Login

russian armor

Soviet tech change suggestion

12 Jan 2021, 18:23 PM
#1
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

This post is based on P.Patch V4, so discard the Penal change cost.

I have been going back n forth in thinking, editing and adding information but got lazy in the last weeks. Thought might as well post it like it is now.

While i think that the current preview balance patch has overall good intentions in regards to the directions of changes for Soviets, i still think it's missing in addressing the deep root problems that Soviet has.
At the moment i think they have a few specific really good efficient units which are carrying the faction, while it has one of the worst efficient tech paths on top of having a big discrepancy between early performance and late game performance.

This post is mostly focusing on giving the faction a solid core structure from which then units could be adjusted in performance as necessary.

First of all here are tech cost.



1- Opening of the game:

The whole reason Soviet has always been hard to balance early on compared to other factions is because if you want to open up with anything other than Cons, you are putting 160mp on tech while starting with the lowest manpower pool (starting unit + mp). This means that the units you get from those tech structures walks a fine line between been able to carry that weight and been too good once you find yourself able to have any sort of map control. This also puts a heavier burden in balancing between team games and 1v1.

OH suffered the same problem (the other faction which requires to build tech) and the solution given to them was slightly improving Pios, increasing their starting mp by 60, giving them MG42 at T0 and more recently, reducing the cost of T2 by 100mp.

2- Light vehicle phase and the conundrum of the T70

T3 timing and why it can't arrive at simil as other factions.
The whole reason Soviets wouldn't have an early M5 for reinforce in the field was either due to it's stats when it was OP when upgraded with the Quad or because Maxim spam was a thing. Thank god both of those had been patched out.
What else? Right, Su76 spam with free barrage. Patch out.
What's left? The T70 which is getting nerfed this patch (and i wouldn't mind further nerfs to it if that's the sacrifice we have to make).

If the Su76 was early enough that it could counter enemies light vehicles without bleeding as much, maybe it would be useful. It's not like the 222 doesn't arrive early enough to counter micro lights or other factions get access to Stuart/Puma/AEC in a timely fashion as well.

Let me give you a list of different resources spent between factions for a similar amount of tools unlocked. Light vehicle cost itself not included.



3- First medium timing, with healing and infantry upgrades. With/out LV

TBD

I'll be honest here and say it was too much of a hustle to bring every permutation and combination possible. Skip. Will add in the future TM.

Proposal:

You skipped or survived all that text wall? Then here is what i'm thinking about.
Considering that ALL stock Soviet units are been adjusted in this patch, i think it's time to adjust the tech system properly. I'm pushing some of the discarded and implemented changes in the preview in a different direction.

Don't take changes in isolation as they are thought to be implemented as a whole package.

Early changes


-Changing the cost of T1 from 160mp/10f to 80mp/15f. (Maybe +5f)
-(MAYBE) Changing the cost of T2 from 160mp/15f to 80mp/15f. (Maybe +5f)
-Reduce the fuel cost of the M3A1 by 5f (If cost of T1 goes to 20f then -10f)

-Penal requires Grenade tech in order to use Satchel/PTRS. Upgrade changed to Explosive/Demolition package.
-Package unlocks Satchel (non sticky), PTRS and AT grenades for Penals (maybe shorter range, current satchel range)
-Probable rollback changes in regards to building time and reinforce time for T1 and Penals.

-PTRS package cost increased to 90/100 muni.
-Gives 2 non droppable PTRS and 2 normal ones.
-Nerf AI performance. Maybe cooldown.
-The PTRS Upgrade replaces the AT grenade with a sticky satchel. Reduce AoE and REPLACE engine dmg with a temporary vehicle debuff (speed + temporary main gun disabled). (It shouldn't be dependent if you pick ANY PTRS)

-Zis gun barrage cost increased from 35muni to 50muni.
-Mortar flare back to vet1. (All mortars should receive other improvements see point below)
-See my other thread for suggestion in regards to mortars/MGs in general. https://www.coh2.org/topic/107022/infantry-mortars-and-mgs-relationship-and-scaling


This basically makes backteching into an AT gun easier and T1 openings are not gonna rely on 45mm doctrines in order to work. One of the specific reasons as to why T1 was been given PTRS penals was to reduce their entire dependency on Guard commanders. Which is funny cause now they rely on a smaller pool of commanders to actually work.
The fuel changes are just there to accommodate for timings.

By giving them a snare, albeit weaker due to lack of oorah and maybe shorter range, their usefulness during the game is not gonna be relegated to just an early/mid game unit. While they get a boost of 80mp due to tech, they will now be spending 150mp/15f for this upgrade.

I think it's better to drop the whole "pseudo" effective AI/AT squad for Penals altogether and leave that for Guards only. The 4 PTRS and cost should put them equivalent to other factions heavy AT infantry units. I think it's important that they retain their first volley dmg but i think a cd nerf is warranted (at least on Penals) if they were to get 4 (due to treshold of number of volleys to kill light vehicles).
Now that vanilla Penals get access to snares, the sticky satchel no longer needs to crit vehicles engine.

Warranted change on the Zis barrage. Which is fine considering the changes to early game. Though this is also a direct buff to other builds (Conscript, sniper, Maxim), i don't think the maxim is that scary anymore, sniper is getting a "burf" (nerf and buff) and can always be adjusted slightly and conscripts are only an issue late game (early game they are getting the sandbag nerf)

At the end of the day the combined change of T1/T2 might be too much which is why the T2 can be optional. I think it's a much better idea to gate the cost opportunity of not skipping either tech with fuel rather than mp. Ideally it balance out with how you must buy Mobilize reserves instead of getting it for free at T4.


Mid game/Ligth tank phase


-Nerf as much as needed the T70.
-Reduce the cost of T3 from 240/85 to 200/55
-Mobilize reserves to T4.


Before: (includes medics)

T1>T3: 600/95
T2>Nade>T3: 750/115
T1>Nade>T3: 750/110
T1>T2>T3: 760/110
T1>T2>Nade>T3: 910/125

After:

T1 > T3: 480/70
T1 > Nade > T3: 80/15 + 200/0 + 150/15 + 200/55 = 630/85
T2 > Nade > T3 = 630/85
T1 > T2 > T3: 80/15 + 80/15 + 200/0 + 200/55 = 560/85
T1 > T2 > Nade > T3: 560/85 + 150/15 = 710/100


Mid game/Medium tank


-Change the cost of T4 from 240/90 to "200/110"
-Mobilize reserves no longer unlocks for free at T4.
-Mobilize reserves required to deploy specific doctrinal units. A little more margin to adjust cost/timing.
-After unlocking Mobilize reserves, it provides the -2mp on reiforce and +20% xp to Conscripts/Penals.

-Experimental upgrade on Penals. After mobilize upgrade they can upgrade to "---" for "xxx" munition which adds a commissar model (pistol, not sure how expensive the model is to reinforce) to the squad increasing the model count to 7 and reducing the popcap by 1 (keeping the same total of 8). Exclusive with PTRS.

---Optional: Improves "To the last man" vet 1 effect from +4% accuracy and -2% weapon cooldown to +6% acc and -4% weapon cd.

---Optional alternative: Let's them use Molotovs.

-Tracking: reduce cost. No longer improves vision. It provides minimap vision for VEHICLES (changed from infantry) and a small duration tracking when hitting a vehicle (UKF style).
This basically tackles the focused sight + tracking combo.


The idea is not to directly increase the DPS of Penals (the officer model does abysmal dps) but to improve over the effects of the vet1 "To the last man" as there is gonnna be an extra model in the squad. Yes, the idea is wild and might as well discard it. The safest option is to just make them be able to use molotovs.

The best of changing the cost of T4 and forcing you to buy mobilize reserves, is that you can have a way of making doctrinal vehicles timing and T4 non doc vehicles such as T3476 be different. Values can be fine tuned.


Before:
T1>T3>T4: 600/95 + 240/90 = 840/185
T2>Nade>T3>T4: 990/205
T1>Nade>T3>T4: 990/200
T1>T2>T3>T4: 1000/200
T1>T2>Nade>T3>T4: 1150/215


After:

T1 > T3 > T4: 480/70 + 200/110 = 680/180 Adding Mob: 780/200
T1 > Nade > T3 > T4: 830/195 With Mob: 930/215
T2 > Nade > T3 > T4: 830/195 With Mob: 930/215
T1 > T2 > T3 > T4: 760/195 Mob: 860/215
T1 > T2 > Nade > T3 > T4: 910/210 With Mob: 1010/230
12 Jan 2021, 18:24 PM
#2
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

I know it might be too late due to the stage we are in with the preview patch, but might as well throw it here since i had already written it.
12 Jan 2021, 18:46 PM
#3
avatar of Kieselberg

Posts: 268

snip


I like ideas for t1 and t2, since the weak early game and abstinence of viable builds for sov is their biggest drawback.
Pip
12 Jan 2021, 19:08 PM
#4
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

I like this suggestion, particularly the changes to tier 4/Mobilise Reserves/Penals.

Giving them 4 PTRs and turning them into a legitimate AT squad rather than the really stupid design they have at the moment is a definite plus, as is the suggestion to provide a lategame upgrade to Penals in the form of a seventh-man upgrade that suits their particular skills. (Suggested names include: "Direct Supervision", "Overseer", "Promotion to Strelky", "Redeem")

Penals might suit an actual grenade more than a Molotov, though both are very useful.
12 Jan 2021, 19:10 PM
#5
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



I like ideas for t1 and t2, since the weak early game and abstinence of viable builds for sov is their biggest drawback.


I think we are pass the point of having expensive tech in combination with oppressive units to compensate.

If T70 is nerfed to P2 levels and you equalise cost between build routes (skipping AT nades with T1 route means no PTRS, therefore 45mm still has a niche) you don't have to worry about the big scary powerspike moments which makes other units in the roster FEEL obsolete.

I had some concerns about teamgames and maxim spam against OKW, but they are getting tech buffs and more accesible ISG as well.
12 Jan 2021, 19:13 PM
#6
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jan 2021, 19:08 PMPip
I like this suggestion, particularly the changes to tier 4/Mobilise Reserves/Penals.

Giving them 4 PTRs and turning them into a legitimate AT squad rather than the really stupid design they have at the moment is a definite plus, as is the suggestion to provide a lategame upgrade to Penals in the form of a seventh-man upgrade that suits their particular skills. (Suggested names include: "Direct Supervision", "Overseer", "Promotion to Strelky", "Redeem")

Penals might suit an actual grenade more than a Molotov, though both are very useful.


I know it might offset balance so it's more of a "thematic" suggestion. I think that an HE grenade would be too much and leave it for real doctrinals units.
Pip
12 Jan 2021, 19:20 PM
#7
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594



I know it might offset balance so it's more of a "thematic" suggestion. I think that an HE grenade would be too much and leave it for real doctrinals units.


With how late it's expected to come, I don't think the Penal 7-man upgrade would upset balance at all, honestly. Having an actual grenade might, and I might agree it may be going slightly too far. I still sort of think Penals should have Merge, but I don't know if it really fits this concept.

Off topic; I should like to see Conscripts use the "Fresh Conscripts" unit card until they receive their 7 man upgrade, using the current one for "Upgraded" units. (Penals similarly might be changed to gain the Star on their card when upgraded, if the Balans team does look at your suggestion).
12 Jan 2021, 21:53 PM
#8
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Half the problem started because units become available earlier making more units available earlier is simply not the solution.
13 Jan 2021, 00:53 AM
#9
avatar of Spoof

Posts: 449

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jan 2021, 19:20 PMPip

(Penals similarly might be changed to gain the Star on their card when upgraded, if the Balans team does look at your suggestion).

Commissar Penals? I would like that, although it is redundant.
13 Jan 2021, 03:18 AM
#10
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jan 2021, 21:53 PMVipper
Half the problem started because units become available earlier making more units available earlier is simply not the solution.


I guess you are talking about light vehicles/tanks, cause then... how do you plan on reshuffling the cost of OH, USF, UKF and OKW?

Specially without making back teching impossible for 2 factions (USF/OKW).


You CAN increase build/research times if your ideal is for specific tech to arrive at a specific point in time, but it seems that the balance team is fine with the timing of the AEC, M20, Stuart, AAHT, Flak HT, P2, Puma, 222, FHT.

Their rush timing (mostly fuel) hasn't changed since release, what has changed is how easier is to back tech.

I'm saying if we nerf the T70 to be equal to the P2 (more sustained DPS rather than bursty), that there should be no reason to gatekeep T3 and hinder both the M5 and Su76 timing.
13 Jan 2021, 06:58 AM
#11
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563

snip


I 'm not even a decent player so I didn't wanna say anything but... I don't know man 4 ptrs seems a bit much. These things deflection damage, that's a lot of continuous chip. Even if they can't kill tanks outright that's a lot of time a tank gonna be spending in repairs. And unlike things like shrecks squads you can't just charge them and crush them they have sactchel(they'll eventually have em in your design). Seems like a bit too much for me.

And the gate keeping LV thing, Yeah the difference between ostruppen ostheer and soviets is gap between early game and LV + elite infantry. I don't know about you but T70's are quite a bit stronger than 222's yet the earlier arrival of that + the PG's make them very difficult to deal with. T70 will never be made as weak as 222's so i don't wanna imagine what the impact of an earlier (albiet weaker) t70 be. Also the su76 is more than capable enough to fend off p4's and deal with infantry(zis can't do the infantry part) earlier su76 might get hard to deal with tbf.
13 Jan 2021, 07:46 AM
#12
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Yeah I like this changes, I don't seriously object to anything here. Soviet teching really needs some help and the faction has the potential to be much stronger without buffing units just by allowing them to flow through the game more easily.

Remind me again why the Red Army of all factions is designed to struggle with manpower the most? If anything that should be OKW considering Germany's manpower situation in late '44...
13 Jan 2021, 08:03 AM
#13
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I guess you are talking about light vehicles/tanks, cause then... how do you plan on reshuffling the cost of OH, USF, UKF and OKW?

One can start by simply returning Ostheer tech cost to what it was and work form there.


Specially without making back teching impossible for 2 factions (USF/OKW).

These faction where designed without back teching. If one want them to have back teching one will have to tone down their unit as it constantly begin done with pack howizter. Removing a "design" weakness without removing a "design" strength simply does not work.


You CAN increase build/research times if your ideal is for specific tech to arrive at a specific point in time, but it seems that the balance team is fine with the timing of the AEC, M20, Stuart, AAHT, Flak HT, P2, Puma, 222, FHT.

Yet the early face game has become about light vehicles instead of infatry. Will all saw the WC2020 being about WC51 and 222 which is not healthy.


Their rush timing (mostly fuel) hasn't changed since release, what has changed is how easier is to back tech.

I do not think that this very accurate many unit had their cost tech cost and/or price and/or power level increased.


I'm saying if we nerf the T70 to be equal to the P2 (more sustained DPS rather than bursty), that there should be no reason to gatekeep T3 and hinder both the M5 and Su76 timing.

Or one could T70 equal to P2 and delay the P2 to similar time frame as T-70...
13 Jan 2021, 08:26 AM
#14
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

One could rebalance Penals by reducing their cost from 280mp to 270mp but compensating with replacing 4 SVTs with Conscript mosin nagants.
13 Jan 2021, 08:34 AM
#15
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jan 2021, 08:03 AMVipper

These faction where designed without back teching.

Maybe 4 years ago.
Time to let go of the past, it will only hurt you if you keep clinging to it.
13 Jan 2021, 09:25 AM
#16
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jan 2021, 08:03 AMVipper

(In reference to OKW/USF) These faction where designed without back teching. If one want them to have back teching one will have to tone down their unit as it constantly begin done with pack howizter. Removing a "design" weakness without removing a "design" strength simply does not work.


You have to provide hard evidence if you state those as fact. Because these factions were designed to be as dynamic as possible to whatever was happening on the battlefield, and not wrongfully, without back tech-ing in its mind.
13 Jan 2021, 10:31 AM
#17
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

I agree with most of what Elchino posted, although it is hard to determine how all the changes at once play out. But the suggestions are at least reasonable and/or look promosing. I also agree that Soviets still have a weird teching split at the early game and the reliance on LVs to survive the mid game has also not been fully solved. The current changes of the balance team are mostly the right direction but don't really solve core issues in my opinion.

I'd like to add one suggestion that bugs me about Soviets: That their side tech is bullshit. It is either useless (molotov) or mandatory anyway that it is factually part of the main tech if you play Conscripts. The minimal choice that it gives is that you can have a chance to get your T70 out before teching AT nades, but often you get them earlier anyway. But it is rare teching them after the mid game has already started, unless maybe of absolute top level games. This "side tech" just does not give enough choice and bundling both side techs together does not solve the core issue. This is different from for example USF weapon upgrades or UKF/USF nades, which you can tech either very early or sometimes far into the mid-late game, depending on play style, unit and commander choice.

So I suggest another rework, either together or independent of Elchino's suggestions:
- Conscripts and Penals start with a weak stun nade once T1/T2 is up: Cheap, but only slows down (+ maybe blinds) the vehicle it hits. 0-40 damage.
- MAYBE: Conscripts get a molotov once T1/T2 is up, but lose their throwing speed vet to ensure this can only be used as garrison denial or to remove flanked MGs from their position.
- MR will not be free anymore, but comes with a small price. Globally upgrades Conscripts and Penals with reinforcement cost reduction and veterancy boost (just as it is now). No additional man for Conscripts or CD reduction.
- AT nade research allows an additional upgrade path for Conscripts: It exchanges the weak AT nade for the current one and replaces molotovs with standard grenades. This upgrade is mutually exclusive with MR upgrade on a squad level.
- MR upgrade on a squad grants 7th man plus CD reduction (bonusses between base version and upgrade can be shuffled of course).

-> Conscripts would have two different layouts: offensive or defensive
-> snare number of Soviet Conscripts builds would be slightly reduced (currently they have often have 4, only OKW can field a similar amount). Penal builds would gain stun nades and reduce reliance on Guards, M42 AT guns and PTRS upgrade in the late game to get any form of snare.
-> The fact that MR is not free anymore could allow for slight changes of other tech costs.


One could rebalance Penals by reducing their cost from 280mp to 270mp but compensating with replacing 4 SVTs with Conscript mosin nagants.

That would be 10 MP off for -25% of DPS and result in quite a nerf. Also most recent note says they cost 290 or did I miss something?

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jan 2021, 08:03 AMVipper

Yet the early face game has become about light vehicles instead of infatry. Will all saw the WC2020 being about WC51 and 222 which is not healthy.

I think that is more due to Osttruppen strat being so effective at the moment and USF dodge truck strat being one of the very few ways to counter the early game pressure.
13 Jan 2021, 10:37 AM
#18
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...
I think that is more due to Osttruppen strat being so effective at the moment and USF dodge truck strat being one of the very few ways to counter the early game pressure.

That is a result of many factors but primarily that increase of power level of light vehicles because their window of opportunity has become smaller.
13 Jan 2021, 10:40 AM
#19
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jan 2021, 10:37 AMVipper

That is a result of many factors but primarily that increase of power level of light vehicles because their window of opportunity has become smaller.

Explain how, given the fact that all of them except for ost ones and kubel got nerfed.
13 Jan 2021, 10:44 AM
#20
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jan 2021, 10:37 AMVipper

That is a result of many factors but primarily that increase of power level of light vehicles because their window of opportunity has become smaller.

The WC51 and 222 have not seen major changes since ages? At least I can't remember and also could not find anything relevant in the change log when searching for WC51, dodge and 222. 222 once got a very minor buff to MG penetration for standardization purposes.

The driver behind this meta does not come from LVs, but from infantry.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 68
unknown 37
United States 3

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

730 users are online: 1 member and 729 guests
litianyu0707
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49143
Welcome our newest member, Spdcderry
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM