Conscripts need to be cheaper

Very nice of you to point out accuracy increase while omitting damage decrease that came along with it. In any case
I'm done wasting my time with you since its obvious you're just provoking people into insulting you by wasting their with false information like this one.

That simply show that you do not understand the mechanics.

Damage is the same at all ranges and thus the DPS is only depended in accuracy.

That stat I provided you with are enough and undisputed proof that it was not the close-mid ranges that got most of the buff as you claim but the long range.

There is one another thing that is quite important, but completely ignored, especially by Vipper here.

Yes, DPS was insignificantly increased, but another thing that happened is, cons now do overkill damage, inflicting more damage then is needed to kill a model, which effectively decreases raw dps.

I never understood why they went with odd 12 dmg number instead of 10 voks have. Sure, it would have made TTK at CQC longer, but that's what PPSHs are for and the unit would be even more reliable without DPS loss on overkill damage.

If someone feels like it, feel free to do the math accounting for overkill damage to readjust their actual DPS and compare that with old one to see if that DPS buff vipper clings to so hard even exists, because with 12 damage, TTK is simply not just HP/DPS as it is the case with literally every other rifle squad in game.

PLS stop putting word is my mouth. I have provided the stat the buff was in long range and mid to close as Kirrik claimed. Anything else is irrelevant to what I written.

Cool, not stop ignoring the damage went from 16 to 12 and post real number instead of manipulative one once again, trying to invoke bias that they are stronger then they actually are.

Actually no stop being lazy and find it yourself. After years of rude behavior don't expect any favors from me.

Pls stop you silly crusade of trying to prove me wrong.

That simply show that you do not understand the mechanics.

But do you?

Damage is the same at all ranges and thus the DPS is only depended in accuracy.

That stat I provided you with are enough and undisputed proof that it was not the close-mid ranges that got most of the buff as you claim but the long range.

So why are you completely ignoring the part where damage went down?
Why are you completely ignoring overkill damage, which lowers real DPS exists now?

Stats you provided are accurate, but incomplete and misleading in result.

I know you are but what am I?

But do you?


So why are you completely ignoring the part where damage went down?
Why are you completely ignoring overkill damage, which lowers real DPS exists now?

Stats you provided are accurate, but incomplete and misleading in result.

Don't want to actually join this conversation but note that Vipper was referring to the fact that the biggest DPS increase actually happened at long range (since you said previously that only their mid-close dps was increased). He was right on this point (and proved it), and you were wrong. Once you understand what he's actually arguing, you realize there was no intent to deceive, since it's all about the relative increases for different ranges, meaning damage numbers (and overkill damage) were not relevant.

Volks actually have 12 damage, not 10. REs have 10 damage though.

Don't want to actually join this conversation but note that Vipper was referring to the fact that the biggest DPS increase actually happened at long range (since you said previously that only their mid-close dps was increased). He was right on this point (and proved it), and you were wrong. Once you understand what he's actually arguing, you realize there was no intent to deceive, since it's all about the relative increases for different ranges, meaning damage numbers (and overkill damage) were not relevant.

Volks actually have 12 damage, not 10. REs have 10 damage though.

So their DPS went from around 0.9 to around 1.0 at 35~ range? That totally changed everything about them, except they still lose every fight at long ranges and 0.1 DPS "buff" isnt much of a game changer.

Meanwhile, Osttruppen got LMG with 9 DPS at long range and 25% accuracy penalty outside of cover. Now THAT was a buff.

Don't want to actually join this conversation but note that Vipper was referring to the fact that the biggest DPS increase actually happened at long range (since you said previously that only their mid-close dps was increased). He was right on this point (and proved it), and you were wrong. Once you understand what he's actually arguing, you realize there was no intent to deceive, since it's all about the relative increases for different ranges, meaning damage numbers (and overkill damage) were not relevant.

I wasn't making that argument, Kirrik did.
I was just addressing the increase wasn't as high as was claimed due to damage being lower.
While increase might still be greatest at long range, the end value is still pretty low.

We're also talking actual 29% accuracy increase compared to base value at close, 25% increase at mid and 60% increase at long range(see how Vippers accuracy numbers suddenly deflated, while still remaining correct? That's how you use relative % increase in non biased way) with 25% loss of damage and about 6-7% loss of total DPS due to overkill damage.

It still is an increase overall, but much less significant then what Vipper claims and even 50% increase from a low value will still give low value, it just won't be dreadfully low anymore.

Volks actually have 12 damage, not 10. REs have 10 damage though.

Then same applies to their Kar DPS. Its not as visible, because they actually have a DPS AND actual weapon upgrade that isn't locked exclusively behind a doctrine.

Thanks for the correction here though, I thought it was 12, but in the context of my previous post that number seemed very odd at the end.

Don't want to actually join this conversation but note that Vipper was referring to the fact that the biggest DPS increase actually happened at long range (since you said previously that only their mid-close dps was increased). He was right on this point (and proved it), and you were wrong. Once you understand what he's actually arguing, you realize there was no intent to deceive, since it's all about the relative increases for different ranges, meaning damage numbers (and overkill damage) were not relevant.

Volks actually have 12 damage, not 10. REs have 10 damage though.

Beat me to it.

Nevertheless, it didn't change the status quo of Conscripts as a unit. More reliable means less annoying results for both parties, but the unit remains the same.

I wasn't making that argument, Kirrik did.

Those vaguely similar profile images and vaguely similar names are really throwing me off... Sorry about the misunderstanding.

We're also talking actual 29% accuracy increase compared to base value at close, 25% increase at mid and 60% increase at long range(see how Vippers accuracy numbers suddenly deflated, while still remaining correct?

Where are you getting those numbers from? The accuracy values - and therefore calculations - Vipper posted are consistent with the ones listed on Cruzz's spreadsheet.

Besides that, I still don't think you quite understand what Vipper's point in posting those specific stats was. For the point he was trying to prove, only the relative increases at each range matter, and if he tried to calculate those numbers any other way, it would simply be bad math.

An edit: for complaints about bias concerning those specific numbers, I found it interesting that Vipper rounded down every single value in a way that made the buffs appear less substantial than they actually are.

Those vaguely similar profile images and vaguely similar names are really throwing me off... Sorry about the misunderstanding.

Np.

Where are you getting those numbers from? The accuracy values - and therefore calculations - Vipper posted are consistent with the ones listed on Cruzz's spreadsheet.

Recalculated them myself.
They are still correct values, just presented in different way.
Comparison math is relative and depending on how you want to compare 2 values, you get different results.
Ex:

3 is 150% of 2. But 3 is only 50% increase to 2(values change a bit when you do not have such simple numbers, but relations remain the same). Both are correct, I used the 2nd one, because I know how people who aren't good at math can wrongly interpret the first once, believing the high % values mean more increase then they actually do(I've worked with statistical % data and stupid people a lot).

Besides that, I still don't think you quite understand what Vipper's point in posting those specific stats was. For the point he was trying to prove, only the relative increases at each range matter, and if he tried to calculate those numbers any other way, it would simply be bad math.
An edit: for complaints about bias concerning those specific numbers, I found it interesting that Vipper rounded down every single value in a way that made the buffs appear less substantial than they actually are.

I know that, but he did choose to use bloated value(if its written like that in any documentation, Cruzzes or else it might be the reason why), but you can't talk exclusively about one value increase if another value also was modified specifically to keep first one in check.
Relative DPS increase happened in higher value at long range, that's true, but the actual DPS increase is much lower then accuracy alone would suggest and he never even hinted at that, that's what I meant in terms of bias. He isn't wrong, but by failing to provide damage decrease information and resulting dps(which isn't 166% of old value), he isn't exactly right either. Accounting overkill damage dps decrease is simply for being very detailed or picky, however you want to see it.

3 is 150% of 2. But 3 is only 50% increase to 2(values change a bit when you do not have such simple numbers, but relations remain the same). Both are correct, I used the 2nd one, because I know how people who aren't good at math can wrongly interpret the first once, believing the high % values mean more increase then they actually do(I've worked with statistical % data and stupid people a lot).

Except that's not what you did. The numbers you stated are at odds with the most reliable source I have access to. If you have a source that provides different accuracy values that give the % increases that you stated, then I ask that you provide it.

Relative DPS increase happened in higher value at long range, that's true, but the actual DPS increase is much lower then accuracy alone would suggest and he never even hinted at that, that's what I meant in terms of bias. He isn't wrong, but by failing to provide damage decrease information and resulting dps(which isn't 166% of old value), he isn't exactly right either. Accounting overkill damage dps decrease is simply for being very detailed or picky, however you want to see it.

He never hinted at that because it's not relevant. The post you responded to did not seek to make ANY statements about how much of a buff the changes were. The sole purpose of the post was to factually prove that con DPS was increased more (in relative figures) at long range than at short or mid. The only relevant information is information that pertains to that calculation. Accounting for overkill damage dps decrease isn't being picky or detailed, its simply bad math because it adds an extra step without changing the results in any way whatsoever.

No one questions ppsh being good, you have that mentioned in the thread multiple times.
No one cares how you can use them with the doctrines, that's the fucking point of this thread, its about their out of the gate performance and (lack of) scaling if you don't pick these doctrines.

If you need to pick a "right" doctrine just to make your mainline infantry work, then that mainline infantry is underpowered, since weapon upgrade seems to be out of question and vet and weapon tweaks proved to do absolutely nothing, only other solution to make them worth something is to cut the cost.

They do not perform nor scale like 240mp unit.

So would making conscript cheaper come with a nerf for PSSH and repair cons?

Because if I pick the "right" doctrine I now get an equally powerful squad for even cheaper.

Not even worth considering a buff unless it's other utilities get nerfed. No singular infantry in this game is anywhere near as flexible as cons.

So would making conscript cheaper come with a nerf for PSSH and repair cons?

Because if I pick the "right" doctrine I now get an equally powerful squad for even cheaper.

Not even worth considering a buff unless it's other utilities get nerfed. No singular infantry in this game is anywhere near as flexible as cons.

If current ppsh cons aren't meta, 20mp cheaper ones won't be as well.
And cons repair just as good as non vetted CEs, which is hardly mind blowing efficiency.

But sure, I'll be up to giving them stock weapon upgrade or even more mosin buffs, even if these buffs would be upgrade at T4 or T3.

So would making conscript cheaper come with a nerf for PSSH and repair cons?

Because if I pick the "right" doctrine I now get an equally powerful squad for even cheaper.

Not even worth considering a buff unless it's other utilities get nerfed. No singular infantry in this game is anywhere near as flexible as cons.

All other infantry have relevant combat potential throughout the game except for cons without doctrines.

Volks come very very close in flexibility. Anti cover/garrison snaring and sandbags are the same. Self heal is the merge counterpart. Salvage is the counterpart to oorah and tripwires.
Only stg,s set them apart. Volks already have better dps and get all their tricks with normal tech and none are locked in doctrines.

By this logic volks needs a dps nerf or a utility nerf.

I think 20mp reduction to cons cost is good. No nerf to cons utility is justified because volks only cost 10 mp more have simaler levels of utility and on top of that are able to fight far more effectively.

I think a 20mp reduction is the sweet spot here. That puts 30mp cheaper than volks which would be acceptable for performance and 20mp cheaper than grens which can be chalked up to lacking a stock weapon.

The side techs can/should be adjusted too, but that's a separate issue that won't make much better for cost in the early stages