They reduced the RA tommies get, than BUFFED Cover bonus to balance the general nerf.
Yes, shittalking, like @ZombieFrancis said it's a passive that affect ONLY dps.
"I was talking about dps.."
At any range wfa mainlines dps is better in a paralleled vetting situation where the same muni has been spent in upgrades, it's not relative AT ALL if both long AND close range dps are higher for allies, it means that the dps curve is always higher, and on the top of that IS dps gets boosted by any cover while riflemen are 5 men as well (and IS can get 5th man too).
Penals also outgun volks while being muni free up to vet 3 volks, but keep up with the 6th man.
There is either no numerical advantage (Rifles, 5 men IS) or the individual dps is so worse that 1 more man won't keep 4 men IS from slaughtering volks whenever they are in a hole in the ground (note that 5 men IS will win even out of cover against out of cover volks).
Your claims about dps being relative are shittalking nontheless.
Lol.
If you look at ZombiFrancis' last post, he just said that he was basically agreeing with me and that you were wrong. Surprised at how you read a post in which the poster backed up my claim and said that yours was wrong, then decided that he was agreeing with you. Guess you'll see whatever you want to see; not surprising since you either completely make up stats or present them entirely out of context.
The fact that Vipper, ZombiFrancis, and a player who is top 10 on the 1v1 leaderboards for the factions he plays (even with frequent computer crashes, sucks losing 3 entire ranks from a single crash) all disagree with you should you give you some idea where your argument stands.
Individual volks models have (negligibly) better dps at max range than riflemen (both at vet 0). Individual volks models have better dps at all ranges than cons. Individual volks models have better dps than infantry sections at close range. Argue cover bonus all you want, but everyone knows that the cover balance is situational while the extra model that a volks squad gets counts for a lot and isnt conditional. Lets not forget that infantry sections and riflemen cost 30 manpower per squad more, and that penals are generally outnumbered because you have to construct a t1 first.
You would expect riflemen to beat volks because they cost more and because the entire faction that theyre a part of was built around them. You would expect infantry sections to win against volks because they cost more. The fact that volks have slightly better dps per model than riflemen at long range means youre factually incorrect, and means that volks have a situation where theyre better than a squad that costs more and makes up a larger portion of its faction's power budget. The fact that volks will beat an infantry section in cover at close range, or an infantry section out of cover at long range also means that they have scenarios where they punch above their weight.
You're saying that WFA core infantry has better dps than volks. I've replied that it depends on whether youre talking about per model or per squad. It is an undebatable fact that the theoretical dps of volks is better than the theoretical dps of infantry sections and riflemen in certain different mixes of range, sometimes per model or per squad.
Vet complicates the argument, but everyone (or nearly everyone) agrees that volks have better vet than the other WFA core infantry. Everyone (or, again, nearly everyone) agrees that the stg upgrade is far more accessible and far more efficient than the other WFA core infantry weapon upgrades.
It's really hard to get a decent/productive discussion going when youre dripping in condescension upon your first reply and constantly making up (literally making up) stats to support your views (ex: "it's not relative AT ALL if both long AND close range dps are higher for allies, it means that the dps curve is always higher"; again, volks FACTUALLY have a higher theoretical max range dps than riflemen and have a higher dps at close range than infantry sections). As much as I'd like to put the argument to rest, it's obvious that at this point, you'll just form a reply and fabricate some entirely new "facts" to attack me, after which 2 other posters and I will tell you youre wrong (just like this time). It's taking me far more effort to disprove all of these literally made up stats than it takes for you to just pull them out of nowhere, so I'll stop here.