[Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback

The t-70 should be around P2 levels, which would leave room to make major improvements to the faction.

That doesn't make any sense considering the Luchs arrives WAY earlier than the T70.

That doesn't make any sense considering the Luchs arrives WAY earlier than the T70.

Currently, yes. The expectation would be that the T-70 (And T3 as a whole) would be able to come sooner if the T70 wasn't as overly strong.

Dude you're literally making our point. The t70 can't carry the faction enough, so it's time for the Soviets to stop relying on it so heavily

You do understand what buffing other things means, right?

No one can convince me that the T70 is so good it needs nerfing though.

Is it one of the best light-tanks, yea, sure. But that surely can't be the criteria for leveling the playing field.

That doesn't make any sense considering the Luchs arrives WAY earlier than the T70.

And everything else in t3 comes too late to be good.
The T70 being nerfed paves the way for the T70 not being the heartbeat of the faction that decides if you make it to late game or not.
Its currently a self fulfilling prophecy where the T70 comes late because it's good and it's good because it comes late.
The rest of t3 would benifit greatly from coming sooner, and the faction as a whole would benifit from the T70 not being the make or break point.

It's still a great tank and is powerful early game. Still has late game utility. Nerf hasn't changed much except time to burst down a squad. And it comes out a bit earlier now.

T70 damage was fine but the rate of fire was bit much. I think reverting other changes and just nerfing it would have sufficed.

It's still a great tank and is powerful early game. Still has late game utility. Nerf hasn't changed much except time to burst down a squad. And it comes out a bit earlier now.

This pretty much. The ROF decrease results in a net DPS loss of barely 15%, and the new AoE model count restriction won't apply in the majority of combat situations, either. Together with the slightly earlier arrival I'd argue the combat value of the T-70 has hardly been reduced by the Balance Preview changes. Yes it might dish out a bit less damage against extremely bunched-up or garrisoned targets, but nerfs to mobility or survivability would have hit the unit way harder than a mere readjustment of its already great DPS.

This pretty much. The ROF decrease results in a net DPS loss of barely 15%, and the new AoE model count restriction won't apply in the majority of combat situations, either. Together with the slightly earlier arrival I'd argue the combat value of the T-70 has hardly been reduced by the Balance Preview changes. Yes it might dish out a bit less damage against extremely bunched-up or garrisoned targets, but nerfs to mobility or survivability would have hit the unit way harder than a mere readjustment of its already great DPS.

I would still like to see a price reduction of the same level as the nerfs. While not bad its timing is a bit to late imo.

I would still like to see a price reduction of the same level as the nerfs. While not bad its timing is a bit to late imo.

The unit will still remain prevalent and strong cause the nerfs are small and tech adjustment was small as well.

Value of unit is more than fine, the problem is that it just drags the other 2 units in the tier for it.

The unit will still remain prevalent and strong cause the nerfs are small and tech adjustment was small as well.

Value of unit is more than fine, the problem is that it just drags the other 2 units in the tier for it.

Yes its prevelant ofcourse how else do you put on the pressure as soviets. The t70 isent just any unit, it is the mid game. Together the small nerfs have a noticable impact.
Dont get me wrong toning it down in dps was the right choice. But together its to much without cost reduction. Esp since lots more nerfs have been done besides the t70. Somewhere a cost reduction seems in order how ever small.

I don't know if this was discussed somewhere already but I do think the reason Penals with PTRS scale so badly into the late game is quite obvious.

Other infantry units with AT weapons get better in accuracy and received accuracy with vetting. This means Shreks/Bazookas/Piats will hit better while the soldiers get less damage by incoming fire themselves.

Penals on the other hand trade Vet received accuracy bonus versus accuracy bonus, resulting in a huge accuracy bonus but only a small received accuracy bonus once they are Vet3.

Guess what: Since PTRS trades damage and penetration versus accuracy by itself the whole Vet accuracy bonus means absolutely nothing for PTRS shooting at vehicles. Vet0 Penals with PTRS in winter patch version hit every vehicle at axis roster at every range automatically (at live version they have a 16% chance to miss a Kubel at long range). 60% veterancy accuracy bonus completely down the drain in AT combat.

The Vet1 ability "To the last man" is no exception to this. While the whole cooldown bonus is only about 0.1 seconds cooldown reduction when 5 man are dead the 20% accuracy bonus with 5 man dead is wasted versus vehicles again. So the only good thing about the ability in AT combat is the 3% received accuracy bonus per man dead (but most tanks will ignore that with main gun AOE nevertheless).

So the whole Veterancy concept of Penals is centered about getting better in AI combat. But with upgraded PTRS they are not great at AI alltogether. That is a strange concept. Shouldn't they get something like a PTRS vet penetration or damage bonus to scale in AT performance?

I don't know if this was discussed somewhere already but I do think the reason Penals with PTRS scale so badly into the late game is quite obvious.

Other infantry units with AT weapons get better in accuracy and received accuracy with vetting. This means Shreks/Bazookas/Piats will hit better while the soldiers get less damage by incoming fire themselves.

Penals on the other hand trade Vet received accuracy bonus versus accuracy bonus, resulting in a huge accuracy bonus but only a small received accuracy bonus once they are Vet3.

Guess what: Since PTRS trades damage and penetration versus accuracy by itself the whole Vet accuracy bonus means absolutely nothing for PTRS shooting at vehicles. Vet0 Penals with PTRS in winter patch version hit every vehicle at axis roster at every range automatically (at live version they have a 16% chance to miss a Kubel at long range). 60% veterancy accuracy bonus completely down the drain in AT combat.

The Vet1 ability "To the last man" is no exception to this. While the whole cooldown bonus is only about 0.1 seconds cooldown reduction when 5 man are dead the 20% accuracy bonus with 5 man dead is wasted versus vehicles again. So the only good thing about the ability in AT combat is the 3% received accuracy bonus per man dead (but most tanks will ignore that with main gun AOE nevertheless).

So the whole Veterancy concept of Penals is centered about getting better in AI combat. But with upgraded PTRS they are not great at AI alltogether. That is a strange concept. Shouldn't they get something like a PTRS vet penetration or damage bonus to scale in AT performance?

Excellent comment

Well, Guards get +10% penetration on PTRS with vet, if PTRS penals will not be cutting it, I don't see why we couldn't add that to them as well, its not like PTRS murders meds anyway, regardless of how rabid theorycrafters make them seem on paper.

I don't know if this was discussed somewhere already but I do think the reason Penals with PTRS scale so badly into the late game is quite obvious.

Other infantry units with AT weapons get better in accuracy and received accuracy with vetting. This means Shreks/Bazookas/Piats will hit better while the soldiers get less damage by incoming fire themselves.

Penals on the other hand trade Vet received accuracy bonus versus accuracy bonus, resulting in a huge accuracy bonus but only a small received accuracy bonus once they are Vet3.

Guess what: Since PTRS trades damage and penetration versus accuracy by itself the whole Vet accuracy bonus means absolutely nothing for PTRS shooting at vehicles. Vet0 Penals with PTRS in winter patch version hit every vehicle at axis roster at every range automatically (at live version they have a 16% chance to miss a Kubel at long range). 60% veterancy accuracy bonus completely down the drain in AT combat.

The Vet1 ability "To the last man" is no exception to this. While the whole cooldown bonus is only about 0.1 seconds cooldown reduction when 5 man are dead the 20% accuracy bonus with 5 man dead is wasted versus vehicles again. So the only good thing about the ability in AT combat is the 3% received accuracy bonus per man dead (but most tanks will ignore that with main gun AOE nevertheless).

So the whole Veterancy concept of Penals is centered about getting better in AI combat. But with upgraded PTRS they are not great at AI alltogether. That is a strange concept. Shouldn't they get something like a PTRS vet penetration or damage bonus to scale in AT performance?

This gets adjusted in the balance mod. They get more rec acc at vet 3 for less acc. After this change they (623 effective HP) outperform both Echelon/Pfussies (519 effective HP) and Pgrens (561 effective HP). Only Rangers and Paratroopers have more. On top of that they have 6 models, so they can survive arty and tank shells more easily than lower sized squads.

The major difference is how ptrs work compared to other at weapons. While shrecks/zooks/piats have high burst dmg, penals need to continuously shoot at their target. This results in 2 problems. 1. Penals cant shoot->go back->shoot again. So they are more likely to be in dangerous positions. 2. While high burst dmg combined with other at can kill one target, the same scenario with ptrs could result in an escaping vehicle with 40 HP. But buffing their rec acc even more doesnt do anything than cripple ai penals more at vet 3.

Well, Guards get +10% penetration on PTRS with vet, if PTRS penals will not be cutting it, I don't see why we couldn't add that to them as well, its not like PTRS murders meds anyway, regardless of how rabid theorycrafters make them seem on paper.

This could work, but 10% is bulletin meme lvl. Thats 7 more far penetration. So vs a P4 you penetrate with 42% chance instead of 38%. Maybe the best solution is to nerf ptrs dmg against infantry to 0, while giving them penetration and dmg buffs on vet 3.

This gets adjusted in the balance mod. They get more rec acc at vet 3 for less acc. After this change they (623 effective HP) outperform both Echelon/Pfussies (519 effective HP) and Pgrens (561 effective HP). Only Rangers and Paratroopers have more. On top of that they have 6 models, so they can survive arty and tank shells more easily than lower sized squads.

Thanks for the insider informations that are completely new for me. It is a step into the right direction for AT Penals. But wouldn't it be better to split received acc between vet2 and vet 3 for a more constant scaling?

This could work, but 10% is bulletin meme lvl. Thats 7 more far penetration. So vs a P4 you penetrate with 42% chance instead of 38%. Maybe the best solution is to nerf ptrs dmg against infantry to 0, while giving them penetration and dmg buffs on vet 3.

I'm not a friend ot units that try to be allround and end up beeing nothing at all for the sake of not beeing op and getting spammed. You have to be very cautious with the power level of this units which can fight infantry and armor alike. So yeah, lowering AI performance for an AT buff would free PTRS Penals of that burden and would set them way apart from the combat role of Guards and Cons as well as their not upgraded AI cousins. I personally would appreciate that.

The ram change really seems like a bad idea.

Maybe for penals they could get DPs instead of PTRS rifles, and they unlock the AT satchel with the conscript AT grenade upgrade?

Along with an increase in the cost of the AT satchel from 45 to 60 munies it could be good?