An essay on Soviets and a radical proposal

Giving penals an upgradeable bazooka would also allow for much more flexibility in build orders.

+ 1

I think that only works if you rename penals.

It's still too confusing to players on both sides when what should be a crazy assault at all costs unit suddenly busts out superior weaponry.

That's the reason why there's so much confusion and back and forth about penal troops.

For 360 MP you would at least expect the combat efficiency that Panzer Grenadiers have...they are indeed how they are described,a 360 MP suicidal squad...

Technically they do. But they have long range firepower for some reason since the whole unit has SVTs. Yep, some of the best long range infantry firepower in the game for straight DPS, but weirdly on a lowest of low assault troop.

I've always imagined that Penal Troops would be closer to Ostruppen, but with assault related abilities.

However, as I've said before we already have conscripts to make those assaults, and they're one of the cheapest to reinforce already. So if the enemy is already countering conscripts, that type of penal troop wouldn't really add anything to your army composition.

Which is why I think they slapped SVTs on them and raised their price to 360. Then they ran out of time and couldn't record voice acting and art to make them a new unit entirely.

Doesn't matter that Penal Troops are actually work well at long range. What matters is that they don't work for their intended purpose.

That's the reason why there's so much confusion and back and forth about penal troops.

Its because people dont know the facts or the stats.

They have preconceptions about how things "should be" rather than knowledge of how they are.

Mostly this is due to the games lack of internal tooltips and other means of presenting them.

You basically dont know and wnt know, what they are unless you dig them up yourself from the game files, spend considerable time looking through stat sheets provided by other players, or by reading this site almost religiously (as I do).

This problem is particularly prevalent in some peoples persistanr and obstinant insistance that t34 SHOULD be much better, and perform a different function, than what it does in the game (as opposed to historically).

They are then dissappointd ed that the unit doesnt match their internal view on what it should be, historically, and thinkTHAT is a balance problem.

It is not the player's job to have to learn every detailed stat in the game.

Not only that, if everything about a unit that was specifically made by the developers says they are expendable assault troops, it's very safe for a player to assume they are expendable assault troops, and to be disappointed when they don't quite work as such for their cost.

It's not the fault of the player for forming preconceptions when the developers themselves have planted that preconception.

Good design involves being able to make a unit such that just using a unit should tell the player how to get a good base of use out of that unit. That's regardless of whether there are detailed tool tips.

Then, looking at stats will give you a small edge in certain situations. That's the edge that expert level players use alongside good micro/macro to win.

When the very core power of a unit is hidden away in obscure stats, and everything about stats says to use that unit in a way against what it is presented as, then you have a problem. It doesn't matter how many people point out that hidden power exists, what matters is that it's confusing and inaccessible to most.

It's like if SC2 zerglings were crazy good at ranged combat, but die in droves in melee combat. Everything about zerglings, including description, graphics, animation, voice overs, even most of their tool tip say that you charge them into melee to do damage, soak up gunfire, and tie up units. Players wouldn't stand for such strangeness in the design of them, and they shouldn't.

It's telling that you hardly see any expert replays, or people in streams using them, even if they're supposed to be that powerful in the right hands.

I actually think the T-34 is in a pretty good place now. Effective when initially brought in, but they quickly become a resource sink if relied on to finish the job or chase down weakened fleeing units. So they can become a trap that leads to a downward spiral in resources and army composition. You start building more T-34s, and stuff to support them, and end up losing to the things that counter both of them.

Up until the recent patch, it's backup, the AT gun wasn't effective enough. And teching to other options for Soviet takes a lot of time and resources, hard to do while fighting off the very things you need to counter.

This is why the T-34 can still be fine as a unit, and still be a problem overall. If the game was just Panzer 4s vs T-34s, it would be a wonderful and interesting match up, but it's not that.

And that's why there's topics like this trying to come up with solutions for the Soviet army overall.

It is not the player's job to have to learn every detailed stat in the game.

Ignorance is ones own responsibility and fault, no one elses.

Fortunately, it can be remedied by taking time to inform oneself.

Okay, you know what, I actually thought you were onto some good things, with some solid points in other posts on these forums.

Then you pull this crap.

This same typical crap you pull, repeating the same stupid notion over like it meant anything the first time.

It is not ignorance to assume that a unit is supposed to work like it is presented.

We're not talking about human rights, philosophy, the arts, or real military tactics. We're talking about a game that you are supposed to play.

Imagine a game where all the units worked opposite of how they were presented.

Imagine if CoH1 had Riflemen all work like Knights Cross Holders without the BAR upgrade, and the BAR upgrade turning them into snipers. However, every description, tool tip, graphic, animation, and more stayed the same for riflemen and the BAR upgrade.

It would not be ignorance for players to be upset, and for people to consider CoH a terrible game if it worked like that.

Hi guys, I would like to join this. I think Soviets hard pressed to T0 build or lose map control in 99% jf games. Need to much mp and time to get maxims-mortars to play "cutoff style" as germans do.

And the thing about unit info. If you want to win, you must know the numbers imo. But many people play for fun and don't want or don't have time to read "secret numbers". CoH it's not such a "progamer" game now, with this state of unit info. Now it's game for fans imo.

In times of WarCraft 1 wasn't user friendly, but comon it's 2013 now. I think it's not tooooo difficult to make more information in unit description.

Thanks.

In DoW2 a guy called Kolaris created a tool-tip mod that clearly and understandably transposed the units stats into the game interface. Can only hope someone finds the commitment and drive to do the same for CoH2.

People may get upset that units dont do what they assume they would, according to history or their apparent title/graphic etc, but unfortunately CoH2 only comes so far as to historical accuracy.

Penals as one prime example of that, when it turns out they infact are expensive and have a better weapon than mainline Conscripts. Maybe they should simply be re-named, (and they are also misnamed as a "battalion"), since gimping them to what an actual Penal unit would have been like not only kills balance, but would probably re-ignite another political shitstorm.

People may get upset that units dont do what they assume they would, according to history or their apparent title/graphic etc, but unfortunately CoH2 only comes so far as to historical accuracy.

Yep, good point. First time i was like "ohh, comon, T34 can't do a shit to Panther? wtf is this?"

But then, I read the unlocked upgrade description, get campaing about Gulag of Heroes and was't surprised in other sides. It's just developers point of view how game should run and sales better.

Well, your OP is back.

I was hoping to have more discussion about whether Soviets are actually designed badly or not to be honest. I'm just so aggravated. Every game as Soviets, I think I'm losing, and getting frustrated and then cometh the uber unit. I just played a long Minsk game were I thought we were screwed by the LMG spam so of course I pop the KV-8. We claw our way back into the game vs triple Tigers with 5 SU-85s, an IS-2 and my two shock squads, one with with vet 3, which are unkillable.

And that was one of the major points I was trying to make in the original thread: it's bad design when a faction is only winning games because of its super units. Elite units in COH just did not totally alter outcomes the same way KV-8s, ISU-152s, shock squads and so on do in COH2. The only unit that comes close is the Calliope.

I hate the way the thing plays compared to US in COH1. I hate the SU-85. On a map where you have to take a right angle to get to safety while moving backward (Semoisky being the worst offender)? You're screwed if something comes rushing out of the fog of war. I so badly miss the M10, airborne, and AT guns with army-piercing, which was just a much more fun and satisfying way to play late game vs Axis armor.

The lynchpin of the entire army is one unit - that stupid SU-85. Maybe not in 1v1 (though I have seen plenty of long "pro" level games where the Soviet player eventually has to give up on AT guns/T-34s and build SU-85s) but certainly in any other mode. And that to me is poor design.

im quite annoyed by the fact that the late game superiority of german tanks are more or less caused by the lack of infantry AT in the soviet army. because dealing with infantry is not one of the strong points of german armour.

most of the german late game tanks are AT but have enough armour/hp to spearhead assaults. however, most of the soviet AT are actually armoured, be it IS-2, t34s or SU85, the exact things that german armour actually counter. the only non armoured effective AT that soviets have is the ZiS but they are just as effective as US AT guns without AT rounds.

this leaves a huge vulnerability in soviet's ability to deal with armour. there is no mobile hard counters to german armour. AT guns don't count as they are limited in mobility and require constant resetting up, easily bypassed.

which leads to the usual, AT nades/button to disable german armour and then send in your own tanks to deal with his anti-tank tanks, which honestly, is quite a high risk no reward move.

where is that unit that can effectively cover against armour rushes? In coh1, US had AP rounds for frontal assaults and bazookas/recoiless for any tanks that gets behind the AT gun wall. they were effective against unsupported tanks who constantly showed their rear armour to them. this i feel, is the main cause of german armour superiority. not too much with german armour being OP, but more so with soviet with inadequately equipped, a bad design.

im quite annoyed by the fact that the late game superiority of german tanks are more or less caused by the lack of infantry AT in the soviet army. because dealing with infantry is not one of the strong points of german armour.

most of the german late game tanks are AT but have enough armour/hp to spearhead assaults. however, most of the soviet AT are actually armoured, be it IS-2, t34s or SU85, the exact things that german armour actually counter. the only non armoured effective AT that soviets have is the ZiS but they are just as effective as US AT guns without AT rounds.

this leaves a huge vulnerability in soviet's ability to deal with armour. there is no mobile hard counters to german armour. AT guns don't count as they are limited in mobility and require constant resetting up, easily bypassed.

which leads to the usual, AT nades/button to disable german armour and then send in your own tanks to deal with his anti-tank tanks, which honestly, is quite a high risk no reward move.

where is that unit that can effectively cover against armour rushes? In coh1, US had AP rounds for frontal assaults and bazookas/recoiless for any tanks that gets behind the AT gun wall. they were effective against unsupported tanks who constantly showed their rear armour to them. this i feel, is the main cause of german armour superiority. not too much with german armour being OP, but more so with soviet with inadequately equipped, a bad design.

Good points. But I don't think that not the ap rounds are the issue but the high cost of the atguns.

And that was one of the major points I was trying to make in the original thread: it's bad design when a faction is only winning games because of its super units. Elite units in COH just did not totally alter outcomes the same way KV-8s, ISU-152s, shock squads and so on do in COH2. The only unit that comes close is the Calliope.

Why is that bad design? Broodwar, which if we exclude the boring-ass MOBAs had perhaps the most entertaining RTS gameplay ever at a high level, had TONS of units that behaved that way. Siege tanks, science vessels, defilers, high templar all had extremely strong AOE or spells that could wreck your day.

And I disagree that this didn't exist in vCoH. Snipers, PE armored cars, vet 2 grens, the fast m8, the fast puma all completely negated everything you had on the field until you countered them.

I manage to win plenty of soviet 1v1 games with t1 t2 t3, AT guns and t34s with snipers is perfectly viable.

Why is that bad design? Broodwar, which if we exclude the boring-ass MOBAs had perhaps the most entertaining RTS gameplay ever at a high level, had TONS of units that behaved that way. Siege tanks, science vessels, defilers, high templar all had extremely strong AOE or spells that could wreck your day.

And I disagree that this didn't exist in vCoH. Snipers, PE armored cars, vet 2 grens, the fast m8, the fast puma all completely negated everything you had on the field until you countered them.

I manage to win plenty of soviet 1v1 games with t1 t2 t3, AT guns and t34s with snipers is perfectly viable.

Well, to some extent I don't mind it - everyone loves saving for the Tiger and it's satisfying when it hits the field. But what we have here is a faction that seems to rely on that mechanic much more.

Yeah, COH had a few - PE and Brits had the worst ones, but let's not get into Brits! I do disagree on the M8 though, its shock value only lasted past the first engagement, then it spent the rest of the game sniping infantry in corners. A great unit but not the same "escape from the slippery slope" mechanic I'm talking about.

And yeah past a certain skill level I think the balance is actually pretty good. But the design of Soviets means you need above average micro to beat someone with average micro, and you'll still need to pull a rabbit out of your hat to put in the final blow (usually a commander item). Whereas I think many Ostheer players don't even feel they NEED their commander abilities and they're kind of like icing on the cake. A Tiger is great, but enough 3 PZiVs will do fine as well. Contrast that to Soviets who will just not win with any combination of T-34s and SU-85s once enough LMGs have been upgraded and shrek-wielding panzergrens are on the field.

IDD that Soviets need more micro, but with factions designed asymmetrically I think that's near impossible to prevent. And the doctrine thing existed in vCoH and I think it was OK there too. German doctrines were optional, American doctrines were (usually) required.

We just had a game where we wrecked Germans dude. Only unit we had that was shock was isu152, you had su85 and I have t34 and at guns. That game didn't require shock units and we won by keeping our vet infantry alive!

Soviets can still need more micro overall, but still have some units or combinations that allow for less micro in one area, letting you get maximum use out of others units elsewhere. Likewise, Germans could be forced to use a bit more micro, which is what the MG42 change a few patches ago was really all about.

There are some late game builds that did lessen the micro. SU-85s used to be one, but it was too spammable so now requires even more micro. Shock troops are definitely a light micro unit due to their survivability. Even though you have to micro them towards the enemy and use their abilities, you aren't constantly watching over them just so that they survive a late game fight like conscripts and T-34s.

I don't think it's feasible to expect an entire community to download a non-existent tool tip mod for the game just to become "not ignorant" either. Nor should players have to download a mod just to get that detailed info. There is a reasonable expectation that even if you're playing to win, you should be able to suss out 90% or more of the strength of your units just from playing intuitively. That's the difference between CoH and Starcraft.

I think the T-34 right now is very similar to the M8, great initial shock value, but quickly outpaced. If you try to keep building more of them, they are a resource sink.

However, I do think that the T-34 vs P4 matchup is really nice, but there's a lot more in the game than that. Those heavy call ins really throw things out.

this leaves a huge vulnerability in soviet's ability to deal with armour. there is no mobile hard counters to german armour. AT guns don't count as they are limited in mobility and require constant resetting up, easily bypassed.

which leads to the usual, AT nades/button to disable german armour and then send in your own tanks to deal with his anti-tank tanks, which honestly, is quite a high risk no reward move.

well, during the war the soviets only had AT guns that could reliably take on german armor. i don't know about soviets using american bazookas against german armor only captured panzerfausts. what the soviets did do is they mass produced more AT guns than any other country did in the war, the soviets stopped german armor by massing a lot of AT guns together creating a pakfront but that is difficult to do in the game due to its high cost. i proposed that soviet AT guns be cheaper but everyone seem to just disagree with me. soviet power is with their heavy weapons. if you are complaining about lack of AT from t3 then let's make relic put this in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/57_mm_anti-tank_gun_M1943_(ZiS-2)

fires faster, AP ability, reposition faster, but weaker crew and no barrage.