Soviet faction

If you talking about Cons durability WHY you always forgetting units size compared to other line infantry?

I may be wrong, but in early CoH2 Cons at Vet0 was with some recived accuracy debuff, like 20% more to hit them. Did they removed this or it's just my imagination here? Still not sure about this.

Conscripts are a very potent mainline infantry and can be considered better than Volks due to their sheer utility.

Can you be more specific about this utility you keep mentioning? The only thing unique to cons is merge and the highly-situational tripwire flare. Having a lot of buttons to press in the UI doesn't translate immediately to more utility. Riflemen scale great, have smoke and can access numerous upgrades both doctrinal and non-doc - that's utility. Volks are easily replaced and have access to tools to take on any unit without any side tech needed - that's utility. Late game cons are good for little more than that enabling your maxim spam through merging, and stopping enemy tanks from running rings around your TDs.

I don't necessarily think that cons need a buff and I definitely don't think soviets as a whole are underpowered. I just don't buy the argument that cons don't shouldn't scale because they have 'utility'

...

You accuse me of playing zealously for one side, yet my playercard says I've played USF and the communists.



...

You played the communists...

Really? When did this faction became available? Is it a DLC? Did you pay it in Rubles? Did you get the permission of the General Secretary of the Regime to do so?

Stop being politically biased even in a damned game forum...

Can you be more specific about this utility you keep mentioning? The only thing unique to cons is merge and the highly-situational tripwire flare. Having a lot of buttons to press in the UI doesn't translate immediately to more utility. Riflemen scale great, have smoke and can access numerous upgrades both doctrinal and non-doc - that's utility. Volks are easily replaced and have access to tools to take on any unit without any side tech needed - that's utility. Late game cons are good for little more than that enabling your maxim spam through merging, and stopping enemy tanks from running rings around your TDs.

I don't necessarily think that cons need a buff and I definitely don't think soviets as a whole are underpowered. I just don't buy the argument that cons don't shouldn't scale because they have 'utility'

AT grenades, molotovs and their charge up ability which allows them to sprint for a short period of time. Granted that you have to unlock some of these abilities, but they're not extravagantly priced. They're also cheaper and have a 6 man squad which increases durability, so if you combine that with AT grenades, molotovs on top of doctrinal upgrades like AT rifles they're actually quite good.

If you watched EU ESL yesterday, you would see that Soviets were the most picked Allied faction(Because they're good, and the units they have are potent) and Conscripts who are supposedly UP or weak were used in each of those matches.

As Katitof would say, the problem isn't necessarily the faction, but rather between the chair and keyboard

If anyone is looking improve their Rus gameplay, watch any of the EU ESL cups. You have Conscripts, t-34's, KV2's and a lot of supposedly UP units making an appearance and winning.

AT grenades, molotovs and their charge up ability which allows them to sprint for a short period of time. Granted that you have to unlock some of these abilities, but they're not extravagantly priced. They're also cheaper and have a 6 man squad which increases durability, so if you combine that with AT grenades, molotovs on top of doctrinal upgrades like AT rifles they're actually quite good.

If you watched EU ESL yesterday, you would see that Soviets were the most picked Allied faction(Because they're good, and the units they have are potent) and Conscripts who are supposedly UP or weak were used in each of those matches.

As Katitof would say, the problem isn't necessarily the faction, but rather between the chair and keyboard

If anyone is looking improve their Rus gameplay, watch any of the EU ESL cups. You have Conscripts, t-34's, KV2's and a lot of supposedly UP units making an appearance and winning.

Molotovs+At nades together cost 300 MP + 40 fuel. More than OKW T1 and 10 fuel lesser than OKW T2, just for to compare. And they don't worth it at all. Free flamegrenades are more effective, free panzerfasusts are more effective (look at stats, bigger damage, bigger penetration).

Ability to charge is cool, but it's not so cool, as axis-players thinks. You can stop that charge by only 1 MG burst, which will supress them immideatly and stop any charge. If Ura! Abilty could give them some supression immunity, then yes - it would be cool. Right now it's very questionable ability.

Combine with doctrinal upgrades? Lol, why my USSR upgrades suppoused to be doctrinal, while Axis upgrades are not doctrinal? Let's make panzerschrecks for Volks doctrinal too and put them into only 1 pretty useless doctrine and will see how loud Axis will start to cry.

And you always try to prove your words by ESL games. Bro, stop watching how people play and play yourself. You will find, that game is not such sweet, as they trying to show it on major competitves, like ESL.

If you talking about Cons durability WHY you always forgetting units size compared to other line infantry?

I may be wrong, but in early CoH2 Cons at Vet0 was with some recived accuracy debuff, like 20% more to hit them. Did they removed this or it's just my imagination here? Still not sure about this.

Who's forgetting unit sizes?

I, for one, mentioned that early game they are OK but when moving towards late-game they tend to die way easier to any other infantry, even if Cons are Vet3.

This is because enemy infantry comes with LMGs, MP44s (not to mention heavier weapons) while Cons durability remains unchanged which results into being dispatched rather fast.

Molotovs+At nades together cost 300 MP + 40 fuel. More than OKW T1 and 10 fuel lesser than OKW T2, just for to compare. And they don't worth it at all. Free flamegrenades are more effective, free panzerfasusts are more effective (look at stats, bigger damage, bigger penetration).

And you always try to prove your words by ESL games. Bro, stop watching how people play and play yourself. You will find, that game is not such sweet, as they trying to show it on major competitves, like ESL.

- And how many cost Merge and Hoorah ?

- At nades and faust does the same damage

How many cost Soviet first tiers ?

T1: 160 MP 10 Fuel
T2: 160 MP 20 Fuel

How many cost Okw first tiers ?

Medic truck: (100 MP - 15 fuel) + 200 MP 25 fuel = 300 MP 40 fuel
Mech truck: (100 MP - 15 fuel) + 200 MP 50 fuel = 300 MP 65 Fuel

Amazing, isnt it ? you can skip molotov generally, at nades are mandatory

Asymetrical things,

- You should really apply your advice for yourself, play instead of whining on balance forums, and you can learn a lot in pro gamer games, and you will notice that soviet is a good faction.
We dont even know if you played a single Coh2 game, playercard ?

You take ubber OKW with all free techs and units, and i play the bad soviets, and lets see who wins ?

calling the Communist faction

problem with the Rus faction

played my fair share of the Communist faction

what the fuck

- You should really apply your advice for yourself, play instead of whining on balance forums, and you can learn a lot in pro gamer games, and you will notice that soviet is a good faction.
We dont even know if you played a single Coh2 game, playercard ?

You take ubber OKW with all free techs and units, and i play the bad soviets, and lets see who wins ?

Soviet is bad faction not because it's impossbile to win with them, but because it requiers from you way more efforts, micro and control, than from both Axis.

Progamers can afford to play so, but major part of CoH community - not.

I think, that asymetrical balance means - factions have different units, playstyles maybe, but it should be equial hard to play as both of them. Right now it's really harder to play as USSR, than as any other faction. Maybe USF is same hard, but for other reasons.

Soviet is bad faction not because it's impossbile to win with them, but because it requiers from you way more efforts, micro and control, than from both Axis.

Progamers can afford to play so, but major part of CoH community - not.

I think, that asymetrical balance means - factions have different units, playstyles maybe, but it should be equial hard to play as both of them. Right now it's really harder to play as USSR, than as any other faction. Maybe USF is same hard, but for other reasons.

Come on, you are saying that USF and Soviets are hard, get back in reality bro, play some OH game in 1v1, and you will love USF and soviets early game

- Play both sides and you will see that the game is pretty balanced

Come on, you are saying that USF and Soviets are hard, get back in reality bro, play some OH game in 1v1, and you will love USF and soviets early game

Love USF for what? For starting with 1 good infantry unit, 1 poor and 1 peaceful car? While OKW starts with badass close combat units.

And I could agree that in 1v1 USSR are more-or-less playable, but... why everyone judge about balance only from 1v1 games experience? There are also 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4. And people also play there, a lot of people. I mostly play in 3v3 and 4v4, because only in those mods you can play with artillery doctrines and artillery itself and not to lose.

The Soviet are fine in most gametypes.

The only thing I say needs a look at are tier one (penals) and tier 4. I personally would like their heavies to pack a more powerful punch but thats just me.

Zarok, you do have the increased suppression and rate of fire bulitins for the maxim as well.

Conscripts in my opinion do fall out late game, if they had a non-doc upgrade would be enough but thats it.

Balord, without the At grenade and at a lesser extent molotovs are almost mandatory for conscripts. I would also say that your little poke at the merge and hoorah ability is quite pathetic.

Just one last thing, this thread reaks of cancer.

I think that the soviets struggle from a lack of decent mainline infantry and a good medium tank.

what the fuck

Far be it for me to support RE in any way shape or form, i would like to point out how calling russians the communist faction somehow seems to generate more responses then when axis are called nazi's.

That is all, carry on.

Just to add in something I haven't seen mentioned yet - that maxim has (what seems to be) two accuracy bulletins and a rate of fire bulletin, whereas the mg42 has no bulletins.

All the talk about crawling through yellow cover / models outside of green cover aside - this isn't really a fair test, I'd expect the maxim to win with a triple bulletin buff.

Zarok, you do have the increased suppression and rate of fire bulitins for the maxim as well.

Indeed i do, the double 5% suppresion bulletins make for a lovely 10% increase in suppresion (remember the old 10% mg42 suppresion bulletin? thats right it got removed for being OP).

But would you say that's an acceptable reason for a maxim to win vs a pre-set-up mg42 (even without superior cover?)
Im genuinely curious as to the answer for that.

Save the time when vet 2 wehr tanks were invincible, soviets were never weak, they certainly are not weak now.
The fact that they can perform even with their core infantry being crap shows how solid they are. Cons and penals need adjusting, true, but even with those considered they are in a good spot, they don't need a total revamp you're suggesting in your biased proposals.

Source: Rank 105 Soviets, Rank 125 Wehr

Holy crap, so much of this thread seems like its based on a massive confusion of two things...

Let's be clear. There are two things being talked about here. One is balance. The other is something like 'good design.' What I mean by this is whether or not a faction is satisfying to play and play against, has a diverse set of units and strategies, has good internal balance e.t.c.

Soviets are clearly balanced, in the sense of having a decent winrate. As others have pointed out, Soviets were the most picked Allied faction in ESL. This wouldn't be the case if the faction was just trash.

HOWEVER. You can believe the faction is balanced while also believing the design is bad. Those two positions are perfectly consistent. In fact, that's what I think. The bad design of the Soviets is evident from the fact that T1 is almost completely ignored by everyone and is virutally unusuable, and from the fact that the vast majority of doctrines are in the same boat. The fact that so many people resist going T4 in favour of call-ins is more evidence. The tech pattern of the whole faction is just wonky, with tech costs being very expensive compared to other factions and tech being delayed further by mandatory upgrades like AT nades. I think Soviets need a moderate rework to be in a better place.

Threads like these would go much better if y'all could distinguish balance from other values relating to game design.

...

Indeed i do, the double 5% suppresion bulletins make for a lovely 10% increase in suppresion (remember the old 10% mg42 suppresion bulletin? thats right it got removed for being OP).

But would you say that's an acceptable reason for a maxim to win vs a pre-set-up mg42 (even without superior cover?)
Im genuinely curious as to the answer for that.

Personally I think so. I like bulletins making a significant impact on gameplay, tactics and how your opponent responds. It increases the versatility of all armies.

I haven't really seen that many triple bulletins making a real difference (triple armour on Ostheer panther is also quite nice), but I think this feature leads to better competitive play. Players can see in the loading screen which commanders and which bulletins are being used by their opponent and it's up to them to respond accordingly.

The best things about bulletins is that you can't buy them, only earned from RNGesus drops. It's not Play2Win, it's Pray2Win.

- And how many cost Merge and Hoorah ?

- At nades and faust does the same damage

How many cost Soviet first tiers ?

T1: 160 MP 10 Fuel
T2: 160 MP 20 Fuel

How many cost Okw first tiers ?

Medic truck: (100 MP - 15 fuel) + 200 MP 25 fuel = 300 MP 40 fuel
Mech truck: (100 MP - 15 fuel) + 200 MP 50 fuel = 300 MP 65 Fuel

Amazing, isnt it ? you can skip molotov generally, at nades are mandatory

Asymetrical things,

- You should really apply your advice for yourself, play instead of whining on balance forums, and you can learn a lot in pro gamer games, and you will notice that soviet is a good faction.
We dont even know if you played a single Coh2 game, playercard ?

You take ubber OKW with all free techs and units, and i play the bad soviets, and lets see who wins ?

Why you ignoring FREE healing and repearing for OKW trucks?

Molotovs+At nades together cost 300 MP + 40 fuel. More than OKW T1 and 10 fuel lesser than OKW T2, just for to compare. And they don't worth it at all. Free flamegrenades are more effective, free panzerfasusts are more effective (look at stats, bigger damage, bigger penetration).

Only an average player would say AT grenades and molotovs aren't worth it. In fact, everything you say can be discredited because of that statement. At high level play, AT grenades are definitely worth it and molotovs are situational but potent if used right.

Your last 2 points are blatant lies and proves that you know nothing about Axis units. If we exclude the names, the incendiary grenades Volks get and the molotovs Conscripts get are exactly the same. They even have the same throwing animation so there's no doubt they're the same thing, yet you insist on the incendiary grenades being better.

Panzerfausts are also the exact same as AT grenades, but in your delusions panzerfausts are exceptionally better somehow.

Ability to charge is cool, but it's not so cool, as axis-players thinks. You can stop that charge by only 1 MG burst, which will supress them immideatly and stop any charge. If Ura! Abilty could give them some supression immunity, then yes - it would be cool. Right now it's very questionable ability.

It's a useful ability since the turn rate on the MG42 and MG34 are relatively slow at vet 1. 2-5 seconds of sprint is definitely a situational ability, but it is a good one. The only people who bash that ability are people who can't use it effectively.

Combine with doctrinal upgrades? Lol, why my USSR upgrades suppoused to be doctrinal, while Axis upgrades are not doctrinal? Let's make panzerschrecks for Volks doctrinal too and put them into only 1 pretty useless doctrine and will see how loud Axis will start to cry.

Doctrinal upgrades are situational as they should be, but they are good when used at the right time, and used correctly.

You're mistaken if you think Axis players would "cry" if panzershreks were moved to a doctrine. The only people I see crying are communist faction fanboys.

And you always try to prove your words by ESL games. Bro, stop watching how people play and play yourself. You will find, that game is not such sweet, as they trying to show it on major competitves, like ESL.

The fact that you're trying to dismiss ESL tournament games, which requires great skill to win in order to legitmise your claims that Conscripts are UP is pathetic.

I reference ESL tournament games because they showcase strategies and units that are considered weak or UP, and how to win with them.

I used to play mostly ProKW before because I thought the Wehrmacht had weak units, but then I watched some tourney games where professional players used Wehrmacht and I realised something; the problem wasn't with the faction, but rather myself and that I wasn't playing them correctly and I wasn't playing my best.

You insist on the communist army being weak and UP, or a large portion of their units, yet you don't take the time to improve. You scoff at tournament games because "they don't show the real game", when you should be watching tournament games and learning.


@isoul

Are you denying that the Eastern European countries weren't communist? The USSR fought in WW2 and was communist, so therefor it's factually correct to call the Russians/Eastern Europeans communist since they are communist.

Personally I think so. I like bulletins making a significant impact on gameplay, tactics and how your opponent responds. It increases the versatility of all armies.

I haven't really seen that many triple bulletins making a real difference (triple armour on Ostheer panther is also quite nice), but I think this feature leads to better competitive play. Players can see in the loading screen which commanders and which bulletins are being used by their opponent and it's up to them to respond accordingly.

The best things about bulletins is that you can't buy them, only earned from RNGesus drops. It's not Play2Win, it's Pray2Win.

Personally, i don't like bulletins making such an impact on gameplay, precisely because of the Pray2Win aspect (i much rather play to win, believe it or not ).

But of more importance is your statement that players can respond to bulletins such as the one i use.
Quite frankly, you should be able to do that in theory, but in practice (or perhaps in this singular instance) you cannot.
In my 3 years of coh2, i have not faced, seen or have been able to use a strat that effectively shuts down maximspam in the early stages (periods in which the maxim utterly sucked being irrelevant here ofc).
Simply put, knowing that maxims are coming will not help you, but the 10% suppresion most definiatly will.

As such, i do not like maxims suddenly being able to beat pre-set-up mg42's thanks to bulletins (if infact, it were the bulletins doing the work and not the maxim itself).