Assault Guards into more doctrines!

Firstly, the photo shows Thompson at different dates from 1942 to 1945. Secondly, this is not a historical game. This is a game based on the Second World War: in one order the “conscripts” of 1941 and Katyusha ZiS-6 of 1941 together with the IS-2 of 1944.

And, No thanks, why replace the excellent Shock Troops with the mediocre Assault Guards. If it is valid to make them a unique unit of middle distance, between the Shock Troops and the Guard, and for this they just need the Thompsons (after all, they have good damage over the medium distance), can still absurd the replacement. Now there is no point in replacing.

It tried to be somewhat historical before other 3 factions came in...maybe.

Because the Assault Guards are just there, they're made to have their own icon, weapons stats, their own usage intended in mind, and I suggested them to be upgradable with 3 Thompsons while also being able to have the PPSh-41 so they would be more of like Shocks but also being able to do some sort of a damage (especially on high vets) from their rifles, so it's like an upgrade for the Rangers, and they still would have their 3rd weapon slot and even with the PTRS upgrade, so they would be perfect for just having a more diverse gameplay without being too similar to other units and not too UP-OP.
And there is, for example, a doctrine with a 120mm Mortar, PPSh-41 upgrade for Conscripts, and then...Shocks, which doesn't seem very useful and logical, so placing these Assault Guards would allow you go for the Thompson upgrade if you really want, or for the PTRS upgrade so you don't rely on the ATGs and tanks with sometimes Snares alone.

There are just too many Shocks and Guards, they're nearly in every single doctrine.
Just let the players understand if they need them this way and if they won't-fine, but still, I think it's an idea worth a try, considering the Grenade and the Vet 1 are going to be fixed.

I've done some testing of the Assault Guards today and I'm pretty pleased with their performance. For a laugh, I decided to try them up against Thompson Rangers, and predictably they lost. But they didn't lose by much. And when I put both units at vet 2, the Guards started winning reliably.

This is very impressive considering the Guards don't have to invest 90 muni into an upgrade. (If you consider their Doctrine comes with muni-to fuel airdrops, this seems like even better value). The replacement of the PPSHs with Thompson mean that the halftrack they come in is lot better at running down infantry.

Talking of the halftrack - this unit is consistently underrated. There are often scenarios where it is a better pick than a T70 because of its utility and potential for blob control when upgraded. Try putting PTRS penals in it and watch that Luchs explode. The fact that this Doctrine gives it to you without having to build T3 first is pretty cool.

I don't agree that the Guards should be separate from the halftrack. I like the synergy between the units and agree with Katitof that they have a distinctly lend-lease theme.

I've done some testing of the Assault Guards today and I'm pretty pleased with their performance. For a laugh, I decided to try them up against Thompson Rangers, and predictably they lost. But they didn't lose by much. And when I put both units at vet 2, the Guards started winning reliably.

This is very impressive considering the Guards don't have to invest 90 muni into an upgrade. (If you consider their Doctrine comes with muni-to fuel airdrops, this seems like even better value). The replacement of the PPSHs with Thompson mean that the halftrack they come in is lot better at running down infantry.

Talking of the halftrack - this unit is consistently underrated. There are often scenarios where it is a better pick than a T70 because of its utility and potential for blob control when upgraded. Try putting PTRS penals in it and watch that Luchs explode. The fact that this Doctrine gives it to you without having to build T3 first is pretty cool.

I don't agree that the Guards should be separate from the halftrack. I like the synergy between the units and agree with Katitof that they have a distinctly lend-lease theme.

But what about putting them into other doctrines with different upgrades, as I mentioned, for more utility and be able to make them suit the situation on the battlefield as you need? Is it a good idea considering their effectiveness?
Also, about the Synergy, it is good, not going to lie, but the problem is the huge ManPower cost of this Synergy which makes them much less used than they should be, as if they came in without it, some would even use it, probably.

I mean I'm not totally against it, but Soviets already have the most call-in infantry in the game lol. They have long range, short range, mid range, ambush, ambush at troops. What more do you need?

And in terms of manpower - since the halftrack is normally 240mp 30 fuel, the Guards work out at 270mp. That is an awesome deal for their performance now.

I mean I'm not totally against it, but Soviets already have the most call-in infantry in the game lol. They have long range, short range, mid range, ambush, ambush at troops. What more do you need?

I want less Shocks and Guards spams as they're basically the only thing everyone does besides spamming Penals, so I don't like it and I want some Guards and Shocks in doctrines to be replaced with a unit that's worse than them in the roles they are in, but can do both, and, after the upgrades, be suited more towards the usual Guards or the Usual Shocks but still be a bit worse (but with 3 weapon slots).

And in terms of manpower - since the halftrack is normally 240mp 30 fuel, the Guards work out at 270mp. That is an awesome deal for their performance now.

Well, yeah, that's a nice thing to mention, just it's still 240MP 30Fuel + 270MP, thus 510MP 30Fuel, which is just really Huge.

Why would any doctrine need them in first place? There are shocks and normal Guards, these guys are just for doctrinal flavor.
The only reasonable thing to change for them is 3xbazooka upgrade as an alternative to thompsons.

The only reasonable thing to change for them is 3xbazooka upgrade as an alternative to thompsons.

That would be absurdly strong on a 6 man unit with access to very cheap transport/firing platforms. The equivalent unit again is Rangers who cost 130 more manpower, would need to spend 150 muni for the upgrades, don't have the same access to mobile transport and aren't part of a faction with lots of cheap and powerful At options.

Would suggested replacing the M5 with an M3 and adjusting cost and increasing diversity. One could then change the cost accordingly.

In addition one has to tone down the vet bonuses since they are designed for units with lower base stats.

Ever heard of paratroopers? 6 man squad with 3 elite bazookas or 5 man fusiliers with 2 Schrecks costing 280 mp and available from the start of the game?

*doublepost*

Ever heard of paratroopers? 6 man squad with 3 elite bazookas or 5 man fusiliers with 2 Schrecks costing 280 mp and available from the start of the game?

Paratroopers have only 2 weapon slots
Shrecks are not available from the start
fusiliers with 2 Schrecks have extremely low AI

Paratroopers have only 2 weapon slots
Shrecks are not available from the start

Way to miss the point
Schrecks are much more powerful than bazookas and you can put Pgrens into German clowncar, there is even Pgren+clowncar callin ingame, somehow it didnt break the game yet despite being cheaper
Paratroopers and Rangers get elite zooks, not normal ones.
Fusiliers are super cheap of a squad to get such powerful AT weapons, yet they exist

The fucking history explanation's bigger than the idea lol

I liked it tho

Way to miss the point
Schrecks are much more powerful than bazookas and you can put Pgrens into German clowncar, there is even Pgren+clowncar callin ingame, somehow it didnt break the game yet despite being cheaper
Paratroopers and Rangers get elite zooks, not normal ones.
Fusiliers are super cheap of a squad to get such powerful AT weapons, yet they exist

I did not respond to your point, I simply corrected your facts. Using correct data/stat helps a debate move allot smoother.
Elite or not paras get 2 bazookas not 3.
The m5 is simply superior even to buffed 250.

To respond to your point, 6 men squad with 3 bazookas/3 SVT and good vet bonuses can easily become problematic especially if they come without a vehicle as suggested by some. The AI/AT potential is simply too high.

I did not respond to your point, I simply corrected your facts. Using correct data/stat helps a debate move allot smoother.
Elite or not paras get 2 bazookas not 3.
The m5 is simply superior even to buffed 250.

To respond to your point, 6 men squad with 3 bazookas/3 SVT and good vet bonuses can easily become problematic especially if they come without a vehicle as suggested by some. The AI/AT potential is simply too high.

Where had I suggested they come out without vehicle? Thats the whole point of triple zooks, right now the only way to use this call in is dismounting Guards and upgrading M5 so it actually does something.

Where had I suggested they come out without vehicle? Thats the whole point of triple zooks, right now the only way to use this call in is dismounting Guards and upgrading M5 so it actually does something.

Now you are the one missing my point. 3 bazzokas/3 SVTs and good vet bonuses make a unit too effective in both roles.

(I never said hat you have suggested that they come without a vehicle)

Now you are the one missing my point. 3 bazzokas/3 SVTs and good vet bonuses make a unit too effective in both roles.

(I never said hat you have suggested that they come without a vehicle)

Both roles, what are you smoking? SVT has worse profile then riflemen garand, they would deal less DPS than 6 man con squad with upgrade, less than PTRS Penals even.

Both roles, what are you smoking? SVT has worse profile then riflemen garand, they would deal less DPS than 6 man con squad with upgrade, less than PTRS Penals even.

PLS stop being aggressive.

Conscripts with SVT have zero AT
PTRS Penal have far less AT than 3 bazookas and only 25% more AI

They would definitely far more AI than double shreck PF.

The unit will not be good as an AI unit but it will be too good as all-round unit.