Did ppsh upgrade get hit with a double nerf?

I browsing through the patch notes, I noticed that the price for ppsh had been increased to 60 munitions.

"Great" I thought "that means they probably left it at 3 ppsh and raised the cost so it cannot be abused as easily".

I fire up the game and give them a shot, only to notice that the description says that they only get equiped with two ppsh.

So have both the priced been raised and numbers lowered, or does only one of them apply? Personally I think the upgrade at this point is only still useful if the price has been increased, because 2 ppsh simply makes them too "meh".

As a follow up question, has anyone tried going for a shock troops doctrine and reinforcing them with conscript merge? I experienced a bit with it and it seems like a quite good way to get a very powerful and cheap ppsh unit

As far as I know, the price went up 50% and the number of PPSHs went down 33%. I don't do maths but that sounds like quite a big change to me, and both seem to have applied.

Tooltip is wrong, they still get 3. Regardless, the muni increase was supposed to accompany G43 being 60 muni so it didn't need to go live anyway.

For the second part, the merge/shocks thing has been a meme for a long time. Only issue is that the merged conscripts dont share the defensive bonuses the shocks get, also a single CQB unit gets torn apart by lmg/rifle blobs, its what make ppsh cons so good as you can just run 1:1 with squads and win the engagements rather than just being focused down like shocks usually are

Oh ignore me then I didn't bother to check the models in game.

Tooltip is wrong, they still get 3. Regardless, the muni increase was supposed to accompany G43 being 60 muni so it didn't need to go live anyway.

For the second part, the merge/shocks thing has been a meme for a long time. Only issue is that the merged conscripts dont share the defensive bonuses the shocks get, also a single CQB unit gets torn apart by lmg/rifle blobs, its what make ppsh cons so good as you can just run 1:1 with squads and win the engagements rather than just being focused down like shocks usually are

So if I understand you right, then the actual performance of ppsh cons should be similar to before the patch right? If that's the case the guards rifle should still be a pretty decent doctrine I suppose

as for your argument for cons, I'm not really sure I understand it. Would it not generally be better to be focused rather than spread out in performance across different distances? I don't see how the 1:1 performance is better when the unit is split evenly between long and short range weapons

So if I understand you right, then the actual performance of ppsh cons should be similar to before the patch right? If that's the case the guards rifle should still be a pretty decent doctrine I suppose

as for your argument for cons, I'm not really sure I understand it. Would it not generally be better to be focused rather than spread out in performance across different distances? I don't see how the 1:1 performance is better when the unit is split evenly between long and short range weapons

Whats so good about ppsh cons vs shocks is that all your conscripts beat lmg grens in 1:1 side engagements, averse to when you just have a single shock and your opponent can blob up grens and focus down individual squads. With their Vet3 RA bonuses cons can walk upto a squad and even if they lose 3 models on the approach they force a retreat usually which is kind of OP when you have 4+ squads with that capability. Shocks really arent that much better than a ppsh con because they both kind of lose and win all of the same engagements and shocks you can typically only get one, it locks you out of guards or radio intercept which are the 2 best things soviets get from a commander and costs 390mp which is archaic after all the cost changes to elite squads over the last 5 or 6 patches.

Merging into shocks is great but u r better off just having ppsh cons and merging into guards

Only shining light for Shocks is that at vet 1 their smoke grenade is amazing (15s cooldown?) because Soviets typically have trouble using smoke with turnrate and fire times on their mortar teams being really bad

So if I understand you right, then the actual performance of ppsh cons should be similar to before the patch right? If that's the case the guards rifle should still be a pretty decent doctrine I suppose

as for your argument for cons, I'm not really sure I understand it. Would it not generally be better to be focused rather than spread out in performance across different distances? I don't see how the 1:1 performance is better when the unit is split evenly between long and short range weapons

Cons performance is unchanged. I think by 1 1 he means one con squad for every enemy squad

Whats so good about ppsh cons vs shocks is that all your conscripts beat lmg grens in 1:1 side engagements, averse to when you just have a single shock and your opponent can blob up grens and focus down individual squads. With their Vet3 RA bonuses cons can walk upto a squad and even if they lose 3 models on the approach they force a retreat usually which is kind of OP when you have 4+ squads with that capability. Shocks really arent that much better than a ppsh con because they both kind of lose and win all of the same engagements and shocks you can typically only get one, it locks you out of guards or radio intercept which are the 2 best things soviets get from a commander and costs 390mp which is archaic after all the cost changes to elite squads over the last 5 or 6 patches.

Merging into shocks is great but u r better off just having ppsh cons and merging into guards

Only shining light for Shocks is that at vet 1 their smoke grenade is amazing (15s cooldown?) because Soviets typically have trouble using smoke with turnrate and fire times on their mortar teams being really bad

Thanks for the feedback. This is certainly food for thought, though I'll admit that I'm probably not done with experimenting.

For example the Counterattack doctrine gives you shocks and "for mother russia", which when used right must be incredible to rush a retreat path and put down the full punishment of 6 ppsh on retreating units. That should be a guaranteed wipe againt pretty much anyting

While PPSh conscripts are a powerful tool, I kinda feel like they might be too powerful. By the late game it is fully visblebto have all of your conscripts upgraded with them even after the price increase. I’d like to see them rebalanced to be a two gun upgrade that costs less. That way they are good, but not too good. Thoughts?

While PPSh conscripts are a powerful tool, I kinda feel like they might be too powerful. By the late game it is fully visblebto have all of your conscripts upgraded with them even after the price increase. I’d like to see them rebalanced to be a two gun upgrade that costs less. That way they are good, but not too good. Thoughts?

I kind of like them going the way of price increase. 40 munis was clearly not enough compared to their performance, but two ppsh would probably just mean that they would underperform at every distance.

At the current price it is comparable to the STG upgrade for Volks and lmg42 upgrade for Grens, which are also great throughout the game and pretty much at any distance. The 3 ppsh adds to the flexibility of the conscript and delay the spam even though it dosen't stop it. I'll at least give it some more time before criticizing it

That’s fair enough. I’m not saying it was wrong or that it doesn’t work, I was just saying what I would’ve done. Lol

Conscripts are supposed to be a sort of multi role hack of all trades infantry unit compared to the Wehrmacht’s more specialized grenadiers (long range combat) and Panzer Grenadiers (mid to short range combat). Conscripts are supposed to beat grens at short range but lose at long range, while the opposite is true for PGrens. They win as long as you play to the enemy’s weakness. The PPSh upgrade allows them to beat everything up close, even dedicated short range units like PGrens when it gives them three SMGs. I like them having two because it keeps their role unchanged as a “counter range” unit but still boosts performance at flanking and clearing team weapons.

In short, three SMGs at any price changes the role to assault CQB type that is potentially spammanle and overlaps with Shock Troops, while two SMGs keeps them in their role as a generalist unit but boosts performance up as a flanking unit.

Both styles of balancing the weapon upgrade can be balanced, but I think having them come cheaperand as only a pairbworks better thematically and with less overlap.

That’s fair enough. I’m not saying it was wrong or that it doesn’t work, I was just saying what I would’ve done. Lol

Conscripts are supposed to be a sort of multi role hack of all trades infantry unit compared to the Wehrmacht’s more specialized grenadiers (long range combat) and Panzer Grenadiers (mid to short range combat). Conscripts are supposed to beat grens at short range but lose at long range, while the opposite is true for PGrens. They win as long as you play to the enemy’s weakness. The PPSh upgrade allows them to beat everything up close, even dedicated short range units like PGrens when it gives them three SMGs. I like them having two because it keeps their role unchanged as a “counter range” unit but still boosts performance at flanking and clearing team weapons.

In short, three SMGs at any price changes the role to assault CQB type that is potentially spammanle and overlaps with Shock Troops, while two SMGs keeps them in their role as a generalist unit but boosts performance up as a flanking unit.

Both styles of balancing the weapon upgrade can be balanced, but I think having them come cheaperand as only a pairbworks better thematically and with less overlap.

I see where you're comming from, but I think in balance terms it is a bit of a "the devil and the deep sea" situation where one could potentially make the upgrade completely moot and the other does not solve the core of the problem. I imagine the change to price increase has been based on some playtesting, where this was picked as the lesser evil

maybe make ppsh upgrade chaneg one of their skill to a different one?
and reduce ppsh to 2 per squad?
Becasue shock troop should be the guy melting stuff left and right not the conscript.

but maybe its more a problem of shock being meh than concript with ppsh being too good?...

ppsh conscript seem to be a problem in 1vs1 not in higher player number games where unit concentration is higher.

maybe make ppsh upgrade chaneg one of their skill to a different one?
and reduce ppsh to 2 per squad?
Becasue shock troop should be the guy melting stuff left and right not the conscript.

but maybe its more a problem of shock being meh than concript with ppsh being too good?...

ppsh conscript seem to be a problem in 1vs1 not in higher player number games where unit concentration is higher.

It's definatly a problem with Shocks being a bad investment. PPSH cons still have the issue with if they are focused down your opponent could probably wipe them, but still have to retreat because there's more of them unlike a shock squad. The armor of a shock squad makes them more durable so you can retreat and likely not lose them unlike a con squad to a LMG Blob.. tho you'll be retreating pretty quickly as stated earlier you're only going to be fielding 1 of the usually....

While guards you field 2-3 sometimes and their LMG is great, and light/medium AT capabilities are probably in the best spot they've ever been except for the cheezy era where PTRS's used to snipe shot models.

x3 PPSH seems good, this means that they are now CC fighters and retain half dps at long range giving grens the superior upperhand, which is how axis engagements usually prefer.