What's your idea for conscripts in terms of design

They were perfect in the EFA Revamp mod, defensive and decent at mid/long range.
I really had a lot of fun using/testing them in the EFA mod.

Now the idea of being forced again to use penals an another 8 months is really frustrating and depressing.

In order for moving DPS to contribute anything, you need to be moving forward (you can't shoot while moving backwards).
In order to be moving forward, this needs to lead you to a higher-gain situation than you are currently.
In order to have a higher gain situation while moving forward, this means that you need to be able to trade more cost-efficiently at close than you do at far.
In order for this to happen, you need something like the current G43 curve.

I use gren g43s against players using snipers. I also use gren g43s against brits due to mortarpits, or against particularly mortar happy players. I don't use G43s to try and fight point blank. Point blank combat is suicide for grens in virtually all situations. I can only think of tommy squads caught out of cover that I actually want to close the distance for the sake of DPS with grenadiers. (But that has everything to do with how Tommy rifles work, and nothing to with grens in actuality.)

Also, fun fact: Cap zones are typically about 18m in diameter. Victory points themselves are almost exactly 5m by 5m. If you're using grenadiers and you're fighting enemies within a capzone: you're fighting at a severe disadvantage.

Conversely, if you don't plan on moving at all, then the best choice you have is find some green cover, stay there and wait for the enenmy to come.
Once the enemy is too close to you, and you are no longer trading well, you hit retreat and you did your job.

This is kind of perplexing to me. The best choice is always fighting from green cover against an enemy that's moving. I can't think of a single situation where the best choice is not to sit in superior cover against an enemy that isn't in position.

And yes, you make a solid point that hitting retreat when you are losing is an appropriate thing to do. (?)

So, my question is:
- If G43 only contributes to long-range DPS, why would you ever forgo the best and most cost-efficient LMG (LMG42) in the game for the G43?

- Note that LMG42 also increase DPS at all ranges; therefore G43 might be a downgrade compared to LMG42 at close-range.

For the reasons I stated above that I go for G43s, which implies not going for LMG42s: snipers and mortars. Personally, weapon upgrades for grens is usually a response to my opponents. But TBH I'm usually spending my munitions on flamethrowers and mines before weapon upgrades for grens. I usually get way more results for munis spent there than I do with grens.

Also, G43s don't drop. The implications of that I think are strong enough on their own.

In addition to everything else, we also have OST design that already makes the faction near helpless in close-quarter maps. G43 commanders and AssGrens kinda help to mitigate that.

...I refute your statement with your own following statement:

What about PGren STGs, then? The amount of distance PGrens have to cover to be cost efficient vs Cons is tiny.

...

But I'm curious though, what about PGren StGs when I was commenting on close range DPS curves of G43s on grenadiers? Like you said, the PGrens do have to cover distance, tiny as it may be, to be cost efficient vs cons. And PGrens, being a 4 man squad, don't have the capacity to offensively close distance without the support of sight or shot blockers.

Imo trying to balance a mainline infantry (conscripts) with a doctrinal ability in mind (G43) is wrong.

Stock units should be balanced around other stock units. Doctrinal abilities should adapt to that balance.

if it were up to me, i would rather have the mod team experiment with global upgrades with Cons than another stat adjustment.

maybe 60 - 70 fu + mp upgrade for (slightly buffed) molotov, at nade and a global weapons upgrade? I don't like LMGs, i guess ppsh is the only option.

a choice that make you chose between teching and cons.

if it were up to me, i would rather have the mod team experiment with global upgrades

Truth.

ppsh is the only option.

In a lot of ways, it really is. However, it would have to stack with the doctrinal PPSh upgrade. But it would give conscripts the ability to decrew (and steal) team weapons in the lategame with more reliability.

I really like the idea of globals, something in every tech, kinda panzer elite esq.
T0 you have molitov and AT nades
T1 could reduce their target size slightly, or their accuracy
T2 could be slight buffs when near the maxim, or slightly higher rof for mortars when nearby (single stacks of course)
T3 could have buffs for oorah (slight recc acc buff on the move, slight rof buff when stationary) or a single stacking buff for nearby cons (see above)
T4 could have cheaper purchase and reinforcment and/or t4 support (t34s ram a bit better, su85 see a bit further (get rid of self sighting ability of course) and katys reload a bit faster) when cons are around

They are supposed to be a utility focused backbone of the army, make them a fucking backbone! They dont have to fight exceptionally well, just help out wherever they are.

Additionally, as well as "trip mine flares" suit the soviet "elite infantry" why not give them a single stack aura for exp gain on cons? If you can slap 10% faster vet on rifles all the time i think you can let cons vet slightly faster when in proximity of a doctrinal and vetted squad...

if you buy DP1928 for your conscripts, wtf am I supposed to do with my Grenadiers?
At least Tommies don't have oorah and AT nades.

support them with the awsome T0 mg-42 Suppresionm platform????


if you by LMG42 for your greens??? wtf am I supposed to do with my constrips???

I'd like to see this game moving away from no-brainer weapon upgrades, especially LMGs as they can be effectively used through A-move commands.

Personally I loathe the lmg42 in team games because more often than not I'm fighting riflemen and penals that have picked em off a wiped gren. By my faultimate or by teammates, lmgs are nasty in just about any allied squad.

Glitching double lmg42 and especially lmg34s is the only time the upgrades are really worthwhile.

I disagree with the weapon upgrades since it still does not deal with the issue that Conscript Mosin Nagants are very unreliable in not only mid-late game fights but also the early game. Losing a certain engagement because everyone missed at point-blank due to their 55% accuracy affects them more as Conscripts also shoot slowly and have 1.087 RA.

Necessary Item

-Mosin Nagants to deal 10-12 damage from 16 with increased accuracy at all ranges. Possibly adjust cooldown/aim-times, but DPS stays relatively the same with maybe slight improvements at range. It would help them stall units, when behind cover, that are trying to fight at long-range. If it's 1v1 vs CQC squads there is always molotovs you can throw or you can fire as much as you need until they close and then you hit the retreat key.

This still ensures you won't overlap with Penals who would still provide much more AI firepower and can win engagements far more quickly.

Other Improvements

-Lower reinforcement reduction for each Conscript upgrade purchased by 1 going to a max of 18. This modifier does not apply if you purchase weapon upgrades OR the weapon upgrades/slot items are slightly toned down when picked up by Conscripts. Incentives their nature as cheaper meatshield units that are either meant to chuck AT grenades, charge in with molotovs, merge, or screen/scout for the more powerful units.

-Space out their veterancy so they can get some survivability before veterancy 3 such as receiving -10% RA at level 1 like Volksgrenadiers. Helps negate that 1.087 they have until veterancy 3.

I disagree with the weapon upgrades since it still does not deal with the issue that Conscript Mosin Nagants are very unreliable in not only mid-late game fights but also the early game. Losing a certain engagement because everyone missed at point-blank due to their 55% accuracy affects them more as Conscripts also shoot slowly and have 1.087 RA.

If the weapon upgrades are replacing half of the mosin nagants, then they would at least be half dealing with their unreliability. But you have to admit, on some design level, fresh, unupgraded conscripts shouldn't be models of reliability and consistency. By investing some upgrades into a global, passive upgrade, their unreliability is mitigated. This already occurs with molotovs and AT nades in that the conscripts can play a real, functional role. Their problem as we have all been discussing is their unreliability in combat.

A global weapon upgrade in that same, working model that by definition improves their reliability in combat should make sense... Enough to at least be worth trying. I mean why not slate the concept against the incredibly long list of changes you've crafted that are already in these mods, patches, and the live game?

Necessary Item

-Mosin Nagants to deal 10-12 damage from 16 with increased accuracy at all ranges. Possibly adjust cooldown/aim-times, but DPS stays relatively the same with maybe slight improvements at range. It would help them stall units, when behind cover, that are trying to fight at long-range. If it's 1v1 vs CQC squads there is always molotovs you can throw or you can fire as much as you need until they close and then you hit the retreat key.

In my opinion, their 16 damage rifles are what can actually give conscripts their edge. I would suggest simply increasing their close range accuracy into the 60% range, but simultaneously reduce the range the rifle considers 'mid' to match penals and rifles: 16. (Mosins are 25).

This would give conscripts a discernible shift in effectiveness at a consistent range with other allied squads. Their superior damage would prevail against Volks at close range until those StGs popped. If cons had a stock global PPSh upgrade soviet players would be able to match OKW's munitions investments with a fuel investment and balance out the StG advantage.

I dunno, it's baffling to me how staunch the resistance has always been to this idea over the years.

This still ensures you won't overlap with Penals who would still provide much more AI firepower and can win engagements far more quickly.

Except if they get PTRS though as per their current design, right? But I got to ask you, wasn't part of that push to give Penals so much AT addressing that threat of overlap? Show Spoiler

Other Improvements

-Lower reinforcement reduction for each Conscript upgrade purchased by 1 going to a max of 18. This modifier does not apply if you purchase weapon upgrades OR the weapon upgrades/slot items are slightly toned down when picked up by Conscripts. Incentives their nature as cheaper meatshield units that are either meant to chuck AT grenades, charge in with molotovs, merge, or screen/scout for the more powerful units.

-Space out their veterancy so they can get some survivability before veterancy 3 such as receiving -10% RA at level 1 like Volksgrenadiers. Helps negate that 1.087 they have until veterancy 3.

I wholeheartedly agree with those kind of vet changes. I've really disliked how with the ubiquitousness of vet 1 abilities, there's really only two effective levels of vet. (Except ol' OKW's vet )

Lowering reinforcement in any possible method available would be appropriate for conscripts. I always thought it was silly that maxims reinforce for cheaper than conscripts so that even merging was inefficient.

What if Conscripts could have a upgrade (possibly global) whereby each squad gets one SMG, just to slightly boost their firepower? It wouldn't directly overlap with the existing assault package upgrade.

Remove Molotov delay, and not at the second level of vet. Add non-doctrinal PPSh, replace PPSh in doctrine to SVT-40.

My thoughts exactly. and maybe do something about the trip flares

I'd like to see this game moving away from no-brainer weapon upgrades, especially LMGs as they can be effectively used through A-move commands.

I would argue that upgrades like the PPSH's aren't necessarily a no-brainer due to the range damage nerf. Much like how penals become less effective AI with PTRS'. Rather than foe type dependant they are more map dependant. Although reading your comment I see that you didn't specifically mention PPSH upgrades.

Just give scripts PTRS