Infantry disparities:

I have some central concerns with the core design of Sov vs Ost infantry and would like to bring them up for discussion:

1) Flame vulnerability:

Ostheer are extremely vulnerable to flame dmg, since they rely on armor for survival and cost efficiency equivalency with Sov, which flame completely bypasses, resulting also in chains of unpredictable critical hits.

Any Ostheer infantry, which nominally costs more, and comes in smaller unit sizes, is reduced, in survival terms, to the survival equivalent of the same number of Sov infantry.

Grens/Pgrens/Pios are hit by flame as if they where a 4 man Cons squad.
Support teams are hit by flame as if they where a 3 man Cons squad.

This poses serious onfield sustainability and reinforce cost disparities which are not "balanced" in any reciprocative way by a Sov infantry vulnerability.

2) Support crew sizes:

According to asymetric, but congruent, infantry unit design, it is irrational that there are only 3 man on Ost Support crews. Nominal Sov unit size is 6 models. This is carried congruently also to 6man Support crews. Yet for some irrational reason, though Ost nominal unit size is 4 models, this is not congruently carried to Support Crews, which have only 3.

Resulting in:

A) Disparity in Support crew onfield survival, especially considering the oft overlooked factor that one man abandons the vehicle without dying.

B) Disparity in Support crew firepower. For example, the ZiS has 4 rifle models firing when moving, whereas the PaK has only 1. Maxim has 5 rifles contributing fire, whereas the MG has only 2.

C) 120mm Mortar has 5 rifles firing, as only one is required to fire the mortar.

D) Sov can recrew abandoned Ost weapons with a full 6 man crew, whereas Ost can only put 3 on captured Sov equipment, further excascerbating the above disparities.

E) Somewhat problematically, Ostheer unirs are decimated when they recrew abandoned equipment. You need a full squad to take one, or you "lose" the unit, because 3 men are assigned to recrew it BUT for some reason, Sov ALSO only needs 3 men to recrew. Congruently Sov should require 4 man to recrew (so that both faction recrews wouldnrequire a 3/4 of a full unit to recrew).

3) CE vs Pios:

A) Pios are patently combat inneffective. Their dmg is utterly pitiable.

B) CEs have 2 functions for which Pio has no reciprocation
- Demopack, which is SERIOUSLY effective for a multitude of uses.
- Sandbagging. Why the hell cant Pios sandbag? Oo

C) Can anyone confirm total repair rate of CEs and Pios? To my knowledge, repair rate is tied to each model, meaning 1 model repairs slower than a full unit. Since Pio model count is smaller, their repair rate should be commensurately greater, in total.

4) Cons versatility:

It is somewhat absurd that a baseline unit has access to the following massive list of abilities at the same time:

i) Merge
ii) Oorah
iii) Molotov
iv) AT nade
v) Hit the Dirt
vi) Trip flare
vii) PPSh
viii) Repair (separately)

This is an astounding spread of versatility which certainly begs the question if some of this shouldnt be allocated to different infantry, such as Penals. This Cons versatility is multiplied and made particularly significant when paired with doctrine specific infantry choices. But 2 vanilla, 2 base, 1 vet, and 2 doctrine abilities/upgrade options on a single bsseline unit at the same time is far too many.

1) Flame vulnerability:
Any Ostheer infantry, which nominally costs more, and comes in smaller unit sizes, is reduced, in survival terms, to the survival equivalent of the same number of Sov infantry.

P grens = 360;
Shocks = 360;
Rifle inf = 360;
Grens = 240;
Conscrips = 240;
CE = 240;
Pio = 200.
Also, it is cheaper to reinforce grenadier squad from 1 man to 4, then conscripts from 1 to 6.
So german infantry is slightly cheaper.

2) Support crerew sizes:

I agree that german crews has less survivability. But it seems like a fair trade considering huge advantage of german armor.
About contributing fire from extra squad mates: they deal pitty damage, unlike any other uni, forget about it.

3) CE vs Pios:
- Sandbagging. Why the hell cant Pios sandbag? Oo

Combat Engineers can't place sandbags neither.

C) Can anyone confirm total repair rate of CEs and Pios? To my knowledge, repair rate is tied to each model, meaning 1 model repairs slower than a full unit. Since Pio model count is smaller, their repair rate should be commensurately greater, in total.

Pioneers squad = 4 men = 200mp.
Engineer squad = 4 men = 240mp.
What are you talking about?

4) Cons versatility:
It is somewhat absurd that a baseline unit has access to the following massive list of abilities at the same time:

i) Merge
ii) Oorah
iii) Molotov
iv) AT nade
v) Hit the Dirt
vi) Trip flare
vii) PPSh
viii) Repair (separately)

This is an astounding spread of versatility which certainly begs the question if some of this shouldnt be allocated to different infantry, such as Penals. This Cons versatility is multiplied and made particularly significant when paired with doctrine specific infantry choices. But 2 vanilla, 2 base, 1 vet, and 2 doctrine abilities/upgrade options on a single bsseline unit at the same time is far too many.

So, the problem is versatality or the number of abilities which you have to choice from doctrines?

Ok, let's find out the difference in ability count between cons and grens:
1) Faust;
2) Grenade;
3) Meds;
4) Comuflage;
5) Machingun;
6) Long range rifles;
7) Interrogation.

One skill difference?

If you question versatality, I would say grenadier = conscripts with a little difference in use.
Don't think I am soviet player. I play both. Agree about weapon crew size only, but as I already said - it is a fair trade for armor disadvantage of soviets.

So, the problem is versatality or the number of abilities which you have to choice from doctrines?

Ok, let's find out the difference in ability count between cons and grens:
1) Faust;
2) Grenade;
3) Meds;
4) Comuflage;
5) Machingun;
6) Long range rifles;
7) Interrogation.

One skill difference?

If you question versatality, I would say grenadier = conscripts with a little difference in use.
Don't think I am soviet player. I play both. Agree about weapon crew size only, but as I already said - it is a fair trade for armor disadvantage of soviets.

I completely disagree with you on that one. A lot of what the Grens can use costs a lot more than whatever the cons end up having to use.

And the cons tend to have a lot of "Press this button to win" abilities. Oorah costs virtually nothing (EDIT: 10 muni - you could get that in about 10 seconds from your opening point...). HTD costs nothing and trip flares (very useful in non Priyapat maps) costs nothing, unlike what the grens have.

I find the cons far more versatile than the grens. Apart from having six man squads surviving everything, you are going to output cons faster than you are going to output grens due to the fact you actually have to build T1 with the Germans before you can start getting grens.

And when cons are supplimented with shock troops, there's almost no point getting grens/PGs anymore as you will lose every infantry battle unless if you're blobbed up. That's when they start using their SU-76 to hit your blobs.

i just played ostheer mainly. And I do find the vulnerability of axis troops quite annoying once medium tanks (T70) come out and my infantry can get killed easily if I don't retreat them instantly. And ye, Russian forces are harder to wipe out in general with all squad sizes larger.
But I don't know if this is imbalanced in any way.

I agree with a lot of what you say. The flame stuff is especially annoying - with flames playing the linchpin in a lot of anti-infantry fights, having four guys rather than six is a real huge downside.

Do you ever not whine lol.

Armor disadvantage for Soviets? Are you high?

Lets not forget Med Kits are nigh useless when you can, in theory, build a medic bunker which will save you on munis in the long run. They are good in a pinch, but very situational.

G43 are doctrine specific, require 2 CP's to unlock and cost 60 munitions. You can get any of the Conscript abilities... No, you can get ALL of those abilities in a single game, by the time the German player simply unlocks the G43, let alone pay for it, and upgrade time.

Camouflage sucks. Its 30 munis, very situational, the damage bonus is negligent. You dont need damage in this game, when every single soldier is carrying Space Marine Armor.

LMG42 is a very nice upgrade, but that's for 60 munis, brings you down a flamer, cuts your mobility dead and hurts your chances to faust the incoming Clown Cars. Not one single ability in the soviet arsenal cuts their mobility, in fact, they tend to boost it.

and the best of them all: the rifle grenade. This is the most situational, non doctrine specific ability in the game. Not only do you need a very specific range but the damage is completely decided on how the enemy units are positioned. Those enemies better hugging, because otherwise, its a waste of 25 munitions.

25 munitions... thats the cheapest ability in the german arsenal, and it is more expensive than any one of the soviet abilities. The only things more expensive than these, are soviet high explosives such as demos and satchels. Which the Axis army has no close equivalent of, anyway.

LOL he mentined the "interrogation" ability. Thats a knee slapper.. But honestly I dont have as much trouble with sov infantry as some describe. My grens have no trouble gaining map control early vs soviet cons. Its all about positioning. I do have a problem with shock troops with ppsh utterly decimating pzgrens. At the same cost non the less.

And to the guy who says germans have the armor advantage... l....o...l... are you doing some of the balancing??

LMG42 is a very nice upgrade, but that's for 60 munis, brings you down a flamer, cuts your mobility dead and hurts your chances to faust the incoming Clown Cars. Not one single ability in the soviet arsenal cuts their mobility, in fact, they tend to boost it.

Hit the dirt disables movement for a while, i would call that "cuts their mobility" and as far as i can remember the LMG is the only upgrade/ability that limits your mobility.

Shock troops grenades costs 45, guards grenades costs 45, flamer costs 60, so your point about the "expensive rifle nade" and how soviets abilities are all cheaper is also false.

I like the way this discussion is going i think there are a few good points, so please stop this hyperbolle bull Sh%t and keep to facts are people will stop listening to the few good and valid points made.

Hit the dirt disables movement for a while, i would call that "cuts their mobility" and as far as i can remember the LMG is the only upgrade/ability that limits your mobility.

Shock troops grenades costs 45, guards grenades costs 45, flamer costs 60, so your point about the "expensive rifle nade" and how soviets abilities are all cheaper is also false.

I like the way this discussion is going i think there are a few good points, so please stop this hyperbolle bull Sh%t and keep to facts are people will stop listening to the few good and valid points made.

Hit the Dirt is not an upgrade, it is an ability. This is besides the point but, Hit the Dirt is specifically designed to be used in situations where you don't want to move. Dont get me wrong: the LMG42 is a good upgrade, it decimates, but there's a sacrifice there, a sacrifice most soviet upgrades don't have to make.

You clearly weren't reading me right: I was saying the rifle grenade is cheap, but the other abilities described above don't measure up. I haven't touched shock troops or guards in this convo at all, I've only been mentioning Conscript abilities as outlined by OP. The only comparison has been to unlocks in a specific doctrine, related to the G43, simply to outline the fact that by the time G43's hit, the Soviets have transitioned to different things that G43's don't work as well against.

Im not doing hyperbole here. I'm trying to view the facts and stats, and weigh them. Doesn't mean I'm right by any means (we are all stll learning the game on the go), but I'm trying to discuss points I've noticed. Don't like it? Ignore the "Bullsh%t" and move on.

I never understood why people deliberately censored themselves on the Internet.

Regarding the OP, I'd have to say really the only thing I've noticed that seems to be slightly unfair is the weapon crew sizes. I'd really like to see 4-man crews for the Ostheer, just to give them a bit more survive-ability. One even slightly crappy nade toss or SU-76 shell can decrew the 360 MP PaK as the last guy, after seeing his comrades gibbed, decides to hightail it the fuck outta there, the damn thing never even warming up its barrel.

The fact that deployed weapons (MG, mortar) nearly always drop when the crew is killed also makes this a bit of a balance issue. Sometimes you may as well not even build an HMG as it is highly desirable to the Soviet player.

I agree pounder, 4 man crews would not hurt anyone, if you have managed to flank the weapon team, killing 1 more guy is not gonna take you long.

Well, i'd say killing an entire crew with a bundled/frag grenade is fine (considering costs, etc). Problem is, there's no real way of prevent that nade: your soldiersrarely deal enough damage to stop an incoming squad (there are exceptions, of course).

Something I've noticed consistently, both playing and through streams, is that flanking weapon crews just isn't as rewarding as in vCoH, because they almost always escape as long as they retreat. Of course, this isn't the case with ATG's, but their survivability is also quite high.

One point about engineers vs. pioneers: Pioneers have SMGs, and are better closer up (but not by much). If you're behind cover and an engineer squad charges you, you'll win the vast majority of the time. Same thing for vice versa generally, though pioneers will lose at a distance as well (ouch).

Pioneers make excellent meat shields for grenadiers charging conscripts, though.


I agree with CombatMuffin about flanking, at least with grens. I've run up to a mortar squad and sat point blank for over 15 seconds only to have it pickup and retreat before I could kill enough of the crew. I can't even rifle nade it because I'm too close. At that range, with that amount of time, the squad would probably be more effective clubbing the mortar loader over the head, taking the mortar and running away. It'd certainly be more effective than shooting the bastards.