Conscripts need to be cheaper

I think what he means is they are just bodies if they don't have any teeth. Which they don't. They can't defend if they are not a threat to the infantry that are attacking and I agree with that.

With the suggested changes the Soviet player will have the option:
a) spam conscripts cap and defend areas with them and wait for doctrinal support
b) Built T1 and play aggressively with Penals
c) Built T1 and combine conscripts and Penal
d)Built T2 and support conscripts with support weapon

A defensive simply unit does not have to good far DPS because the it the ratio of damage that it takes to the damage it does that makes that is important.

No, conscripts are fine as they are now. Yes they cost 240 to build, but you can build them from the start. They aren't supposed to be a infantry unit you just spam to fill your front lines and think they will hold in every phase of the game (with doctrine choice they can work). Conscript mp reinforce cost is dirt cheap already. Point I am trying to say that soviet players think that they can play conscript spam, because they are seeing gren spam from OST and this logic is wrong how the soviets work.

This won't work.

I will ignore your "defensive" infantry and will focus-fire your "offensive" glass canons.

Well one need to test it.

yes you can if it has an ability that gives it damage reduction like hit the ground or/and when you use another infantry to attack like suggested penal or/and it fi support it with maxim/moratrs.

Have a nice day.

So how do you even imagine that?

Defensive infantry that needs to close in?

Or defensive infantry with ability that reduces damage to the point, where long range squads with LMGs can't deal with it, because if it can't do that, its not defensive by definition, since it can't defend the area its supposed to?

Starting to see how stupid your idea sounds?

You can have short range infantry OR defensive infantry - you can't have both and grens, tommies and even Osttruppen(you know, the actual defensive infantry) are perfect example of that.

So how do you even imagine that?

Defensive infantry that needs to close in?

Or defensive infantry with ability that reduces damage to the point, where long range squads with LMGs can't deal with it, because if it can't do that, its not defensive by definition, since it can't defend the area its supposed to?

Starting to see how stupid your idea sounds?

You can have short range infantry OR defensive infantry - you can't have both and grens, tommies and even Osttruppen(you know, the actual defensive infantry) are perfect example of that.

PLS STOP the personal insults.
Have a nice day.

Conscripts should be the cheapest and most cost efficient as they have no upgrades non-doctrinal.

That should be Ostruppen, so if cons get cheaper, Ostruppen should too.

I'd rather just buff their range DPS or make them more effective. They are shit units that mandate you not only upgrade them but also pick a commander to give them such utility that is often granted to other units. Most arguments against such a unit is "it’s in t0" but is irrelevant as units such as volks,sturms, Rifles, MG42, and more are all plopped into t0.

As such IMO they should at least have some sort of role other than to die, the changes we had in the previous patch (or the ones that were removed) made cons viable and increased their long-range damage rather than being required to be at range 0-10 for actual damage.

The fault/flaw in this logic that such units must get close to do damage mandates that you lose models to get close, but you will always trade at as cost meaning the 24mp replacement can begin to add up especially in late game when they simply lack any sort of map presence. Other units simply get a pass such as volks and rifles that scale but due to the "low price" of cons apparently that means we cannot have them scale.


I would have to agree that if we must keep the same cons in current build and stats, 220 with maybe a 20mp replacement feels fair.

Cons are already 20 to reinforce.

The only mainline with a weird reinforce cost is the Infantry Section, and the Sturmpio if you consider it a mainline.

I don't think Cons are as bad as people claim - I go for them pretty often, and since PPSH commanders are pretty meta, they tend to perform pretty well overall. I think that making them too good would make them overshadow T1 builds.

Imo the main problem with Cons is the nade techs costing such a high amount of MP and fuel. Something like 150/20 for both nades combined would be far more reasonable. The fuel cost of AT Nade is positively criminal, and delays the T70 by so much. It's one of the reasons why so many people crutch on Penals/Guards.

Cons cost the right price.
Soviets have a problem with their teching it needs a change just like USF.

It's not about Cons cost being high, but rather volksgrenadier being too cheap.
(they cost the same as cons, they perform better and get their upgrades for free).

Sturmpios aren't mainline, many players seem to be using them as mainline inf in fear of light tanks or they want to be aggressive in early game.
Good players never build a second sturmpio when the game starts.

Cons are already 20 to reinforce.

Imo the main problem with Cons is the nade techs costing such a high amount of MP and fuel. Something like 150/20 for both nades combined would be far more reasonable. The fuel cost of AT Nade is positively criminal, and delays the T70 by so much. It's one of the reasons why so many people crutch on Penals/Guards.

This. Agree 100%

They already did this in the past, but somehow the axis defense force thought it was op so they removed a joint package upgrage.

To be honest I don't honestly see any reason for cons to even HAVE a side tech given their performance... You could tack 20 extra fuel onto t3 for timing and I don't think it would make cons OP to have their kit outright. Would make up for their I'll performance for cost and they could be left at 240mp. T0 techs could include a munitions acquisition that cheapens abilities by 5mu across the board or something for combat engies (I think that armour for them would be wicked, making them durable if nothing else)

Aren't volksgrendiers literally translate to Civilian Soldiers and if I remember history right, Volks should be on par of Conscripts since thats what they were historically.

I mean, thats just me looking at it from a historical point, but yeah, I think Conscripts should be reduced in manpower cost and upkeep rate.

Aren't volksgrendiers literally translate to Civilian Soldiers and if I remember history right, Volks should be on par of Conscripts since thats what they were historically.

I mean, thats just me looking at it from a historical point, but yeah, I think Conscripts should be reduced in manpower cost and upkeep rate.

You are thinking of volksstum. Volksgrendiers were solders.

You are thinking of volksstum. Volksgrendiers were solders.

Ahh, yeah; thats right. Thanks for the correction, but if I remember correctly, in vCOH, Volks were the tier-1 Wehr Infantry right? I'm surprised in COH2 that they are so powerful as it is. Once updated with STG44s and with two stars of vet, they are really powerful and can easily overrun most in an infantry/infantry situation.

I mean lets be honest, OKW's high win rate can be pointed to various things, the Volks being so strong is one of those pluses. So I guess making factions more akin to what they are, since its the Soviet Union; their buff should be the huge supply of undertrained conscripts that get slowly stronger over time. Or if possible, a system that allows them to use PPSHs are three star vet.

My suggestion is that the Anti-tank grenade research also lowers conscript cost by a bit, like 220/18 per. That tech is mostly only gotten if you're using cons heavily anyway.

To make PPSh cons less of a no-brainer, the lower cost could be mutually exclusive with the PPSh upgrade. The implementation of the lower cost could be an upgrade that costs -20 manpower and lowers reinforce cost by 10%.

If I could go back in time to the start of development for Soviets, I always liked the idea where Conscripts would get cheaper with teching up and maybe even a larger squad size sort of like the DoW I Imperial Guard.

Since that is not the case, and I don't believe Conscripts are as bottom of the barrel as some others say, probably just adjusting some cost on their upgrades which could then maybe give them a slightly MP decrease or something, but it'd have to be fairly minor.

7-8 man squad upgrades would probably be busted, even if it was exclusive from weapon upgrades

Conscript get some of the highest vet bonuses compared to other infantry both offensively and defensively.

And? Your point is?

I would hope that the mainline squad with the largest target size, the worst dps, and no weapon upgrade to improve it gets some of the largest bonuses...

That should be Ostruppen, so if cons get cheaper, Ostruppen should too.

Here's an idea I would love you watch you try to explain.

That should be Ostruppen, so if cons get cheaper, Ostruppen should too.

Why?
Volks cost only 10 more then cons and rofltsomp cons so hard its not funny.

Conscript get some of the highest vet bonuses compared to other infantry both offensively and defensively.

For the sake of example, 50% of 1 is still less then 40% of 2.
Where 1 is cons firepower and 2 is whatever any other squad, say grens.

Highest vet argument is completely irrelevant if you have no stock access to weapon upgrades and worst base weapon in game.

Aren't volksgrendiers literally translate to Civilian Soldiers and if I remember history right, Volks should be on par of Conscripts since thats what they were historically.

I mean, thats just me looking at it from a historical point, but yeah, I think Conscripts should be reduced in manpower cost and upkeep rate.

No thats Volksstrum, Volkgrendiers are still a professional fighting force. Their effectiveness was however ranging from very good to very bad depending on support and leadership.