Soviet tech change suggestion

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.

You couldn't be any more wrong. No changes to LV at all. It was the rise of early infantry call in that dominated that tournament and players adapted their metagame.

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.

222 become build able instead of upgrade. The old mu upgrade was bad but removing 221 was a mistake. 222 could become an upgrade cost manpower/fuel or separate vehicle. Then i could be delay and 221 could be a soft counter to micro light and hard counter to sniper. In addition 222 followed the rest of light vehicles and received a buff to accuracy via veterancy in every vet level.

WC51 received several buff mostly during DBP (if I remember correctly).

222 become build able instead of upgrade. The old mu upgrade was bad but removing 221 was a mistake. 222 could become an upgrade cost manpower/fuel or separate vehicle. Then i could be delay and 221 could be a soft counter to micro light and hard counter to sniper. In addition 222 followed the rest of light vehicles and received a buff to accuracy via veterancy in every vet level.

WC51 received several buff mostly during DBP (if I remember correctly).

Please check AND include the dates of these "recent" additions, they've been out for years. The other week, you tried to pass something from 2016 as recent..

222 become build able instead of upgrade. The old mu upgrade was bad but removing 221 was a mistake. 222 could become an upgrade cost manpower/fuel or separate vehicle. Then i could be delay and 221 could be a soft counter to micro light and hard counter to sniper. In addition 222 followed the rest of light vehicles and received a buff to accuracy via veterancy in every vet level.

WC51 received several buff mostly during DBP (if I remember correctly).

Really, from when are these changes? I checked the most recent changelog page that dates back to 2018 and nothing of this is on there.
Do you really want to argue that something that happened over 2-3 years ago is the reason we see a drastic change of meta just "now"? That does not make any sense. If these strats/units were so OP, players would likely have discovered them ages ago.


But to be honest, let's go back to topic. Elchino made a high quality post and put a lot of effort into it. It's worth discussing that one. If you want another WC2020 thread, open that one instead.

Going back to the suggestion in thread:
4 PTRS is mistake it completely shuts down light vehicle especially since the weapon is extremely effective in transports. It also too good vs mediums.

The idea that soviet need both a AI semi elite infatry this early and one of best AT squad stock is also flawed especially since the have access to the doctrinal units.

If one want soviet to become like ostheer in stock unit one would have to also change the commander abilities and reduce the number of doctrinal units available to faction. Or make Ostheer like Soviet and increase access to doctrinal units while increasing their power level to Soviet standards.

Really, from when are these changes? I checked the most recent changelog page that dates back to 2018 and nothing of this is on there.
Do you really want to argue that something that happened over 2-3 years ago is the reason we see a drastic change of meta just "now"? That does not make any sense.

When one keep buffing unit to make them more attractive all is needed is change in meta to make this unit used.

In this case for instance Super heavies become the dominant meta and there was no reason to use commander without super heavies or delay them in anyway.

Making skipping T1 more viable did not create the problem only brought it to the surface.

If these strats/units were so OP, players would likely have discovered them ages ago.

Tell that to Dshk.

But to be honest, let's go back to topic. Elchino made a high quality post and put a lot of effort into it. It's worth discussing that one. If you want another WC2020 thread, open that one instead.

If I wanted a WC2020 thread I would make one, I am simply responding to your questions.

Agree for Mobilize reserves，maybe should work on weapon squad too?

Agree for Mobilize reserves，maybe should work on weapon squad too?

Soviet weapons reinforce with 20 for hmg and for 15 for the rest. It is already pretty low.

One should be use merge for HMG anyway so it can go down to 18 with mobilize.

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.

1- Which is why i said, increase the cost equivalent to 2x Schrecks, nerf AI and reduce cooldown.

Deflection dmg/Pen dmg

PS: 30/120
Elite zook: 25/100
Piat: 25/100
Zook: 20/80
PTRS: 10/40

2- Indeed you can't charge Penals PTRS but same can be said with RE Piats or (if someone does) Rifles Zooks. Either of them been cheaper and providing more utility.
That's the reason why i removed permanent engine dmg from the crits and replaced by a temporary debuffs. If that's still too much, maybe decreasing the dmg from the satchel (IIRC 340) to (240/200) range should be enough.
For comparison, PG still keeps their bundle + sprint after upgrade. Not counting doc abilities. PF keep a nade, flare and can unlock sprint (vet5).

3- Did you check the list of values i put for every faction to push out their light vehicles out? This is without counting the cost of the vehicle itself.
Nerf withstanding, why should be any different from Axis dealing out with AAHT/Stuart/AEC.

4- Not sure where you get that the Su76 can deal whatsoever with infantry even when it has it's barrage. By that same metric, the Puma with it's MG (basically a better LMG42) and it's ability to deal with medium tanks is problematic as well.

Going back to the suggestion in thread:
4 PTRS is mistake it completely shuts down light vehicle especially since the weapon is extremely effective in transports. It also too good vs mediums.

Read my answer towards zero and i'll add. Right now, in their current state, the 3 PTRS is not good enough in order to deal with either the Flak HT nor the FHT. Not my words, everyone who played the preview patch. Inconclusive against P2 after they buff their performance against cover.

That's the reason i also want to nerf the AT satchel, increase their cost, nerf their AI and nerf their cooldown. So the PENAL PTRS closes the gap to zooks, with a better performance against lights but worst against heavier vehicles. The burst dmg remains comparable.

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


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.


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


Or one could T70 equal to P2 and delay the P2 to similar time frame as T-70...

1- You just created a problem where there is none for the other 2 factions, while OKW remains the same as well.

2- Do you think 222, FHT, Puma, P2, Flak HT, AA HT, M20 and Stuart are too strong atm?

3- The early game has been change due to doctrinal infantry and abilities once heavies are no longer a victory condition. It's has not been conditioned by light vehicles and Dodge is just a consequence of how good the OH meta is atm.
Before the heavy meta we had things like Ostwind rush and all recently reworked commander units like Pathfinders, JLI, Falls, SVT drops.

4- Timing wise (tech rush) it pretty much similar for UKF/OKW/USF. OH/SU has been the ones left behind and it's one of the reasons why old OH depended so much in panic Puma. I disagree about power level of lights.

-T70 has been dropped down in power level, just not at the same rhythm the game has go down.
-M5/Su76 had been severly nerfed
-Stuart/AEC had both way higher AI on top of more disruptive abilities.
-Greyhound nerfed
-AAHT/Flak HT both nerfed although made far easier to use.
-P2 nerfed.
-222 overbuffed but like 6 years ago and then nerfed while receiving QOL changes.

5- P2 is not the only problem. What do you do with FHT/Flak HT? Do you make them obsolete by delaying them more even though USF/UKF can field Stuart/AAHT/AEC? Do you put the FHT upgrade back in BP2?

How much do you plan on delaying ALL light vehicles and HOW, because it's not something that can be done in stages or by faction. It has to be done all at the same time. And then how much do you delay medium vehicles so light vehicles can operate? And how much do you delay heavy vehicles after that ?

....
Read my answer towards zero and i'll add. Right now, in their current state, the 3 PTRS is not good enough in order to deal with either the Flak HT nor the FHT. Not my words, everyone who played the preview patch. Inconclusive against P2 after they buff their performance against cover.

Flak HT and FHT are AI vehicles why should an AT infatry be able to deal with them to begin with?
Bazooka RE, Piat Ro.E and Tank hunter Tommies all face similar issues and I do not see the reason why PTRS Penal should be an exception.

In addition if you load PTRS Penal in vehicle the probably can deal with both vehicles.

The thing with PTRS in that in current implementation it always hits light vehicles.

That's the reason i also want to nerf the AT satchel, increase their cost, nerf their AI and nerf their cooldown. So the PENAL PTRS closes the gap to zooks, with a better performance against lights but worst against heavier vehicles. The burst dmg remains comparable.

I totally agree with removing the engine damage from satchel since they should have a tool to deter vehicles from pushing them around but they do not need to cause engine damage with a single snare.

There are several problems with Penal and PTRS. If one makes the very good vs light vehicles one runs the risk of making the Penal/sniper combo too strong.

In addition the fact that the unit start with superior AI and can then transit to AT make the unit too versatile and can create blobbing issue. If one wants there properties from singe unit one should probably follow the PF model and allow 2 different paths, an AI upgrade and AT upgrade. Else one can "create" an dedicated AT infatry and be done with.

1- You just created a problem where there is none for the other 2 factions, while OKW remains the same as well.

I simply suggested rolling back so that unit have bigger windows of opportunity.

2- Do you think 222, FHT, Puma, P2, Flak HT, AA HT, M20 and Stuart are too strong atm?

222 comes way to early, its hmg accuracy bonus are too high (around 145% on mg and 156% on 2cm)
FHT is too lethal and expensive. it should have it DOT move to an ability (that goes for all Flame vehicles)
AA HT should lose the suppression on the move
M20 should have it skirt upgrade cost replace with mu/fu, its hmg accuracy bonus are too high (around 145%)

3- The early game has been change due to doctrinal infantry and abilities once heavies are no longer a victory condition. It's has not been conditioned by light vehicles and Dodge is just a consequence of how good the OH meta is atm.
Before the heavy meta we had things like Ostwind rush and all recently reworked commander units like Pathfinders, JLI, Falls, SVT drops.

It might but that does not mean that light vehicles have no received buffs.

4- Timing wise (tech rush) it pretty much similar for UKF/OKW/USF. OH/SU has been the ones left behind and it's one of the reasons why old OH depended so much in panic Puma. I disagree about power level of lights.

And it was WFA that should have adapted to EF timing and not the other way around.

-T70 has been dropped down in power level, just not at the same rhythm the game has go down.
-M5/Su76 had been severly nerfed
-Stuart/AEC had both way higher AI on top of more disruptive abilities.
-Greyhound nerfed
-AAHT/Flak HT both nerfed although made far easier to use.
-P2 nerfed.
-222 overbuffed but like 6 years ago and then nerfed while receiving QOL changes.

5- P2 is not the only problem. What do you do with FHT/Flak HT? Do you make them obsolete by delaying them more even though USF/UKF can field Stuart/AAHT/AEC? Do you put the FHT upgrade back in BP2?

How much do you plan on delaying ALL light vehicles and HOW, because it's not something that can be done in stages or by faction. It has to be done all at the same time. And then how much do you delay medium vehicles so light vehicles can operate? And how much do you delay heavy vehicles after that ?

As I have pointed out that using Ostheer old fuel tech value seem a like a good place to start. One can keep the changes of moving Fuel cost to BP.

Flak HT and FHT are AI vehicles why should an AT infatry be able to deal with them to begin with?
Bazooka RE, Piat Ro.E and Tank hunter Tommies all face similar issues and I do not see the reason why PTRS Penal should be an exception.

In addition if you load PTRS Penal in vehicle the probably can deal with both vehicles.

The thing with PTRS in that in current implementation it always hits light vehicles.

I totally agree with removing the engine damage from satchel since they should have a tool to deter vehicles from pushing them around but they do not need to cause engine damage with a single snare.

There are several problems with Penal and PTRS. If one makes the very good vs light vehicles one runs the risk of making the Penal/sniper combo too strong.

In addition the fact that the unit start with superior AI and can then transit to AT make the unit too versatile and can create blobbing issue. If one wants there properties from singe unit one should probably follow the PF model and allow 2 different paths, an AI upgrade and AT upgrade. Else one can "create" an dedicated AT infatry and be done with.

M3 + PTRS is in the back of my head and not sure how to deal with it without outright killing it. Not sure how but what i thought was to make the 2 non droppable PTRS not able to shoot out while been on board or somehow be severely penalised in some way (cd/accuracy).

Tank hunter tommies will require a rework no matter what.
RET/RE are cheaper to build and reinforce, are engineers with more utility in them and zook/piats are good at all stages of the game. You don't see them early on because you don't want to kill the AI of a unit just to deal with a LV. On top of the upgrade cost.


I don't think it's problematic that PTRS can ALWAYS hit light vehicles more so how often they can hit it. The more i think about it, i think a way to tune is to make the 2 non droppable PTRS way worst.
In regards to blobbing, that's the whole reason to nerf the AI of Penals PTRS. Unless you want to tell me now that PGs with schrecks are also an issue.


If you ask me for a better and easier solution, they would just receive Elite zooks by lend lease. Way easier to balance than what the current situation is with PTRS where the only viable way seems to double down on this route.

If SU had a hard AT infantry unit which could threaten vehicles in the late game, then it means it's way easier to nerf and justify things like hard nerfs on ram or doctrinal abilities

M3 + PTRS is in the back of my head and not sure how to deal with it without outright killing it. Not sure how but what i thought was to make the 2 non droppable PTRS not able to shoot out while been on board or somehow be severely penalised in some way (cd/accuracy).

Tank hunter tommies will require a rework no matter what.
RET/RE are cheaper to build and reinforce, are engineers with more utility in them and zook/piats are good at all stages of the game. You don't see them early on because you don't want to kill the AI of a unit just to deal with a LV. On top of the upgrade cost.


I don't think it's problematic that PTRS can ALWAYS hit light vehicles more so how often they can hit it. The more i think about it, i think a way to tune is to make the 2 non droppable PTRS way worst.
In regards to blobbing, that's the whole reason to nerf the AI of Penals PTRS. Unless you want to tell me now that PGs with schrecks are also an issue.

The difference between PG and Penal is that making PG the core mainline infatry of one's is not really viable while making Penal the core of your army is easier.

There is little reason to reinvent he wheel.

Penal/PTRS Penal should either be designed to be like PG and arrive later in which a case having good AT would less of an issue or should either be follow the PF design and have upgrade.

If you ask me for a better and easier solution, they would just receive Elite zooks by lend lease. Way easier to balance than what the current situation is with PTRS where the only viable way seems to double down on this route.

If SU had a hard AT infantry unit which could threaten vehicles in the late game, then it means it's way easier to nerf and justify things like hard nerfs on ram or doctrinal abilities

Creating a separate AT infatry or Anti light vehicle infatry for soviet would be a better solution than adding that role to Penals.

snip

My issue with how you suggest and think about changes is that you plan as if we had balance patches available every 2 months so we can make adjustments and see where that takes us. Most of what you ask for seems like will never be done from a pragmatical point of view.


1- Give data and compare it, cause i can also say "i just want balance".

2- What you describe is basically people just opting to skip light vehicles at all. Back to the point of how much you delay then medium vehicles + heavy tanks.

3- Power level as you describe it, didn't rise. It has been constantly going down.

4- Invent a time machine and ask them to change their whole philosophy so they adapt to your own personal view of how the game should be.

5- Again, your whole idea is killing OH back to what it was before, see where it lands, then nerf USF/UKF/OKW.
How long it will take and which are those changes. And what do you plan to do to delay medium vehicles and heavies as well.

Balance in an RTS is a process which is constant. No matter what you do, there will always be outliers. What you constantly suggest is completely changing the paradigma we have in the hopes that it will be better.

The difference between PG and Penal is that making PG the core mainline infatry of one's is not really viable while making Penal the core of your army is easier.

There is little reason to reinvent he wheel.

Penal/PTRS Penal should either be designed to be like PG and arrive later in which a case having good AT would less of an issue or should either be follow the PF design and have upgrade.

Creating a separate AT infatry or Anti light vehicle infatry for soviet would be a better solution than adding that role to Penals.

The problem is that i don't think that is EVER gonna happen at all. You can suggest things that are more likely to happen than better solutions that are impossible to implement.

For the 4 ptrs penals. If it's too oppressive against light vehicles, make the 4th one (or even 3rd and 4th) be locked behind t4? Upgrade price around 80 muni

Or maybe split the upgrade, 60mu for 2 ptrs and AT satchel, 20-40 for two more, after t4 built

My issue with how you suggest and think about changes is that you plan as if we had balance patches available every 2 months so we can make adjustments and see where that takes us. Most of what you ask for seems like will never be done from a pragmatical point of view.


1- Give data and compare it, cause i can also say "i just want balance".

2- What you describe is basically people just opting to skip light vehicles at all. Back to the point of how much you delay then medium vehicles + heavy tanks.

3- Power level as you describe it, didn't rise. It has been constantly going down.

4- Invent a time machine and ask them to change their whole philosophy so they adapt to your own personal view of how the game should be.

5- Again, your whole idea is killing OH back to what it was before, see where it lands, then nerf USF/UKF/OKW.
How long it will take and which are those changes. And what do you plan to do to delay medium vehicles and heavies as well.

Balance in an RTS is a process which is constant. No matter what you do, there will always be outliers. What you constantly suggest is completely changing the paradigma we have in the hopes that it will be better.

No it is not "in the the hopes it will be better", these number have been tested and where fine for EFA.

The problem is that i don't think that is EVER gonna happen at all. You can suggest things that are more likely to happen than better solutions that are impossible to implement.

Well at some point one has to recognize that he is an the wrong direction and simply change it.

Having a high AI mainline infatry that can then upgrade with PTRS is simply bad design. It much easier to change the design than to balance the unit with in this flawed design.

A similar flawed design was chosen with Super heavies and the changes where not only reverted, but Super heavies even got a tech cost.

No it the hopes it will be better, this number have been tested and where fine for EFA.

Unless you want to remove 3 factions from the game permanently, vanila dynamics and balance could not be more irrelevant even if you tried.

Well at some point one has to recognize that he is an the wrong direction and simply change it.

We're at least 5 years past that point in time tho, but you refuse to see it.
In fact, the changing point in balance philosophy was departure of PQ, who you also cling to.

Having a high AI mainline infatry that can then upgrade with PTRS is simply bad design. It much easier to change the design than to balance the unit with in this flawed design.

Rifles can do it and there is no problem with it.
Tommies can do it and there is no problem with it.
Volks were the actual mainline with strong AT upgrade and it cut way too little of AI dps while providing most powerful AT weapon, while being durable, cheap and contrary to penals, actually spammable that was problematic and dealt with, a problem that is NOT shared by penals, nor ever was.