Conscripts need to be balanced

Sidaroth who hurt you

Your bitterness against OKW is palpable everywhere i see your posts lol

I just play USF, so you can imagine how sick I am of OKW being basically "USF but better" in 1vs1, heh.

They could just ignore them to be honest, Volks are a funny unit, you need to spend more to beat them because Vet 5 special snowflake faction.

funny, in the past when axis wer spending more to beat cheaper allied tanks that, wernt fair but now .

fyi, upgraded riflemen beat upgraded volks

fyi, upgraded riflemen beat upgraded volks

For that to be true you need to spend 300mp and 40 fuel on side techs, plus all the muni. And they cost 30mp more to begin with.

Meanwhile for only 10 more MP more Volks stomp cons around the whole game. They also get a better version of their grenade and an equivalent snare for free.

For that to be true you need to spend 300mp and 40 fuel on side techs, plus all the muni. And they cost 30mp more to begin with.

Meanwhile for only 10 more MP more Volks stomp cons around the whole game. They also get a better version of their grenade and an equivalent snare for free.

OKW need to tech too to get upgrades and use things like snares mate. when it comes to comparing to cons, first cons have no upgrade, they need a upgrade (that i agree makes them UP) and when it comes to the flame nade, it costs far more then cons flame nade to use and finally snare aint free, it costs to use

and when it comes to the flame nade, it costs far more then cons flame nade to use and finally snare aint free, it costs to use

Both of those unlock for free was my point. The soviets need a side-tech for their molly (who cares if its cheaper to use its absolute garbage) and a seperate one for their AT nades.

I'm well aware of what OKW needs to do to get their grenades and snares, that is not the same as side-tech. Those costs are the tech costs for units, and everyone has to pay those.

Yes OKW has to pay for a truck before teching, but that is offset by the bonuses their teching gives them. The Soviets would gladly pay more if it meant they got more than a redecorated base sector.

The biggest issue for cons right now is that they weren't really considered when volks got the StG upgrades. In fact, not much with considered with volk StGs except removing their panzerschrecks.

Volks without StGs are much more in line with how the unit is supposed to function.

The StGs do two things: improve volks damage output at all ranges, and it eliminates their weakness: close range. Both cons and rifles are designed to function best at close range.

If the remaining Kar98ks are replaced with mp40s in the StG upgrade, Volks continue to have a weakness: which becomes long range. Rifles and cons would then benefit staying at range against upgraded volks and it would be the volks that would have to close.

The StGs just give volks the full strategic advantage the way they currently are.

Both of those unlock for free was my point. The soviets need a side-tech for their molly (who cares if its cheaper to use its absolute garbage) and a seperate one for their AT nades.

I'm well aware of what OKW needs to do to get their grenades and snares, that is not the same as side-tech. Those costs are the tech costs for units, and everyone has to pay those.

Yes OKW has to pay for a truck before teching, but that is offset by the bonuses their teching gives them. The Soviets would gladly pay more if it meant they got more than a redecorated base sector.

offset for what? they pay for it finished. just like how con have to pay for side techs, it doesn't come free

The biggest issue for cons right now is that they weren't really considered when volks got the StG upgrades. In fact, not much with considered with volk StGs except removing their panzerschrecks.

Volks without StGs are much more in line with how the unit is supposed to function.

The StGs do two things: improve volks damage output at all ranges, and it eliminates their weakness: close range. Both cons and rifles are designed to function best at close range.

If the remaining Kar98ks are replaced with mp40s in the StG upgrade, Volks continue to have a weakness: which becomes long range. Rifles and cons would then benefit staying at range against upgraded volks and it would be the volks that would have to close.

The StGs just give volks the full strategic advantage the way they currently are.

if mp40s replace stg's, ther vet also needs to be reworked for received accuracy so they suit ther purpose. i'd personally remove stg's and give them shrek thats nerfed to bazooka levels and see how that pans out

if mp40s replace stg's, ther vet also needs to be reworked for received accuracy so they suit ther purpose. i'd personally remove stg's and give them shrek thats nerfed to bazooka levels and see how that pans out

The upgrade itself could confer an RA bonus as well. It could have a vet requirement to boot.

It could also be possible that only the SMG volks had the lava nades, which itself is a powerful tool for assaulting a position. Normal volks could get their original grenade again. Though if you think about it, even current StG volks assault positions rather effectively without RA bonuses and using Kar98ks.

Returning to volkschrecks would require removing the faust as well most likely.

Returning to volkschrecks would require removing the faust as well most likely.

God, what a nightmare that would be. You can already do something similar with Riflemen, but tbh their snare takes like ten years to fire for whatever reason so Rifle zookblobs have never been a problem.

Only after penals are nerfed?

offset for what? they pay for it finished. just like how con have to pay for side techs, it doesn't come free

I think the idea is that cons suck, then to make them suck less you need to actually do something. With volks stuff being tied to teching they get better by naturally playing the game, for cons you need to invest 40 fuel and more importantly 250mp into getting a snare and the longest throwing nade in history that will only punish the enemy if they dont look at their unit for 30 seconds.

Compare to say volks and teching to med truck- your 10mp more unit now has their much more responsive, longer ranged (yes, more expensive too) nade, their snare, can upgun themselves, have an onfield reinforcement, the option for onfield medics and an option for FRP, they have teched including forward spawn for their leig, and 4 more units unlocked (ontop of the 3 theu start with) for about the same cost (15 truck+25 for tech, im sorry i dont recall the manpower cost)

Yes its great the flexibility that sidegrades give you, but not when they are SOO inefficient both with and without the U̵p̵g̵r̵a̵d̵e̵s̵ side techs

The biggest issue for cons right now is that they weren't really considered when volks got the StG upgrades. In fact, not much with considered with volk StGs except removing their panzerschrecks.

Volks without StGs are much more in line with how the unit is supposed to function.

The StGs do two things: improve volks damage output at all ranges, and it eliminates their weakness: close range. Both cons and rifles are designed to function best at close range.

If the remaining Kar98ks are replaced with mp40s in the StG upgrade, Volks continue to have a weakness: which becomes long range. Rifles and cons would then benefit staying at range against upgraded volks and it would be the volks that would have to close.

The StGs just give volks the full strategic advantage the way they currently are.

Vanila cons will actually straight up lose to vanilla volks even if they pop out of a corner and go straight into cqc.

Vanila cons will actually straight up lose to vanilla volks even if they pop out of a corner and go straight into cqc.

My experiences and tests sort if support this. Cons are indeed inconsistent even at their most efficient range. But even so, volks getting stgs doesn't help that scenario one bit.

Please note the efficient range for a squad is not the same thing as the most efficient range for weapon dps.

My whole thing is that I don't want to see units balanced on broken scales. Cons need to be balanced and I'd agree they need consistency so that they are reliably strong at close range. (And only close range.) But balancing them around the problem of volks stgs will only bury the issue further.

Okw v soviets has been about as bad as usf v ostheer. But I think cons have much more room to be balanced if and only if, the blaring flaws with volks stgs are addressed.

There is another missed element of the puzzle. A silent advantage everyone didint notice or failed to acknowledge that ultimately leads to some factions losing early game. I mean starting resources + the mp cost of the free unit, unit cost effeciency and side techs. Overall early game advantages and how they snowball into latter stages of the game. It looks like this:

faction - starting resources - free unit cost - in sum
OKW - 340 + 300 = 640
UKF - 340 + 280 = 620
USF - 400 + 200 = 600
OST - 420 + 200 = 620 - 80 barracks = 540
SOV - 390 + 170 = 560 - 160 barracks = 400

Also relatively allied mgs are weaker early game compared to axis because okw has sturmpios that can rape you in the house and mg42 is stronger than any other mg in the game. Also brit IS costing 280 can lose to pios 200 at close range. Even rifles can lose to pios close range. So ost early game with double pios + double mg isnt that bad when compared to soviet combat engineers + cons (stop comparing ost to soviets please, they are literally on a different level).

Both rear echelons and pios cost 200 but can you imagine RE actually winning against pios? This is how ost can still cap while you are forced to retreat. On top of which pios get flamer upgrade later on, can plant mines, build bunkers etc. Basically 10x more cost effective when it actually counts. RE can use later on man vehicles and carry weapons but any weapon they carry deals significantly less damage when compared to main infantry so its always better to equip your rifles first. While on the other hand a flamer is always usefull no matter the case, there is always a building to clear and flamers are best at doing that.

When we compare okw to sov we get less resources as sov even if we dont build barracks. Combat engineers cost 170 mp while sturmpios 300, double combat engis cost 340, can you imagine a world where double sov engis win against sturmpios? Maybe in very favorable circumstances. Combat engis cant win vs volks while sturmpios rape cons anytime, anywhere. If we decide to go penals our starting resources effectively schrink to 400.

This is possibly the main reason why some factions seem stronger especially in 2v2s where you have to contest the same resource points with the very first units. After the first wave of units okw will have favorable position due to effective resource advantage. Now advantageous okw positions force sov player to put in even more resources to regain that position. In that case soviets will be put in mp drain situation on top of already having less resources.

Even if we went con spam early and somehow defended against early okw push cons will become an even bigger mp drain due to lack of upgrades, no free at or nades, no monster scaling. You can always pay 250 mp and 40 fuel + pick a specific commander early to elevate cons cost effeciency to volks level but that limits your early game resources even more allowing okw to field another unit or tech up instead. Also this leaves you open to getting your commander countered because you chose to pick him early making it even easier for okw to stay ahead. Even if you gain an early lead there is literally no possible way to get ahead of okw if the okw player has at least half a brain.

IMO best way of balancing the game would be first to adjust costs and side techs. First, redistribute side techs to all factions equally and re-adjust teching costs. By side techs I mean an upgrade that is not a requirement to tech up which can increase your units cost effeciency. Second, adjust cost effeciency of units. Especially T0 and T1 units. So if a unit like cons performs like shit then it should cost shit. I apply simple logic to early game stage, two units costing 240 should be able to easily fend off a 300 mp unit (cons vs sturmpios). A unit costing 240 should be as cost effective as 250 mp unit. The same rule applies to mg42 vs maxim cost effeciency. How are those two mgs valued at 260 each is beyond my comprehension. When maxim has worse sight range, range, damage, suppresion, armor penetration and arc of fire. Literally worse unit in every aspect, less cost effecient but costing the same as mg42 260 mp becuse its called a machine gun, while at the same time mg34 costs 230 mp while still performing better than maxim. I mean whoever is balancing the cost of units (F*** YOU).

Game should be balanced stage by stage. First early game, then mid game and late game lastly when previous two stages allow both sides a fair game.

Btw Im not sure but this information might need to be presented in a separate topic, what do you think?

I just want all factions to have a fair early game stage. Balanced, equal.

IMO best way of balancing the game would be first to adjust costs and side techs.

Timing and pacing of units and tech is such an important component of this game. One would think this would be clear, right? Balance requires a stable foundation to measure.

Game should be balanced stage by stage. First early game, then mid game and late game lastly when previous two stages allow both sides a fair game.

Considering 5 of the 5 factions were designed to be imbalanced at specific stages of the game, this is a challenge. The purported goal of the balance patches is to achieve balance, but I don't think there's much consensus on what that looks like, how to get there, or to be honest, even where we are now.

Timing and pacing of units and tech is such an important component of this game. One would think this would be clear, right? Balance requires a stable foundation to measure.



Considering 5 of the 5 factions were designed to be imbalanced at specific stages of the game, this is a challenge. The purported goal of the balance patches is to achieve balance, but I don't think there's much consensus on what that looks like, how to get there, or to be honest, even where we are now.

This kind of attitude changes nothing. Because views on balance vary things should stay the same. Nonsense. Clearly current balancing strategy didnt improve state of the game drastically. Basically things have stayed the same for years. I understand that from an axis players standpoint the game should stay the same because he has clear advantages. But believe me you will have much more satisfaction from the game when its fair. I played axis especially during penal flamer meta, because I hate playing overpowered shit. I like it when its a challenge but a fair one too. Having an intelligent opponent is a challenge enough, being handicapped is something I dont need.

This kind of attitude changes nothing. Because views on balance vary things should stay the same. Nonsense.

You do realize I was agreeing with you, right?

Clearly current balancing strategy didnt improve state of the game.

This is, like, basically what I was saying.

COH2.org Balance Forums.

You do realize I was agreeing with you, right?

This is, like, basically what I was saying.

COH2.org Balance Forums.

Well the way you framed it wasnt clear enough. Next time write something like "I agree" or "yes". Simpler that way with fewer words.

Yeah but nevertheless trying to balance the game holistically where each faction ganes advantages during each stage of the game doesnt really work imo. Earlier stages of the game are always more important than later stages because advantages bleed from one stage to the next. Having advantage during early game gives you an upper hand during mid game and so on. Early game advantages snowball the game. Thats why its so important to have balanced cost effeciency especially during early stages of the game.

Simple solution might be adjusting unit building cost in line with its vanilla combat capabilities (by vanilla I mean no vet without upgrades, volks vanilla should take into account incediary nades and pfausts since they dont require upgrades).

Reinforcement cost would take into account units progressive strength taking into account upgraded weapon, max vet, utility abilities etc. TBH reinforcement cost should be scaling with units vet + weapon upgrades. So for each level vetted unit should be more expensive to reinforce.

This way both early and later stages of the game get balanced.