why are penals better than cons objectively
Posts: 6
does anyone want to explain the logic behind, the mainstay conscript of russia is generally a worse unit than criminals forced to fight fresh out of jail?
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Conscripts are far better than Penals. Please provide playercard.
Posts: 6
Penal battalions were made up of deserters and disgraced officers, not civilians from jail cells.
Conscripts are far better than Penals. Please provide playercard.
penals are more versatile by far?
Posts: 538
It might fit into Relic's storyline of brutal Russia, so Conscripts being everybody who could walk and hold a rifle, like the Volkssturm in Germany. Every human, no matter what. So in average: not well trained or suitable for war.
That is to only explanation I have for Cons being the worst inf.
There might have been an initial story of the squad not having enough rifles for all 6. not sure.
Let us see what others bring.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Shock armies that provided shock troops
Guard armies that provided Guards troops
NKVD armies that provides Penal battalion
At some point the designed was changed and Penal become "stock elite" similar to PG.
Then thing started to become complicated...
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
I asked myself the same question.
It might fit into Relic's storyline of brutal Russia, so Conscripts being everybody who could walk and hold a rifle, like the Volkssturm in Germany. Every human, no matter what. So in average: not well trained or suitable for war.
That is to only explanation I have for Cons being the worst inf.
There might have been an initial story of the squad not having enough rifles for all 6. not sure.
Let us see what others bring.
Which cavity collapses if you look at the skin. The conscripts skin is a 1943 uniform. And this means the conscripts are much better prepared and there is no hint of the mythical one rifle for three.
Posts: 999 | Subs: 1
outside of how the game actually is,
does anyone want to explain the logic behind, the mainstay conscript of russia is generally a worse unit than criminals forced to fight fresh out of jail?
as stormjäger said already, you may want to rethink your preconceptions about what penal battallions acually were and who was forced to fight in them.
penals were usually well-trained and often well-equipped troops, so the ingame representation isn't super far off i'd say.
Posts: 1660
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
outside of how the game actually is,
does anyone want to explain the logic behind, the mainstay conscript of russia is generally a worse unit than criminals forced to fight fresh out of jail?
There were penal battalions and penal companies.
Penal companies were what in-game battalion description says.
Penal battalions were trained OFFICERS and had supply priority over regular infantry.
Its historically accurate they are better performing and equipped then fresh conscripts.
Its also historically accurate that Relic doesn't do their research well.
In game however, conscripts are much better, especially in cost efficiency, lasting power and late game scaling - they also have much more flexibility and utility even if most of it is locked behind doctrines.
Relic original design had 3 types of armies/commanders:
Shock armies that provided shock troops
Guard armies that provided Guards troops
NKVD armies that provides Penal battalion
At some point the designed was changed and Penal become "stock elite" similar to PG.
Then thing started to become complicated...
That's completely untrue and deliberately misleading.
In fact, for AI performance and cost, Penals were CARBON COPY of PGs and were on exact same level of elite infantry as them with sole exception of not having grenades and AT upgrade compared to PGs.
Posts: 1389 | Subs: 1
No, that's not the case. You have been telling that for a few years without references, and you deflect every time you're caught on that. But repeating that does not make it true.
Well, he is not far away. I’ve seen concepts for Red Army from 2011-2012, and they mentioned visual differences for building depends on speciality (something like Hammer and Anvil for UKF). So, in the very beginning, idea like that were discussed, but not implemented to the game.
Edit: found it
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Well, he is not far away. I’ve seen concepts for Red Army from 2011-2012, and they mentioned visual differences for building depends on speciality (something like Hammer and Anvil for UKF). So, in the very beginning, idea like that were discussed, but not implemented to the game.
Edit: found it
If it died at conceptual board, then it wasn't design that made it into actual game.
Nothing more, nothing less then that.
He is once again making up things and twisting how things were.
The absolutely closest thing that made it was penals being replaced by guards/shocks in T1, but I'm not sure if it was still in early post release or was scrapped in beta, which still is not what he tried to describe.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
....
That's completely untrue and deliberately misleading.
In fact, for AI performance and cost, Penals were CARBON COPY of PGs and were on exact same level of elite infantry as them with sole exception of not having grenades and AT upgrade compared to PGs.
PLS read more carefully this part of my post because you are disagreeing and proceed to repeat what I have post only to actually agree with what I have posted.
"At some point the designed was changed and Penal become "stock elite" similar to PG."
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
PLS read more carefully this part of my post because you are disagreeing and proceed to repeat what I have post only to actually agree with what I have posted.
"At some point the designed was changed and Penal become "stock elite" similar to PG."
It couldn't be any more irrelevant what has happened in pre-alpha.
Posts: 1273
Well, he is not far away. I’ve seen concepts for Red Army from 2011-2012, and they mentioned visual differences for building depends on speciality (something like Hammer and Anvil for UKF). So, in the very beginning, idea like that were discussed, but not implemented to the game.
Edit: found it
Exactly, drawings of buildings with a name is not actual game design or implementation. What vipper says is very far fetched from what has been actually done in the closed alpha. I'm annoyed as it is not the first time that she says something that is not actually true at all. So many thanks for showing exactly what is meant
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
Penals were always a very strange unit AI perfomance wise, BUT they had flamethrower and flamethrowers had crits being able to instanly kill models, therefor penals AI was always shitty and their DPS came from the insta-kill flamethrowers.
Then flame weapons were nerfed and insta-kill removed, after that decade of useless penals started.
Posts: 1273
Posts: 1515
Posts: 1594
There were penal battalions and penal companies.
Penal companies were what in-game battalion description says.
Penal battalions were trained OFFICERS and had supply priority over regular infantry.
Its historically accurate they are better performing and equipped then fresh conscripts.
Its also historically accurate that Relic doesn't do their research well.
Which sources are you using for this information? People keep saying this, but I've been unable to find any information that supports the idea that Penal Battalions were made up exclusively of officers, and were better equipped than regular, non-penal infantry.
I'd be interested to read about this, though I'm not entirely sure what the logic behind organising Penal infantry like this would be.
Livestreams
50 | |||||
17 | |||||
3 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.624225.735+2
- 5.920405.694+4
- 6.276108.719+27
- 7.306114.729+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Wilmor89
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM