Conscripts post 9/9 patch

If you have a dump and take another dump next to it, the first one won't magically smell like flowers and turn into chocolate.
You'll simply have 2 dumps.

That is the situation of current soviet core infantry and with guards being battered as well, pretty much only mainline infantry soviets have that actually can fight are shock troops.

Relic wants soviets to spam snipers and maxims.

Hmm, yes but if volks and grenadiers were slightly nerfed and LMG 42 was slightly nerfed, means that penals were indirectly BUFFED.

I'd love an official answer as to why conscripts were given a received accuracy penalty

I don't think anyone here, axis or ally, thinks that's a justified nerf

I find it hilarious that people keep talking about how great Penals are now. Penals didn't get changed at all.

Obviously not...but nearly ever other infantry squad did receive changes, which indirectly effects penals.

There's just one thing wrong with that vision of the conscript squad. Veterancy and unit survival are key to winning games in CoH2 and making conscripts that unit that is meant to die in droves goes against that not to mention it's not fun to play. Nobody likes seeing their units drop so quick and just feed the long range axis infantry vet to the point where closing in becomes extremely difficult.

Funnily enough if we talk about the 9% penalty buff on cons and the 0.91 bonus on grens it's like 5.5 cons vs. 4.4 worth of grens now in terms of small arms fire. Conscripts still have the advantage in tanking explosive damage but the lines are starting to blur in terms of survivability.

Perhaps but as we know the soviet union didn't rely on unit preservation and veterancy to win, though of course I know that this is a fun arcade game not a historical re-enactment. The problem I see with your argument is that you think conscripts should be more like grens or volks and that way we lose the asymmetry.

Cons will die in you charge them from long range at grens (no fun) so you have to make it fun by finding the other ways to play them - forcing the grens from cover with your mortars then oorahing them in - flanking with multiple cons squads over fences and round buildings, using true sight to ambush etc. An issue with this is the cost relative to grens - they are not cheap enough to be able to afford 2 con squads per gren but they would probably need to be nerfed even more to reduce their price so...

To contradict some of what I have said the changes made the cons cause more dps at mid range than they did which makes me think they are also intended to be played in cover vs advancing infantry rather than having to always rush in close. This still fits with the concept of massed sub-standard troops as a strategy

Perhaps but as we know the soviet union didn't rely on unit preservation and veterancy to win, though of course I know that this is a fun arcade game not a historical re-enactment. The problem I see with your argument is that you think conscripts should be more like grens or volks and that way we lose the asymmetry.

Cons will die in you charge them from long range at grens (no fun) so you have to make it fun by finding the other ways to play them - forcing the grens from cover with your mortars then oorahing them in - flanking with multiple cons squads over fences and round buildings, using true sight to ambush etc. An issue with this is the cost relative to grens - they are not cheap enough to be able to afford 2 con squads per gren but they would probably need to be nerfed even more to reduce their price so...

To contradict some of what I have said the changes made the cons cause more dps at mid range than they did which makes me think they are also intended to be played in cover vs advancing infantry rather than having to always rush in close. This still fits with the concept of massed sub-standard troops as a strategy

And which countries exactly relied on unit preservation and veterancy? Very few troops survived close combat, on both sides.

I'd love an official answer as to why conscripts were given a received accuracy penalty

I don't think anyone here, axis or ally, thinks that's a justified nerf

But its not in isolation - many other infantry types have also changed often to their detriment - the nerfs have taken different forms in order to emphasise different approaches to playing each type of infantry. This is the nerf/buff for for the cons - they die easier but cause more damage when alive unlike say the sturmpios who got more survivability in exchange for less dps.

Going back to the core concepts of conscripts is they are cannon fodder who through sheer numbers get that Molotov or at grenade off or through slow attrition defeat the superior german infantry so this change is emphasising this. Looking at the stat changes it appears they can do a bit more damage in range meaning also that in defensive positions they may also perform a bit better.

Whether the costs to build or reinforce is quite right is up for debate. I tend to use conscripts as the forward scouts and spotters or meat shields for support weapons. Others like the human wave approach. Quite simply you are expected to lose rather a lot of them

Sounds great in theory but fails in the game (unless you go PPSH-cons Advanced Warfare, but seems like a niche tactic.

Objectively, it looks like Cons can just oorah in and do a lot of stuff like AT Nade or Molotov. However, Molotov is one of the slowest animations in the game. Performing it in the late game is just asking for half of the squad getting wiped. At nade also fails to pen medium tnaks and up. Right now, they are just too squishy and/or lack the damage to be effective frontline infantry.

Using them en masse to bleed the Axis is actually detrimental; they are very squishy, so they actually hurt your upkeep and manpower even harder than they hurt the Germans!!!

And which countries exactly relied on unit preservation and veterancy? Very few troops survived close combat, on both sides.

The ones that played a computer game on the internet.

I didnt say I dont like using combined arms anywhere in my post. Infantry leads and support weapons...well...they support.

Conscripts now are more support weapons. They arent meant to lead any charge at least with cost efficiency. Getting close is great. Doing damage is great. But you are still taking more. At which point you lose models. Which is a bleed.

Soviets are backwards. Support teams like Maxims and Snipers lead where conscripts just act as support. Rather then playing OKW where my Infantry lead and support teams support them.

Either that or use STs and Guards for real infantry thus limiting your pool of commanders.

Conscripts are not and havent been a frontline infantry squad since WFA came out.

Edit:

TLDR using conscripts as infantry feels alot like trying to use an MG42 as infantry.

Conscripts aren't supposed to be front line infantry in the late game. Their role in the late game is to keep tanks in check with at nades, just like volks prevent tanks from rolling you with their shrecks. They have insane mobility, a very reliable AT snare, a durable 6 man squad, and molotovs and ppsh if you want to buff their combat capabilities. Buffing their combat capabilities would almost certainly bring us back to the days of mass conscript spamming, because why would you build anything else?

Look at grenadiers by comparison, the changes they received don't allow them to stand on their own, sturmpios received a similar nerf. Conscripts still beat Grens when oorahing into mid/close range. Additionally, the focus on close combat units makes mgs much more valuable, as you can't just sit back at max range and snipe them down. Conscripts are still solid in the early game, but IMO making them scale super hard into late game would make them too much of a faceroll unit.

And which countries exactly relied on unit preservation and veterancy? Very few troops survived close combat, on both sides.

I don't wish to get into a WW2 argument on this site as virtually everyone including myself is an absolute WW2 nerd but come on - the Soviet union suffered at estimated 9 million dead and 20 million wounded or sick from its combat forces. Despite all the flack the single player campaign got and to be fair it was not representative of the entire war there were occasions where entire Soviet brigades were thrown away simply to hold the Germans up. German losses may have reached 6 million but only when attacked on all sides and overwhelmed by the 200 odd divisions the Soviets had hanging around after the Germans destroyed the first 120

The OKW faction in this game is built on the concept of grizzled veterans from the Eastern front being switched West for the battle of the Bulge, With allied troops you have more of a point but units like the 7th Armoured fought from North Africa to Berlin and the US had the Big Red One who undertook both Italian and then the Normandy landings because of their veterancy

I'd love an official answer as to why conscripts were given a received accuracy penalty

+1

I don't wish to get into a WW2 argument on this site as virtually everyone including myself is an absolute WW2 nerd but come on - the Soviet union suffered at estimated 9 million dead and 20 million wounded or sick from its combat forces. Despite all the flack the single player campaign got and to be fair it was not representative of the entire war there were occasions where entire Soviet brigades were thrown away simply to hold the Germans up. German losses may have reached 6 million but only when attacked on all sides and overwhelmed by the 200 odd divisions the Soviets had hanging around after the Germans destroyed the first 120

The OKW faction in this game is built on the concept of grizzled veterans from the Eastern front being switched West for the battle of the Bulge, With allied troops you have more of a point but units like the 7th Armoured fought from North Africa to Berlin and the US had the Big Red One who undertook both Italian and then the Normandy landings because of their veterancy

I'm fairly sure that the most aknowledged source is 1:1.3 casaulty ratio in favor of the germans, of course this also includes romanian and hungarian forces and what not, but they are still axis.

The OKW concept in this game is historically bogus , german quality of troops was best in 1941, worse in 42, then worse in 43 and worse in 44 and so on.

And what does exactly this throwing away of brigades mean?

same with osttruppen. they're basically a 5 man squad that bleeds like a 6 man squad now.

Perhaps but as we know the soviet union didn't rely on unit preservation and veterancy to win, though of course I know that this is a fun arcade game not a historical re-enactment. The problem I see with your argument is that you think conscripts should be more like grens or volks and that way we lose the asymmetry.

Cons will die in you charge them from long range at grens (no fun) so you have to make it fun by finding the other ways to play them - forcing the grens from cover with your mortars then oorahing them in - flanking with multiple cons squads over fences and round buildings, using true sight to ambush etc. An issue with this is the cost relative to grens - they are not cheap enough to be able to afford 2 con squads per gren but they would probably need to be nerfed even more to reduce their price so...

To contradict some of what I have said the changes made the cons cause more dps at mid range than they did which makes me think they are also intended to be played in cover vs advancing infantry rather than having to always rush in close. This still fits with the concept of massed sub-standard troops as a strategy

Which is all well and good but in terms of micro required then it is heavily in favour of the axis player. They have to control smaller numbers of higher dps units and generally keep in green cover at far distance. So you as the Soviet try your best to flank, find weaknesses in the axis player while they sit in green cover. I find this gameplay to be fun but as the game progresses and veterancy starts to shine the lethality of long range combat really makes it harder to do this. Not to mention as you reach pop cap as Soviets you are going to have a larger number of generally inferior fighters.

I like asymmetrical balance but if that is the case why do conscripts cost the same as grens? If we want to go the route of chaff infantry then why not go 100% and nerf them more and decrease cost as you said. If you think about it reinforcing conscripts from 1 to 6 men costs 100MP. To get grens back to 100% it is a max of 90 MP so that MP is a problem. Even at 50% squad number it is 60 each for gren and cons so the higher reinforce on grens per model is misleading.

I agree with you that it seems they want cons to be used in cover at medium distance and that is how I will start playing them as right now trying to get in close is asking for a dead unit.

I don't wish to get into a WW2 argument on this site as virtually everyone including myself is an absolute WW2 nerd but come on - the Soviet union suffered at estimated 9 million dead and 20 million wounded or sick from its combat forces. Despite all the flack the single player campaign got and to be fair it was not representative of the entire war there were occasions where entire Soviet brigades were thrown away simply to hold the Germans up. German losses may have reached 6 million but only when attacked on all sides and overwhelmed by the 200 odd divisions the Soviets had hanging around after the Germans destroyed the first 120

The OKW faction in this game is built on the concept of grizzled veterans from the Eastern front being switched West for the battle of the Bulge, With allied troops you have more of a point but units like the 7th Armoured fought from North Africa to Berlin and the US had the Big Red One who undertook both Italian and then the Normandy landings because of their veterancy

Some of your points are silly...

True, there were horrendous Soviet casualties on the Eastern Front, but many of the worst losses these happened during 1941-1942 when the USSR was in a desperate position/unprepared/overconfident sometimes.

The Ussr did wisen up after Stalingrad on preservation of their forces/adapting to the conditions. Saying that the USSR did not care about veterancy is plain wrong. Look at the Guards Armies. Divisions and armies that fought hard or accomplished much were given "guards" status. Some of these armies were used to lead an assault, defend a crucial sector, or to launch a counterattack.

Saying that the Ussr simply outnumbered and overwhelmed the Axis does not give credit to the Soviet soldier or to their generals. They conducted many brilliant operations such as Bagration, Kursk, Stalingrad, etc.

I will stop here to avoid derailing haha

I'd love an official answer as to why conscripts were given a received accuracy penalty

I don't think anyone here, axis or ally, thinks that's a justified nerf

http://www.twitch.tv/relicentertainment/b/567569238?t=36m45s

I'm fairly sure that the most aknowledged source is 1:1.3 casaulty ratio in favor of the germans, of course this also includes romanian and hungarian forces and what not, but they are still axis.

The OKW concept in this game is historically bogus , german quality of troops was best in 1941, worse in 42, then worse in 43 and worse in 44 and so on.

And what does exactly this throwing away of brigades mean?

Throwing away of brigades (say 2000 - 5000 men) means for example placing untrained troops in the path of the advancing German army. Troops who might fire all their ammo in a panic before the Germans entered effective range and then were cut down bu the infantry, it means 1000's of penal troops going into battle being encircled and dying before the unit being reincarnated (same unit number/name) with fresh troops and being sent in again with the same thing happening before the unit being reincarnated and the same thing happening... The most famous is probably at Stalingrad where the Soviets were hanging onto a few hundred yards of the west bank and on the decisive day sending hundreds of men without weapons across the river to hold it open. In operations around Rhzev a million Soviet troops got chewed up

These are all documented examples. As I've stated in the end the kill ratio ended up not so unfavourably to the Soviets but mainly due to the overwhelming numbers they possessed meaning in the long run they pulled it back particularly when all the 'veteran' German troops had succumbed to the Soviet tidal wave and they got into the old men and boys stuff.

It is also untrue to say that very few troops survived close combat - the vast majority did (unless badly trained 'conscript' spam) however if you keep goiung into close combat then you become more likely to die.


This is all besides the point and I dont wish to derail the thread. I am not arguing that conscripts are not too weak and the changes might be wrong - they may be, I haven't played them enough this patch but I am arguing that I understand the concepts behind the decisions.

I answer to why they got a received accuracy nerf I believe it was possibly to keep their survivability static relative to a number of other units who lost dps versus them

Conscripts aren't supposed to be front line infantry in the late game. Their role in the late game is to keep tanks in check with at nades, just like volks prevent tanks from rolling you with their shrecks. They have insane mobility, a very reliable AT snare, a durable 6 man squad, and molotovs and ppsh if you want to buff their combat capabilities. Buffing their combat capabilities would almost certainly bring us back to the days of mass conscript spamming, because why would you build anything else?

Look at grenadiers by comparison, the changes they received don't allow them to stand on their own, sturmpios received a similar nerf. Conscripts still beat Grens when oorahing into mid/close range. Additionally, the focus on close combat units makes mgs much more valuable, as you can't just sit back at max range and snipe them down. Conscripts are still solid in the early game, but IMO making them scale super hard into late game would make them too much of a faceroll unit.

No they are not good early game. Since OKW came out. I can get Obers in 8 mins if I push (1v1). Is 8 mins late game?

Even Sturms will crush Conscripts horribly if used well. Is the first unit in the game late game?

What about 2CPs for JLI? 3 for Falls? That is not late game.

I can live with the balance against Ost pre WFA. But out the gate they are completely defunct against OKW. I play both Soviets and OKW. And I love OKW. Volks is how scripts should be.

Edit: To illustrate that this isnt OKW OP thread its scripts are shit thread...

Conscripts aren't supposed to be front line infantry in the late game. Their role in the late game is to keep tanks in check with at nades, just like volks prevent tanks from rolling you with their shrecks. They have insane mobility, a very reliable AT snare, a durable 6 man squad, and molotovs and ppsh if you want to buff their combat capabilities. Buffing their combat capabilities would almost certainly bring us back to the days of mass conscript spamming, because why would you build anything else?

Look at grenadiers by comparison, the changes they received don't allow them to stand on their own, sturmpios received a similar nerf. Conscripts still beat Grens when oorahing into mid/close range. Additionally, the focus on close combat units makes mgs much more valuable, as you can't just sit back at max range and snipe them down. Conscripts are still solid in the early game, but IMO making them scale super hard into late game would make them too much of a faceroll unit.

Not supposed to be frontline infantry? Seriously?
Why Rifles, Volks, Grens can be, but only Conscripts can't?
I like these arguments that what Cons should only throw AT grenades.
They are six man, but they die way too fast. In fact soviet players don't want them to kill everything that moves. I'd say people want them to hold longer.. Just make them hold the line and we are fine.

Conscripts aren't supposed to be front line infantry in the late game. Their role in the late game is to keep tanks in check with at nades, just like volks prevent tanks from rolling you with their shrecks. They have insane mobility, a very reliable AT snare, a durable 6 man squad, and molotovs and ppsh if you want to buff their combat capabilities. Buffing their combat capabilities would almost certainly bring us back to the days of mass conscript spamming, because why would you build anything else?

Look at grenadiers by comparison, the changes they received don't allow them to stand on their own, sturmpios received a similar nerf. Conscripts still beat Grens when oorahing into mid/close range. Additionally, the focus on close combat units makes mgs much more valuable, as you can't just sit back at max range and snipe them down. Conscripts are still solid in the early game, but IMO making them scale super hard into late game would make them too much of a faceroll unit.

That's all well and good in theory. In practice and against decent opposition, AT nades only work against poorly microed vehicles (and Axis vehicles have usually superior Ai DPS allowing them to bleed conscripts on approach), molotovs have some of the lowest damage and longest animation of any grenade (with a price tag no less), their ''durability'' is kinda shat on by being the only infantry squad with a negative received accuracy modifier, and 6 men don't help you much when their DPS scales fairly poorly and they bleed like snuffed pigs as soon as any decent AI weapon is pointed their way.

Meanwhile, even with the LMG nerfs grenadiers can easily stand up to anything save Shocks and upgraded paras. You can very much use grens as your only mainline infantry if you support them with Mgs and vehicles. Doing that with conscripts is sub par at best since they bleed far more manpower, and suicidal at worst since your infantry fires peashooters at anything with veterancy.

The game has changed a lot since the (brief) window of conscript spam. OKW late game has no problem pounding any infantry to dust with their own elite troops, and Ostheer has access to two really good infantry units, now that PGrens are buffed as they should be. Making conscripts less shit late game certainly wouldn't change the meta in any significant way.

What I find curious, is that for all three other factions spamming their basic infantry is a valid and usually effective strategy. But if Soviets can do it, suddenly it's OP and faceroll? Come on.