Login

russian armor

About soviet shock troops in WWII

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (5)down
18 Oct 2018, 17:12 PM
#21
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 14:51 PMVipper
Yes one could say that about allot of abilities in the game.

But one can not claim that "shock troops" are designed for urban defense. They have nothing special for urban fighting or for defensive fighting. They are CQC assault elite units.


Isn't urban combat close quarters?
18 Oct 2018, 17:22 PM
#22
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660



Because Relic was made not historical, boring, the Enemy at the gates stereotype a single company that has nothing to do with history. Assault Engineers (Shock Troops) have never been used in Stalingrad. Only Assault Teams (Regular Infantry)


Now Relic doesn't make historically accurate unit, yet you somehow keep saying that ShockTroops are a representation of these "assault engineers" except every single thing of this unit is telling otherwise.

You are simply in denial
18 Oct 2018, 17:29 PM
#23
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



Now Relic doesn't make historically accurate unit, yet you somehow keep saying that ShockTroops are a representation of these "assault engineers" except every single thing of this unit is telling otherwise.

You are simply in denial

No man, a few people gave you the facts. here you are in denial.
18 Oct 2018, 17:40 PM
#24
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660


No man, a few people gave you the facts. here you are in denial.

Facts from me:

1) Shock Troops appear in game in Stalingrad, that means that the unit is inspired to the elite shock army troops deployed in the closing day of the battle, when soviets where litterally fighting for Volga docks. NO UNIT in coh 2 campaign (or any coh campaign) breaks any time rule.
Germans lack a long barrelled vehicle for half the campaign. Not even ToW allows you to deploy units that weren't deployed by the time period you are playing on.

2) No quote, equipment, descrition and ability shows that they are ass engies

3) Those assault engineers weren't named Shock Troops, while the Shock Troops where the elite division deployed months after Barbarossa start.

Feelings from you:

1) They are assault engineers because i say so

2) Relic units aren't historically accurate because i say so, but only to the degree that i like.
18 Oct 2018, 18:09 PM
#25
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 17:12 PMLago

Isn't urban combat close quarters?

Forest combat can also be close quarters combat, what differentiates urban is Garrison and thus the specialized tools to deal with garrison define "urban specialization.

One could argue that units with flamers or weapons with better modifiers vs garrison like Vamp ST44 or the new G43 are "urban specialized" units.

Shock troops are not particularly good at dealing with cover (compared to other QCQ units) so the claim that shock troops "are urban combat specialists" is simply false.

Shock troops is already one of the most common abilities in COH2 (by adding them to urban defense they become the most common if I am not mistaken).

In addition when Relic asked for suggestion they made it clear that the suggestion should fit the commanders thematically.

Shock troops simply do not fit the theme of "urban defense" since they are not a defensive unit and can prove problematic with the aura buffs available to the commander and forward healing/reinforce.

Neither does a heavy assault gun like the KV-2.

Imo the main reason both units where introduced (and also the Stug-E and storm troopers) was increase the scope of the patch. Again imo that is mistake since the scope is pretty big to begin with and the effort should focus fixing the units and abilities already in scope a goal hardly achieved since there still problems with them. The same approach of expanding the scope was used in previous commander revamp patch and the result where average.

For instance in this patch Valentine if far from a good spot, while its speed when vetted is ridiculously high even without "war speed".
18 Oct 2018, 18:52 PM
#26
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2


Facts from me:

1) Shock Troops appear in game in Stalingrad, that means that the unit is inspired to the elite shock army troops deployed in the closing day of the battle, when soviets where litterally fighting for Volga docks. NO UNIT in coh 2 campaign (or any coh campaign) breaks any time rule.
Germans lack a long barrelled vehicle for half the campaign. Not even ToW allows you to deploy units that weren't deployed by the time period you are playing on.

2) No quote, equipment, descrition and ability shows that they are ass engies

3) Those assault engineers weren't named Shock Troops, while the Shock Troops where the elite division deployed months after Barbarossa start.

Feelings from you:

1) They are assault engineers because i say so

2) Relic units aren't historically accurate because i say so, but only to the degree that i like.


Shock armies which were created from November 1941 are ordinary reinforced armies. Compared with the usual army they had more tanks, guns and mortars.

If you recall the old and historical commander of the Theater of War: in 1941 were available:
- Shock Troops. dressed in SN-42, but it is clear from the name that this was developed in 1942
- Guardsmen, Guard title was founded on May 21, 1942.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Штурмовая_инженерно-сапёрная_бригада
Once again look at the article on Wikipedia and you will see this photo:

these are soldiers of the 1st Assault Engineering-Sapper Brigade in street fighting, Central Front, September 1943. Let me remind you the 1st Assault Engineering-Sapper Brigade was formed in May-June 1943.
18 Oct 2018, 19:49 PM
#27
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 14:33 PMVipper


Even if one agrees that shock troops represent "Assault engineers" (and they do not), the assault engineers are used in assault and not in the "defense" and thus do not fit the "Urban DEFENSE" commander thematically neither does a Siege tank as KV-2.



And Mechanized assault doctrine should be about excessive use of halftrucks to transport motorized infantry to the front line quickly and provide covering fire, not about StuG-e and tigers.

I also assure you that blitzkrieg and lightning war was the exact same thing, yet in coh2 these are 2 completely different doctrines.

Soviet advanced warfare wouldn't be focused on IL-2s and regular T-34/85, but actually advanced stuff, like IS-2.

See, its just a name to make the doctrine look cool.
You're only going to end up chasing your own tail in circles if you keep focusing on nomenclature instead of making interesting and functional doctrine.
18 Oct 2018, 20:50 PM
#28
avatar of NorthFireZ

Posts: 211

Does it really matter if Shocks are Urban Defense? Is it really that much of a make or break for the doctrine?

Imo, probably not since they are using this chance to revamp units instead.

I wouldn't mind if KV2 was in another doctrine, would you really if you played Soviets and want some variety?

Just like we're seeing OST Stormtroopers, it's been really cool revamp patch so far so... what's the problem? Why the whining about Urban defense? Is this really worth your time? How are Shocks going to really break the Coh2 experience with Guards are much more reliable? How many people actually dislike the fact Urban Defense is going the way it's going. What's a good solution if not for Shocks? Will, there ever be a better time to revamp KV2 if not for now? Do Commander Themes even matter now at all?

Food for thought.

18 Oct 2018, 21:20 PM
#29
avatar of skyshark

Posts: 239

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 19:49 PMKatitof


And Mechanized assault doctrine should be about excessive use of halftrucks to transport motorized infantry to the front line quickly and provide covering fire, not about StuG-e and tigers.

I also assure you that blitzkrieg and lightning war was the exact same thing, yet in coh2 these are 2 completely different doctrines.

Soviet advanced warfare wouldn't be focused on IL-2s and regular T-34/85, but actually advanced stuff, like IS-2.

See, its just a name to make the doctrine look cool.
You're only going to end up chasing your own tail in circles if you keep focusing on nomenclature instead of making interesting and functional doctrine.


these names aren't nearly as silly as some of the brit ones: Advanced Emplacements? Show me the historical basis for THAT.
18 Oct 2018, 21:46 PM
#30
avatar of LordRommel
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 278 | Subs: 1



these names aren't nearly as silly as some of the brit ones: Advanced Emplacements? Show me the historical basis for THAT.

I guess that the doctrine "Advanced Emplacements" is the result of the historical situation of Mongomery's tactic to wait in front of Caen until the Wehrmacht had been dug in :D

At the end all those names and design features were done to help players to recognise and to evaluate/judge the units. The unit has to work in the doctrine concept. Relic could have named the shock units "soviet infantry type A/B/C/ect". As long as they were balanced you should be happy with those units and doctrines.
At the end it is a game and not a ww2 simulation.
18 Oct 2018, 21:55 PM
#31
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

Technically even US marines are a form of shock troops. Heck, in game pgrens are more or less shock troops too by the same definition. The term is pretty loosely defined and should really be a more blanket term like “rifleman” as in an infantryman with a rifle as opposed to specifically mainline US infantry. The terminology of the word shouldn’t define the actual role/balance of the coh2 Soviet unit called shock troops.
18 Oct 2018, 22:09 PM
#32
avatar of skyshark

Posts: 239

Technically even US marines are a form of shock troops. Heck, in game pgrens are more or less shock troops too by the same definition. The term is pretty loosely defined and should really be a more blanket term like “rifleman” as in an infantryman with a rifle as opposed to specifically mainline US infantry. The terminology of the word shouldn’t define the actual role/balance of the coh2 Soviet unit called shock troops.


i'm glad we all agree now!

/thread
18 Oct 2018, 22:10 PM
#33
avatar of murky depths

Posts: 607

Technically even US marines are a form of shock troops. Heck, in game pgrens are more or less shock troops too by the same definition. The term is pretty loosely defined and should really be a more blanket term like “rifleman” as in an infantryman with a rifle as opposed to specifically mainline US infantry. The terminology of the word shouldn’t define the actual role/balance of the coh2 Soviet unit called shock troops.


What? No... the name is super important, and clearly shock troops must be...



If you really want shock troops to be an urban specialist then just let them upgrade to a flamer ;)

Actually, that'd be pretty dope. Kind of like a supped up version of sturms with the flamer.

18 Oct 2018, 23:10 PM
#34
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 19:49 PMKatitof

And Mechanized assault doctrine should be about excessive use of halftrucks to transport motorized infantry to the front line quickly and provide covering fire, not about StuG-e and tigers.

I also assure you that blitzkrieg and lightning war was the exact same thing, yet in coh2 these are 2 completely different doctrines.

Soviet advanced warfare wouldn't be focused on IL-2s and regular T-34/85, but actually advanced stuff, like IS-2.

See, its just a name to make the doctrine look cool.
You're only going to end up chasing your own tail in circles if you keep focusing on nomenclature instead of making interesting and functional doctrine.

The idea that changes should follow the theme is not mine but Relic's so you can argue with them that it only there to "look cool" if you want.

"Please use this thread to discuss or submit ideas for the Soviet Commander Revamp.

If you want to submit a full proposal, here are a few guidelines.
....
Suggested changes should not detract from the commanders given theme."

Contrary to what you have argued Shock troops are not a defensive units, both shock troops and KV-2 are assault units and do not really fit the theme of "urban defense".
18 Oct 2018, 23:12 PM
#35
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

You just keep repeating the same thing over and over again man. Nobody cares that it is called urban defense. It's about making fun doctrines.
18 Oct 2018, 23:14 PM
#36
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 23:10 PMVipper

The idea that changes should follow the theme is not mine but Relics so you can argue with them I you want.

"Please use this thread to discuss or submit ideas for the Soviet Commander Revamp.

If you want to submit a full proposal, here are a few guidelines.
....
Suggested changes should not detract from the commanders given theme."

Contrary to what you have argued Shock troops are not a defensive units, both shock troops and KV-2 are assault units and do really fit the theme of "urban defense".

The idea never held together anyway.
Only a couple of doctrines made any sense in context of their names and that went straight to the garbage can the moment modders revamped first commander.

Names now are just a label to know which group of abilities you talk about, that's it.

But ok, lets have it your way.
Lets put soviet bunkers and hull down for soviet tanks.
That's defensive, isn't it?

Hell, we could even replace shocks with guards.
Guards like the name suggests are guarding, therefore can't attack, therefore are perfect fit for defensive doctrine.
18 Oct 2018, 23:14 PM
#37
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 23:12 PMTobis
You just keep repeating the same thing over and over again man. Nobody cares that it is called urban defense. It's about making fun doctrines.

I do not really see any fun in doctrine than can turtle up in FHQ or forward reinforcement/healing point get shock troops and ATG by CP 2 and then turtle up even more with KV-2 while being able to use 2 auras to buff its infantry.
18 Oct 2018, 23:16 PM
#38
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 23:14 PMVipper

I do not really see any fun in doctrine than can turtle up in FHQ or forward reinforcement/healing point get shock troops and ATG by CP 2 and then turtle up even more with KV-2 while being able to use 2 auras to buff its infantry.


So now you don't want DEFENSIVE doctrine to turtle, aka be defensive?
But turtling is thematically correct for DEFENSIVE doctrine.

And what 2 auras?
FHQ on ambient building isn't going to follow your army anywhere and is an active ability which will be not active 75% of the time.

AoE Oorah for 10 seconds can hardly be called an aura.
18 Oct 2018, 23:21 PM
#39
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 23:14 PMKatitof

The idea never held together anyway.
Only a couple of doctrines made any sense in context of their names and that went straight to the garbage can the moment modders revamped first commander.

Names now are just a label to know which group of abilities you talk about, that's it.

But ok, lets have it your way.
Lets put soviet bunkers and hull down for soviet tanks.
That's defensive, isn't it?

Hell, we could even replace shocks with guards.
Guards like the name suggests are guarding, therefore can't attack, therefore are perfect fit for defensive doctrine.

There is little point in debating anything with you since you simple derail any and all threads.

You claim that the name of commanders means nothing but the fact is Relics clearly has a different opinion and wants commander abilities to be mathematical.

You claimed Shock troops where defensive units when both in game and in real life they where offensive oriented.

You are wrong in both account and I have little more to add and no intention of reaching 11.000 post count with pointless posts.

Have a nice day.
18 Oct 2018, 23:26 PM
#40
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2018, 23:16 PMKatitof


So now you don't want DEFENSIVE doctrine to turtle, aka be defensive?
But turtling is thematically correct for DEFENSIVE doctrine.

And what 2 auras?
FHQ on ambient building isn't going to follow your army anywhere and is an active ability which will be not active 75% of the time.

AoE Oorah for 10 seconds can hardly be called an aura.

There is no point in debating with someone that claim that "inspire" is not an aura.

Also read the patch notes if you want to know the affects or inspire, it is not actually a " Oorah for 10 seconds" that is simply misleading. PLS stop trolling.

KV-8
-Capture Point replaced with Inspire: Infantry within 30m will move faster and have their weapon cooldowns reduced by 20%. Costs 25 munitions.
PAGES (5)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

725 users are online: 725 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM