What I don't like in Soviets

>People who say that anything allied is the late game terrifying powerhouse

Ohhohoho. Hooooo. Oh lawdy.

If only axis had access to smoke, blitz, extremely efficient handheld AT, AT guns with a huge RoF, 5 levels of vet for extra scaling over time and the single best ability in the entire game bar none.

That ability being target weak point.

Point is, Soviets don't have a magical 'get me a huge resource advantage' button. They just have a late game, much unlike USF really do.

I think, instead of cluttering up the forums, you should consider playing the game- and instead of comparing each individual factor, compare the sum of its parts. I can compare volks > cons and JP4 > SU85 and KT > IS2 and Stuka > Kat+120 all day long but you'd have to be stupid to say that OKW > Soviets in terms of faction performance, where both sides play to the maximum potential.

Just for your last post:

In early game where cons really matter, they are about equal to grens. At close distance, cons will usually win most of the time and with 2 cons squads you can easily get close because it's 12 models against 4 (not looking at molotovs at all).

Ost sniper became pretty good, but Soviets are still 2 guys/girls. If the Ost sniper dies you lost 360MP. If a sov sniper dies you usually can retreat easily.

The maxim builds up much faster, has 6 men and is way better in buildings.

ZiS has barrage. Yes, it lacks target weak point but otherwise it's mostly as good as a PaK.

Nobody should ever build a Su-76 right now.

The M3 comes way earlier and can carry a flamethrower. This is very hard to counter especially as OKW.

A P4 is more expensive than a T34/76. The T34/85 itself is much better than a P4 while costing about the same and doesn't even require teching.

KV-8 has a much better armour than an Ostwind and deals crits 24/7.



So you see what I did?
I don't care if what I wrote is 100% true but at least I gave some reasons why I don't think you're right.
You are simply writing things without any reasons at all.

The fact I didn't take the time to write an enormous post doesn't mean I'm somehow lacking the capacity to justify what was written. But seeing as you want one.

The fact that cons are roughly equivalent to grens at vet 0 with no munitions spent on LMG's is indeed more or less right. The whole 2vs2 thing I frankly have to outright disagree with, though. Two gren squads focusing fire on a con squad will wreck one of them before it even gets to a range where it can start doing good damage unless they get some godly RNG in the long range moving shots and the grens have no cover to sit in.

But the fact that at their very first moment that can be about equal just makes them similar for the first 5 minutes. After that Grens continue to scale, get upgrades, great vet and an LMG. The rifle nade and LMG combo make them so good at long range combat that any attempt to close into close range becomes fatal, making conscripts pretty much obsolete by comparison. Two units that start almost the same but one gets to continue being useful and is allowed a focus on long range combat (and a nade that invalidated MG play) vs. a unit that's good for a few minutes and then petty much fodder and AT snares?

Cons < Grens.



The Ost sniper, including its received accuracy modifier, is now harder to kill than the soviet sniper ever was. Couple that with Axis squads almost universally having a long range combat focus vs. the close range nature of soviet ones meaning that the Ost sniper has so much more reaction time than the soviet pair? Yeah, it's harder to kill an Ost sniper with the sole exception of sniper wars. 82hp is enough to survive a katty rocket landing on its helmet.

The ost sniper also has a much better vet ability now, much more damage output stock and its veterancy consequently means more in terms of overall RoF and MP bleed.

Sov Sniper < Ost Sniper.



The Maxim has 6 men for the sole purpose that, generally, an axis squad has 1.5x the DPS of a Soviet one at mid to long range, where axis squads like to engage. Their actual survivability to small arms is essentially identical. Also, rifle nades completely invalidate them. It can only suppress one squad, can't do good damage any more and is essentially a big MP bleeding rifle nade target. Is it useless? No. Is it anywhere near as useful a force multiplier as an MG42, which also gets APIT which has more capacity to deal with light vehicles than even the vastly more expensive DshK/.50 cal.


And again, the scalability of the maxim just does not exist. Even with vet it looks at one squad, sort of annoys it and usually catches a rifle nade. MG's remain area denial tools minute 1 to the last moments of the game.

Maxim < MG42



ZiS has a very, very expensive barrage that takes forever between shells. It's 60MU a time to maybe hit one squad and then just be area denial at best.

The PaK has 10 more pen (it's something) at all ranges, has a much better RoF, and comes with Target Weak Point. The best ability in the game, ever.

ZiS < PaK.



The M3 is faust bait and the scout car in T2 now comes out easily enough to tidy them up. To be honest this is the closest comparison going as both are still fairly useful, but the SC has a MU upgrade that makes it hard counter the also 15FU M3A1, can spot all game with great LoS and is actually a sodding AA gun to boot. The 222 scales, the M3A1 does not. Common soviet problem.

M3A1 < 222.


T-34-76 < P4, SU-76 < StuG, we know this already. The former is justified, the latter is comical.

The T-34-85 / PzIV comparison is a very close one. The lack of a tech cost is an issue with all call in units, bit it quickly ebbs away as the game goes on.

The PzIV is, anyway, much better at killing infantry, can upgrade with pintle MG's, comes out earlier and with a little vet/commander choice is much, much more survivable. It can give a reasonable show at fighting the T-34-85 one on one and can also allow itself blitz and smoke to allow it to get the hell outta dodge or push onto a wounded tank. They're both good and I'd say, given their similar cost, are about as good as each other. A small edge to the 34-85, which works fine with its slight price disparity.


The KV-8 no longer crit machines because its DPS got nerfed so much that the HP damage it does it negligible, so it never lowers HP enough to get them crits in. It may indeed have more armour than an Ostwind but it's also slower, less damaging, less dangerous to light vehicles, can't blitz, can't fire at aircraft. It's good Vs. Buildings but they die to a stiff breeze in the current damage model assigned to them, so ah well. The Brummbarr is just 100% better. More AI damage, good medium killing, indirect fire, pintle MG, vehicle stuns, deflection damage.

Point still stands on the KV-8 < Brummbar. Ost is probably a closer comparison but is also substantially cheaper and non-doctrinal.

I think, instead of cluttering up the forums, you should consider playing the game- and instead of comparing each individual factor, compare the sum of its parts. I can compare volks > cons and JP4 > SU85 and KT > IS2 and Stuka > Kat+120 all day long but you'd have to be stupid to say that OKW > Soviets in terms of faction performance, where both sides play to the maximum potential.

Ranks for modes I'm actively playing (as and when I have the time, work keeps me a bit busy) tend to float between the 50-200 mark. With some time off and dedication I can normally get in the practice and grind to hit the top 25 for a mode.

OKW > Soviets.

Funnily enough, when every part involved is almost always better than its comparison, the sum of those parts tends to be better too...

I am not gonna bother going through the argument in its entirety, however, Conscripts are not merely "equal" to Grens in the earlygame, they are quite superior. Without upgrade Grens do not have the dps to keep Cons from closing the disctance - which won't even be necessary in the first place, depending on the map. Conscripts are more survivable, more mobile (Hoorah), can deny cover/buildings at the very cheap, and most importantly, can create their own green cover.
That by the way, is ok, since OH T1 offers the support to rectify Gren inferiority, but lets stay realistic.

I am not gonna bother going through the argument in its entirety, however, Conscripts are not merely "equal" to Grens in the earlygame, they are quite superior. Without upgrade Grens do not have the dps to keep Cons from closing the disctance - which won't even be necessary in the first place, depending on the map. Conscripts are more survivable, more mobile (Hoorah), can deny cover/buildings at the very cheap, and most importantly, can create their own green cover.
That by the way, is ok, since OH T1 offers the support to rectify Gren inferiority, but lets stay realistic.

Grens Vs. Cons really isn't that simple. Here, look at this:

http://www.coh2-stats.com/compare?utf8=%E2%9C%93&squad1=grenadier_squad_mp&squad2=conscript_squad_mp&commit=Compare

Grenadiers actually have more DPS at literally every range. Even at point blank, some good RNG on damage distribution can mean a grenadier squad can win a full health vs. full health engagement.

Now, this is very rare. But even a single model snipe while cons close in is probably going to mean that the cons will lose the fight. Is it a guarantee? No, but cons don't simply auto win by getting into close range.

Cons are indeed more survivable, but they come with a received accuracy penalty that no other squad in the roster has at all unless you're an engineer suad bulding/repairing or Rear Echelon volley firing, have less DPS at all ranges and need to close in to have a decent chance.

Which, if they get in with 6 models, they do. But even then, grens do more damage still.

I am not gonna bother going through the argument in its entirety, however, Conscripts are not merely "equal" to Grens in the earlygame, they are quite superior. Without upgrade Grens do not have the dps to keep Cons from closing the disctance - which won't even be necessary in the first place, depending on the map. Conscripts are more survivable, more mobile (Hoorah), can deny cover/buildings at the very cheap, and most importantly, can create their own green cover.
That by the way, is ok, since OH T1 offers the support to rectify Gren inferiority, but lets stay realistic.

Well, if they had it, then grens would be superior as they'd be able to win engagements effortlessly without exposing themselves.

Saying the cons are quite superior is also misleading.

1 gren vs 1 con, sure cons might win that, but 2 grens vs 2 cons, gren DPS becomes potent enough to seriously cripple one of the con squads on approach.

Cons being able to build cover doesn't really help them much.
They are mid/short ranged unit with bad long range DPS, not exactly the type of inf you'd want to sit behind the cover at far.

You can't say the cover denial is "cheap" because its a side cost of 125/25, that isn't really cheap, especially compared to the side costs of axis for similar convenience.

Also, grens have HMG support right from the start that keeps cons at distance.
1 HMG and 1 gren will usually win against 2 cons unless you got jumped on.

You can't really say just grens vs cons, because Ost doesn't rely exclusively on grens and ins't balanced to do so. Cons can work alone slightly better, but they'll fall short without elite infantry or tier support really quickly.

[...]
You can't really say just grens vs cons, because Ost doesn't rely exclusively on grens and ins't balanced to do so. Cons can work alone slightly better, but they'll fall short without elite infantry or tier support really quickly.

Please reread my post, I addressed just that point. However, if viewed in isolation, which seems to be oddly en vogue here on occasion, Cons trump Grens. Sandbags are no mere gimmick by the way, absolutely on the contrary, especially in 1s, where 1v1 harassment/counterharassment engagements in the periphery of the map are hugely important for overall map control, the ability to create green cover literally makes all the difference in the world...think ie. Semois fuel points, Kholodny Winter, etc.. Even at long range with an LMG, Grens without cover will have a hard time against Cons in green cover, or at least, it will take them incredibly long to dislodge them.

The Ost sniper, including its received accuracy modifier, is now harder to kill than the soviet sniper ever was. Couple that with Axis squads almost universally having a long range combat focus vs. the close range nature of soviet ones meaning that the Ost sniper has so much more reaction time than the soviet pair? Yeah, it's harder to kill an Ost sniper with the sole exception of sniper wars. 82hp is enough to survive a katty rocket landing on its helmet.

The ost sniper also has a much better vet ability now, much more damage output stock and its veterancy consequently means more in terms of overall RoF and MP bleed.

Sov Sniper < Ost Sniper.

Just came here to respond to this rather interesting train of thought.
For starters, the Wehr sniper does not have, and never has had, a received accuracy modifier.

Secondly, the Wehr sniper has in no way whatsoever more health than the Soviet sniper. Combined health pool of the Soviet sniper and spotter are 88 (or 96), both of which, you may notice, are higher in value than 82.
Besides that, there is of course the fact that the Soviet sniper squad has 2 man, vs the single man of the wher sniper, making the sov sniper still more survivable than its wehr counterpart.

As for your comment about the Wehr sniper being more survivable than the Sov sniper ever was, you conveniently gloss over the past two years of sprint and clown-car snipers.

Moreover, nearly every single Axis squad (barring Osttruppen, Fusiliers, Assgrens and Volks) have a squad size of only 4 men. This results in 2X soviet snipers forcing instant retreats.

The vet ability for the wher sniper is RNG at its finest- it can kill 1 man, it can (very occasionally) wipe squads, but in terms of damage it is better yes, but I rate flares more useful overall, since it is a non-doctrinal way to provide LoS, which is always useful.

The higher RoF of the wher sniper is offset by the larger soviet squads. However versus the main force of the USF (rifle’s with the occasional paratrooper) it is indeed more potent, but USF also has more than capable light vehicles to deal with said wehr sniper leading to a balanced situation in this regard.
Therefor the higher RoF does not lead to "much more damage output stock", infact its equal vs soviets until you get a second sniper for both sides, then (as noted vs the 4 man axis squad) the sov sniper gets far better damage output.

Overall, I rate the wher sniper to be on par with its sov counterpart until you start getting more than 1 sniper, then the soviet sniper wins.

Just came here to respond to this rather interesting train of thought.
For starters, the Wehr sniper does not have, and never has had, a received accuracy modifier.

It used to have armour, which got converted into Rec Accuracy, unless I am very much mistaken. Which is possible, as I've not checked the raw in a while. That's one I'll not be contesting.

Secondly, the Wehr sniper has in no way whatsoever more health than the Soviet sniper. Combined health pool of the Soviet sniper and spotter are 88 (or 96), both of which, you may notice, are higher in value than 82.
Besides that, there is of course the fact that the Soviet sniper squad has 2 man, vs the single man of the wher sniper, making the sov sniper still more survivable than its wehr counterpart.

The HP difference is little consequence when most snots taken at snipers happen at max range for a squad, an area in which 7-10% HP advantage is nothing compared to the 2 or 3x DPS value of the squads taking the shots at their respective counterparts.

2 men is also a bad, bad thing. It means more chance of scattered shots hitting a member. It means any AoE damage has to only be half as close to kill the squad members. A single AoE hit for 50 damage to a sniper team will wipe it, an Ost sniper will walk out of it with 32hp remaining.

The Sov sniper is in no way more durable than the Ost one any more. It just bleeds more MP now.

As for your comment about the Wehr sniper being more survivable than the Sov sniper ever was, you conveniently gloss over the past two years of sprint and clown-car snipers.

For reference, that comment was purely about the amount of fire needed to kill the model(s). Sprint being removed and beta scout cars not in any way factored into this equation. And given they're all past patches, they're now all irrelevant anyway.

What the fuck are people blabbering their bullshit about...



Cons > grens in pretty much all situations in a 1v1 fight. Hell, even vannila cons have a decent chance vs LMG grens at mid range and will win at close range. PPSH cons can just run up to LMG grens from long-mid range and still win the engagement.


That said, the more grens vs cons there are, the better is it is for grens. 1V1 cons almost always win, 2v2 its mostly RNG, 3v3 and grens will almost always win. So keep blobbing

If you don't wanna believe me, listen to Burts people. Conscript centric strats are very much viable right now.
Anyways, as for the OH sniper, I think it actually has been overbuffed, and this is something I was totally wrong about when the patch came out, contrary to my expectations the health increase has nothing short of a massive impact.
I actually dont mind its added survivability to AOE/RNG based weaponry in the least, even though that might sometimes seems ridiculous (ie. surviving a direct hit by the 82), however, it is too resilient to small arms fire now, to the point where an unsupported sniper in cover can often force a retreat from a charging single infantry squad which from both a gameplay and a balance standpoint is IMHO unwarranted.

60ish health plus target templates would help...alot.

Early and mid game, Cons vs Grens is "Fine". It's all about map and skill. If you sneak up on grens and Oorah when you see them, you are gonna win. If not, you lose.

The LMG will change this but you can't still compare LMG Grens vs Cons, it's very very situational, support units, map control, grenades etc. In an isolated test arena, LMG grens will beat Cons but in game it's different.

I think, instead of cluttering up the forums, you should consider playing the game- and instead of comparing each individual factor, compare the sum of its parts. I can compare volks > cons and JP4 > SU85 and KT > IS2 and Stuka > Kat+120 all day long but you'd have to be stupid to say that OKW > Soviets in terms of faction performance, where both sides play to the maximum potential.

I also wish Brachiaridos would stop cluttering the forum.


I had a thought but I'm not sure. Is it possible that grens and cons are actually pretty balanced, each having their own advantages and disadvantages - but that due to certain game mechanics (eg effect of crits on 4-man vs 6-man), map layouts and teching structure, grens have a harder time making full use of their advantages over cons?

1 example: Grens will beat cons when stood at a distance, both behind green cover and lose at closer range (correct if wrong, pls) Because of shot-blockers and Oo-rah, it is pretty hard to make sure you keep them at range.

Scenario: 1 Gren in green cover + MG in green cover. Conscripts appear from left side at medium range from behind shot blocker and out of MG arc. They oo-rah in to grens, taking damage, MG turns.

When MG packs up, new con squad appears from behind shotblocker on other side, oorahs in and throws molotov on MG, which is forced to retreat. 1st Cons has lost the engagement, retreats, leaving full-health 2nd cons to beat the half-health gren squad now without MG support. Cons win.

(The reverse situation with grens vs con+MG doesn't work because flanking and getting in close plays to the son+mg's advantage)


(To anyone thinking "molotovs cost an upgrade", please remember that building Ost T1 costs fuel / time / manpower.)

Add to this the fact you can fairly safely pump out 6-8 conscripts + elite inf without having to worry about a hard counter for a long time, while as OST you are forced to get AT pretty quickly.Soviets will almost always have more squads on the field, more capping power, more resources.


Solution - Map changes or MG suppression improved on yellow cover or more damage taken when oo-rahing or units firing from green cover do more damage or whatever.

If you think conscripts are useless then you have never made use of merge squad. Get 2 flame engineers at the start of the game and keep reinforcing them using merge squad and watch as your OKW opponent cries because he can't stop the fire.

I also wish Brachiaridos would stop cluttering the forum.

Apologies that I'm a better player than you, but what you'd like as crutches and reality don't correlate very well.

(Also please remember that building Ost T1 is nearly half the price of getting molotovs, 150/25 vs 80/10)


Also, how on earth in your hypothetical did the grens get to half health? The cons got MG's and shot at by grens just getting close and one model was busy presumably throwing a molotov.

Also, the MG is still there, can park itself facing the cons and either force them to move around and focus fire it (meaning grens remain still reasonably unscathed and free to use their better DPS than cons at all ranges)

The only way the axis really loses that is terrible micro or leaving that con flank so horibly open they can emerge literally on top of the MG42 and grens because they are directly on top of each other around a blind corner.

And keep in mind all that oorahing and molotovs has run a bill 35 to 45 MU up for the soviet as well. Odds are a higher MP bill for the fight, too.

Apologies that I'm a better player than you, but what you'd like as crutches and reality don't correlate very well.

(Also please remember that building Ost T1 is nearly half the price of getting molotovs, 150/25 vs 80/10)


Also, how on earth in your hypothetical did the grens get to half health? The cons got MG's and shot at by grens just getting close and one model was busy presumably throwing a molotov.

Also, the MG is still there, can park itself facing the cons and either force them to move around and focus fire it (meaning grens remain still reasonably unscathed and free to use their better DPS than cons at all ranges)

The only way the axis really loses that is terrible micro or leaving that con flank so horibly open they can emerge literally on top of the MG42 and grens because they are directly on top of each other around a blind corner.

And keep in mind all that oorahing and molotovs has run a bill 35 to 45 MU up for the soviet as well. Odds are a higher MP bill for the fight, too.

Facing conspam as Ost is markedly easier than facing it as OKW simply because you have all the tools you need to help negate it. When playing OKW your only suppresion platform is quite fragile and has extremely poor pathing and your base infantry is inferior to his infantry. You also have no snare.

Really the only saving grace is praying your Sturms don't get model sniped and going to Fuss + Sturmoffizer, but right now Ost early game is way ahead of OKW's early game if only because you have far more options available to you.

but right now Ost early game is way ahead of OKW's early game if only because you have far more options available to you.

I would have to disagree with you on that, Alex.

In the first five minutes of the game, a Kubelwagen is vastly superior to an MG42 because of its mobility. You can drive your Kubel with your Sturmpio to the enemy cutoff, fuel, whatever, and deny them that point.

On certain maps, it may make sense to put an MG42 in a building. In the first ten minutes, if your MG42 fails to setup properly in the house (where the setup progression bar stops) it is possible to lose the MG42 and at that early stage of the game, it can set you back or even end the game. (talking 1v1 here)

A Kubel is much more maneuverable and, as a result, survivable. If in the right location, it can more easily dodge an AT nade from oorahing cons than an MG42 can from a molotov.

There's also the problem of the MG42 not firing when an enemy unit enters its arc, rotation of the gun, aim time, etc. which can cause serious issues. Kubel inflicts suppression on the move, but not enough to suppress; that way, when the kubel does go into suppression mode, it can be near-instant. We've all seen MG42 fail to suppress...


MG42 is what saves Ostheer's life early game, especially against con spam. When the MG42 fucks up either because it's in a house, or the ready aim time, rotation time, etc. fucks you over, it can dramatically change the course of the match.