G-43 vs SVT-40

Why am I comparing these two weapons? The G43 design was stolen from the Russians! Who actually stole it from some Finnish designer but I don't want to turn this into a history lesson. Essentially they were the same exact weapon. (When germans captured SVT-40's they were often given to officers as they were considered a superior weapon.)

I think the G43 is an excellent weapon. When I see that gun on a vet 3 Gren squad my Shock troops know they aren't going to be having a good time. What I am really questioning is the DPM on these guns are waaaayyy higher than the penals weapons. Of course this is conjecture because I haven't looked up the actual numbers but a couple of G43 squads vaporize my infantry whereas the same can't be said about penals with their stock SVT40. Why the massive discrepancy? I'm already paying huge MP for essentially a kamikaze squad that loves to sit on top of satchel charges with their thumbs up their butts.

1st Penals arent soldiers very simple answer.
2nd G43 was much more compact, had better handling also they had optical crosshair or telescopic sight as default.
3rd SVT-40 was longer range also had more stopping power but it was complex and needed so much cleaning.
4th as from game view grens has 4 man despite how many times it had been told to relic they didnt give up on 4 man design causing dps go way above for per model.Its not your penals are bad its 4 man system messing balance big time.

1st Penals arent soldiers very simple answer.
2nd G43 was much more compact, had better handling also they had optical crosshair or telescopic sight as default.
3rd SVT-40 was longer range also had more stopping power but it was complex and needed so much cleaning.
4th as from game view grens has 4 man despite how many times it had been told to relic they didnt give up on 4 man design causing dps go way above for per model.Its not your penals are bad its 4 man system messing balance big time.

I have a really hard time with 2 and 3. Have you ever broken these weapons down? Do you actually go shooting? Have you ever machined anything yourself – particularly gun parts?

If you said no to any of these I really don't think you should be citing those. The only people who would have any business citing those facts would be the soldiers or engineers who designed or used those weapons. Everything else is conjecture from arm-chair gun experts.

"SVT-40 was longer range also had more stopping power but it was complex and needed so much cleaning."

Range -- The Germans were notorious for their far superior optics. Again if you had done your homework you would know the "weak" point of the SVT-40 was actually its sights. I would argue that the G43 would be more successful in farther ranged engagements simply due to the superior iron sights. The superior iron sights of the German weapon coupled with their superior optics has me thinking you pulling all of this stuff out of your ass.
Stopping Power -- The German gun used a 7.92 or 8mm bullet so stopping power goes to G43.
Complexity -- As it turns out EDUCATION, as it always does, had everything to do with the effectiveness of the SVT-40. The Russian equivalent of the "Marines" never had any problems with the "complex" gas operated system. Why? Because they were better educated, and thus were able to care for, and maintain, and use their guns to stupid good effectiveness. Giving the SVT-40 to conscripts was like giving an AK-47 to a caveman. Complaints about complexity are to be expected.

The guns, the G43 and SVT40, were identical in terms of complexity yet you heard Russian soldiers bitching because they weren't very well educated.

I have a really hard time with 2 and 3. Have you ever broken these weapons down? Do you actually go shooting? Have you ever machined anything yourself – particularly gun parts?

If you said no to any of these I really don't think you should be citing those. The only people who would have any business citing those facts would be the soldiers or engineers who designed or used those weapons. Everything else is conjecture from arm-chair gun experts.


Range -- The Germans were notorious for their far superior optics. Again if you had done your homework you would know the "weak" point of the SVT-40 was actually its sights. I would argue that the G43 would be more successful in farther ranged engagements simply due to the superior iron sights. The superior iron sights of the German weapon coupled with their superior optics has me thinking you pulling all of this stuff out of your ass.
Stopping Power -- The German gun used a 7.92 or 8mm bullet so stopping power goes to G43.
Complexity -- As it turns out EDUCATION, as it always does, had everything to do with the effectiveness of the SVT-40. The Russian equivalent of the "Marines" never had any problems with the "complex" gas operated system. Why? Because they were better educated, and thus were able to care for, and maintain, and use their guns to stupid good effectiveness. Giving the SVT-40 to conscripts was like giving an AK-47 to a caveman. Complaints about complexity are to be expected.

The guns, the G43 and SVT40, were identical in terms of complexity yet you heard Russian soldiers bitching because they weren't very well educated.

I suggest you take some of your own advice in para 2 of your reply, unless you were there on the Eastern Front in WW2 shooting at the Germans with SVT-40???

Giving SVT to Penal Troops made even less sense than giving them to Conscripts! Penals were lucky to get guns at all, some of them were given nothing, or sticks shaped like guns. In fact, I'd go further and question why there are no regular Soldiers in the Red Army? Everyone is an Engineer, Crew, Conscript, Penal, Guard, or Shock Troop (who I'm not convinced actually existed). The real reason here is simple though: Gameplay.

That is also the reason the G43 is leagues ahead of the SVT, and the reason the MP 44 doesn't decimate a Conscript Squad before even needing to reload.

The G43 is a doctrine ability, that costs 50 Munitions for 2 Rifles. Usually these are given to Grenadiers, in which case they become the bulk firepower of the Squad, rather than the MG 42. On the other hand, the SVT is free, and every Penal Squad comes with 6 of them right off the bat. That's already a 3/1 ratio for a weapon that the Ost player paid for. If G43 Grens meet Penals, the G43 Grens certainly better win, it'd be massively unfair otherwise.

A similar situation emerges in wondering why a Conscript squad with 2 PPSh's can challenge Assault Grenadiers with 5 MP 40's. Because the Conscripts paid for their upgrade (although as this upgrade is much cheaper, the difference is much smaller).

I never understood why Guards were made into crappy Ranger knockoffs.

Give them their rifles and the option to purchase either a pair of SVT-40s and a DP-28, a single (and more effective than it currently is) PTRS, or a sniper rifle/equivilant. Guards were, if even honorific, experienced, well equipped troops by their very name and nature. Every Soviet infantry squad had DP-28s, relegating them to Guards (and making them have the same DPS as Shock Troop PPShs--seriously?) is a ridiculous notion. Conscripts should be normal, experienced troops while Penals would be your starting "Enemy At the Gates" suicide infantry, something like Osttruppen, that you can mass and run around the map to get massacred while you try to hold territory for your more useful, experienced infantry.

In the bulletins tab, Penal Troops are labeled as being 'human mine trampling units' that were given 100g of vodka and sent forward into minefields--so yeah, let's give them the most advanced Soviet rifle fielded in the War, access to flamethrowers and satchel charges and make them silly and expensive.

My take on what infantry should be (IMHO, Eastern Front mod for CoH1 got it right).

Engineers -> Should have access to ROKS flamethrowers, assault gear and PPShs (probably 1.75 armor or whatever the equivalent is to Shock Troops; this would be the infamous Sturmovie Ingenery; assault engineers), and minesweeping gear in addition to satchel charges replacing demolition charges if the assault gear upgrade is chosen (or demolition charges are granted if it's chosen).

Penals -> Current conscripts. Cheap, make them ~= to Osttruppen.

Conscripts -> Normal Soviet infantry with access to a single DP-28 for 30 Munitions or a single PPSh for 5 munitions (would still make Con doctrines that grant dual PPSh's viable, and three of them would make Conscripts fit their new roll as main-line infantry; the dual-SMG upgrade would likely need a re-price to avoid masses of PPSh-toting Cons).

Guards -> As mentioned above, get access to a pair of SVT-40s and a DP-28, a single PTRS rifle, or possibly a single scoped Mosin-Nagant (equivilant to the Soviet sniper's, but with a default range of 30 and Conscript-grade 0.25 long range accuracy).

Shock Troops -> Likely the same as is, but with the option to purchase DPs and/or ROKS flamethrowers.

New units that I can think off are Soviet Marines, especially with the Southern Front patch, the Siege of Sevastapol comes to mind. Soviet Paratroops were ridiculously effective in combat and could make fantastic single-doctrine infantry (it would be preferable to make them either glass cannons, or Guards-grade durability and improved firepower at the cost of a price tag approaching 500 manpower).

A PTRS tank-hunting type unit might also be made available as a cheaper alternative to the ZiS-3 at T2, so you could make them to counter LVs if you wished. This would take the handheld AT out of doctrines and lend them to all players, which would mean Ostheer HHAT could be put up for some buffs to make them more effective. Does this mess with the "choose doctrine with AI infantry -> go T2 OR choose doctrine with Guards -> go T1" faction design Relic gave to the Soviets? Yep. Do I think it's a silly design choice to corner players into a tiny select group of strategies based on what doctrine they choose? Really? Doctrines should augment your tactical choices, not dictate them.

On the German side of the fence, Pioniere were historically granted access to MG34/42s and were organized exactly the same as Grenadier units--squads of 10 men with a pair of MP40s and a single GPMG (gen. purpose MG). In addition, they could obviously prepare defensive positions and wielded bundled grenades and satchel charges.

Grenadiere -> Should be moved to T2 and made more effective, experienced troops (as seen in vCoH). Being the anal about historical details guy, I'd suggest access to an LMG42, a pair of MP40s, or the rifle grenade as an upgrade to a normal Stielhandgrenate ability. The 3cm grenade projector should be an anti-blob weapon that allows the squad to stand off from enemy infantry and still deal WTF explosive blows to them, not the piss-ant excuse for a marshmallow launcher we have now. Access to the Panzerfaust is a must, but their Panzerfaust should be made as effective as the effective blast and damage of a pair of Shrecks. I would also suggest a squad size increase to 5 (I'm a history nut, again, and this reflects Relic's tendency to create half-sized squads; Soviet squads were 12 men IRL, 6 in game. LATE WAR German infantry units were mostly 8 men, 4 in game. So on and so forth).

Panzergrenadiere -> Made into doctrinal, elite infantry deployed in halftracks. Arm them with K98ks and allow them to STACK upgrades for the LMG42 and Gewehr 43, with a single LMG and pair of G43s made available to each squad. Panzergrenadiere were 10 man squads (9 infantrymen, one man remained behind to man the LMG mounted in the squad's dedicated 251 halftrack) granted access to a PAIR of GPMGs, a PAIR of semi-automatic rifles (and, on paper, a scope for one of them), an MP40 for the squad leader, and, in 1943, access to it's own Panzershreck. Squad for squad, Panzergrenadiere had the highest possible concentration of firepower of any WW2 infantry formation, bar none. These guys should be MG42s without the teardown that run around and just terminate anything on legs in front of them. HOWEVER, they should be extremely expensive. Panzergrenadier divisions were incredibly rare in comparison to normal Infanterie/Grenadier divisions.

There should be a new, T1 infantry unit (Osttruppen?) that's either made up of German-affiliated Allies including Italy, Romania, and so on, or organized like Grenadiere (5 man squad, access to an LMG or pair of MP40s) but created with inferior stats.

The infantry gameplay in CoH2 is stale and repetitive, lacking none of the thrill or need for cunning seen in vCoH. Hell, they even gave us arcs of fire for ATGs and MGs when you select them. Get one squad of Cons pinned, select enemy MG, see arc of fire, send one squad around each flank, hit Ura!, run in, Molotov, rinse repeat. Waw much fun so interest, can into amazing. I'm sure I'll get a string of "no!"-s for my suggestion, but I HATE the infantry balance and concepts for the game as it stands.

I feel like Penals were a later addition to the game, their role does not match their description or voices, and their weapons and further contradict it.

Personally I would have made Penals like this:

Shtrafniki: "Armed" with sticks, shtrafniki are just meat-shields designed to take the heat off real combat troops. At 7 men for 105 manpower, costing 15 manpower to reinforce, there is no immediate resource benefit to keeping them alive, and they only give half the XP of conscripts on death. Having no weapons of their own, shtrafniki prove their loyalty by dying in the field. Once enough men have died to achieve Vet 1, shtrafniki are considered trusted enough to be given real weapons, and a free upgrade for Mosin-Nagant rifles (conscript rifles) become available. Vet 1 shtrafniki are slightly effective as a conscript squad. Vet 2 increases their durability and lethality, Vet 3 further increases durability and lethality. Shtrafniki cannot capture points until Vet 2, and cannot capture at normal speed until Vet 3.

Penal company - the guilty soldiers and sergeants
Penal battalions - the guilty officers. Each soldier had a great experience and training (as they Officers)
Nobody sent unarmed penal unarmed guns - is idiotic
After 4 months stay in a penal unit restores soldiers in rank and awards and could no longer be sent to penal units
Штрафные войска составляли 1% от числа всех вооружённых сил как у СССР так и у Немцев
Make the Penal like Ostruppen - only rifles and AT grenade
SVT-40 was released about 1.6 million (each had mount for optics)
G-43 was released about 400 000

Guards - 6 people, 6 SVT-40, difficult to upgrade to 2 PTRS
Conscripts - difficult to upgrade to 2 SVT-40, after the construction of T3 or T4
Assault engineers (in the game Shock Troops) - SVT-40 were in high quantities, as they were technically competent people.

I have a really hard time with 2 and 3. Have you ever broken these weapons down? Do you actually go shooting? Have you ever machined anything yourself – particularly gun parts?

If you said no to any of these I really don't think you should be citing those. The only people who would have any business citing those facts would be the soldiers or engineers who designed or used those weapons. Everything else is conjecture from arm-chair gun experts.

To your face

http://www.gunpics.net/german/g43/g43dis.html
http://www.gunpics.net/russian/svt40/svt40dis.html

Every weapon in existance even the ones from 1300s are recorded piece by piece for knowledge keeping.

I never understood why Guards were made into crappy Ranger knockoffs.

Give them their rifles and the option to purchase either a pair of SVT-40s and a DP-28, a single (and more effective than it currently is) PTRS, or a sniper rifle/equivilant. Guards were, if even honorific, experienced, well equipped troops by their very name and nature. Every Soviet infantry squad had DP-28s, relegating them to Guards (and making them have the same DPS as Shock Troop PPShs--seriously?) is a ridiculous notion. Conscripts should be normal, experienced troops while Penals would be your starting "Enemy At the Gates" suicide infantry, something like Osttruppen, that you can mass and run around the map to get massacred while you try to hold territory for your more useful, experienced infantry.

In the bulletins tab, Penal Troops are labeled as being 'human mine trampling units' that were given 100g of vodka and sent forward into minefields--so yeah, let's give them the most advanced Soviet rifle fielded in the War, access to flamethrowers and satchel charges and make them silly and expensive.

My take on what infantry should be (IMHO, Eastern Front mod for CoH1 got it right).

Engineers -> Should have access to ROKS flamethrowers, assault gear and PPShs (probably 1.75 armor or whatever the equivalent is to Shock Troops; this would be the infamous Sturmovie Ingenery; assault engineers), and minesweeping gear in addition to satchel charges replacing demolition charges if the assault gear upgrade is chosen (or demolition charges are granted if it's chosen).

Penals -> Current conscripts. Cheap, make them ~= to Osttruppen.

Conscripts -> Normal Soviet infantry with access to a single DP-28 for 30 Munitions or a single PPSh for 5 munitions (would still make Con doctrines that grant dual PPSh's viable, and three of them would make Conscripts fit their new roll as main-line infantry; the dual-SMG upgrade would likely need a re-price to avoid masses of PPSh-toting Cons).

Guards -> As mentioned above, get access to a pair of SVT-40s and a DP-28, a single PTRS rifle, or possibly a single scoped Mosin-Nagant (equivilant to the Soviet sniper's, but with a default range of 30 and Conscript-grade 0.25 long range accuracy).

Shock Troops -> Likely the same as is, but with the option to purchase DPs and/or ROKS flamethrowers.

New units that I can think off are Soviet Marines, especially with the Southern Front patch, the Siege of Sevastapol comes to mind. Soviet Paratroops were ridiculously effective in combat and could make fantastic single-doctrine infantry (it would be preferable to make them either glass cannons, or Guards-grade durability and improved firepower at the cost of a price tag approaching 500 manpower).

A PTRS tank-hunting type unit might also be made available as a cheaper alternative to the ZiS-3 at T2, so you could make them to counter LVs if you wished. This would take the handheld AT out of doctrines and lend them to all players, which would mean Ostheer HHAT could be put up for some buffs to make them more effective. Does this mess with the "choose doctrine with AI infantry -> go T2 OR choose doctrine with Guards -> go T1" faction design Relic gave to the Soviets? Yep. Do I think it's a silly design choice to corner players into a tiny select group of strategies based on what doctrine they choose? Really? Doctrines should augment your tactical choices, not dictate them.

On the German side of the fence, Pioniere were historically granted access to MG34/42s and were organized exactly the same as Grenadier units--squads of 10 men with a pair of MP40s and a single GPMG (gen. purpose MG). In addition, they could obviously prepare defensive positions and wielded bundled grenades and satchel charges.

Grenadiere -> Should be moved to T2 and made more effective, experienced troops (as seen in vCoH). Being the anal about historical details guy, I'd suggest access to an LMG42, a pair of MP40s, or the rifle grenade as an upgrade to a normal Stielhandgrenate ability. The 3cm grenade projector should be an anti-blob weapon that allows the squad to stand off from enemy infantry and still deal WTF explosive blows to them, not the piss-ant excuse for a marshmallow launcher we have now. Access to the Panzerfaust is a must, but their Panzerfaust should be made as effective as the effective blast and damage of a pair of Shrecks. I would also suggest a squad size increase to 5 (I'm a history nut, again, and this reflects Relic's tendency to create half-sized squads; Soviet squads were 12 men IRL, 6 in game. LATE WAR German infantry units were mostly 8 men, 4 in game. So on and so forth).

Panzergrenadiere -> Made into doctrinal, elite infantry deployed in halftracks. Arm them with K98ks and allow them to STACK upgrades for the LMG42 and Gewehr 43, with a single LMG and pair of G43s made available to each squad. Panzergrenadiere were 10 man squads (9 infantrymen, one man remained behind to man the LMG mounted in the squad's dedicated 251 halftrack) granted access to a PAIR of GPMGs, a PAIR of semi-automatic rifles (and, on paper, a scope for one of them), an MP40 for the squad leader, and, in 1943, access to it's own Panzershreck. Squad for squad, Panzergrenadiere had the highest possible concentration of firepower of any WW2 infantry formation, bar none. These guys should be MG42s without the teardown that run around and just terminate anything on legs in front of them. HOWEVER, they should be extremely expensive. Panzergrenadier divisions were incredibly rare in comparison to normal Infanterie/Grenadier divisions.

There should be a new, T1 infantry unit (Osttruppen?) that's either made up of German-affiliated Allies including Italy, Romania, and so on, or organized like Grenadiere (5 man squad, access to an LMG or pair of MP40s) but created with inferior stats.

The infantry gameplay in CoH2 is stale and repetitive, lacking none of the thrill or need for cunning seen in vCoH. Hell, they even gave us arcs of fire for ATGs and MGs when you select them. Get one squad of Cons pinned, select enemy MG, see arc of fire, send one squad around each flank, hit Ura!, run in, Molotov, rinse repeat. Waw much fun so interest, can into amazing. I'm sure I'll get a string of "no!"-s for my suggestion, but I HATE the infantry balance and concepts for the game as it stands.

I wish. this would be fucking awesome.

To your face

http://www.gunpics.net/german/g43/g43dis.html
http://www.gunpics.net/russian/svt40/svt40dis.html

Every weapon in existance even the ones from 1300s are recorded piece by piece for knowledge keeping.

I believe you dude. Its my fault for perpetuating this argument, but like I said without real field, and engineering experience everything from us is just conjecture.

Penal company - the guilty soldiers and sergeants
Penal battalions - the guilty officers. Each soldier had a great experience and training (as they Officers)
Nobody sent unarmed penal unarmed guns - is idiotic
After 4 months stay in a penal unit restores soldiers in rank and awards and could no longer be sent to penal units
Штрафные войска составляли 1% от числа всех вооружённых сил как у СССР так и у Немцев
Make the Penal like Ostruppen - only rifles and AT grenade
SVT-40 was released about 1.6 million (each had mount for optics)
G-43 was released about 400 000

Guards - 6 people, 6 SVT-40, difficult to upgrade to 2 PTRS
Conscripts - difficult to upgrade to 2 SVT-40, after the construction of T3 or T4
Assault engineers (in the game Shock Troops) - SVT-40 were in high quantities, as they were technically competent people.

I feel like this is the most informative post in the thread. I would like to know your sources.

I believe you dude. Its my fault for perpetuating this argument, but like I said without real field, and engineering experience everything from us is just conjecture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kKq7i9uq_U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIGY_SuWxsc

I watched g43 and fg42 firing in reallife and reallife field striping before you made this thread.Please observe

if you're handy with the Russian language (or Google Translate) you can read about penal battalions here.
penal battalions
And about the SVT-40 here
SVT-40
About assault engineering brigade here
1
2

Penal company - the guilty soldiers and sergeants
Penal battalions - the guilty officers. Each soldier had a great experience and training (as they Officers)
Nobody sent unarmed penal unarmed guns - is idiotic
After 4 months stay in a penal unit restores soldiers in rank and awards and could no longer be sent to penal units

Thank you, someone who actually reads into things.

Anyway back on topic. Correct me if I'm wrong (Waiting for Nullist to jump in here or someone with good knowledge of the game statistics and tables.) but do grenadiers have a better chance of hitting targets than Penals? This would explain the apparent "ineffectiveness" of the SVT against G43s. Or are the damage tables for both guns radically different?

Really this sort of thread makes me realise why I love COH, I love how passionate everyone is about WW2 history.

Personally I think it just boils down to the fact the SVT's are in the hands on under-trained penal troops and the G43 is in the hands of highly trained grenadiers. But all in all the g43 was a better rifle

I love these ideas about having a Soviet squad armed with just sticks. I'd want to go back in time and see the Russian Rage Reviews (TM) after the game was released and see footage of unarmed squads being thrown at MG-42s in MP games whilst Conscripts flank them.

I love these ideas about having a Soviet squad armed with just sticks. I'd want to go back in time and see the Russian Rage Reviews (TM) after the game was released and see footage of unarmed squads being thrown at MG-42s in MP games whilst Conscripts flank them.

Oh god. I mean it would probably be horrible, and hilarious to watch all at the same time.

Thank you, someone who actually reads into things.

Anyway back on topic. Correct me if I'm wrong (Waiting for Nullist to jump in here or someone with good knowledge of the game statistics and tables.) but do grenadiers have a better chance of hitting targets than Penals? This would explain the apparent "ineffectiveness" of the SVT against G43s. Or are the damage tables for both guns radically different?

IIRC, Grenadier K98ks have an accuracy of 0.35 at long range and 0.65 at short range, while Conscript rifles have an accuracy of 0.25 at long range and 0.5 at short range. Penal SVT-40s have an accuracy of 0.26 at long range and 0.47 at short range.

Thank you, someone who actually reads into things.

Anyway back on topic. Correct me if I'm wrong (Waiting for Nullist to jump in here or someone with good knowledge of the game statistics and tables.) but do grenadiers have a better chance of hitting targets than Penals? This would explain the apparent "ineffectiveness" of the SVT against G43s. Or are the damage tables for both guns radically different?

I'm not Nullist, but I'll do it. Grenadiers are much more accurate with their Kar 98's (65%/35%) and G43's (65%/80%) than Penals are with their SVT's (47%/26%).

I love these ideas about having a Soviet squad armed with just sticks. I'd want to go back in time and see the Russian Rage Reviews (TM) after the game was released and see footage of unarmed squads being thrown at MG-42s in MP games whilst Conscripts flank them.

I'm talking about just Penal Troops. I'm well aware that the "unarmed Russians charge into battle" was just an act of severe desperation during the Battle of Stalingrad. Penals on the other hand were just prisoners plucked from Gulags, rounded into a group, charged at enemy positions, then the survivors were put into another group and charged again. Sometimes they held sticks to make them look like Soldiers, and in winter they wore the darkest uniforms so the Germans would fire at them first and not the Red Army men nearby.