Conscripts - when being a looser is your fate

I would make that trade, Osttruppen are awesome.

Cons aren't your mainline fighting infantry, penals are. Now that they are buffed to being awesome in the coming patch they will finally fill their real role. Support unit. They are great in the early game, until they peter off with vet and fall into a supporting role with their many abilities, giving penals, guards, and shocks the role of damage dealers.

But you cant A-move blob them. Other factions have so big advantage in low ranks

Merge is fun on the fly and with PPSh upgrades they aren't half bad.

Otherwise they throw molotovs on MGs and AT nades on tanks with a scratch.

Cons have so many useful abilities that adding more dps or survivability to them will make them OP

Hi MissCommissar,

cross-reading your posts indicates that you are passionate about the game and your posts are well above the random rant, which both is good.

However, I think there are some flaws in your original statement, because you seem to forget that 6 cons have simply more HP than 4 grens. Even taking "target size" into account, 6 cons have effectively about 440 HPs, whereas 4 grens sit at 351. Likewise, the combined DPS of cons is about 20.6 vs. 23 for 4 grens (point blank). You can do the math, and it turns out that cons on average will win vs. grens at short range. At long range it is the other way around.

This "balance" originally was kept while both squads would level up. However, after the buff to vet3 of cons about almost a year ago (more reduction in "target size"), vet3 cons probably have the upper hand now in slightly more situations vs. vet3 grens.

Now, the obvious "problem" is that grens eventually will get the LMG upgrade, at which point they will win regardless of the distance (unless you are somehow able to keep them moving). You wouldn't be the first person to complain about the lack of a similar upgrade for cons.

However, looking through the soviet commanders it seems pretty obvious that this is not a simple oversight, but a deliberate design choice: Unlike Ostheer, almost every commander has either weapon upgrades for cons, Guards or Shock troops, or other call in infantry. It's ok if you don't like the choice (again you wouldn't be the first one there) but I guess chances of that being changed isn't too high.

That said: I read a lot of your posts. In several of those you complained basically that some Russian units don't have the role of their Ostheer counterpart (e.g. MGs) or that Russians can't e.g. build Ostheer bunkers. Taking this together it sounds like you would be more happy if Ostheer is copied over to Soviets, relabeling the units and using Russian models. Wouldn't that be kind of bland? Btw, glad to hear that you seem to have realized that Ostheer fits your preferred style of play better.

Last comment: In terms of having your squad killed by the main gun of tanks, target size is not overly relevant. They don't get whiped because the tanks hit a model, but because they hit some place close to the squad; and the only thing of importance then is having your guys not bunch up. Guess which property of cons helps them in that situation over grens...

Edit: Molotovs do have impact damage, same as OKW's incendiary grenades. I guess you checked out the stats site? You have to look at the "_MP" version.

I wonder, if MissCommissar would not be Russian, would he have cared so much for the Soviet faction?

Imo the skill disparity between the different core infantry is what gives the illusion that Cons are bad.

Like, I'd say that Rifles and Cons have the highest skill ceiling of mainline infantry allowing them to dominate the map and provide cheap utility to any army composition. (or expensive utility with Rifles) Compare this to Grens, where they are designed to be grouped up and A-moved, or Volks, which are also designed to be grouped up and a-moved. Worse yet is the fact that Axis core infantry generally trades positively when A-moved at max range, which doesn't promote the infantry tactics CoH is known for.

Are Axis core troops OP? Sans Shreks, not really at all, everything has a counter, but the fact that they are so easy to use at most skill levels makes other core troops seem weak by comparison.

Hi MissCommissar,

cross-reading your posts indicates that you are passionate about the game and your posts are well above the random rant, which both is good.

However, I think there are some flaws in your original statement, because you seem to forget that 6 cons have simply more HP than 4 grens. Even taking "target size" into account, 6 cons have effectively about 440 HPs, whereas 4 grens sit at 351. Likewise, the combined DPS of cons is about 20.6 vs. 23 for 4 grens (point blank). You can do the math, and it turns out that cons on average will win vs. grens at short range. At long range it is the other way around.

This "balance" originally was kept while both squads would level up. However, after the buff to vet3 of cons about almost a year ago (more reduction in "target size"), vet3 cons probably have the upper hand now in slightly more situations vs. vet3 grens.

Now, the obvious "problem" is that grens eventually will get the LMG upgrade, at which point they will win regardless of the distance (unless you are somehow able to keep them moving). You wouldn't be the first person to complain about the lack of a similar upgrade for cons.

However, looking through the soviet commanders it seems pretty obvious that this is not a simple oversight, but a deliberate design choice: Unlike Ostheer, almost every commander has either weapon upgrades for cons, Guards or Shock troops, or other call in infantry. It's ok if you don't like the choice (again you wouldn't be the first one there) but I guess chances of that being changed isn't too high.

That said: I read a lot of your posts. In several of those you complained basically that some Russian units don't have the role of their Ostheer counterpart (e.g. MGs) or that Russians can't e.g. build Ostheer bunkers. Taking this together it sounds like you would be more happy if Ostheer is copied over to Soviets, relabeling the units and using Russian models. Wouldn't that be kind of bland? Btw, glad to hear that you seem to have realized that Ostheer fits your preferred style of play better.

Last comment: In terms of having your squad killed by the main gun of tanks, target size is not overly relevant. They don't get whiped because the tanks hit a model, but because they hit some place close to the squad; and the only thing of importance then is having your guys not bunch up. Guess which property of cons helps them in that situation over grens...

Edit: Molotovs do have impact damage, same as OKW's incendiary grenades. I guess you checked out the stats site? You have to look at the "_MP" version.

Here is few points:

1.) Maybe cons will beat grens in close range. But... there is always problem with "close range", which people forgeting - you need to get you unit safe to that close range, before it will start affect. And with such accuracy, grens can just snipe out you upcoming Cons or whoever else and be good. Same actually works with any Long vs Close range squads. For that reason, I think, that Stormtroopers are way lower, than Guards. Saying from my experience: units with bigger range of efficient fire are better than any other. It also works even in DoW... but no, there are jumppacks.

2.) I don't understand, why people like to mention "Veterancy bonuses" comparing or discussing about units. Almost all units, guess even Osttrupens, can be really cool, when they have Vet3, but when I call-in unit, it usually comes with Vet 0. And getting veterancy for Cons is quite problematic - EXP coming from performing frags and dealing damage. But... as I said - Cons can't effectively deal damage, like their oppose from Axis or even Allies side. So - they vetting pretty slow + squad wipes under fire/retreat fire because of high target size. It's really difficult to make them Vet3. Way easier to do it with Grens or whatever else infantry, which is more resistable to damage and deal real damage.

3.) Unlike Ostheer, USSR is "addicted" to doctrines. You show that addiction as benefit, but it is actually great minus and cripple of entire faction - you can get reliable combat units or upgrades only and onlt from doctrines. While facitons like, OKW, UKF or even Ostheer have units, doctrinal of USSR level in stock and from their own doctrines they getting "top of the line elite", which is outstanding, compared with soviet Call-ins. And of course - weapons and other upgrades are in stock for those factions, only poor USSR must suffer without it for some reason. I would agree, if that exception of non-doc upgrades would be compenstaed with high quality of infantry itself, but it is even worse than all others... It's just cripple, without compensative benefit. Unreasonable and unnecessary.

4.) When I talk about "Ostheer unit design", I mean, that their design has reason and it is design, as it should be, when you making "healthy faction". HMG = defensive. Core infantry = damage and versality (grens can into versality, actually). Defenses = exist. And everything else. Soviet design, from another side, is absolutely unreasonable. Idea of "offensive HMG" was retarded from very start, cos HMG will be support-defensive weapon in CoH 2, like it or not. That's how in-game mechanics works. Same goes to Cons, to some other units in stock... Their design, just like design of entire faciton is broken. Absolutely no defenses for USSR + tough doctrinal addiciton + tiering system, stolen from CoH 1 USF, but Relic, I suppoused, missed the idea of that system, so it became also wrong. USSR needs either serious redesign or addition of some gameplay elements, like deffensive structures and reliable stock units, for to heal doctrinal addiction. Otherwise - USSR always will be underdogs, compared with other "healthy" factions.

5.) Hm... maybe molotovs have impact damage, it's low anyway. And besides, problem with molotovs is not impact damage, but "slow-mo" throwing and range of that throwing. It's risky to use that nade, you can lost entire squad, while they throwing that shitty bottle. Or, while they try to reatreat after that. It happens pretty often with me, when my squads shooting those guys in back - good accuracy + high target size works.

Cons have oorah for closing the distance, why are we even discussing this?

Cons have oorah for closing the distance, why are we even discussing this?

Orrah doesn't make them more resistable to damage or doesn't protect them from supression. Grens still can shoot them down, while they running on them or random HMG burst can stop that rush and turn them back.

And besides - they are not close combat squad in a first place, if we don't give them PPSHs. Mosins rifle shooting very slow, so, in close combat they might lose to Grens or Volks. It will all depend on random and luck, but I see pretty often, how Cons can't deal in close with Volks or even same Grens. Poor rate of fire and still low random accuracy makes that unit absolutely bad even in close combat. Make PPSH undoctrinal and that will make sense in something.

But... better DP-28s. Cos again obvious truth - Close range < Long range in CoH 2.

Orrah doesn't make them more resistable to damage

Yes it does, less time under fire = less damage taken.

Stop trying to make a big issue out of something that isn't really an issue.

Conscripts are fine frontline infantry. They just have a higher skill to use.

The reason why people refer to the veterancy is because that is the best part of them. They are good at taking gunfire and replacing their losses due to the fact that they're really cheap. I also have to mention asymmetric balance. Where Soviet's lack long range, they have ways to get themselves close to their foes by 'oorah'. Just like CartoonVillain said, it rushes them into their enemies or strategically secure buildings from support weapons or grenadiers.

I mean, they are the only frontline infantry I know that can rush a tank and rain down anti-tank grenades.

Now their merge ability also makes them unique and useful compared to other infantry. Its very useful on the go when you have a vet 3 anti-tank gun with low health or getting Guards or Shocks back into the fight without waiting.

Stop trying to make a big issue out of something that isn't really an issue.

Conscripts are fine frontline infantry. They just have a higher skill to use.

The reason why people refer to the veterancy is because that is the best part of them. They are good at taking gunfire and replacing their losses due to the fact that they're really cheap. I also have to mention asymmetric balance. Where Soviet's lack long range, they have ways to get themselves close to their foes by 'oorah'. Just like CartoonVillain said, it rushes them into their enemies or strategically secure buildings from support weapons or grenadiers.

I mean, they are the only frontline infantry I know that can rush a tank and rain down anti-tank grenades.

Now their merge ability also makes them unique and useful compared to other infantry. Its very useful on the go when you have a vet 3 anti-tank gun with low health or getting Guards or Shocks back into the fight without waiting.

This, Cons are fine it's the rest of Soviet Army that have problem, OH can only dream of getting a cost effective screening like Cons, Gren is expensive as hell and Osttruppen is doctrinal and has zero scaling, with OKW it is less of an issue but that's why you have Maxim.

This, Cons are fine it's the rest of Soviet Army that have problem, OH can only dream of getting a cost effective screening like Cons, Gren is expensive as hell and Osttruppen is doctrinal and has zero scaling, with OKW it is less of an issue but that's why you have Maxim.

I agree, they are fine and that the rest of the Red Army needs some help. I mean, Penals and T-34/76s have been sitting in the dust. Even the Maxim still has that issue when it comes to retreating, but because the gunner died the rest of the group has to literally come back to get the weapon itself before continuing.

I agree, they are fine

Yea, infantry with almost 0 firepower efficiency and 0 ways of making it better without doctrines (exclusive for USSR, lol), infantry, which can't hold a punch because of high target size stat, infantry, which only can run like a crazy and throw shitty grenades, exahusting my ammopool, right after exhausted fuelpool on unlocking that shit is fine.

If such infantry is fine, then I guess Grens are Uberfinegoodnice! And TommyRiflemans are not tommies, they are Rex Power Colts, each of them. Soviet mainline infantry is one of the worst infantry squads in game and definitely - worst mainline infantry squad of all factions.

Utility squads shouldn't worth like combinants (240 MP). Utilites of all other factions cost something around 200 MP. If they would cost so, then OK, at least it will have sense. More or less.

We may look at another "utility infantry" squad in game - Rear Echelones. They are pretty similar - cheap, ineffective in combat with their "drunk redneck accuracy", but working good as support and utility. And even may be turned in combat effective squad with... additional weapons! Rears showing us, that weapon upgrades can be really saving for Cons and their poor state, we shouldn't ignore that!

So, as I said, more sense it will have, if there will be some way to improve combat stats of those trashsquads. Commissars is good way, they can improve their accuracy and rate of fire by their aura, there are video, that shows how Commissars work, I like that. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFOfH70Yb4w

Or, Conscripts may already get non-doc weapon upgrades. Can somebody explain me, why USSR is really ONLY faction in game, which not allowed to have non-doc weapon upgrades for core infantry? And what they getting instead of such significant (it is significant) loss? From my point of view - USSR getting nothing, it's one way "downgrade", without compensation. That's not how assymetrical balance and balance in general works.

The only valid point going for conscripts here is that a stock PPsh upgrade for conscripts would work well as long as it came late/end game.

But that does not mean conscripts are useless in the slightest. Right now going T1 or using Penal Battalions is typically a poor decision outside of a teamgame context, which unnecessarily burdens conscripts. That is mostly what is at heart here.

Totally agree, 240 low popcap insanely durable 6 man squad buildable form base hq should be able to snipe evil nazis across the map, annahillate their puny tanks with rain of grenades, shoot down planes, upgrade to 6 lmg and 6 shrecks (one for each hand) while spawning out of buildings and planting demo charges.

Balance? Not even once.

I think the root of the problem is simple. People play different modes and not all units works for all modes on the same way.

Conscripts are fine on 1v1 and 2v2 as MAIN LINE INFANTRY. When we get to 3v3+, unless specific strats, you should deviate from the thinking that CON = main line infantry to CON = support/complementary unit. Leave that role mostly to USF/UKF or use doctrinal infantry.

Yea, infantry with almost 0 firepower efficiency and 0 ways of making it better without doctrines (exclusive for USSR, lol), infantry, which can't hold a punch because of high target size stat, infantry, which only can run like a crazy and throw shitty grenades, exahusting my ammopool, right after exhausted fuelpool on unlocking that shit is fine.

If such infantry is fine, then I guess Grens are Uberfinegoodnice! And TommyRiflemans are not tommies, they are Rex Power Colts, each of them. Soviet mainline infantry is one of the worst infantry squads in game and definitely - worst mainline infantry squad of all factions.

Utility squads shouldn't worth like combinants (240 MP). Utilites of all other factions cost something around 200 MP. If they would cost so, then OK, at least it will have sense. More or less.

We may look at another "utility infantry" squad in game - Rear Echelones. They are pretty similar - cheap, ineffective in combat with their "drunk redneck accuracy", but working good as support and utility. And even may be turned in combat effective squad with... additional weapons! Rears showing us, that weapon upgrades can be really saving for Cons and their poor state, we shouldn't ignore that!

So, as I said, more sense it will have, if there will be some way to improve combat stats of those trashsquads. Commissars is good way, they can improve their accuracy and rate of fire by their aura, there are video, that shows how Commissars work, I like that. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFOfH70Yb4w

Or, Conscripts may already get non-doc weapon upgrades. Can somebody explain me, why USSR is really ONLY faction in game, which not allowed to have non-doc weapon upgrades for core infantry? And what they getting instead of such significant (it is significant) loss? From my point of view - USSR getting nothing, it's one way "downgrade", without compensation. That's not how assymetrical balance and balance in general works.

Conscripts are not the worse infantry out there. Besides, these guys have had some issues during their first year and they've found themselves a good spot that makes them more reliable in the long run than Riflemen and grenadiers. Want to know why, their merge ability allows them to be useful on the field where they can reinforce elite infantry on the go before they can quickly reinforce at HQ or a halftrack.

You know what makes them better than other frontline infantry units, they are a cheap. I don't know about you, but they can handle taking losses and can return to the frontline if the player decides to give them some healing. Back during the beginning of WFA, these guys were better than riflemen because they were cheap to reinforce. This is useful when fighting against snipers or guys who kite with their 222.

Don't even compare these guys to Rear Echelons, because the main difference is that conscripts can actually do some damage to their targets. Even their veterancy allows them to take damage while they gain better accuracy at vet two and shoot faster at vet three.

If you look at these guys from the balance perspective, these guys are cheap, but cost effective at being versatile in the field. Especially at reinforcing, defending from cover, and even chasing after snipers if one decides to go risky.

Not to mention, you can have more conscripts on the field than rifleman, tommies, or grens because they are so cheap to reinforce. Compare 20 manpower of a conscript to the 28 manpower of a rifleman. These might not mean much since one has more manpower to reinforce, but when losses begin to stack up conscripts win the war of attrition. Its that part which the Ostheer, UKF, and the USF can't risk because manpower would simply disappear thanks to their high reinforcement costs as the Soviets may still have some extra manpower left. This is the case if players don't take too many losses everywhere.

What if I told you guys that mass conscripts strats are still completely viable in 1v1?
Seriously, they are. I shall throw around some buzzwords, flanking, spacing, staggered approach, timing push. In short: Ramp up your infantry micro back to your Coh days, and keep in mind that in practice hoorah and your ability to build your own green cover makes conscripts much less susceptible to suppression than riflemen - gasp! Further enhance your capabilities by selecting commanders that strenghten con utility/synergies (hit the dirt and PPShs especially, rapid conscription deserves a honorary mention as well), and faceroll your opposition back to the stoneage.
If all that fails you can usually simply blob at least OKW to death and call in AT partisans vs a nasty Luchs or go for Tank Hunters...Now go out and do the herp a derp. Last one on the dancefloor is a grenadier and dies to a doorflare.

And another thing you have to take in mind. You have the ultra ranged kat, capable of wiping 3 models with each rock.