interesting. There is elegance in quality over quantity.
I guess that is personal preference but I find a combination of units more interesting than a blob of the same units.
3 Dec 2020, 09:15 AM
#370
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6



There's no elegance in giving one unit all the tools. I agree with Vipper.

IS and Riflemen never carry AT unless you are desperate or bad. And PG with schrecks is also very rare sight and mostly it's just one PG.


But it is the exact same amount of tools as Panzer Grenadiers. Stock anti-infantry, anti-tank upgrade and mega grenade/Satchel. The only difference is PTRS penals get the Sticky Satchel which I think is cheesy and should be removed if Penals get buffed. (Use Conscripts for snare) Mega blobs of Penals will not survive MG42's or superior OKW infantry.
3 Dec 2020, 10:44 AM
#371
avatar of Todore

Posts: 15

Why not just give penals the 7man upgrade at T4 to solve their lack of late game. It would even have synergy with their vet 1 ability " To the last man ". So in the end, soviets are left with a choice between 7 man cons which have mediocre firepower but great utility or 7 man penals which have good firepower but bad utility for their late game infantry.
3 Dec 2020, 11:17 AM
#372
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 10:44 AMTodore
Why not just give penals the 7man upgrade at T4 to solve their lack of late game. It would even have synergy with their vet 1 ability " To the last man ". So in the end, soviets are left with a choice between 7 man cons which have mediocre firepower but great utility or 7 man penals which have good firepower but bad utility for their late game infantry.

Because adding additional model to a squad is not magical solve-all-problems solution.
It works well for cons because of their own stock vet as well as all the bonuses it provides.

Penals wouldn't work in same context and contrary to cons, penals have 2 weapon slots.
3 Dec 2020, 11:27 AM
#373
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Hell no on PTRS penetration buff. It would be a megabuff to Guards blobs which would clown mediums.

Guards might aswell not resive penetration buff to keep them LV+inf combatians. Penal PTRS and Guards PTRS are separate weapons anyway. But an any case, not to purpose blobing, long range penetration always can be lower, to make fighting mediums harded at max range.

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 07:43 AMVipper


Then its 260 damage over x2 PTRS vs 240 double zooks\schrecks\piats, if penals have same bonus damage.
3 Dec 2020, 11:30 AM
#374
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


Then its 260 damage over x2 PTRS vs 240 double zooks\schrecks\piats, if penals have same bonus damage.

No, its not, not even close, because axis tanks have more then 70 armor.
3 Dec 2020, 11:31 AM
#375
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


No, its not, not even close, because axis tanks have more then 70 armor.


Because follow the discussion please. Or you feel that nessesry to put your two words everywhere, whithout even reading in what context its being said.
3 Dec 2020, 11:36 AM
#376
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Because follow the discussion please. Or you feel that nessesry to put your two words everywhere, whithout even reading in what context its being said.

Its still incorrect, because PTRS most certainly do NOT shoot once per second.
3 Dec 2020, 11:41 AM
#377
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


Its still incorrect, because PTRS most certainly do NOT shoot once per second.


The timing (if delay between shots is a cooldown) might be incorrect. 260 damage output is correct, what might be incorrect is that it takes them 11 seconds to fire 5 rounds each, not 5.

But even with that my suggestion is still the same.
3 Dec 2020, 12:06 PM
#378
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Then its 260 damage over x2 PTRS vs 240 double zooks\schrecks\piats, if penals have same bonus damage.

Think you reading the stat I provided wrongly damage for PTRS is:

Conscripts
Damage vs infatry 20
Damage vs vehicle 40
Damage vs vehicle on deflection 20


Penals
Damage vs infatry 20
Damage vs vehicle 40
Damage vs vehicle on deflection 20

Guards
Damage vs infatry 27
Damage vs vehicle 40
Damage vs vehicle on deflection 20

Keep in mind the PTRS are weapon with magazine and used CD between shots and not reload.
3 Dec 2020, 12:19 PM
#379
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 12:06 PMVipper



Damage over specific types of the unit goes on top of the base damage then?
3 Dec 2020, 12:40 PM
#380
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Damage over specific types of the unit goes on top of the base damage then?

base damage + damage from target tables

The 3 weapons are also different and thus use different accuracy values.
Guards PTRS can have allot more accuracy and hit infatry entities more often.
PAGES (66)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

727 users are online: 727 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM