So penal is underpowered? or others are overpowered?

I think you missed the point; if Penals were just better cons - which would be the case if they had AT etc. - then you could end up where Cons never get built, and you;re back to the same problem: one of the units in the roster has no function.

My idea for the At satchel was to make them more like the gammon bomb. Useful against slow and heavy tank but not so much against the nimble ones. You would still need conscript for the at nade against anything that can dodge.

the penal would basically be the anti-elite unit. Flamethrower to roast the ober and satchel to wreck the king tiger. They are penal/suicide squad because they are expected to tackle the axis' strongest unit.

I'm not against that, but there are circumstances in which the satchel is already useful against the bigger tanks. Something as slow as a KT with engine damage can easily be caught by Penals with a satchel. It's just too situational to be really considered "AT".

None of which MATTERS because Sovs are performing well in the charts and in tourneys. So whatever issue this is, it's fundamentally AESTHETIC and not one of balance.

Cool, so can we revert 222 buff as ost did ok without it?
Lets also forget about brummbar, army does fine, so the unit is balanced.
Flame hetzer is performing 100% up to the cost too, because OKW does good, therefore flame hetzer is balanced.
M-42 is perfectly fine and valid AT gun, because soviets do well too.
We see IS-2 or T34/85 every single game, which means T34/76 is in perfect spot.
And according to ESL statistics thread, we sould buff brits ASAP, because they are clearly most underpowered army in game, I suggest starting with emplacements.

If it turn out that when something is done about Maxims, Soviets fall off, THEN it will be time to proposes boosts to Cons or Penals or something else. That is not the case now.

Last time devs responded to question about maxim nerf, they have confirmed that nerf won't happen without buff in other area of sov early game and they are aware of under performance of stock units, no need to wait until anything changes, because maxims would have to be removed from the game for players to start using different units instead because these different units DO NOT WORK.

None of which MATTERS because Sovs are performing well in the charts and in tourneys. So whatever issue this is, it's fundamentally AESTHETIC and not one of balance.

If it turn out that when something is done about Maxims, Soviets fall off, THEN it will be time to proposes boosts to Cons or Penals or something else. That is not the case now.

If you balance units only when win rates indicate that there is a problem, you end up with a game where each faction has only one strategy. This is currently a problem with CoH2 in general (every faction has equal cheese) and especially with the Soviets (Maximspam).

The fact remains that Penal Battalions do not currently perform a role that is useful to the Soviets (unlike Conscripts) and lack the durability and DPS scaling to be useful outside of that role. Since they aren't useful, they need to be reworked regardless of general Soviet balance.

Cool, so can we revert 222 buff as ost did ok without it?

...snippage. The 222 was buffed to make it more attractive for players, not to displace an already existing unit. The fact that this could be done and was done without making the faction significantly more powerful is great.

So, they solved the aesthetic problem without having too significant effect and overall power parity. That's precisely the sort of approach I'm suggesting for Penals, as opposed to one that makes Penals inherently superior to the stock infantry.

We see IS-2 or T34/85 every single game, which means T34/76 is in perfect spot.

As someone who opened a thread asking if the /76 needs love, your attempted reductio ad absurdam cuts no ice. The /76 is NOT in a good spot as evidenced by the fact that it is so seldom seen. Again, that needs a much more delicate approach than simply "buff the unit", because Sovs are doing fine.

...snippage. The 222 was buffed to make it more attractive for players, not to displace an already existing unit. The fact that this could be done and was done without making the faction significantly more powerful is great.

Cool.

Can we now buff penals to make it more attractive for players?

It wouldn't displace any unit in any way because:
-it doesn't have AT(guards still needed, PTRS cons still an option)
-it doesn't have AT snare or doctrinal support(cons still needed)
-it doesn't have suppression(maxims still needed)
-it doesn't have great durability scaling as any other sov infantry(less rec acc/armor then shocks/guards/cons)

So, they solved the aesthetic problem without having too significant effect and overall power parity. That's precisely the sort of approach I'm suggesting for Penals, as opposed to one that makes Penals inherently superior to the stock infantry.

My solution solves the problem of unit being useless, keeps synergies, grants it a new, unique role, completely prevents any kind of overlaps with any other sov infantry and is extremely simple to implement.

Penals would be superior combatants to cons, but why wouldn't they? They are AI specialists in AI tier, they cost more then cons, but cons would still be needed for AT support and map presence.

As someone who opened a thread asking if the /76 needs love, your attempted reductio ad absurdam cuts no ice. The /76 is NOT in a good spot as evidenced by the fact that it is so seldom seen. Again, that needs a much more delicate approach than simply "buff the unit", because Sovs are doing fine.

I've already proven to you with multiple examples that because faction overall does fine it doesn't mean that 100% of the units are fine. I find it hilarious that you even attempt to discuss that.

Cool.

Can we now buff penals to make it more attractive for players?

I have not said you CAN'T buff them. I've said that buffing MAY not be the best way, and that buffing them to point of replacing Cons would be futile. So what are you objecting to?

Penals would be superior combatants to cons, but why wouldn't they? They are AI specialists in AI tier, they cost more then cons, but cons would still be needed for AT support and map presence.

Seeing as you seem to be wholly unaware of what I actually suggested, I'll reiterate; I worry that you would have to give Penals a mega-buff for them to be so attractive as to prompt players to spend Fuel to build T1; and that if they are so attractive, they may overshadow Cons.

I've already proven to you with multiple examples that because faction overall does fine it doesn't mean that 100% of the units are fine. I find it hilarious that you even attempt to discuss that.

It's quite difficult for you to "prove" a point that I made myself. I did not say that "100% of the units are fine"; I said that buffing and debuffing are not the only ways that a unit can be affected to make it more accessible.

I have not said you CAN'T buff them. I've said that buffing MAY not be the best way, and that buffing them to point of replacing Cons would be futile. So what are you objecting to?



Seeing as you seem to be wholly unaware of what I actually suggested, I'll reiterate; I worry that you would have to give Penals a mega-buff for them to be so attractive as to prompt players to spend Fuel to build T1; and that if they are so attractive, they may overshadow Cons.

Well, I know that you DO NOT want to buff them and believe that moving useless unit to another tier will somehow make it less useless.

It won't. It will be just as useless dead-weight unit and we still have a dead tier, so your suggestion doesn't fix anything, but creates even more problems.
Since you seem to be unaware of what I've suggested previously, I'll repeat it:

Mirror penal dps to rifle DPS(on squad level, not model to model level), adjust cost if needed, done.
Nothing will overshadow cons as long as they are the only ones with AT nades and no one in his right mind uses them for actual damage since they do none without ppsh, vet or not.

I would spend fuel on AI dedicated tier because I'm not a fan of maxim spam(which is a case of my recent lose streak in 1v1-yes, I play 1v1 again), teching later on to T2 isn't super expensive and I need units that actually can stand up to axis infantry early game AND scale into late game. I don't want to be forced for a doctrine only to get working infantry, its bad enough I need to do it if I want working armor.

It's quite difficult for you to "prove" a point that I made myself. I did not say that "100% of the units are fine"; I said that buffing and debuffing are not the only ways that a unit can be affected to make it more accessible.

I agree with you on that one, but the accessibility is NOT an issue here.

There is no problem at all accessing T1 and T2 as soviets since they are relatively cheap techs. The problem is you're paying premium price of tier and are delivered subpar options in return, sniper being best out of three and still being behind one man snipers in terms of RoF, camo and survivability(1 man snipers can take mortar to the fact, sov scout team can't, what was advantage in vanila became disadvantage now).

Price of T1 or penals was never any issue, it was always about penals NOT delivering much in return for the price ever since march deployment patch was introduced.

That is three years since the unit is a POS. Even SU-76 got love.

Well, I know that you DO NOT want to buff them and believe that moving useless unit to another tier will somehow make it less useless.

No, you do not know that, because I have said no such thing. I have only objected to buffing them to the point that they render Cons useless.

...I need units that actually can stand up to axis infantry early game AND scale into late game. I don't want to be forced for a doctrine only to get working infantry, its bad enough I need to do it if I want working armor.

... and that sounds exactly like what you are arguing for: more powerful infantry that come out early.

I agree with you on that one, but the accessibility is NOT an issue here.
...The problem is you're paying premium price of tier and are delivered subpar options in return...

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Which is why I suggested that if Penals were simply moved to a tier that Soviet players are likely to build, they may get more use - not because they are more powerful, but because they are available.

Price of T1 or penals was never any issue, it was always about penals NOT delivering much in return for the price ever since march deployment patch was introduced.

And I'm pointing out that I think you're wrong about that; I think their price is fine for their effectiveness, and that we don't see the because so few people go T1, and those who do are doing it for snipers and clown cars... as I already explained.

Then I suppose I just see things.

I suspect that if Penals were available in another tech structure, they would be seen more often. As it stands, you only go T1 if you intend to go sniper or clown car; going T1 specifically for Penals simply is not worth it. And if you are going sniper or clown car, that is where you will sink your MP.

If Penals were moved to T2 or T3, which most Soviet players in most games are going to build anyway, then they will be available to more players in more games. Not as "elite" infantry, but as a tool for solving specific problems. If you are on a map with a lot of buildings, or facing off against many MG's, or just want to replace a squad that was wiped, Penals will be there and available to use.

Penals don't need a buff, and Soviets as a whole don't need yet more elite infantry. They just need to be available as as option in more games than they are at present.

Well, back to the point now.

... and that sounds exactly like what you are arguing for: more powerful infantry that come out early.

That is pretty much exactly their role.
Utility stripped, combat squad. Firepower support for conscript that has plethora of counters already and is reliant on cover, especially later in the game because of low rec acc vet bonuses.

Penal design and role since day 1 is a more powerful infantry that comes early, but can't operate effectively without con support.

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Which is why I suggested that if Penals were simply moved to a tier that Soviet players are likely to build, they may get more use - not because they are more powerful, but because they are available.

And again, as I've said, they still be ignored, because they provide nothing that cons and CEs can't do by themselves, therefore regarding them useless.
People wouldn't build them at current state even if they were T0, because they don't do much over cons while having utility limited to garison clearing, which both, cons and CEs can do by themselves.

And I'm pointing out that I think you're wrong about that; I think their price is fine for their effectiveness, and that we don't see the because so few people go T1, and those who do are doing it for snipers and clown cars... as I already explained.

Believe me, a LOT of people tried them, tried building strats around them. That do include a number of TOP players who played with them for some time and all came to the same conclusion-they are not worth it in that state.
It became highly ineffective the moment they hit top 200 players.
This is why only people who played for the lulz(Lenny) or no-meta-or-death(sexywingz) used them and even then, they couldn't compete at all with players of equal skill unless opponents threw hard.

People don't go for T1, because units there do not perform cost effectively. That is all.

Similarly with USF, T1 is not meta, but its definitely not POS and everyone goes for it for certain matchups.

Penals are old 222. It doesn't matter if they are "balanced" around their current cost if they don't do the job at all.

Penal design and role since day 1 is a more powerful infantry that comes early, but can't operate effectively without con support.

On this we more or less agree.

Believe me, a LOT of people tried them, tried building strats around them. That do include a number of TOP players who played with them for some time and all came to the same conclusion-they are not worth it in that state.

I find this difficult to believe, stated as simply as this. They only cost 30MP more than cons: how are they "not worth it"? The ability to buy a flamethrower on them alone is worth more than that - after all, they only cost 45MP per model, while CE's cost 50 each and have much less combat and staying power.

People don't go for T1, because units there do not perform cost effectively. That is all.

What I think you're ignoring is the OTHER costs of T1. Going T1 delays your AT nades or your Zis or your T-70, because all of them require the fuel you just spent on T1. Therefore, the failure of this strategy is not necessarily simply because Penals are not able to whip Obers with one hand tied behind their backs; there are other relevant factors.

I find this difficult to believe, stated as simply as this. They only cost 30MP more than cons: how are they "not worth it"? The ability to buy a flamethrower on them alone is worth more than that - after all, they only cost 45MP per model, while CE's cost 50 each and have much less combat and staying power.

Well, you can jump on pretty much any high level player stream and ask them directly.
That 30mp is bigger then you think. Look what 20mp reduction did to pgrens. Look what 15mp increase did to volks and their strength.
And I don't need them for flamer.
See, this is yet another case of role overlap. Yes, its useful, but its hardly a reason to get them, because CE already cover that. Pair of CEs will do incomparably better job at pretty much everything and it won't even cost you more as you start with one.
Reinforce cost aren't really that relevant, because you can use cons for merge.
In fact, you SHOULD cons for merge CEs to get them vet asap by allowing them to stay on field, cons will vet up anyway, they won't go crap, but they'll vet.
Same with the penals, they were supported by merge cons so they can stay on field, these strats still weren't effective at all vs better players, because later on penals became irrelevant, not being able to keep up with long range firepower of axis and being squishy compared to everyone else.

What I think you're ignoring is the OTHER costs of T1. Going T1 delays your AT nades or your Zis or your T-70, because all of them require the fuel you just spent on T1. Therefore, the failure of this strategy is not necessarily simply because Penals are not able to whip Obers with one hand tied behind their backs; there are other relevant factors.

That isn't really an issue as T1 is a shock tier, units that are easily countered, but should be very potent when they arrive, you should be able to utilize their shock value to get ground and deny resources to opponent. Utilized well, you shouldn't have problems to rush for T-70 or SU-76. Lack of AT in the tier isn't really a problem, there are plenty of doctrines to help that and going T2 isn't really a set back like it was pre sov tech redesign. Going for T1 will dely AT nades by 30-50 seconds, kubel won't do much in that time and you'll still have them before 222 arrives.

Thing is, not a single of these units does that now. These are shock units that don't pack a punch and can't take one. Penals are pinnacle of it since once a blue moon we might see M3 and still some players play an old sniper+guard motor combo.

And its not about penals vs obers, they don't even trade efficiently vs volks or grens.
Penals can't stand up to cheaper squads, let alone more expensive ones. Pfussies walk over them so hard its not even funny for mere 20 more mp, but then again, its almost the same with cons and volks now.

You know, in a lot of ways, Conscripts are the one squad that are totally okay to be outclassed.

They have merge. Being eclipsed by maxims, penals, guards, or shocks, shouldn't be as pronounced an issue for conscripts because they can merge. Now, admittedly maxims are still cheaper than cons, which ruins that, but people tend to forget about merge in general.

Back in the 360mp Penal days I used to just use conscripts to rush to the front and merge and retreat. I used to merge everything to save on manpower. And, IIRC, only shock troopers weren't worth it because the conscripts didn't get their armor.

Merge is awesome when you have squads with a decent weapon profile.

See, this is yet another case of role overlap. Yes, its useful, but its hardly a reason to get them, because CE already cover that. Pair of CEs will do incomparably better job at pretty much everything and it won't even cost you more as you start with one.
Reinforce cost aren't really that relevant, because you can use cons for merge.
In fact, you SHOULD cons for merge CEs to get them vet asap by allowing them to stay on field, cons will vet up anyway, they won't go crap, but they'll vet.
Same with the penals, they were supported by merge cons so they can stay on field, these strats still weren't effective at all vs better players, because later on penals became irrelevant, not being able to keep up with long range firepower of axis and being squishy compared to everyone else.

I really don't like both Penals and CE's having a flamer. Either one or the other is always going to be more effective with it, the flows alot better with it being taken off one.

I really don't like both Penals and CE's having a flamer. Either one or the other is always going to be more effective with it, the flows alot better with it being taken off one.

They deal the same damage.
Show Spoiler

It's the same weapon, but the Penals are more accurate with it if they have vet.

Although I'm not sure how much accuracy affects how flamethrowers work, and I don't know if the accuracy from vet applies to any weapons penals are holding or just their SVTs.

5 men riflemen with flamers proved problematic. I doubt that 6 men Penals with flamers the same firepower and the ability to blow up OKW trucks will not prove equally problematic just because then need a cheap production building...

5 men riflemen with flamers proved problematic. I doubt that 6 men Penals with flamers the same firepower and the ability to blow up OKW trucks will not prove equally problematic just because then need a cheap production building...

five man riflemen that has smoke (to deny suppression and get into a range that flamethrower shines without taking any damage) and a longer ranged, faster throwing grenade. oh and a snare... and the ability to 100% heal on field...and the ability to further increase their damage OR give them AT... but aside from that yea its EXACTLY the same
also were discussing changes, any buffs will require some other changes for example if we were to give grens a 5th man to buff survival NO ONE AT ALL is expecting them to retain their current stats, lmg, and tech included abilities NO ONE and receive a buff.
people are so stuck on "they have flamethrowers so no buff" they are ignoring that soviet dont NEED the penals to have a flamethrower, before when flamers could explode and penal flamer couldnt there was a reason to get them but now its just a case of redundancy being used to keep them insufficient

i mean.. if they were fine there would be alot less maxim spam....

we sould buff brits ASAP, because they are clearly most underpowered army in game, I suggest starting with emplacements.

I think counter battery needs a buff too, maybe replace the 25pdrs with land mattresses?

also were discussing changes, any buffs will require some other changes for example if we were to give grens a 5th man to buff survival NO ONE AT ALL is expecting them to retain their current stats, lmg, and tech included abilities NO ONE and receive a buff.

Long range DPS from 4 to 8.
Done, unit fixed.
Nothing more is needed, no big changes, no new abilities, no vet changes.
Just this simple change gives them new utility without impacting their intended role of mid range squad.
...

I guess that THERE AT LEAST ONE

people are so stuck on "they have flamethrowers so no buff"...

I don't know who this people are but I let you know If I see one...

i mean.. if they were fine there would be alot less maxim spam....

Penals should become more attractive... turning them into a unit that can take out 1v1 Gren/PG and Volks/SP is another.