Login

russian armor

Soviet September patch discussion

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (30)down
3 Sep 2019, 22:33 PM
#541
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Does Assault Guard veterancy still differ significantly from normal Guard veterancy?

Should be looked into if it's so, patch only mentioned they get Thompsons instead of PPSH's.

it whould be a bit different, if i recall normal guards get a pen buff with vet which wouldnt be necessary for ass guards, i think they have some sort of combat buff in its place
3 Sep 2019, 23:46 PM
#542
avatar of RoastinGhost

Posts: 416 | Subs: 1

Normal Guards get:
1 Firing Positions
2 .88 RA, 1.14 acc, 1.1 pen
3 .75 RA, 1.14 acc, .8 cd, +25% button duration
2560 xp required for vet 3.

Assault Guards:
1 Flares
2 .71 RA, .75 cd
3 40% acc, +25% grenade range
2880 xp required for vet 3.

Assault Guard vet is basically the same as Shock Troop vet, but has higher requirements (2720 for them).
Seems fitting for the unit, and not overpowered. The requirements had been too high, but might be more reasonable now that the squad deals a lot more damage.
4 Sep 2019, 05:53 AM
#543
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

Normal Guards get:
1 Firing Positions
2 .88 RA, 1.14 acc, 1.1 pen
3 .75 RA, 1.14 acc, .8 cd, +25% button duration
2560 xp required for vet 3.

Assault Guards:
1 Flares
2 .71 RA, .75 cd
3 40% acc, +25% grenade range
2880 xp required for vet 3.

Assault Guard vet is basically the same as Shock Troop vet, but has higher requirements (2720 for them).
Seems fitting for the unit, and not overpowered. The requirements had been too high, but might be more reasonable now that the squad deals a lot more damage.


Flares are boring for an elite unit and should be replaced with something more fitting, like what was was done for Shocks and Penals.

Assault Guards have worse RA than normal Guards at vet 3 with 0,71 vs 0,66. I'd rather see them give up their slightly better accuracy bonus of 40% vs 30% for more durability.

You're right about the Veterancy requirements. They seem a bit high, but propably don't need a change now that they have three Thompsons.
4 Sep 2019, 09:47 AM
#544
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Can we ditch Conscript sidetech?

They're never going to stack up against Penals when you have to pay extra to have the same capabilities for worse troops.
4 Sep 2019, 10:22 AM
#545
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 09:47 AMLago
Can we ditch Conscript sidetech?

They're never going to stack up against Penals when you have to pay extra to have the same capabilities for worse troops.

That is a problem of Penal that need no side tech and not conscripts, side tech is good from a design point of view. It the Penal that need to looked at and not conscripts especially if OKW start get toned down.
4 Sep 2019, 12:54 PM
#546
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 10:22 AMVipper
That is a problem of Penal that need no side tech and not conscripts, side tech is good from a design point of view. It the Penal that need to looked at and not conscripts especially if OKW start get toned down.


You could lock Penal troops's stuff behind the sidetech, but then the sidetechs would become automatic purchases.

And if the sidetechs are automatic purchases, there's not really any point in having them. Just factor them into the teching cost instead.

USF and UKF pulled off sidetech acceptably. Soviet's sidetech has been a train wreck from the start.
4 Sep 2019, 13:46 PM
#547
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 12:54 PMLago


You could lock Penal troops's stuff behind the sidetech, but then the sidetechs would become automatic purchases.

And if the sidetechs are automatic purchases, there's not really any point in having them. Just factor them into the teching cost instead.

USF and UKF pulled off sidetech acceptably. Soviet's sidetech has been a train wreck from the start.

Imo sidetech can easily work for the soviet. Side tech allows you to choose if you want to invest into a unit or not. And since Soviets have so many good doctrinal option imo it is the way to go.
The player will have the option to either improve his core units with side tech or invest in doctrinal units.

The current changes to T2 (cheaper) do not make more attractive simply because T1 offers to much for too little. Instead they allow back tech solidifying T1 as the best option.

If one lock penal power behind side techs and upgrades T2 will become more attractive with out leading to maxim spam.
4 Sep 2019, 13:50 PM
#548
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 13:46 PMVipper

Imo sidetech can easily work for the soviet. Side tech allows you to choose if you want to invest into a unit or not. And since Soviets have so many good doctrinal option imo it is the way to go.
The player will have the option to either improve his core units with side tech or invest in doctrinal units.

The current changes to T2 (cheaper) do not make more attractive simply because T1 offers to much for too little. Instead they allow back tech solidifying T1 as the best option.

If one lock penal power behind side techs and upgrades T2 will become more attractive with out leading to maxim spam.

Or it could completely backfire and move soviets back into call-in inf spam meta due to inefficient resource having to be pumped into infantry to be competitive, forcing tech delay every single time.

Keep in mind that for side tech to be a viable option, base unit also needs to be cost efficient and viable option, otherwise you'll just repeat cons again.

Trying to force side upgrades with excuse of them having doctrinal infantries is extremely bad argument, given that current penal state is a direct response to allow soviets to play without call-in infantry doctrines.

T2 will never be attractive option if maxim remains inefficient and con 7th man comes so late.

Best case scenario, meta will shift back to M3 flamer into cons+snipers into guard spam.
4 Sep 2019, 14:03 PM
#549
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1


Or it could completely backfire and move soviets back into call-in inf spam meta due to inefficient resource having to be pumped into infantry to be competitive, forcing tech delay every single time.

Keep in mind that for side tech to be a viable option, base unit also needs to be cost efficient and viable option, otherwise you'll just repeat cons again.

Trying to force side upgrades with excuse of them having doctrinal infantries is extremely bad argument, given that current penal state is a direct response to allow soviets to play without call-in infantry doctrines.

T2 will never be attractive option if maxim remains inefficient and con 7th man comes so late.

Best case scenario, meta will shift back to M3 flamer into cons+snipers into guard spam.


It's unlikely scenario. I wouldn't dramatize so much.

Simple weapon upgrade or a sidetech upgrade would be as natural as a lmg upgrade for grens or riflemen. It doesn't make unit completely worthless, it just reduces it's starting power and splits in into later stages of the game.
As Vipper wrote it would allow penals to be a cheaper, easier to access infantry unit but with locked SVTs upgrade (assumingly stronger that current becouse of the sidetech upgrade) they could become elite infantry squad with good scaling in time and efficiency more appropriate for a mid stage of a match rather than first min of a game. Same as panzerfuzziliers are made after the revamp.
4 Sep 2019, 14:10 PM
#550
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 14:03 PMStark


It's unlikely scenario. I wouldn't dramatize so much.

Simple weapon upgrade or a sidetech upgrade would be as natural as a lmg upgrade for grens or riflemen. It doesn't make unit completely worthless, it just reduces it's starting power and splits in into later stages of the game.
As Vipper wrote it would allow penals to be a cheaper, easier to access infantry unit but with locked SVTs upgrade (assumingly stronger that current becouse of the sidetech upgrade) they could become elite infantry squad with good scaling in time and efficiency more appropriate for a mid stage of a match rather than first min of a game. Same as panzerfuzziliers are made after the revamp.

And that would require cost decrease to base unit significant enough to warrant additional investment after which you might just as well roll penals into cons and give the upgrades to cons instead.
Also, PFs comparison isn't exactly valid as volks contrary to cons are excellent infantry from get go.

You are all also completely ignoring for whatever reason timing, penals arrive much later then any other mainline and are always outnumbered and opening with penals leaves you with much lower map control in early game, exposing you to lights and you think its a good idea to delay own lights even further?

Stop looking at matchup as 1 penal vs 1 gren/volk.
Start looking at it as 2 penals vs 3 grens/volks as that's much more realistic for the timing and the cost.
4 Sep 2019, 14:12 PM
#551
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 14:03 PMStark


It's unlikely scenario. I wouldn't dramatize so much.

Simple weapon upgrade or a sidetech upgrade would be as natural as a lmg upgrade for grens or riflemen. It doesn't make unit completely worthless, it just reduces it's starting power and splits in into later stages of the game.
As Vipper wrote it would allow penals to be a cheaper, easier to access infantry unit but with locked SVTs upgrade (assumingly stronger that current becouse of the sidetech upgrade) they could become elite infantry squad with good scaling in time and efficiency more appropriate for a mid stage of a match rather than first min of a game. Same as panzerfuzziliers are made after the revamp.


And what's the point then in the Penals if they have to buy SVT-40? This will be T1 Conscripts with the possibility of SVT-40 purchase. Then it is much simpler and more profitable to simply remove the Penals and transfer the SVT-40 to the Conscripts. This will solve the question of the disgusting design of the two starting infantry units. If we leave the Conscripts as they are and make the Penalts with the purchase of SVT-40, then in the end we will get instead of one unviable tier two unviable tiers.
4 Sep 2019, 14:14 PM
#552
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1


You are all also completely ignoring for whatever reason timing, penals arrive much later then any other mainline and are always outnumbered and opening with penals leaves you with much lower map control in early game, exposing you to lights and you think its a good idea to delay own lights even further?


No1 said it would keep it;s 300MP cost.

For the timing - grens says hello. Wanna earlier and better early map control go conscripts or go for penals who scale better in time. That's the idea.

It needs complete revamp of penals (in price, build time, reinforcing cost, etc.) but it's possible and it could work, possibly better than current solution

And what's the point then in the Penals if they have to buy SVT-40?

Same as panzerfuzzilier without G43 upgrade
4 Sep 2019, 14:17 PM
#553
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 14:14 PMStark


No1 said it would keep it;s 300MP cost.

Hence what I've said in the first sentence?
Last sentence regards to people complaining about them being "op" now, while completely ignoring everything else that isn't 1v1 vacuum scenario.

For the timing - grens says hello.

Go check the build time for grens and ost T1 and compare that to soviet T1 and penals.
Then go and compare how long it takes to build 3 grens and how long it takes to build 3 penals, including manpower income.
Return with surprised pikachu face.

It needs complete revamp of penals but it's possible and it could work, possibly better than current solution

I honestly doubt that, given what mod team already said about penals and penal openings.
4 Sep 2019, 14:25 PM
#554
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1

Hence what I've said in the first sentence?
Last sentence regards to people complaining about them being "op" now, while completely ignoring everything else that isn't 1v1 vacuum scenario.

Go check the build time for grens and ost T1 and compare that to soviet T1 and penals.
Then go and compare how long it takes to build 3 grens and how long it takes to build 3 penals, including manpower income.
Return with surprised pikachu face.

I honestly doubt that, given what mod team already said about penals and penal openings.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 14:14 PMStark

It needs complete revamp of penals (in price, build time, reinforcing cost, etc.) but it's possible and it could work, possibly better than current solution

4 Sep 2019, 14:27 PM
#555
avatar of JulianSnow

Posts: 321

Plus that war isn't balanced..

What they really should remove is that retreat option on Penals, because if they did retreat in 1943 the commissar would shoot them due to order 227.
4 Sep 2019, 14:32 PM
#556
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2019, 14:14 PMStark



Same as panzerfuzzilier without G43 upgrade


No, not the same. For Penals, you spend resources for T1 (160mp + 10 fuel) and do not get support. Panzerfuzzilier in T0 and you can go to any tier and in any case you will get MG-34.
So the fines with the purchase of SVT-40 - the death of T1.
4 Sep 2019, 14:36 PM
#557
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

Plus that war isn't balanced..

What they really should remove is that retreat option on Penals, because if they did retreat in 1943 the commissar would shoot them due to order 227.

The commissars were abolished in 1942. And more: in the game commissar is in the NKVD commander. but the commissar is the representative of the party in the army; he has nothing to do with the NKVD and in fact has no power over the soldiers.
4 Sep 2019, 14:49 PM
#558
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



No, not the same. For Penals, you spend resources for T1 (160mp + 10 fuel) and do not get support. Panzerfuzzilier in T0 and you can go to any tier and in any case you will get MG-34.
So the fines with the purchase of SVT-40 - the death of T1.
g43 come at tier 1 tho
4 Sep 2019, 14:57 PM
#559
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

g43 come at tier 1 tho

In any case, what would the Penals with the purchase of SVT-40 be at least somehow comparable with the Fusiliers, they should be T0. Conscripts in T0. No one will move Penals. Penals - either remain the same or must be removed and SVT-40 are given to Conscripts.
4 Sep 2019, 14:58 PM
#560
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474


In any case, what would the Penals with the purchase of SVT-40 be at least somehow comparable with the Fusiliers, they should be T0. Conscripts in T0. No one will move Penals. Penals - either remain the same or must be removed and SVT-40 are given to Conscripts.
they should come in doc tho :snfPeter:
PAGES (30)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

805 users are online: 1 member and 804 guests
mmp
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM