To start, I should have specified that I think an easy fix would be an increase in reinforce to ONLY Volks and Fussies by about 2-3MP, this over the course of the early to mid-game it would slightly delay Raks or elite infantry.
Now for your first point SOVIETS/USF/OKW are all infantry focused factions with their respective mainlines taking up similar popcap. What other metric then reinforce cost would you use for bleed.
There is no exact metric for bleed. Bleed is caused by small arms, for which we can estimate a metric based on reinforcement cost / effective health to at least get a durability value of "how much damage must be applied before I need to pay for a model". I also literally once proposed a model for infantry comparisons which is still in the signature.
Second, bleed is caused by AoE weapons. There is obviously no perfect metric for that, but MMX has done some great work with the calculator he published.
The point is to go out and make sure the enemy loses more than you do. One of the only units that does not do this and is designed not to do this is the Conscript. In the early to mid game I think we can agree Sturmpioneers are going to beat Conscripts badly and you know inflict bleed. The player now has to reinforce which slows other stuff down, Sturms are expensive and have a very narrow weapon profile which does not scale well compared to the other multiple options they have.
First off, I was only criticizing the metric you use to support your claims. Your metric does not logically show what you want to show, nor do larger parts of your numbers reflect what at least my personal experience is. And since I've been around this forum for a while and know what people usually complain about, I'll make the far fetched claim that I am by far not alone). That was my sole point.
Now, to the specifics:
Sturms beat most early infantry because of their high damage and (for the timing) good RA. As you said, they do not scale well (4 men CQC squads are not a good deal). How does your metric reflect that? It doesn't, because your metric does not adjust for veterancy or weapon upgrades, which are a huge part in determining infantry strength. Chances are, if your metric can't adjust to the core scaling mechanisms, it will only be able to reflect the unit in one specific state. Therefore, drawing a generalized statement from it does not work.
Also Pgrens come at a later time which has already been stated, an army has already been made so MP generation is reduced while also having a double impact of high POP cost. However when they hit they hit hard. They will demolish most early game units from BOTH USF and Soviets. So in the economy exchange, K/D it causes more bleed then it receives. That is literally the point of ELITE infantry for every faction. PGren arrive earlier than other Elites such as Para/Rangers which means they will have more VET so they can cause model drops leading to MP bleed.
I feel infantry is fairly closed to balance so I never brought up received acc or health of infantry so not sure what the point of that statement was. Wouldn't initial cost/pop cap/reinforce cost/upgrade cost all work together to decide performance of a unit such as DPS/range/durability? That would be outside of the scope of what I presented.
But that's not the case. Grens and Volks work differently because they have stock elites as backup. IS work differently because UKF as a whole is a huge mess. Sturms are the only engineer unit designed for combat. Obers are OKW's replacement for a late game AI vehicle. Faction context matters. And while I agree that by far and large most outliers have been moved closer to the rest of the bunch, the initial cost and reinforcement cost are not a good indicator. Bleed is a measure of durability and cost, but offensive power factors into it as well. But in the end, it will still be that: How resistant your squad is to losing MP. Reinforcement cost obviously is a factor, but not really the initial cost, unless we talk about squad wipes.
The point of the health statement was to make clear where your metric falls short: It does not take actual durability into account. Increasing the health of a squad lowers the bleed, yet your metric does not detect any of that. It is actually completely insensitive to any RA modifiers.
For your second point, you seem to have latched on the conscript most likely due to your argument being much weaker using literally every other unit. As stated Conscripts are one of the only units designed to lose models in that fashion and still maintain faction economy. You took a general statement and focused on a K/D that would never happen. Sticking with what you said under the constraints which is early-mid game trying to slow down the blob. Volks aren't losing 4 units once they get STG which is a stock upgrade that happens way before Mobile reserves and should hit before SVT or PPSH upgrades. So your example is worst case scenario for the OKW player, which once again means they are bleeding less.
I used Conscripts since they are the most obvious example. There are others in your list that also do not make fully sense. Osttruppen score very high in your metric, PGrens score super low although those are classic units that get bled by LVs. Stormtroopers score super low despite next to no one buying two of them because they'd cost too much MP to reinforce. In your metric, replacing all Grens with Storms or at least PGrens should be super beneficial. But in reality that's a classic for bleeding yourself dry of any MP. Even Rifles, Captain and Lieutenant beat vanilla Volks, upgraded versions beat upgraded Volks (which they should since they are more expensive). Yet Volks are better in your metric. Captain has exactly the same value as the Lieutenant despite being a worse unit. Again, your metric does not show what you want to show. It does not show bleed, it shows what the benefit is of keeping a squad (barely) alive compared to building it new. Because that's exactly what you're calculating: The (relative) cost difference of replenishing the squad compared to the cost of building a new one.
You also touch another point that I initially didn't mention for brevity:
Why is everything calculated to lose exactly one man less than possible? Basically no squad is supposed to do that. All players will retreat if there are 2-3 models left, depending on the squad. Larger squads like Osttruppen and Cons will retreat with rather 3, smaller squads like Obersoldaten and Grens with rather 1-2 men. How do you account for CQC units needing to close in (and surely losing a model on the way), whereas long ranged units can stay in the back and eat minimal damage? This is not accounted for at all.
Since you seem to be fairly against what I said. I want ask some fairly straight forward questions.
1) Do you believe OKW float MP? If yes why?
2) Do you believe OKW blob is not a problem especially Fussies? If yes how would you fix it.
To 1) Can't really tell since i have not played much OKW in the last two months. When I played it, I regularly floated but that's exactly the reason why I am a shitty OKW player.
To 2) Pfussi blob can be a problem at least in team games. Volks not so much. For Pfussies, I'd have their moving accuracy slightly nerfed in exchange for an early game buff or some slightly better RA or something.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
