Login

russian armor

Soviet Industry

8 Sep 2015, 18:27 PM
#1
avatar of Jonky

Posts: 118

So the current strategy for Soviet Industry is floating a ton of manpower before activating it (usually I float till I have enough fuel for the first T34 and spare the infantry, around 1500MP). Early-mid game fuel is still the limiting factor, but around the 40-45 minute mark any industry player becomes crippled by manpower.

I think there needs to be a comprehensive change to SI that extends its viability in the late game while not increasing its early-mid game potency. I have two ideas:

1. Decrease vehicle MP costs by a %, increase/double infantry reinforce costs.
This fits in with the commander relying heavily on vehicles, limiting infantry play by keeping it prohibitively expensive while not causing such an unsustainable MP drain from tanks. Tanks used to be much cheaper MP wise which was the original point of this commander. I think 33% would be enough to extend sustainability a long way.

2. Decrease vehicle MP costs to nothing, stop all MP income.
This completely removes infantry sustainability as any you have is almost inevitably worn away, it doesn't vastly increase early game vehicle play which is very fuel dependent but makes late game possibilities very open.

3. Make Muni cost ability lasting x time that stops manpower income and doubles Fuel income or close to it.
This would at least make Soviet Industry more flexible in the late game, though it's my least favourite idea.

4. Give Engineers the scavenge ability from Tank Hunters. This refunds a fair amount of MP from what I remember. Again this isn't my favourite choice but would still improve things a bit.

Feel free to add any other ideas, I really like the commander but would like it to be a bit more viable especially in the late game.
8 Sep 2015, 18:42 PM
#2
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Sep 2015, 18:27 PMJonky

1. Decrease vehicle MP costs by a %, increase/double infantry reinforce costs.
This fits in with the commander relying heavily on vehicles, limiting infantry play by keeping it prohibitively expensive while not causing such an unsustainable MP drain from tanks. Tanks used to be much cheaper MP wise which was the original point of this commander. I think 33% would be enough to extend sustainability a long way.

I like this idea.

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Sep 2015, 18:27 PMJonky

2. Decrease vehicle MP costs to nothing, stop all MP income.
This completely removes infantry sustainability as any you have is almost inevitably worn away, it doesn't vastly increase early game vehicle play which is very fuel dependent but makes late game possibilities very open.

Whoa man. Without a way to obtain manpower this is not suitable.
8 Sep 2015, 18:43 PM
#3
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

I love KV2 and Im waiting for fix for ages.
Currently KV2 is pudding and MP - > fuel is punishing you.

I would like to see something like OKW rep truck, so I can turn on/off conversion whenever I want.

As for KV2,this unit has a lot of issues which need to be fixed.
8 Sep 2015, 18:44 PM
#4
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

good ideas. soviet industry along with other soviet+ostheer commanders need to be overhauled
8 Sep 2015, 18:49 PM
#5
avatar of Jonky

Posts: 118


Whoa man. Without a way to obtain manpower this is not suitable.


It would work the same as at the moment. You'd have to save enough manpower to at least have T4 up and to reinforce your army for some time if you desire. You're signing the eventual death warrant for your infantry for the ability to keep up tank production all throughout the game.

Sure, if you activate it at 3CPs it would destroy your game, but that's the same as SI now :foreveralone:
8 Sep 2015, 18:52 PM
#6
avatar of Plaguer

Posts: 498

The new teching made windustry a little more viable since you get both of the core vehicles (34/76/SU85) from the same building but at the same time the teching made it extremely manpower costly but still this commander is one of the "troll picks"

This commander really needs some kind of an adjustment to Building costs (For example halving the MP cost of buildings) and/or maybe lowering the MP cost of vehicles by 25%(?)
8 Sep 2015, 18:57 PM
#7
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Sep 2015, 18:49 PMJonky


It would work the same as at the moment. You'd have to save enough manpower to at least have T4 up and to reinforce your army for some time if you desire. You're signing the eventual death warrant for your infantry for the ability to keep up tank production all throughout the game.

Sure, if you activate it at 3CPs it would destroy your game, but that's the same as SI now :foreveralone:


Well I don't want to argue because you are indeed right, but I only want to add that you are right practically. Theoritically infantry squads are still able to be produced in an urgent need to cap some points. I'd like it to stay that way.
8 Sep 2015, 19:22 PM
#8
avatar of Jonky

Posts: 118



Well I don't want to argue because you are indeed right, but I only want to add that you are right practically. Theoritically infantry squads are still able to be produced in an urgent need to cap some points. I'd like it to stay that way.


Aha, well comrade, you have forgotten the glory of Soviets vet 1 tank abilities :foreveralone:

The decreased pop cap of the T34 will really alleviate this problem (it's going down to 8, which I have hoped/asked for for a long time!). When I play industry I usually have a few vetted T34s around, but you will be relying on your allies to a certain extent for capping it's true.
8 Sep 2015, 19:30 PM
#9
avatar of Jonky

Posts: 118

The new teching made windustry a little more viable since you get both of the core vehicles (34/76/SU85) from the same building but at the same time the teching made it extremely manpower costly but still this commander is one of the "troll picks"

This commander really needs some kind of an adjustment to Building costs (For example halving the MP cost of buildings) and/or maybe lowering the MP cost of vehicles by 25%(?)


From my experience I do think at least a 33% MP reduction would be required to make late game production viable at the current level. I think infantry MP reinforce/buying costs should be raised in that case so the mid game doesn't become a vehicle and infantry wave that is a win or lose battle, but more a consistent flow of vehicles as the intention was.
8 Sep 2015, 19:33 PM
#10
avatar of Jonky

Posts: 118

I love KV2 and Im waiting for fix for ages.
Currently KV2 is pudding and MP - > fuel is punishing you.

I would like to see something like OKW rep truck, so I can turn on/off conversion whenever I want.

As for KV2,this unit has a lot of issues which need to be fixed.


I love it too, but don't even use it when I go SI due its high cost and poor performance :foreveralone:
8 Sep 2015, 19:35 PM
#11
avatar of Gecko2k3

Posts: 91

I would like to se an answer from GoD_Lee or any from relic team. KV2 and soviet indstry really need love
9 Sep 2015, 15:50 PM
#12
avatar of Jonky

Posts: 118

I would like to see an answer from GoD_Lee or any from relic team. KV2 and soviet indstry really need love


That's the dream :foreveralone:

I think they look at things and change them, they rarely comment on these forums from what I see; they don't want to get mobbed. Maybe they also get sad whenever someone calls them Lelic :guyokay:

But if you are reading this Relic, please give me back 8 pop cap T34. At least lower the manpower :( Think of the StuG :foreveralone:

0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

1083 users are online: 1083 guests
0 post in the last 24h
11 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49993
Welcome our newest member, vip8scom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM