German flexibility vs Soviet flexibility

Sov versatility seems to derive from unit abilities and Commanders.

Whereas Ost versatility is provided by the linear tech path.

I dont agree at all... i think ur just fumbling for reasons because you dont want to admit the truth Nullist.

I dont agree at all... i think ur just fumbling for reasons because you dont want to admit the truth Nullist.

What "truth"? What was not true in my observation?

Then where does Sov flexibility stem from, and where does Ost flexibility stem from?

This is not a rhetorical question, I expect a coherent and concise answer.

A) Where does Ost flexibility reside?
B) Where does Sov flexibility reside?

In the final analysis, Soviets can be considered to be as effective as Ostheer if you have above average micro to avoid the manpower drain of conscript reinforcement and losing snipers. Germans are balanced if you have average micro.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

@Sluz: I think the linear nature of Ost teching and builds provides a stronger base with which to react. You generally have everything you may need readily available, if you can micro well enough to have resources to purchase them.

Conversly, and asymmetrically to this, as Sov, you need to deliberately choose those options, to have them available. When you have chosen them, they perform slightly better, overall, than Osts generalised equivalents, at those specific tasks. The micro challenge comes in, at making use of those specialised choices, specifically for those tasks vs Osts more generalised options.

Now, there are an number of theoretical situations one can setup, artificially, for discussions sake, to demonstrate that that doesnt pan out, but I think that is the underlying design precept, and one that should be remembered when gauging IF Sov units and Ost units, asymmetrically, are actually following that central design concept, or not.

Units like the T70, for which Ost has no light tank equivalent. Or the SU76 as a glass cannon artillery option, and ZiS Barrage, are all indicative of this underlying versatility concept that Im proposing is the case.

I think there are problems on Sov with the tech division between t2 and t3, which are actually lateral, rather than progressive. There is something problematic in the unit division between these two buildings, that leaves Sov vulnerable to Osts solid and comprehensive, and generalised, teching. If you make the wrong choice, you are fucked, whereas with Ost, you can srill build counters and initiative units feom your existing tech base.

In the final analysis, Soviets can be considered to be as effective as Ostheer if you have above average micro to avoid the manpower drain of conscript reinforcement and losing snipers. Germans are balanced if you have average micro.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Because 4 man squads constantly retreating to nades/snipers/else and reinforcing is less a manpower drain than replacing a conscript model??

I don't buy the micro argument. Both sides will suck if you cant control your forces, however you are confusing the strength of soviet specialist units (snipers, blah blah) as a weakness. They dont require "more" micro... but they do become very powerful with good micro. Countering a supported and well micro'd sov sniper or two on langreskaya is a feat in itself.

@Sluz: I think the linear nature of Ost teching and builds provides a stronger base with which to react. You generally have everything you may need readily available, if you can micro well enough to have resources to purchase them.

Conversly, and asymmetrically to this, as Sov, you need to deliberately choose those options, to have them available. When you have chosen them, they perform slightly better, overall, than Osts generalised equivalents, at those specific tasks. The micro challenge comes in, at making use of those specialised choices, specifically for those tasks vs Osts more generalised options.

Now, there are an number of theoretical situations one can setup, artificially, for discussions sake, to demonstrate that that doesnt pan out, but I think that is the underlying design precept, and one that should be remembered when gauging IF Sov units and Ost units, asymmetrically, are actually following that central design concept, or not.

Units like the T70, for which Ost has no light tank equivalent. Or the SU76 as a glass cannon artillery option, and ZiS Barrage, are all indicative of this underlying versatility concept that Im proposing is the case.

I think there are problems on Sov with the tech division between t2 and t3, which are actually lateral, rather than progressive. There is something problematic in the unit division between these two buildings, that leaves Sov vulnerable to Osts solid and comprehensive, and generalised, teching. If you make the wrong choice, you are fucked, whereas with Ost, you can srill build counters and initiative units feom your existing tech base.

please tell me where exactly you see the soviet units performing better than the german counter parts? German mortar is better than standard soviet mortar, grens are better than cons, the mg42 is agree'd to be better than maxim, soviet sniper is better sure, but ALL german armor is better than the soviet counerparts, the pak is better than the zis although the zis has a high cost barrage it can use to maybe almost kill 1 squad...

I dont see this fairy tale game your talking about. Where is the trade off we get for having half of our army unavaliable to us during the game while german never has to make such a choice? Where is the trade off for, as others have said, needing more skill/micro to play soviet? I dont see any trade off except larger squad sizes, but they still have less armor/hp...

the only cases youi can come up with where soviets have more 'options' in thier abilities are a few rarely used units like the su76 barrage (which does not do much dmg at all), the zis, and the t70. Mind you, you DO get a light tank pretty much in the flame half track and upped gun scout car, and you get them far before we can get a t70.

Its all nonsense your defending something that cannot be defended right now, the game needs balancing. And you barely play the game so how would u know and why do you always argue on every balance discussion when your experience is in low rank/tier play?

as ive said before, im decently high rank with BOTH factions, and if it was the other way around id argue that soviet be nerfed.

and to add to the other discussion of soviet flexibility possibly coming from call ins.... Germans have just as many call ins if not more now with the new commanders. Giving them even more strategies to use.

Because 4 man squads constantly retreating to nades/snipers/else and reinforcing is less a manpower drain than replacing a conscript model??

I don't buy the micro argument. Both sides will suck if you cant control your forces, however you are confusing the strength of soviet specialist units (snipers, blah blah) as a weakness. They dont require "more" micro... but they do become very powerful with good micro. Countering a supported and well micro'd sov sniper or two on langreskaya is a feat in itself.

I think what sluzbenik is trying to say is:

If you have 2 players with above average micro, Soviet is equal to Ostheer (still need a hell of a lot more micro and attention playing as Soviet)

If you have 2 players that have average micro, Soviet player is doomed.

and it gets progressively worse for Soviet balance as the skill of players goes down..

@Nullist - Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about in my radical proposal post. I know no one bothered to get through it to the actual proposal, where I said AT guns should be in T3, T3 should be cheaper, and both tanks in T4.

@Immortal - I think you're just taking the more positive perspective on what I just said. Soviet specialist units are more powerful, generally, but the drawback is you need above average micro to use them, whereas just having a good army composition is 80% of the battle as Ostheer, thus the perception that Ostheer is easier to play. Multitasking comes into play as well, as Soviet you will need to play more of a harassing game, have units separated from one another, not visible on the same screen. Ostheer players meanwhile usually have units closer and supporting one another. So even with good players, you will quite often see a conscript squad or two lost, and often early during a game when forces are most spread out, whereas Ostheer units generally are totally lost later to arty/snipers, T70s wiping out low-health units, and so on.

The units that the soviet's can build VERY early game:

Conscripts: (harassing light infantry and a way to reinforce heavier troops in the field, bad against other infantry, tanks, light vehicles

Combat Engineers: (4 man squad armed with rifles, can plant demos and place mines, lose against all German units bar pioneers at long range, same price as conscripts.)

__________________________________________________________________________________________
The units that the Germans can build VERY early game:

Grenadiers: (infantry deigned to counter other infantry, can be upgraded with MG42's to kill a conscript a second, same price as conscripts, and will win in 1v1 combat against them with moderate to no losses)
MG42: (instapins infantry out of cover, forcing them to retreat same price as grens and can only be tackled with flanks)
German Mortar: (fast firing, accurate, and kills 3-4 squad members on a successful hit, same price as grens)
German Sniper: (armor shrugs off all shots apart from really lucky hits, 1 hit kills all infantry)
Osttruppen: (weak infantry with the ability to kill scout cars with ease, loses against all other infantry bar engineer units
Assault Grens (fast firing, fast moving, shock troops designed to get early map control with ease, wins against all soviet units bar DP upgraded guards, and shock troops.)

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Soviet Mid-Game

T1 (loses to vehicle heavy doctrines due to lack of AT gun, T4 almost a nessesity unless opponent is really unlucky and or bad)

Sniper Squad (2 man sniper squad, counters german snipers 75% of time if the enemy is not in heavy cover, 1 unit dies from a MG42 blast at long range, cloak does not carry from cover to cover unlike the german sniper, counter MG42's effectively
Penal Battalion (infantry squad with around the same HP and Armour values as conscripts, effective mid to long range, can blow enemy squad up with a satchel charge (somtimes themselves, too!) outright loses to PG's of equal vet, MG42 gren
Clown car: (practically gets one shotted by panzerfausts unless high vet, next to useless unless opponent is doing assault grens only)

T2 (loses to infantry heavy builds, outright, counters tank heavy builds)

ZIS: (anti tank gun with slightly worse damage than a pak, six models
Mortar (soviet mortar worse in every way than the german one apart from the 6 models)
Maxim (soviet machine gun easily flanked, 6 models)

__________________________________________________________________________________________

German Mid Game

T2
Pak: (Counters soviet tanks)
Panzergren's: (counters soviet infantry)
Scout Car: (counters sovet mortars, snipers, maxims)
halftrack: (counters all infantry with the fuhrer's holy fire; reinforces all german infantrty)

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Soviet T3

T34: anti infantry tank, countered by T2, T3, T4
M5: transport and anti aircraft, countered by T2, T3, and T4, not as nearly as effective as German counterpart (flammenwerfer)
T70: light tank designed to inflict squad wipes, countered by t2, t3, and t4

Soviet T4

SU-85: mobile anti tank, countered by T2
Rocket Truck: mobile artillery, extremely effective againt infantry blobs, useless if a enemy squad gets near it
Su-76: Mobile assault gun, good artillery ability, countered by t2, t3, and t4

__________________________________________________________________________________________

German T3

STUG: (counters t34's at long range, t70's outright.)
Ostwind: (Counters all soviet infantry)
P4: (highly spammable, flexibile tank, capable of AT, AI and stopping harassment)

German T4
Panther: (hard counter to all soviet tanks bar the IS2)
Brummbar: (hard counter to all soviet infantry, needs AT support
Panzerwerfer: mobile artillery, vulnerable to most soviet units, has MG.


Look me in the eyes and tell me the germans don't have a clear, undisputed advantage in 1v1.


http://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198016893993
Proof i'm not a soviet fanboy.
i'm just a concerned player that has gone down almost 1000 ladder positions since these last few updates on the soviet side.

Early game (assuming conscript spam and no T1/2):
Now, the theory was that because Conscripts were T0, while the Ostheer require a Tier building to make anything worthwhile the Soviet flexibility is a bit different and the Soviets could always get more units on the field faster than the Ostheer in the very early game if they just kept building conscripts.

Unfortunately, the German 0cp call-ins and especially Ostruppen kind of mess this difference in tech structure up. I think you're probably underselling most of the Soviet army (for instance, snipers and mortars normally against 4-man squads, mortar has precision strike as a vet ability, ZiS can be merged to keep it on the field and has a barrage ability, T-34 has ram, so if you get a numerical advantage against P-IVs you'll beat them) and your description of the German units, especially the sniper, which has a total of 40hp, is really overestimating them.

Some very good Soviet players go T1-T3 if they have a decent early game. I'm not 100% sure how you losing 1000 ladder positions as Soviet is evidence of them being weaker, because a lot of other people must have gone up ladder positions.

My view on Soviets right now is that conscript spam to Tier 3 is easy but risky. Conscripts T2-T3 is harder but safer. T1-T4 is high risk but very powerful. Ostruppen need a large rework and German vehicle veterancy still requires fine-tuning.

In the final analysis, Soviets can be considered to be as effective as Ostheer if you have above average micro to avoid the manpower drain of conscript reinforcement and losing snipers. Germans are balanced if you have average micro.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

That describes vCOH very well too.

That describes vCOH very well too.

No, not exactly. In COH preventing rifle flanks was a real art, requiring lots of bike micro, mine laying, and wire. So the Wehr players had just as high a CPM requiment as the US in my experience.

Rubbers, you didnt answer my two specific questions yet.

This is not a rhetorical question, I expect a coherent and concise answer.

A) Where does Ost flexibility reside?
B) Where does Sov flexibility reside?

Rubbers, you didnt answer my two specific questions yet.

and im not going to, If you read my first post on this thread you will find where I feel ost flexibility is, in then teching system and in the game mechanics in general, im the one who brought this up in the first place on this thread.

I dont feel sovs HAVE flexibility, so what are you asking.... My opinions already been explained.

Aaand another person who wont answer a direct question.

Seems to be very difficult for some people these days.

Dunno. For me it was a necessary skill I learned in school.
Either you answered your test questions specifically and relevantly, using the proper syntax, Or you failed. Maybe that is no longer the case and kids just run around saying "no, im not gonna answer your question".

A) Where does Ost flexibility reside?
B) Where does Sov flexibility reside?

Seemed simple enough to me. But I guess not.

Dont answer then.
--->

your post is well organized but there are also a lot of holes making it look one sided. grenadiers pretty much have the same role as conscripts. they are not specifically designed to counter infantry the mg42 upgrade is just OP.

you say that ostruppen can take down scout cars with ease. do you realize that the conscripts AT nade does exactly the same thing? so you should also state that conscripts take scout cars with ease as well. since panzerfaust and conscript AT nade has the same range except the conscripts has the advantage since they can oorah.

the soviet maxim mg immediately suppresses enemy infantry and it could reposition itself a lot faster.

the soviet halftrack can suppress infantry pretty quick. the german half track doesn't suppress at all.

saying that these units are countered by t2, t3, t4 isn't specific and it doesn't help. hell you can also say panthers are countered by t2.

Aaand another person who wont answer a direct question.

Seems to be very difficult for some people these days.

Dunno. For me it was a necessary skill I learned in school.
Either you answered your test questions specifically and relevantly, using the proper syntax, Or you failed. Maybe that is no longer the case and kids just run around saying "no, im not gonna answer your question".

A) Where does Ost flexibility reside?
B) Where does Sov flexibility reside?

Seemed simple enough to me. But I guess not.

Dont answer then.
--->

one problem...


being questioned by you is not a fucking test. you to try to belittle my arguments because you have no real point of your own, and you have ZERO experience to draw from since all your experience is in low tier play. I answered your question and you didnt like my answer. Lol Get over yourself and get out of this argument you have no value to bring.

Aaand another person who wont answer a direct question.

Seems to be very difficult for some people these days.

Dunno. For me it was a necessary skill I learned in school.
Either you answered your test questions specifically and relevantly, using the proper syntax, Or you failed. Maybe that is no longer the case and kids just run around saying "no, im not gonna answer your question".

A) Where does Ost flexibility reside?
B) Where does Sov flexibility reside?

Seemed simple enough to me. But I guess not.

Dont answer then.
--->

it doesn't make a difference if he answers. you will just ignore it and repeat the same thing over and over again. is closing your ears another skill you learn from school?

the tears of commie whinegirls. lol these forums are so much fun to read. idiot noobs who cannot micro are asking for buffs to make up for their lack of skill. what happens when good players play as soviets and they are uber buffed? then the balance will really be fucked.

your post is well organized but there are also a lot of holes making it look one sided. grenadiers pretty much have the same role as conscripts. they are not specifically designed to counter infantry the mg42 upgrade is just OP.

you say that ostruppen can take down scout cars with ease. do you realize that the conscripts AT nade does exactly the same thing? so you should also state that conscripts take scout cars with ease as well. since panzerfaust and conscript AT nade has the same range except the conscripts has the advantage since they can oorah.

the soviet maxim mg immediately suppresses enemy infantry and it could reposition itself a lot faster.

the soviet halftrack can suppress infantry pretty quick. the german half track doesn't suppress at all.

saying that these units are countered by t2, t3, t4 isn't specific and it doesn't help. hell you can also say panthers are countered by t2.

I basically agree but I'd note that Ostruppen's scout car counter is somewhat stronger because you'll have twice as many units on the field (hence twice as many fausts/nades) as you would with either Grenadiers or Conscripts.

here be something to bring a soviet smile to your face.