Diversifing the DPS roles of Penals and Cons

that doesnt change the fact theyre good long range AI. people need to stop writing them off just because they have ptrs.

would they do more damage if they didnt? sure.

do they still have almost the exact same dps as an lmg gren despite carrying 2 AT weapons? absolutely.

I'd make them use the flamethrowers while on the move >

That'd be insane..............ly awesome!

that doesnt change the fact theyre good long range AI. people need to stop writing them off just because they have ptrs.

would they do more damage if they didnt? sure.

do they still have almost the exact same dps as an lmg gren despite carrying 2 AT weapons? absolutely.

But they are just piñatas. The only unit on the game on which you are better dropping the weapons they come with.

Soviets need this unit, but its going to be a bit strange having penal troops be one of the more elite and well equipped of the soviet infantry... its extremely odd that they are a stock unit, and i kind of like the idea to simply change it in order to make it easier to design a scaleable unit.

Soviets need this unit, but its going to be a bit strange having penal troops be one of the more elite and well equipped of the soviet infantry... its extremely odd that they are a stock unit, and i kind of like the idea to simply change it in order to make it easier to design a scaleable unit.

I like it too, we could just make an original Penal Batallion commander with the unit and give them PPSHs and low armor.

God damn it, i did it again. Is there a way to delete your posts?

I whanted to edit that:
It's not like penals were common anyways.

I like Penals as they are.

I wish they brought back Shocks and Guard rifles being constructed from T1 though. I always felt that being able to use shocks/guard rifles alongside support weapons was broken as fuck. Especially with no build time.

Soviets need this unit, but its going to be a bit strange having penal troops be one of the more elite and well equipped of the soviet infantry...

They were.

Penal units were composed of officers who often were extremely well trained and experienced. As well as that they were given out all sorts of hardware, more than standard units. Basically, Penal units could be rated as an equivalent of Guards or the like. By 1944 they weren't suicide units, but they were given the most difficult tasks and were equipped as such.

that doesnt change the fact theyre good long range AI. people need to stop writing them off just because they have ptrs.

would they do more damage if they didnt? sure.

do they still have almost the exact same dps as an lmg gren despite carrying 2 AT weapons? absolutely.

At max range, LMG Grens do 9.41 + 3*2.13 = 15.8 DPS, while DP Guards do 6.42 + 2*0.23 + 3*1.24 = 10.6 DPS, if I remember the weapon compositions correctly and the spreadsheet is accurate. Upgraded Guards have total output closer to that of vanilla grens (8.5DPS) than LMG grens.

This is actually better than I thought they were, so your point is well taken.

guards get 2 dp lmgs, so they are even better

2*6.42 + 2*1.24 = 15.3 dps

im not even going to count the ptrs because the chances of a hit are so slim.

This thread makes me happy. Whats the special Penal's Guard's in the Land Lease doc?

guards with 4 ppsh, 2 svts and they come in a ht

Hmm...Cow's idea is better I suppose.

I would like this:

Guards-6 man squad

4 SVTs 2 PTRS.

Upgrade: 2 DPs

PTRS revised to become an anti-infantry weapon but also works against light AFV.

Ability: smoke grenade, grenade, and AT grenade volley

Penals:

6 SVTs

Ability: upgrade to flamethrower

Satchel charge

molotov

They were.

Penal units were composed of officers who often were extremely well trained and experienced. As well as that they were given out all sorts of hardware, more than standard units. Basically, Penal units could be rated as an equivalent of Guards or the like. By 1944 they weren't suicide units, but they were given the most difficult tasks and were equipped as such.

But they arent a commonality. A better troop becomes more frequent in the late game. Itll make the soviet faction look better if troops of some honorary title were given the best standard role, not penalized troops. It just seems insulting to make it look like uncommon penalized troops shining in front of actual Red army soldiers.

Soviet penal companies and battalions (authorized 1942 to Soviet fronts and armies) were small units used as shock troops for the most dangerous attacks and equipped according to mission. (casualty rate about double of regular formations).

They were armed with the usual weapons, including submachineguns, machineguns, anti-tank guns, flamethrowers and PTRS. They are definitely armed with extra flamethrowers as the memoir Penalty strike (penal company commander) often talks about his flamethrower teams.

In the memoir they even get air resupply.

CoH2player and Marco describe the historical side quite well.
Might have been "shameful" to be in one, but the tasks they where assigned where evrrtyhing but. In war, a unit doesnt really get to question its orders, but a Penal unit in particular, has even less option to do so, making them "ideal" for very dangerous actions.

The French Foreign Legion, is another example of an essentially, if not practically Penal unit, and its accomplishments are anything but shameful or dishonorable., even if not celebrated.

I suppose they could have neen included as Strelky for example instead, but I think Relic wanted the Penal element to make the campaign a bit more dramatic.

Anyways, historical accuracy aside, I vote for them as a tech based baseline long range infantry with SVTs, and ONE Muni upgrade option from the general Sov infantry weapon pool to provide Sov some core long range effect and the upgrade options to diversify baseline infantry options beyond what Cons can have, and to fill the gap a bit between the essentially otherwise split Sov Commander specialised infantry options.

So no matter if you choose Shock/Guard/PPSH or especially one of the Commanders without either one, you can still go Penals to fill the gap.

I do like the idea of them being renamed as strelkovy and given a vast choice of weapons (though maybe keep PPShs for doctrine... maybe...).

This isn't 1941, the Red Army is not doing human wave assaults.

The Red Army of 1944 is extremely professional and well equipped and capable of the same (if not greater) operations that the Western allies and Germany are capable of.

As has been pointed out, Penal units where not (usually) unequipped for their dangerous roles. Yes, some commanders probably cared less if they died, but that is arbitrary in war. Soldiers will always die, in every engagement. What matters, is mission success, and in order to do that, umits mist be supplied and armed to complete the mission (despite higher attrtition).

Even with a Penal unit, its pointless to send them into dangerous mission, without the means to complete it.

The really paradoxical thing about criticism of Penals inCoh2, is that it actually seems to be the Sov supporters primarily who are misrepresenting Penals as a "suicide throwaway unit", not the game itself. Penal DPS and cost, is not throwaway. They are NOT a suicide unit. Yet some people, especially those nominally empathetic to the Sov military historyseem to keep insisting on the stereotype, though the game, actually, doesnt ay all portray them as suicide disposable units.

They are expensive. They have good weapons. How is that representing them as suicide expendable units? It doesnt.
So why do Sov afficionados keep claimimg that Penals are stereptypically represented as suicide/expendable?
The game does the exact opposite. They habe MUCH better DPS than Cons, and are more expensive too.

Makes no sense.

I am a sub-lieutenant in the Finnish Marine reserve (under the Navy). Im trained to lead a platoon (additioanlly also with an extended period of squad leadership) and operate within a company sized structure. If necessary, I can lead and organize the entire company, until a higher officer arrives.

It would unconscionable, and wasteful, to sen anyone, even penals, into am engagement without the tools and support they need to complete their objective. For a dangerous mission, I wpuld ask for volunteers from a "free unit". From a penal unit, I dont have to ask. The motivational threshold, and limited liberty within the command structure, is different. Wasting men however, without a purpose is insane, whether they are penals or not. Sending them jn without tools and support to compleye their mission, also equally insane.

The situatioj on the early Eastern Front for the Soviets was so dire, and the necessity of slowing the German advance so crucial, that men where indeed expended and sent to die, without enough support, and their only purpose to hold the enemy for a bit. Both penals and otherwise. There was no alternative. This happens in war, and was ironically mirrored for the Germans in theor own desperate defence when the fortunes of war turned against them.

As I said, I find it paradoxical, somewhat hypocritical, and ironic, that it is especially people empathic to the Sov military history, are the ones who try to paint Penals as "unhistoric" or exploited in the CoH2 game. Theysre everytjing but, in the actual game system. They cost more MP, and have much better weaponry than the mainline Cons and Combat Engineers.

See what I mean? Just makes no sense to insist they are portrayed badly, when infact thr ingame representation is the exact opposite of what is claimed.