PTRS penals informative poll

Saw the vid and you briefly mention the M3 and the SU sniper. Again, once the changes to Penals are implemented, the current situation would still remain the same.

-Are penals worth getting or not? You won't think about combining your army composition with M3 and snipers (you get sometimes a single one depending map and opponent and still not worth the cost/risk/reward).
I know there are some ideas roaming around on how to bring T1 as a whole into the late game, but this means it's just a stop gap patch till the other changes are on the scope of been implemented.

"What do PTRS Penals do, that Guards don't? And the answer is really nothing..." That's the problem. We are not getting T1 because we want snipers and M3, we are getting it because LIVE Penals with Flamers are OP.
The whole point of high risk/high reward on T1 was when either M3 and/or snipers were OP. Every noob can just blob around a ball of Penals with flamers and Guards and be effective. That's not the case with utilizing either snipers or clowncars. That's why live T1 is low-medium risk/high reward.


-Less relevant but i won't think PTRS penals will make Shocktroops return.
Show Spoiler

-IMO, the key to bring T1 into play is not having a single unit been viable/OP rather than the whole tier been balanced. I think with PTRS or not we are going in the direction of making Penals balanced but again making T1 been dead. Why not play Cons/T2 instead (quoting Jesulin/Hans) and with that, why not play USF/UKF competitively.

1- Penal: I do think that the AT Satchel is really a great idea. Why? Cause it would be too easy to bully/push around the unit if that wouldn't be the case. Guards have button to avoid this.
2- M3: same with other light vehicles (Kubel) why not start by reducing veterancy requirements.
Better veterancy? Utility? Faster unload/load of troops?
3- Sniper. Since we have to embrace the whole 2 man snipers concept why not:
-Make flare vet 0 again. Flare (same with mortar/trip wire) reveals cloaked units. Flare are shot by the spotter only.
-Sniper model has same sight range as infantry units (35)
-Spotter models has current sight plus 5 (45>50). You will have same sight range as shoot range.
-Vet1: increase spotter sight range by +10
-Spotter and sniper model can independently die. Spotter is cheaper to reinforce than sniper model (45vs90).
Train thought:
Show Spoiler

Looks interesting.

I don't understand the point of PTRS Penals

that sounds like a blobbing promoter #1

and is against the basic principles of CoH and RTS in general (combined arms > anti-everything units)




why not give soviets something like a PTRS tank hunter squad (4 men , 2 PTRS, at Nade + mines)

you know, for different unit types, synergy of army composition, combined arms and such...

I really don't know where the PTRS on penals came from or why it's considered such an important addition.

Like, I don't think I've ever heard that idea even tossed around until it was already in the patch.

Some people may consider me a bit of an axis fan boy, but I think the PTRS are a good idea. The point is, that is a SOV player won't get stumped at T1 if they end up seeing a bunch of light vehicles.

I don't think it will cause blobs. The penal PTRS DPS isn't what the guards is and it reduces their AI.

It's included more as a backstop to quick scout cars/luchs plays.

Edit: I think taking away the flamethrower decreases their AI overall, but now there is a choice between decent AI and "meh" AT.

Some people may consider me a bit of an axis fan boy, but I think the PTRS are a good idea. The point is, that is a SOV player won't get stumped at T1 if they end up seeing a bunch of light vehicles.

I don't think it will cause blobs. The penal PTRS DPS isn't what the guards is and it reduces their AI.

It's included more as a backstop to quick scout cars/luchs plays.

Edit: I think taking away the flamethrower decreases their AI overall, but now there is a choice between decent AI and "meh" AT.

If they get caught up seeing a bunch of lvs then they kinda screwed up.

I would certainly appreciate someone listing the PTRS stas on Penals compared to guards. Thx.

I think ome of the problems is if the PTRS is too strong it will be spammed and if it is too weak everyone wiill ignore it and you wasted your time.

why not give soviets something like a PTRS tank hunter squad (4 men , 2 PTRS, at Nade + mines)

you know, for different unit types, synergy of army composition, combined arms and such...

Excellent Idea. Wouldn't hurt if there was one additional dude in the squad though.

If the ptrs is too strong it won't result in blobs, it will result in axis skipping light vehicles and rushing for p4s. Spending fuel in an attempt to have your opponent spend munitions just doesn't play out.

If I know my light vehicles are countered outright by a unit munitions upgrade I won't bother with light vehicles.

Deterrents like the at satchel don't undermine rushing for light vehicles but they do reduce their capacity for shock value and shutting down counterplay without directly having to edit vehicle stats.

penals should not be changed they have thier weaknesses. 25 to reinforce and no snare or at for goodanti inf. if u lose a squad u prolly wont afford another one. easy to tank crush or light tank exp feed..n more

I decided to run a few basic scenarios with sov and ost build orders and the results to a certain degree counter the argument that sov t1 is defenseless against early vehicles and that t2 in inaccessible or rather not feasible.

Please note, I only ran basic test with ost and sov due to time and being tired from work.

Ost start with 430 mp and 20 fuel.
Sov starts with 400 mp and 20 fuel.

For ost to tech and build t2 is as follows.

T1 80mp and 10 fuel.
Bp1 100 mp and 40 fuel.
T2 200 mp and 20 fuel

For a grand total of 380 mp and 70 fuel.

For Sov to build t1 and t2 cost 320 mp and 30 fuel.

Now consider probable build orders for Ost.

mg, gren, gren, mg, for a mp cost of 1000 and taking till around 3min.

For soviets I have chosen

con, penal, con, penal for a mp cost of 1080 and taking till around 3min 35 secs.

I have chosen this b/o so that sov maintain map presence early game.

At this point soviets have spent 160 more mp. However ost now has to start teching and building to get AC out and the cost far exceeds sov t2. Edit :If At nades for sov are included then things begin to even out.Soviets can literally ignore tech for maybe 3 mins due to the fact that fuel is the limiting factor for ost getting an AC. I could get An AC out at approx 6.30 holding half the map.

There are numerous other factors that could be considered and how initial engagements play out certainly influence the outcome of the early game and corresponding tech choices. But the claim that t1 is flawed without AT is not 100% accurate.

For me mixing penals and cons, then deciding to go AT nades, or maybe t2, or maybe spam mines and try to hold till t3 is far more strategic and cerebral than just building 4 penals, upgrade ptrs when lvs turn up, then go t3 for t70 while my ptrs penals hold all enemy lvs at bay.

The other thing I noticed is it is very easy to constantly damage axis vehicles with ptrs, so the axis player will be constantly repairing his vehicles. The dropoff in AI once equipped with ptrs was nowhere near a profound as I expected...

I know this is an isolated test involving just two factions and not under automatch conditions so take from it what you will.