Suggestion: penals immune to suppression
17 Oct 2013, 18:46 PM
#61
![avatar of =][=mmortal](/uploads/avatar/6497.jpg?updated=1372535109)
Posts: 215
Penals arent used because they dont serve a purpose, not because their stats are terrible (although they do seem weak). No AT, no doctrinal cheese abilities like HTD, no molotovs.... why ever use this unit?
18 Oct 2013, 10:15 AM
#62
Posts: 954
That would be ridiculously OP. About 2x the dps of grens, and 50% more HP for only slightly more MP? For 360mp, sure (that would be just a change of armor to 1.5).
I would also support a straight MP reduction to 280mp with no other changes.
360MP and 25MP reinforce, Or 360MP 30MP reinforce but armor rise from 1.0 to 1.5,
but as everyone know the problem of soviet teching, T1 and T2 are just mutually
exclusive for their high cost, without T2 ZIS-3 support, soviet going to have a harsh time fight those fantasy German armor
First off all. Tripwire so gud, 10 ammo for a whole dead squad ? + sight.
Vehicle capture point can win games, blitzkrieg save a tank. Fair Deal i think
18 Oct 2013, 11:42 AM
#63
Posts: 688
Despite the suffering of the penals in its current state, I cannot support this suggestion.
No infantry unit should be immune to suppression. It just doesn't make sense.
No infantry unit should be immune to suppression. It just doesn't make sense.
'There's honour in victory, honour in defeat and honour in just staying alive'.
[Quote from Wings Reel]
[Quote from Wings Reel]
18 Oct 2013, 13:03 PM
#64
Posts: 89
Despite the suffering of the penals in its current state, I cannot support this suggestion.
No infantry unit should be immune to suppression. It just doesn't make sense.
If you think about it for a while you should come to the conclusion that it wouldn't be so extremely unbalanced as people tend to think.
Why? Well first of all, standing infantry takes incredible damage from mgs. Rushing straight forward into an mg would result in severe damage to the unit.
Second, all units should have a counter unit, I don't see why the penal squad couldn't be balanced in such a way that it could become the hard counter to mgs from the The Special Rifle Command building.
18 Oct 2013, 15:04 PM
#65
Posts: 95
If you think about it for a while you should come to the conclusion that it wouldn't be so extremely unbalanced as people tend to think.
Why? Well first of all, standing infantry takes incredible damage from mgs. Rushing straight forward into an mg would result in severe damage to the unit.
Second, all units should have a counter unit, I don't see why the penal squad couldn't be balanced in such a way that it could become the hard counter to mgs from the The Special Rifle Command building.
Flanking is the hard counter to the mg42. Why do you feel that you need a mindless no skill unit that can take out an mg42?
If the reinforcement cost were reduced a bit I really think they would be fine.
18 Oct 2013, 18:02 PM
#66
Posts: 89
Flanking is the hard counter to the mg42. Why do you feel that you need a mindless no skill unit that can take out an mg42?
If the reinforcement cost were reduced a bit I really think they would be fine.
I can think of a plethora of maps where you can position a german MG in such a way that it's impossible to flank it. I'm sure you can too. Nuff said.
18 Oct 2013, 19:16 PM
#67
Posts: 2425
Permanently Banned"Hi! I am Penis Battalion! Ima stand erect in your MG arc and shoot you in the face with G43/LMG DPS! U mad?"
No, I dont think so.
No, I dont think so.
18 Oct 2013, 19:47 PM
#68
Posts: 89
"Hi! I am Penis Battalion! Ima stand erect in your MG arc and shoot you in the face with G43/LMG DPS! U mad?"
No, I dont think so.
Suffering from reading disability? Don't reply to my posts. Third time I remind you of this.
Also:
I don't see why the penal squad couldn't be balanced in such a way that it could become the hard counter to mgs from the The Special Rifle Command building.
Plus: The fact that during the war, running straight into a german mg is often what soviet soldiers had to do. There was no retreat option.
18 Oct 2013, 20:21 PM
#69
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedSuffering from reading disability? Don't reply to my posts. Third time I remind you of this.
Was my post addressed to you? Nope.
Notice the the title and topic of the thread?
Reading disability right there.
If I ever talk to you, Ill address you. I havent, so quit this bullshit.
18 Oct 2013, 20:31 PM
#70
Posts: 525
"Hi! I am Penile Battalion! Ima stand erect in your MG arc and shoot you in the face with G43/LMG DPS! U mad?"
No, I dont think so.
corrected
on a side note. i would give them the ability to simple not duck for cover, make the penile batallions not dance for anything. mortar rounds falling? we dont duck for cover. grenade? what is duck? tank shooting? lol try to hit me. they should only duck for suppresion.
does it reflect that i hate those units dancing around?
Disclaimer: any post made by this user should not be taken seriously, reader discretion is advised.
18 Oct 2013, 22:51 PM
#71
Posts: 307
Why? Are Penals supposed to counter MG42s or something?
Actually, the situation is currently the exact opposite.
Penals own the everloving hell out of Grens.
I dont understand how you can say something that is so utterly contradictory to the actual facts of these units stats.
Key: Near / Medium / Far
Penals: 34.674 / 21.816 / 8.952
Grens: 15.1 / 9.608 / 4.116
Thats more than twice the DPS on Penals that have the same survival coefficient as Grens.
Maybe you can show me a replay in which Grens "kill penals really good"?
I dont understand how someone can claim what you did, with a straight face, as if there was any objective factual basis for it, whatsoever. Blows my mind, completely...
As to Penal improvement: Reduce MP cost and swap Flamer for PTSR upgrade to diversify and enable non-Commander Sov early AT. It would be a "poor man's shrek", on a unit with otherwise good ranged DPS, and doesnt step on Guards, since Guard have 1.5 armor, upgradeable Button, but worse DPS.
Hey Nully, could you provide us with link where you get this stats on damage? Thanks.
Vae Victis!
18 Oct 2013, 23:19 PM
#72
Posts: 2425
Permanently Banned
Hey Nully, could you provide us with link where you get this stats on damage? Thanks.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdEpuSHcxNko1VGVFYjczYXpFZWhqOHc#gid=0
Wish I could credit who's made them. All I know is Wooof.
19 Oct 2013, 23:14 PM
#73
Posts: 688
Flanking is the hard counter to the mg42. Why do you feel that you need a mindless no skill unit that can take out an mg42?
If it doesn't take suppression, it'll stay in the line of fire and die.
Do you have any problem sacrificing a 240 MP unit to kill a 360?
I'd take that trade any day.
'There's honour in victory, honour in defeat and honour in just staying alive'.
[Quote from Wings Reel]
[Quote from Wings Reel]
19 Oct 2013, 23:16 PM
#74
Posts: 2425
Permanently Banned
If it doesn't take suppression, it'll stay in the line of fire and die.
Do you have any problem sacrificing a 240 MP unit to kill a 360?
I'd take that trade any day.
The fuck does this post even mean.
Seriously. Ive read it 5 times. Still makes no fking sense.
19 Oct 2013, 23:19 PM
#75
Posts: 525
If it doesn't take suppression, it'll stay in the line of fire and die.
Do you have any problem sacrificing a 240 MP unit to kill a 360?
I'd take that trade any day.
Uhm,what?
20 Oct 2013, 17:19 PM
#76
Posts: 401
He's trying to make the argument that being unsuppressable means they will stay the firing arc of an MG for longer, thus taking more damage.
Which is a silly argument.
The whole point of being unsuppressable is to be able to move to get around MGs and out of its line of fire. Any decent player will run all over the place dodging MGs and blowing stuff up.
No infantry, ever, should be immune to suppression. I'd even go so far to say that suppression resistance should not be a thing either unless there's some really, really, really good reason or penalty associated with it (such as extra damage from MGs).
Which might be an interesting way to do things. A small suppression resistance for drastically increased MG damage to Penals. But that would still require a drastic overhaul of that part of the balance scheme anyway.
Which is a silly argument.
The whole point of being unsuppressable is to be able to move to get around MGs and out of its line of fire. Any decent player will run all over the place dodging MGs and blowing stuff up.
No infantry, ever, should be immune to suppression. I'd even go so far to say that suppression resistance should not be a thing either unless there's some really, really, really good reason or penalty associated with it (such as extra damage from MGs).
Which might be an interesting way to do things. A small suppression resistance for drastically increased MG damage to Penals. But that would still require a drastic overhaul of that part of the balance scheme anyway.
22 Oct 2013, 08:15 AM
#77
Posts: 688
It's not silly. It's a fact. And one that's been mentioned previously in the threads by others.
Which some of you would have known, had you read before you posted...
Which some of you would have known, had you read before you posted...
'There's honour in victory, honour in defeat and honour in just staying alive'.
[Quote from Wings Reel]
[Quote from Wings Reel]
22 Oct 2013, 08:29 AM
#78
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedIt's not silly. It's a fact. And one that's been mentioned previously in the threads by others. Which some of you would have known, had you read before you posted...Sorry, what "fact" are you referring to specifically?
Are you trying to state that Penals where unsuppressable by HMGs, as historical fact?
22 Oct 2013, 10:33 AM
#79
Posts: 45
I think that penal squads could get conscripts "Urah !", this unit even fits more for this ability than conscripts.
I like idea with suppression mitigation for penal squads but in bit other way
!
I think that "Urah !" should cancel suppression during ability duration but also seriously multiply damage received from suppression weapons, so it would be more like charging on German AA quad in CoH 1 rather than trolling MG's and running through firing arc without scratch.
This way "Urah" charge would be high risk (You can get your squad chopped down entirely), high gain tactic.
EDIT_1: Of course, still, no "Urah !" if suppressed already
.
I like idea with suppression mitigation for penal squads but in bit other way
!I think that "Urah !" should cancel suppression during ability duration but also seriously multiply damage received from suppression weapons, so it would be more like charging on German AA quad in CoH 1 rather than trolling MG's and running through firing arc without scratch.
This way "Urah" charge would be high risk (You can get your squad chopped down entirely), high gain tactic.
EDIT_1: Of course, still, no "Urah !" if suppressed already
.
22 Oct 2013, 12:58 PM
#80
Posts: 182
I love penal squads, but in a 1vs1 they don't fill a roll or come out in a reasonable amount of time. Mass conscripts is a lot more effetive. I've really tried incorporating them into some sort of strat with tier 1 but due to their survivability and current abilities (and considering the current german meta usually involves quick light vehicles) they just become a manpower drain. They have potential but it definitely hasn't been reached.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
31 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
0 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.943410.697+9
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.655.929+6
- 8.307114.729+3
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1266
Board Info
781 users are online:
1 member and 780 guests
A_E
A_E
3 posts in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
31 posts in the last month
12 posts in the last week
31 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50064
Welcome our newest member, harryrichardson
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, harryrichardson
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM