Login

russian armor

Buff cons/penals and nerf Maxim to end support weapon spam

10 Feb 2016, 18:43 PM
#41
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I don't think conscripts were every meant to be mainline infantry. To be honest, I use them more like support. [snip]

That is exactly what is the problem.

Cons are NOT mainline inf, because they don't perform without heavy doctrinal support and vet.

Penals are NOT mainline inf, because they are more expensive, less durable(vetted) cons.

Maxims are soviet mainline inf, because its the ONLY stock squad that is able to deal more bleed then it takes and allowing for a fighting chance past early game without heavy doctrinal support.
Neo
10 Feb 2016, 18:54 PM
#42
avatar of Neo

Posts: 471

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Feb 2016, 18:43 PMKatitof

That is exactly what is the problem.

Cons are NOT mainline inf, because they don't perform without heavy doctrinal support and vet.

Penals are NOT mainline inf, because they are more expensive, less durable(vetted) cons.

Maxims are soviet mainline inf, because its the ONLY stock squad that is able to deal more bleed then it takes and allowing for a fighting chance past early game without heavy doctrinal support.


I started typing something but you said it better than me.

If Cons are not mainline infantry then it's Maxim spam to infinity and beyond.
10 Feb 2016, 18:59 PM
#43
avatar of whitesky00

Posts: 468

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Feb 2016, 18:43 PMKatitof

That is exactly what is the problem.

Cons are NOT mainline inf, because they don't perform without heavy doctrinal support and vet.

Penals are NOT mainline inf, because they are more expensive, less durable(vetted) cons.

Maxims are soviet mainline inf, because its the ONLY stock squad that is able to deal more bleed then it takes and allowing for a fighting chance past early game without heavy doctrinal support.


So what is the problem? Cons are support. Don't use them to go toe-to-toe with Axis.
I feel only penals needs to be looked at.
10 Feb 2016, 19:06 PM
#44
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



So what is the problem? Cons are support. Don't use them to go toe-to-toe with Axis.
I feel only penals needs to be looked at.


Yes, cons are support atm, not mainline infantry.

Maxims are mainline infantry.

People are angry that HMG is used as mainline infantry, because mainline infantry performs on engineer level of aweful and falls behind the moment first inf call-in or inf upgrade appears on axis side.

People are angry that maxims are mainline infantry.
Fucking soviet players are angry that maxims are mandatory, because without them your army just shits itself in struggle to not exceed 3:1 K/D ratio in favor of axis troops.

You can't have core unit underperform so greatly, because you'll end up with mid and late game issues.
Cons issue is lack of scaling, vet buff helped, but still each and every squad but pios will beat them, LMG grens will beat them, new volks will beat them, outscale them.

What is the point of having a mainline infantry that loses to everything and doesn't fucking scale?

NONE.

Therefore, maxims.
Only removal of maxims from the game will make players stop spamming them as long as cons and penals are nothing more but vet fodder for axis troops.

There are also people whining about DSHK, but these people are just lunatics if they think most expensive doctrinal HMG in game shouldn't perform as it does now.
10 Feb 2016, 19:15 PM
#45
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

Buff Penals to be mid to long-range glasscannons(they have 2 30% accuracy buffs at vet), give Conscript veterancy three to make them cheaper at 15-16mp per model.

Conscripts screen for units like Penals and other elites while they damage.
10 Feb 2016, 19:37 PM
#46
avatar of whitesky00

Posts: 468

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Feb 2016, 19:06 PMKatitof


Yes, cons are support atm, not mainline infantry.

Maxims are mainline infantry.

People are angry that HMG is used as mainline infantry, because mainline infantry performs on engineer level of aweful and falls behind the moment first inf call-in or inf upgrade appears on axis side.

People are angry that maxims are mainline infantry.
Fucking soviet players are angry that maxims are mandatory, because without them your army just shits itself in struggle to not exceed 3:1 K/D ratio in favor of axis troops.

You can't have core unit underperform so greatly, because you'll end up with mid and late game issues.
Cons issue is lack of scaling, vet buff helped, but still each and every squad but pios will beat them, LMG grens will beat them, new volks will beat them, outscale them.

What is the point of having a mainline infantry that loses to everything and doesn't fucking scale?

NONE.

Therefore, maxims.
Only removal of maxims from the game will make players stop spamming them as long as cons and penals are nothing more but vet fodder for axis troops.

There are also people whining about DSHK, but these people are just lunatics if they think most expensive doctrinal HMG in game shouldn't perform as it does now.


I do not care about angry people but conscripts were NEVER a mainline infantry. Since the release of this game, they never have been. Even the campaign never did... the first or second mission teaches you to use them to merge with others.

That's like the same thing OST are complaining how their grens don't scale into late game versus riflemen and 5 man IS.

You should be using shocks or guards by late game.

Cons and penals just screen. My killers are MGs, mortars, and snipers until light vehicle phase. Stop trying to make them do all end all solution. that's not the purpose. Penals need a buff but cons are fine where they are.
Neo
10 Feb 2016, 19:43 PM
#47
avatar of Neo

Posts: 471



I do not care about angry people but conscripts were NEVER a mainline infantry. Since the release of this game, they never have been.


What are you talking about?

In the first year of the game (before infantry lethality changes), 7-con builds were pretty standard.

When the PPSH/Radio Intercept commander was added, it was pretty normal to see both players in a 2v2 go PPSH cons.

Cons have been and should be mainline infantry.
10 Feb 2016, 19:56 PM
#48
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

You should be using shocks or guards by late game.


This is another component of the issue.
10 Feb 2016, 21:19 PM
#49
avatar of Gumboot

Posts: 199



You should be using shocks or guards by late game.



So relic should just remove all commanders without shocks and guards.. Seems like a better option then a slight performance buff to Cons.
10 Feb 2016, 21:32 PM
#50
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



I do not care about angry people but conscripts were NEVER a mainline infantry. Since the release of this game, they never have been.


This is completely wrong.
We had for a while 3 conscripts followed by whatever or just 5/6 conscripts strats. With and without PPSH.


10 Feb 2016, 21:34 PM
#51
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

I also find the issue here is that why would I build a 6-man script squad without suppression, for one that does have it (maxim)?

If we do buff cons and leave maxims as they are we end up with a situation where both strategies are viable, just that adding a con spam is now a flavor. I would prefer to see the maxim operate as a regular machine gun to eliminate: turning in a huge circle to move one arc over (issue with it being the bike from COH1 and not a regular MG), the stupid 6-man train, and limited ability to suppress blobs because of the higher micro requirement placed on the Soviet player. In this case I would want the maxim arc widened and the tear up/tear down increased. It would also be sweet to see squad size decreased.

Side note: The maxim, which is the literal vickers gun (only slight differences), was meant to be swept side to side and fired constantly. In COH2 it is the most limited arc, with limited sustained fire, completely contrary to this.

Death spiral should be considered a bug and removed on next patch.
10 Feb 2016, 21:51 PM
#52
avatar of whitesky00

Posts: 468



This is completely wrong.
We had for a while 3 conscripts followed by whatever or just 5/6 conscripts strats. With and without PPSH.




Well I have been playing since release and I generally never saw it viable. Cons used to have chance of instant death to fire. They were always sub-par at best and only good to deny for a short period of time per se a building until an MG arrived or some other type of support. Con spam is and was heavy MP bleed and is not viable since WFA arrived with forward retreat points. It made retreats shorter and sturms melt cons.

I never played 1s but maybe that was a strat then and maybe that was bad and now unviable just like rear echelons got nerfed because of spam. the point of the game is combined arms. why would you want a game where you spam 5-6 conscripts? if you love spamming as allies, play USF and spam rifles. we do not need another faction that plays the same.

Or, are you telling me that we should buff cons so they're like rifles and we should spam them to win games?
Neo
10 Feb 2016, 23:02 PM
#53
avatar of Neo

Posts: 471


I never played 1s


I think this is the reason for the disagreements here. In large team games, the dynamics are very different - you probably don't know what it's like to have a 1v1 map with 6-7 maxims on it.
11 Feb 2016, 01:15 AM
#54
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



Well I have been playing since release and I generally never saw it viable.

I never played 1s but maybe that was a strat then and maybe that was bad and now unviable just like rear echelons got nerfed because of spam. the point of the game is combined arms. why would you want a game where you spam 5-6 conscripts? if you love spamming as allies, play USF and spam rifles. we do not need another faction that plays the same.

Or, are you telling me that we should buff cons so they're like rifles and we should spam them to win games?


And that's the difference here. In comparison to teamgames, you actually need map control ON YOUR OWN. Therefore, con "spam". Same with Gren spam.
Is it bad? Not necessarily. At that point i'll say we had more viable strats than now.

11 Feb 2016, 01:35 AM
#55
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Another thing to keep in mind is that Maxims cost FIFTEEN manpower to reinforce.

I think the only cheaper thing to reinforce are Ostruppen. Saving on that manpower bleed with maxim spam can be (/is) crucial.
11 Feb 2016, 07:43 AM
#56
avatar of stalinqtxoxo420mlg

Posts: 54

conscript scaling is fine with the new vet 3

maxim is fine

penals suck and need scaling/reasons in general to be built. maybe give them an AT rifle upgrade option?

volks scale too much and should be nerfed
11 Feb 2016, 10:00 AM
#57
avatar of PencilBatRation

Posts: 794

So in otherwords the maxim itself is fine, and not only that, it also needs support from stronger cons/Penals as well?


No.
11 Feb 2016, 13:03 PM
#58
avatar of Multihog

Posts: 83


penals suck and need scaling/reasons in general to be built. maybe give them an AT rifle upgrade option?

How does that help, though? PTRS is relevant like 3 minutes of the game.
11 Feb 2016, 14:38 PM
#59
avatar of kitekaze

Posts: 378

Buff cons, they said...

11 Feb 2016, 14:47 PM
#60
avatar of newvan

Posts: 354

Buff cons, they said...

Well, try same in 1v1 not 3v3 were you can have support of your team mates.

And 3 stars ML-20 against Jaeger Armor with recon and Stuka - is a true skill from ost player.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

426 users are online: 426 guests
1 post in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49963
Welcome our newest member, Broyhilerfkis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM