Volks are disgustingly good, need toning down.

You have a solid point Vipper. +1 to all you said.
I hope some dev can get this ideas and put them good use.

It might be that volks are 250mp when Tommies and rifles are 280mp or that Tommies and rifles need to side tech and dump double the muni to have double lmgs to wreck face. Of and likley have to hit base to GET those guns, not enemy territory. AND they need to throw more fuel at being able to deny cover via grenades.

As for penals, well that are 300mp and require a building that is 160mp (so getting the first penal out the OKW will can have 2 volks to support their Sturm vs 1 penal and a CE) penals are strong but pay for it by early game map control, and their AT upgrade makes them very vulnerable to stg volks. If you are afraid of the AT satchel, don't let them get within 10 range of you and you will be fine. It's there to keep you from being able to squish them and disrupt their rifles, it's defensive primarily.

Everyone is complaining about volks because they are even comparable to more expensive to get squads with more munitions dumped that require even more fuel and even more manpower to even unlock. Volks get everything without having to invest anything WHILE being able to put up a fight against larger investments

Watch the tourney games, like Devm vs Jesulin. Everyone is playing Soviets and everyone is goign T1 for Peniles and scout car. and EVERY game, 1 min after scout car flamer hits vs OKW (and most games vs ostheer) the Soviet has huge map control.



As for Brits, well Tommies are amazing, hard to kill, can heal on field, can group heal on field for 1-time investment. Double lmgs are better than stgs in the long run, which is why they have a MINIMAL upgrade cost. (Also please not that Brit tech is cheap. You need SOEM downsides!) But Tommies at least have the option of heavy AI dbl lmgs. Volks and grens do not. And nor do the poor grens have 5-men upgrades fffff!



lastly AND I NOTE YOU DIDN'T REPLY TO THIS POINT I MADE - Tommies, Riflemen and Peniles can be equipped with handheld AT that is GREAT against lights (which are supposed to counter early game inf spam but can;t because of the damn handheld AT) and very good vs medium tanks which are supposed to HARD COUNTER inf splob but cab;t because of th handheld AT

WHICH WAS REMOVED FROM VOLKS BECAUSE HANDHELD AT ON MAINLINE INF OP OMGZZZ

So answer that, plox.

Watch the tourney games, like Devm vs Jesulin. Everyone is playing Soviets and everyone is goign T1 for Peniles and scout car. and EVERY game, 1 min after scout car flamer hits vs OKW (and most games vs ostheer) the Soviet has huge map control.

Because cons, while more reliable then ever before, are still piece of shit non scaling infantry without doctrine support and T2 strats were removed from the game by changing Maxim into 30kg rattle.
Not because penals are "too op".

Volks also hardcounter maxims pretty well, stomp on cons so hard its not fun and are weak to early scout car.

Tournaments are about winning the prices.

That won't be done unless you employ most effective tactics available within current balance.

As for Brits, well Tommies are fckng amazing, can heal on field, can group heal on field for 1-time investment. Double lmgs are better than stgs in the long run, which is why they cost more. But Tommies at least have the option.

Damn, tommies are so amazing that brits couldn't win anything at CGS2, pro players who mained them abandoned them the moment actually competitive games started - I guess they just wanted to give opponents a fair chance, eh?

lastly AND I NOTE YOU DIDN'T REPLY TO THIS POINT I MADE - Tommies, Riflemen and Penals can be equipped with handheld at that is GREAT against lights (which are supposed to counter early game inf spam btu can;t because of the damn handheld AT) and very good vs medium tanks which are supposed to HARD COUNTER inf splob but cab;t because of th handheld AT

No one puts PIATs on tommies.
No one puts zooks on rifles.
PTRS penals are detterent, not counter, they lack burst to kill any microed light aware of them and working with own infatry to scout for them.

Flame halftruck also quite effectively hardcounters PTRS squads, guards included.

And no, medium tanks are not supposed to hardcounter anything, they are even called GENERALIST tank - medium tanks are capable of engaging all units, but they hardcounter nothing but non AT infantry and light vehicles aka all that isn't a threat to them in the first place.

You confused medium tanks with brummbar/stuh/other suppressive or AoE AI centered vehicles.

WHICH WAS REMOVED FROM VOLKS BECAUSE HANDHELD AT ON MAINLINE INF OP OMGZZZ

No, it was removed on volks, because it was strongest AT weapon in game on very cheap, very sustainable, self healing, easily spammable infantry that sacrificed very little AI dps to carry that most powerful handheld AT weapon and could alpha strike any medium vehicle in game.

Only Cons have sandbag native, but they don't have stock upgrades, everything else had to be paid to unlock. We're talking about cumulative tools that make them super strong for a cheap price. Now I know they need that vs Soviet Penal start, we can't really nerf volks and not touching penal or nerfing penal and not touching volks.

stg volks are better out of stock as they cost more duh, but u will get surprised to learn that at max vet even with stg it's a 50/50 vs vet 3 cons volks vet is that bad, btw okw pays for upgrades too, its called truck, and i already did the calculation some time ago of who pay most with tier with or with optional, okw pays more than everyone for all tier and tie with UKF if we count the optional upgrades, so okw does pay for the upgrades, but they pay taxes on it instead of buying upfront
volks should have gotten the mp 40 upgrade and got a boost to vet to compensate for stg

If usf and okw both try to get their AA HT out, and usf also want to get BARs and grenades, with okw and usf med and lieutenant costing right about the same and the AAHT costing damn close too... Who pays more to have grenades, weapons and the squads to carry them and their vehicle?

One could argue that part of the higher cost on okw teching comes from the ability to place it anywhere, and the fact that their final tech is a 360 bunker that can also shoot down planes. Usf obviously has their own boons, but they are constantly paid for via mp tax as well
Volks have no right being as good as they are given the price paid for then and lack of investment needed to bring them to full potential. Outside their kit they have some of the most complete support availible. They are guaranteed to have access to an MG and AT as well as an early game shock squad and late game they have access to one of the best AI squads in the game.


Side note, why is their "tax" unlocked abilities better than cons specifically bought abilities? Not arguing WHY they have a file nade, but why is it so much better than the molitov? Why does it have longer range and throw faster on a squad that can also get a weapon upgrade AND have it just given to them? That's the kind of blatant overstepping that makes volks so good. All the benifits of stuff with none of the balancing drawbacks.

Side note, why is their "tax" unlocked abilities better than cons specifically bought abilities? Not arguing WHY they have a file nade, but why is it so much better than the molitov? Why does it have longer range and throw faster on a squad that can also get a weapon upgrade AND have it just given to them? That's the kind of blatant overstepping that makes volks so good. All the benifits of stuff with none of the balancing drawbacks.

I do disagree with your intent of showing volks as some ubersoldier, i agree with the fact that volks now look like cons with steroids, including the "molotov flamenade" and a sandbag build ability but thats that, i mean they are not the best inf by a long shot, they just have some weak spots rounded up so its not that obvious how to counter them. They do have a downside, they are on the axis faction and specifically OKM that lacks a solid way to hold and harness land controlled, no caches, no reliable blob control, cheesy raketen, you already know that. The faction itself its the downside IMO. Its not like UKF that lacks of snare but if pzfaust werent on volks, OKM would be much worse stopping rushes than UKF.

If usf and okw both try to get their AA HT out, and usf also want to get BARs and grenades, with okw and usf med and lieutenant costing right about the same and the AAHT costing damn close too... Who pays more to have grenades, weapons and the squads to carry them and their vehicle?

One could argue that part of the higher cost on okw teching comes from the ability to place it anywhere, and the fact that their final tech is a 360 bunker that can also shoot down planes. Usf obviously has their own boons, but they are constantly paid for via mp tax as well
Volks have no right being as good as they are given the price paid for then and lack of investment needed to bring them to full potential. Outside their kit they have some of the most complete support availible. They are guaranteed to have access to an MG and AT as well as an early game shock squad and late game they have access to one of the best AI squads in the game.


Side note, why is their "tax" unlocked abilities better than cons specifically bought abilities? Not arguing WHY they have a file nade, but why is it so much better than the molitov? Why does it have longer range and throw faster on a squad that can also get a weapon upgrade AND have it just given to them? That's the kind of blatant overstepping that makes volks so good. All the benifits of stuff with none of the balancing drawbacks.

As usual, you've neglected the fact that frags are better than flame nades for anyone not in top 50, and that USF nade package comes with smoke, and that USF doesn't even need nades since they already win the infantry game handily if they've LT + BAR tech.

You also conveniently ignored the fact that the problem with USF vs OKW is having to defend early aggression into Luchs - going LT vs OKW means you were already holding your own and you're ready to begin your mid-game snowball over your opponent. The problems in the matchup arise from Sturmpio early dominance and USF Riflemen design rather than Volks themselves. Riflemen becoming 260/26 in exchange for tuning down their uber-veterancy would address the early game issue. Riflemen are the problem, not Volks. If Volks got unfairly nerfed, then OKW would be even more helpless vs Soviets and Brits. Tommies wreck Volks, but not having a snare, having no anti-garrison, and having no mobile indirect fire are hamstringing the faction overall. Basically USF and UKF suck, but the reason isn't Volks.

The downside of OKW base buildings is their extreme vulnerability when setting up and their significantly worse health/armour compared to standard base buildings. One-click off map abilities can destroy a full health OKW T4 - no other faction has that weakness. Every other faction has permanent tech - and that is itself the trade-off for the Schwer HQ. And as already mentioned, OKW pays more than any other faction for teching. USF/UKF can actually choose to invest in side-grades or to actually rush for tech. If you're ahead as USF or UKF, you can actually rush for a Sherman or a Centaur. The OKW P4 is definitely the best stock medium of the 5 factions, but the amount of fuel needed to get there is by far the largest. Many players forget that OKW starts with -10 fuel and the trucks are extremely expensive at 100/15 X2 or X3. Since your mechanised or battlegroup is almost never going to be outside the base sector, the 100/15 "tax" simply doesn't make sense based on your argument.

Getting a free Rifleman squad with a BAR and a Thompson is paid for via an "mp tax". The MP bleed you inflict on the enemy by having a superior squad as well as the additional territory more than make up for that reduced MP income. I'm sure no one in their right minds thinks of the free squads as "mp upkeep" - since they're clearly a massive bonus to field presence.

Flame nades are absolutely better than frags. A frag has to be aimed and timed to properly work. There is an immediate effect of course but that's it that's all. If you miss, if they hop out of the garrison, step away from cover, pay attention at all it is wasted munitions. The flame nade however denies that building, that cover. Throw it in front of a charging enemy and they will take damage from it oleven if you are a second too quick. This compounds with the STG and probably is the most broken aspect of volks. The ability to deny cover, and quickly, at at range for unknown reasons...

The problems in the matchup arise from Sturmpio early dominance and USF Riflemen design rather than Volks themselves. Riflemen becoming 260/26 in exchange for tuning down their uber-veterancy would address the early game issue. .

And create a similar issue on late game. There isn't a ober-like infantry squad on USF stock roaster to carry them after 20 minutes.
There is a simplest solution, just make riflemen 280 manpower squad value their price from the moment they hit the field, and not a-like 260 manpower squad value that need 120 munition investment + vet3 to finally match their price.

Flame nades are absolutely better than frags. A frag has to be aimed and timed to properly work. There is an immediate effect of course but that's it that's all. If you miss, if they hop out of the garrison, step away from cover, pay attention at all it is wasted munitions. The flame nade however denies that building, that cover. Throw it in front of a charging enemy and they will take damage from it oleven if you are a second too quick. This compounds with the STG and probably is the most broken aspect of volks. The ability to deny cover, and quickly, at at range for unknown reasons...

There is not really a universal conclusion which grenade is better, since it depends on the situation. The flame nade is definitely better against garrisons when you want it denied - but in most other cases a regular grenade would be much prefered. In fact, in almost all other situations I would much prefer the killing potential of regular grenades.

You conveniently left out the huge downside of flame nades which is that you can never take full advantage of certain situations because of its damage-over-time rather than burst damage. Hitting a clumped up HMG crew or squad will always leave it with a chance to retreat rather than instantly killing all the models, like the pineapple does. However these situations are much more common than garrison or cover denial. Actually, I think regular grenades are so much better overall that I would love to have it replaced by a Model 24 grenade and move the flame nade to Sturmpioneers.

The problems in the matchup arise from Sturmpio early dominance and USF Riflemen design rather than Volks themselves. Riflemen becoming 260/26 in exchange for tuning down their uber-veterancy would address the early game issue.

I agree, although personally I wouldn't change the veterancy as that would leave the USF more vulnerable mid to late game. I think it would be best to make Riflemen 260MP and add the (standard build of 3 Riflemen) 3x20 saved manpower to the weapon racks tech. This way USF has a faster opening while the mid game power spike timing is unaffected.

Side note, why is their "tax" unlocked abilities better than cons specifically bought abilities? Not arguing WHY they have a file nade, but why is it so much better than the molitov? Why does it have longer range and throw faster on a squad that can also get a weapon upgrade AND have it just given to them? That's the kind of blatant overstepping that makes volks so good. All the benifits of stuff with none of the balancing drawbacks.

molotov and flame nade have the same time to explode, volks cost more than cons they have 1 less man similar dps and worse vet, if they did not have some sort of upgrade why should they cost more ?

molotov and flame nade have the same time to explode, volks cost more than cons they have 1 less man similar dps and worse vet, if they did not have some sort of upgrade why should they cost more ?

So much wrong in this post its not even funny...

1) Flame nade is much faster, if you think 2 seconds are equal to 4-6 seconds, you really need some grip on reality.

2) Volks cost 10 more and utterly stomp cons, they do not have "similar" dps, they have superior DPS, the same DPS as grens, they had similar DPS before they got buffed, worse vet is irrelevant, cons scale better to make up for lack of stock weapon upgrade all other stock mainline inf has and they still fall short.

3) Volks do get all their abilities and weapon upgrades for absolutely free, with a whooping total of zero fuel investment that doesn't contribute to tech, volks abilities and weapon are locked behind time gate, cons abilities are locked behind hefty investment.

molotov and flame nade have the same time to explode, volks cost more than cons they have 1 less man similar dps and worse vet, if they did not have some sort of upgrade why should they cost more ?

The time from throwing and time to flames might possibly be the same but it's the time to throw that is important, not the time of ignition. The short animation (and MUCH longer range) enables it to frontally burn out mgs where the molotov cannot. Often I see the molotov thrower die while hes doing what I can only assume is pissing in the bottle because it takes so long to throw and the animation has to restart. Never see it for the lava nade. If you get in range with Volks the target WILL burn. Get in range with cons and you might need that extra model because it might take 6 guys to complete the action.

The time from throwing and time to flames might possibly be the same but it's the time to throw that is important, not the time of ignition. The short animation (and MUCH longer range) enables it to frontally burn out mgs where the molotov cannot. Often I see the molotov thrower die while hes doing what I can only assume is pissing in the bottle because it takes so long to throw and the animation has to restart. Never see it for the lava nade. If you get in range with Volks the target WILL burn. Get in range with cons and you might need that extra model because it might take 6 guys to complete the action.

I agree. Molotov from THROW to HIT comes slightly faster, but Molotov has a looong preparation time. The only bonus of that is that u can cancel the throw, but it's rarely useful. But cons often get molotov-death-looped - dying one by one trying to get the molly ready, while VGs throw it farther and almost instantly.

And create a similar issue on late game. There isn't a ober-like infantry squad on USF stock roaster to carry them after 20 minutes.
There is a simplest solution, just make riflemen 280 manpower squad value their price from the moment they hit the field, and not a-like 260 manpower squad value that need 120 munition investment + vet3 to finally match their price.

I disagree with you here. Elite anti-infantry specialists only buildable from 12 to 15 mins onwards being able to counter mainline 260mp infantry shouldn't be seen as a problem.

Basically what you want is Riflemen to be way too good - infantry that scales perfectly and has no weaknesses at any point in the game. Their current late game stats would be completely unacceptable for a 260mp unit.

Riflemen are designed right now to start off very weak, become decent, and become super powerful late game. Volks are good early game and have an STG power-spike in midgame, but are mediocre late game. The asymmetry in when they get their power boosts is problematic for the USF vs OKW matchup, but making Riflemen overly cost-effective is only going to swing things the other way with USF becoming too overpowering in infantry engagements.

I disagree with you here. Elite anti-infantry specialists only buildable from 12 to 15 mins onwards being able to counter mainline 260mp infantry shouldn't be seen as a problem.

Basically what you want is Riflemen to be way too good - infantry that scales perfectly and has no weaknesses at any point in the game. Their current late game stats would be completely unacceptable for a 260mp unit.

Riflemen are designed right now to start off very weak, become decent, and become super powerful late game. Volks are good early game and have an STG power-spike in midgame, but are mediocre late game. The asymmetry in when they get their power boosts is problematic for the USF vs OKW matchup, but making Riflemen overly cost-effective is only going to swing things the other way with USF becoming too overpowering in infantry engagements.

lol. So your solution is to keep Riflemen early game being somewhat equal to what they are today but cheaper, so they don't have the upper hand on volks. And then late game, when they would start to get that upper hand being ripe off by falls/obers because reason.

But since you say it shouldn't be a problem, just explain yourself: how.

Riflemen have never being design to be weak early game, quite the opposite in fact. They always been so strong that the entire USF design revolved around paywalls and hard strategical decision to mitigate their potential. The situation we are today is the result of late design to make all factions equal early-to-late game but never took in consideration that USF is laking tools and struggling with a specific design that can't work anymore the moment your remove the advantage to riflemen.

I did this comparison for cons, but now I think it would help to do it for riflemen too. Raw numbers in the top section, relative ratios at the bottom, sorry for the formatting:

Rifle squad effective durability: 5.15 effective models

Volks: 5 effective models

Rifle squad DPS at max range: 8.49 DPS

Volks: 9.035 DPS

Rifle squad DPS at 3 range: 33.945

Volks squad DPS at 0 range: 23.71

Rifle squad vet 0, 1 bar, 34* range DPS: 10.835 DPS

Volks vet0, 2 stgs, 34* range: 9.488 DPS

(*volks stgs spike up in DPS from 1.446 at 35 to 1.96 DPS at 34, given this detail, its probably more useful and informative to take the DPS at 34 and not 35)

Rifles, vet 0, 1 bar, close (3 range): 40.36 DPS

Volks, vet 0, 2 stgs, close (0 range): 29.266 DPS

Rifles, vet 3 effective durability: 7.81

Volks vet 3 durability: 6.49

Rifles, vet 3, 2 bars, 34 range: 18.062

Volks, vet 5, 2 stgs, 34 range: 13.326

Rifles, vet 3, 2 bars, 3 range: 64.439

Volks, vet 3, 2 stgs, 0 range: 39.779




Rifles/volks vet 0 effective durability: 103%

Rifles/volks vet 0 DPS max range: 94%

Rifles/volks vet 0 DPS close: 143%

1 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 0, 34 range: 114%

1 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 0, close range: 138%

Rifles/volks vet 3 effective durability: 120%

2 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 3, 34 range: 136%

2 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 3, close range: 162%


Didn't double check my calculations. Even counting the difference in utility (flame nades, and sandbags) and rack costs, to me, these numbers justify rifles costing 12% more. If you make rifles 260/26 as some have suggested, then ask yourself whether or not the utility that volks bring is actually equivalent to these combat advantages rifles have.

....
Didn't double check my calculations. Even counting the difference in utility (flame nades, and sandbags) and rack costs, to me, these numbers justify rifles costing 12% more. If you make rifles 260/26 as some have suggested, then ask yourself whether or not the utility that volks bring is actually equivalent to these combat advantages rifles have.

From a design point of view and imo if one keep the current USF tech design, riflemen have to be the best mainline infantry in the game and giving the USF player the option to either invest in riflemen upgrades or go for light vehicles. Unfortunately other units like Penal, Guards... have also be buffed considerably and are now comparable to riflemen. Which volks also need to be very strong.

Since high lethality units make the game less tactical and more arcade/rng I would suggest toning down VG and then also toning down allied infantries like Penal and Guards (and lowering their price).

Else one will probably have to change the USF faction tech making faction more similar, while not solving the problem of lower tactical play and "relative position" having a small impact.

I don't want to get into this because it's not the point of the thread, but you bring it up anyway in a lot of threads, regardless of its relevance.

You always say these units are bad design-wise because they diminish the impact of relative positioning, which is a mechanic that you seem to be placing on some kind of pedestal. Stuff like (not actually quoting) "grens with LMGs are good because of relative positioning," "smgs are good because of relative positioning," "volks are bad because they're okay at every range and diminish the importance of relative positioning, turning fights into a dps race." A weapon profile that is okay at every range is no worse for relative positioning than any other weapon profile is. I have yet to see you argue why this is actually the case for, say volks and penals, and not for grens or any other unit in the game.

Put grens against guards. Where is the relative positioning there? They're both best at long range and are bad at short, so it's just a DPS race. Same thing for grens against LMG rifles, or against LMG tommies.

Rangers against assault grenadiers? Rangers against panzer grenadiers? Any close ranged unit vs any other close ranged unit? No relative positioning, its just a DPS race.

Long ranged weapons are not affected by relative positioning any significant amount more than weapons that are okay at all ranges.

When volks face a long range unit, they want to be in close range. When they face a close range unit, they want to be at long range. when they face a unit thats good at all ranges, they stay at whatever range they're at and it becomes a DPS race.

Just like how when lmg grens face a close range or mid range unit, they want to be at long range. And when they face a long range unit, they stay at whatever range they're at and it becomes a DPS race.

As long as two weapons are good at similar ranges and bad at similar ranges (or universally okay at the same ranges), relative positioning will not be a factor. Given how many weapons there are, you just can't have every weapon be unique enough so as to preserve relative positionings importance for every engagement.

On a different note, you refer to high lethality units, but as far as combat infantry is concerned (no engineers, vehicles, scouts, etc.), the only low lethality unit would probably be conscripts. I don't know why you refer to volks, penals, and guards as if they were some exception as high lethality units when every other unit is too. Fair enough if you dislike high lethality and want to bring most combat infantry down a bit using conscripts as a baseline, but I just don't understand why you single out volks, penals, and guards as if every other unit wasn't similarly high lethality too.

Didn't double check my calculations. Even counting the difference in utility (flame nades, and sandbags) and rack costs, to me, these numbers justify rifles costing 12% more. If you make rifles 260/26 as some have suggested, then ask yourself whether or not the utility that volks bring is actually equivalent to these combat advantages rifles have.

Don't forget to add SP and 100mp advantage making 4xvolks start basic vs USF. As I stated before Volks are just the tree that hides the forest of balance issues on this matchup.
Then sandbag completely mitigate the difference in dps at long range and flamnde the difference in dps at close range.
Honestly both abilities make early volks way too good vs vanilla riflemen.
Now i also know that removing those abilities would put OKW in jeopardy vs Soviet...