I see no problem with that. Each faction is different and there are no rules.
Worse case scenario one can simply move Zis to HQ available after T1 or T2 is fully teched.
If they are "elite/semi elite" they are timing is wrong. It is as simple as that.
Osttruppen are defensive infatry, suggest Penal are offensive so there is little analogy.
Conscripts with 7 men upgrade are fine with or without commanders.
Not really other AT infatry far more expensive. The idea that PTRS units should operate on their own vs both infatry and vehicles is flawed to begin with and a recipe for trouble.
1- There are rules. Mp values had been adjusted so all factions can immediately start building a unit from the get go and all 5 can build different units from the start.
In that build you suggest, yes, Zis been at HQ would be better but that doesn't solve all the other mirage of problems.
2- As wrong as the existence of IS and SP from the start.
3- The analogy is the point you bring about map control.
4- Missing the point. You are pushing them to be a cheaper worst main line infantry without having any of the scaling nor support from commanders.
5- Read what i said. They need to have a different profile. If it's not clear for you.
Guards PTRS is fine.
ALL other variants of PTRS are not. If you want a squad to gimp their AI, then they should be dedicated AT infantry. Drop down close to 0 the PTRS AI for those squads and change the weapon profile so 4x PTRS behave close to 2x Zook/PIATs.
I am not sure of OP's suggestions. I would like Soviets to somehow reflect the more offensive nature, on the other hand I really don't like adding yet another "normal" infantry unit into the Soviet rooster. Shock troops and the PPSH upgrade are meant to reflect the SMG production, I think it is better to reuse these options instead of creating more overlap between units/upgrades.
Regarding Vipper's suggestion to the tech/infantry rework:
I think there will be a general issue of Soviets having two "weak" infantry squads, which creates more overlap for standard play.
However a quick and not yet really thought through idea was to take it a bit further and shuffle the Soviet roster around a bit more.
- Soviet tech is now linear
- T0: as is
- T1: Maxim, M3, Sniper
- T2: ZiS, M5, mortar
- T3: Penals, T70, Su76
- T4: as is
It would 100% cause some major tech cost reshuffles. Also I assume Penals would be weak at that spot, so they could probably be buffed and cost increased to ~340, but designed as real elite long range infantry without having to find a weird balance now between the early game and late game. It would (obviously) also mean that ALL Soviet builds are now based on Conscripts which could take a lot of diversity from the faction for 1v1 at least (in team games almost nobody plays T1 anyway from my experience). T2 would probably need to go up in costs, T3 could go down a little. M5 would come a little earlier which would fit it's power level. I have not thought of potential squad upgrades yet since this is - as I said - just a quick idea for the time being.
1- You better search what recently is.
Flamers were stronger back then, cause they could just death crit your whole squad. Penals were the only unit in the game who had a flamer which wouldn't explode. Rifleman flamer became problematic when the flamethrower explosion was basically removed from the game.
That's like your sole unique opinion. Everything in the game was better than going 270mp Penals. Whether it was Cons spam/PPSH/PTRS, clowncar, sniper, maxim spam, Guard spam, double Shock, Partisans, Irregulars.
2- Which is what i said.
Not a single moment before that.
3- These are only your ideas, that you need to include in your own whole mod build suggestion. If someone makes a suggestion, you can expect a counterpoint to work only if you completely rework the whole game around it.
A single AT gun doesn't shut down the whole map.
The problem is not the PTRS weapon on it's own. Its on which unit and tier it's assigned to and what tools are available to them.
You are simply mistaken.
The changes to flamers overall performance is what made flamers riflemen and Penals too strong and not the changes to weapon chance to explode.
And that is why they had eventually to removed both of them.
...
Regarding Vipper's suggestion to the tech/infantry rework:
I think there will be a general issue of Soviets having two "weak" infantry squads, which creates more overlap for standard play.
...
The overlap is actually between "elite/semi elite" Penal and 3 types of guards/Shock.
Having 2 mainline infatry with completely different play styles actually solves the overlap issues.
When Soviet faction design was changed to reduced the dependence on doctrinal units the change was one sided. Soviet stock unit become easier available and more powerful while doctrinal unit remained powerful (or even become stronger) and remained available to many commanders.
That was partially fixed for vehicles with tech requirement for all factions but it is not fixed for Soviet doctrinal infatry.
If one wants to make stock Soviet infatry more inline with other faction one will have to make similar changes to doctrinal infatry like making available to less commanders and moving to CP3.
The changes to flamers overall performance what made flamer riflemen and Penals too strong and not the changes to weapon chance to explode.
And that is why they had eventually to removed both of them.
Show me were i'm wrong. Flamers were always strong or even stronger, they had the drawback that they would randomly explode, even wiping your own squad. Which in some cases made them not worth the risk.
Penals became oppressive after their rework patch.
Flamer no longer randomly exlodes: around 18 Jun 2015
My main issue with that would be that the Penals, although their portrayal is at-odds with their role, do have some things that fit the bill. Tossing bags of explosives and charting tanks with Anti-Tank rifles both seem like very 'suicide-squad' type attacks which would seem odd for Soviet Riflemen to be doing. That's the sort of thing you give to Penal Troops who will probably get themselves killed or Elite Troops who at least have the experience and training to survive such madness. It would also be a shame to see the unit completely deleted, since I do quite like their voices and attitudes.
I see it in that way:
1. Penals and their voicelines goes to Commissar (since their voicelines sounds like you speak with stereotyped commissar) and penals replace guards 3D model in that squad.
2. Penals as unit in tier 1 renamed into Riflemen and get voicelines from conscripts (since they have voicelines with "Strelky") and Guards 3D model without poncho (since they have voicelines with "Strelky").
In that case we have:
1. Commissar with voicelines (currently has none)
2. No stereotyped units in core tech
3. Red Army finally got unit, which can be called as backbone of the army in term of design (mainline infantry unit like riflemen, IS, grenadiers and etc.)
4. Penals assets still in use.
Show me were i'm wrong. Flamers were always strong or even stronger, they had the drawback that they would randomly explode, even wiping your own squad. Which in some cases made them not worth the risk.
Penals became oppressive after their rework patch.
Flamer no longer randomly exlodes: around 18 Jun 2015
Rifle flamer removed: around 6 Apr 2016
Penal rework: around 16 Jun 2016
Having played the game for years at various levels, I can only confirm that this is exactly right. It also coincides with the time I started to get hate for playing with Penals and I switched to OST.
Show me were i'm wrong. Flamers were always strong or even stronger, they had the drawback that they would randomly explode, even wiping your own squad. Which in some cases made them not worth the risk.
Penals became oppressive after their rework patch.
Flamer no longer randomly explodes: around 18 Jun 2015
Rifle flamer removed: around 6 Apr 2016
Penal rework: around 16 Jun 2016
Critical's kills from flamers removed on the 23 June 2015 patch.
Riflemen with flamer not an issue.
3 month later on September 3 2015 preview patch hand held flamer get buffed. Change goes lives on October.
On December:
"Rifle Company
We made some adjustments to Rifle Company to address the ongoing issue of mainline infantry having such a strong anti-garrison weapon. Another thing we wanted to address was the ability to break the intended pacing of veterancy.
Rifle flamers Moved to rear echelons (CP reduced to 0)"
And keep in mind that flamer where CP 1 not CP 0 for Riflemen.
The idea being that T1 is the "Aggressive" option and T2 is the "Defensive" option for Soviet (With ZiS being tier 0 (And perhaps requiring T1 or 2? It probably isnt a balance concern to allow SOV to build a ZIS immediately.) to prevent Soviet being without an AT option (And the power of the ZIS barrage).
UNIT CHANGE BRIEF:
Penals are changed into a more "Aggressive" Conscript alternative.
Relative to Conscripts:
~ Same price/reinforcement costs.
~ Same build speed.
~ Same Population space.
~ Similar throwables, HE grenade and (weakened)AT Satchel Charge/AT grenade vs Molotov and AT grenade.
~ Both have access to OORAH.
+ Improved close/mid DPS through either SVT rifles or PPSH (And "To The Last Man").
+ Improved on-the-move DPS through SVT rifles or PPSH.
+ Retain ability to upgrade to PTRS.
Sorry this is rather a long and rambling write-up, I've been trying to think of interesting solutions to make tier 1 more attractive, and despite the essay above, this requires minimal tech changes, and not too drastic a rework of the Shtrafbat in terms of core functionality. Please let me know which parts of this (If any) sounds somewhat workable. Precise numbers are not included at this stage.
1- We had 270mp Penals with flamers for years and they were still bad. Cause 190/200mp CE (which were worse than current CE) were doing a better job while providing utility.
2- RET/RE Flamethrowers can still get another weapon upgrade/minesweeper. The problem is not the flamer, it's what the unit which get access to them has. Rifles had smoke, HE grenades and snares. The issue was never the amount of models the squad has.
I suppose that is true, I forgot Riflemen had smoke at that time or they they could combine it with a BAR. I would gladly give the SVT's back to Penals, perhaps as part of the Flamer package so that the squad's initial price may remain low and there can be no arguments about PTRS Penals having "too much AI".
The 2/3 PTRS end up been not enough in the light vehicle phase, specially in 1v1. FHT/Flak HT can do too much dmg and P2 can move around the map and the moment you are forced to retreat your whole line collapses.
The obvious solution here would be to buff the PTRS, then. Another solution would be give them explosive resistance, but I would prefer this be added to their Veterancy to replace Received Accuracy.
Whatever you are designing, you have to think the following thing:
Why would i bother going on a tech with a clowncar, a sniper and a infantry unit vs playing with Conscripts + CE and T2.
That is a good point, Assault Troops and ZiS would overshadow Penals and I'm not sure what to do about that.
Its not even historical flavour.
Penal BATTALIONS were composed of officers and had supply priority over regular army troops, they had highly trained military personal in them and were very well supplied. They both, make sense and do deserve elite/semi-elite infantry status in historical context.
Penal COMPANIES are the "run into meat grinder" meme.
Relic having battalions in name, but describing companies in flavor text isn't helping here either.
The "run into the meat grinder" meme was real, but not the way Hollywood has shown us, and not actually limited to Penal Companies. Soviet Command would choose whatever option had the highest projected success rate with the lowest projected casualties. Sometimes this option was having infantry (not necessarily Penals) charge at fortifications or even over minefields, because this was seen as the best option given the options available.
Penal Troops for the most part were equipped and fed the same as anyone else, the draw of having Penal Troops for a Soviet Commander was that you could take your own men off the most dangerous part of the line and put Penal Troops there. Someone's going to be there regardless, but it may as well be the "expendable" troops rather than your own.
The "run into the meat grinder" meme was real, but not the way Hollywood has shown us, and not actually limited to Penal Companies. Soviet Command would choose whatever option had the highest projected success rate with the lowest projected casualties. Sometimes this option was having infantry (not necessarily Penals) charge at fortifications or even over minefields, because this was seen as the best option given the options available.
Penal Troops for the most part were equipped and fed the same as anyone else, the draw of having Penal Troops for a Soviet Commander was that you could take your own men off the most dangerous part of the line and put Penal Troops there. Someone's going to be there regardless, but it may as well be the "expendable" troops rather than your own.
I like how you first accept that penal units were not used as Hollywood portrays just to ignore distinction between penal companies and battalions and feed right into Hollywood meme anyway.
There was nothing expendable about penal battalions, in case you haven't read it first time - they were made out of trained OFFICERS, not random potato farmers who said wrong word or ran wrong way.
I think you are trying to shoehorn a unit based on historical flavour. Power and timing is weird. You say you want to improve midgame but they are effectively an Assault Grenadier that requires tech. AssG shines because they are an excellent opening unit combined with the effects of tech rushing. Not due to their scaling.
I am not sure of OP's suggestions. I would like Soviets to somehow reflect the more offensive nature, on the other hand I really don't like adding yet another "normal" infantry unit into the Soviet rooster. Shock troops and the PPSH upgrade are meant to reflect the SMG production, I think it is better to reuse these options instead of creating more overlap between units/upgrades.
I don't feel that is represented in-game, in fact it's the opposite. MP 40's and StG's are far more represented currently than any SMG, let alone the PPSh. Conscript Assault Package is expensive and only grants 3, while Shock Troops are costly elite troops meant to be employed surgically for effect. This combined with there not being any PPSh's in the stock roster portray PPSh's as an uncommon weapon, rather than something that outnumbered every other SMG combined. Soviets without PPSh's, to me, are like Germans without Machine Guns (Volksgrenadiers don't count, they were organized differently and their portrayal with StG's is reasonably accurate, if a tad optimistic).
I see it in that way:
1. Penals and their voicelines goes to Commissar (since their voicelines sounds like you speak with stereotyped commissar) and penals replace guards 3D model in that squad.
2. Penals as unit in tier 1 renamed into Riflemen and get voicelines from conscripts (since they have voicelines with "Strelky") and Guards 3D model without poncho.
In that case we have:
1. Commissar with voicelines (currently has none)
2. No stereotyped units in core tech
3. Red Army finally got unit, which can be called as backbone of the army in term of design (mainline infantry unit like riflemen, IS, grenadiers and etc.)
4. Penals assets still in use.
This seems palatable to me, we were always on the same page with this. I would still love for them to have access to PPSh's through an upgrade. But SVT armed Infantry Troops would be a welcome addition. Still the Satchel and PTRS Package seem a bit odd, especially since the Satchel is actually a part of the Penal's soldier model. It is an imperfect solution but not a bad one.
I like how you first accept that penal units were not used as Hollywood portrays just to ignore distinction between penal companies and battalions and feed right into Hollywood meme anyway.
There was nothing expendable about penal battalions, in case you haven't read it first time - they were made out of trained OFFICERS, not random potato farmers who said wrong word or ran wrong way.
I'm not sure what this distinction of "Penal Battalion/Penal Company" comes from, I'm not aware of such a distinction. To my knowledge Penal Battalions are made up of Penal Companies, just like a regular Battalion is made up of regular Companies. I did see a reference to an "8th Independent Penal Battalion" which was allegedly made up of disgraced officers, you may be thinking of this one in particular.
And I did literally just say Penal Troops were equipped and used not much differently than Infantry, so I don't know how that's "Hollywood". They got the often jobs with the highest mortality rate, but those jobs would have been done by the Infantry anyway.
I'm not sure what this distinction of "Penal Battalion/Penal Company" comes from, I'm not aware of such a distinction. To my knowledge Penal Battalions are made up of Penal Companies, just like a regular Battalion is made up of regular Companies. I did see a reference to an "8th Independent Penal Battalion" which was allegedly made up of disgraced officers, you may be thinking of this one in particular.
And I did literally just say Penal Troops were equipped and used not much differently than Infantry, so I don't know how that's "Hollywood". They got the often jobs with the highest mortality rate, but those jobs would have been done by the Infantry anyway.
This has been said on the forum many times. Exists:
- Penalty companies. These are units of guilty soldiers and sergeants. They can be as large as a battalion, but they will still be called a company because they are privates. Colobarationist soldiers who fled back or were taken prisoner also come here.
- Penal battalion. They can be of any size (for example, a company), but everything will be called a battalion early on because an officer will serve in it - no matter who, a lieutenant or a colonel, if they got drunk, incompetently fulfilled the order and killed many soldiers under their command, did not fulfill the order, etc. ... They go to the penal battalion.
All those freed from a separate penal battalion were reinstated in rank and in all rights, all military awards were returned to them. In the event of death, the family was entitled to a pension on a general basis from the salary of the last position before being sent to a separate penal battalion.
I like how you first accept that penal units were not used as Hollywood portrays just to ignore distinction between penal companies and battalions and feed right into Hollywood meme anyway.
There was nothing expendable about penal battalions, in case you haven't read it first time - they were made out of trained OFFICERS, not random potato farmers who said wrong word or ran wrong way.
This is not true. Penals indeed had trained troops and offircers who were thrown into penal battalions because of minor reasons. But it aswell were consisted of criminals and untrustfull soldiers. Not to mention that they were most of the time commanded by either members of communist party, who might aswell have been brainwashed fanatic of the party, just like some of the Waffen SS members or NSDAP members.
If you read history, even German veterans describe german penal battalions as something you dont wanna end up in, because you will most likely be killed, not because you are thrown into a meat grinder, but because tasts you were given were almost suicidal. And it was a common sittuation even when germany was winning.
During late stages of the war, sutiation with soviet penal battalions might have been better and they could have had more expirienced ppl in them, simply because soviet army was already winning on the EF aswell as by 43-44 Red Army started working properly.
This is not true. Penals indeed had trained troops and offircers who were thrown into penal battalions because of minor reasons. But it aswell were consisted of criminals and untrustfull soldiers. Not to mention that they were most of the time commanded by either members of communist party, who might aswell have been brainwashed fanatic of the party, just like some of the Waffen SS members or NSDAP members.
If you read history, even German veterans describe german penal battalions as something you dont wanna end up in, because you will most likely be killed, not because you are thrown into a meat grinder, but because tasts you were given were almost suicidal. And it was a common sittuation even when germany was winning.
During late stages of the war, sutiation with soviet penal battalions might have been better and they could have had more expirienced ppl in them, simply because soviet army was already winning on the EF aswell as by 43-44 Red Army started working properly.
You again completely ignored distinction between battalions and companies, because you mention battalions and proceed with the description of company.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
