Radical T0-T1 Restructure Proposal:

Interesting proposal, albeit I fear it will bring even more grenspam.

One thing I feel should be done is give T1 AT capabilities. The reason it's barely built is that light vehicles can completely ruin your day if you go that way unless you can somehow get a T70 out before their FHT/AC, and then you utterly cripple your late game AT with no AT guns or SU-85s.

So I'd make building T1 unlock lend-lease bazookas for conscripts (and/or maybe penals). At about 70-80 ammo for one, make them similar to shrecks with less penetration so they're mostly effective against lighter vehicles, or P4 rear armor. Because Soviets's current infantry AT pretty much sucks.

i dont know nullist , maybe it would e simpler to reduce the by 10% the building time of t1 , penals and t2 accompanied by finetuning of mp costs , recruitment costs , capping times and pop requirements , i think that would make for better balance and more assymetrical play

Put in the LMG upgrade and the balance is gone to hell...
And please don't say the answer is Penals

The purpose of the proposal, would be for Penals to be the answer, yes.

There is, imo, no way to make Cons a LMG Gren counter. It has to come from Penals.
Even if a non-doctrine PPSH upgrade was ever implimented, that still wouldnt change that.
There is no way that Cons, no matter what upgrade they might ever get, can match LMG Grens, nor should they, despite some peoples unreasonable expectations that they "should".

In my proposal Ost T1 (through MP costs and buildtime), and hence LMGs, are delayed to where Penals would be more viable.

Since LMGs are a T1 upgrade in my proposal, if Ost skips the additional cost of T1, you can either go T2 too, at the same cost, or T1, with Penals that will dominate his non-LMG Grens.

The T0-T1 split, that currentky "saves" Ost that 120 MP and associated buildtime, is, imo, exactly what is squeezing Penals out of their correct timing in early game. It may not seem like much, but imo that is exactly what is delaying Penals, in relation to LMG Grens, out of the meta. That 120MP and buildtime. And for what? An artificial difference, since Ost doesnt have Grens at T0, so presumably needs a "cheaper" T1. Which it doesnt, because the rate of appearance of LMGs is timed to Muni, not conventional tier structure, currently.

@ The_Courier

Ive long been for swapping Flamer upgrade with PTSR on Penals.
They wouldnt overshadow Guard, because Guard are:
A) Callin, meaning you can skip T1
B) Guard have 1.5 armor
C) Guard have DP upgrade with Button

Thereby my proposal provides Sov with a baseline non-doctrinal AI infantry unit, that at T1, can provide that limited AT vs light vehicles that youvpoint out, as well.

It would be a decent idea if PTRS were actually good AT, which they, well, aren't. Anything bigger than an AC can safely ignore them, even if they're firing at its butt.

As for Penals, I've long been a proponent of removing their SVTs and sticking the flamer on them stock, along with perhaps an armor upgrade or suppression resistance. There, you got your flavor close-combat suicide infantry, now can I please get some decent ranged AI on my conscripts via upgrade?

I disagree with every single line of that.

But wtvr, to each their own opinion.

I would love for Penals to ditch the flamethrower upgrade for a PTSR upgrade. You could go t1 and not be forced into taking a Guard commander. Only thing is, I know Relic wants the Penal Battalion to be a suicide squad not a Ranger (elite infantry) clone. The change would fit the meta well but I can see Relic not wanting to change the design intent of the unit. I hope they do it though.

if relic wants penal battalions to be suicide squad they wouldn't give them svts and put them at 360 manpower.

Penal battalions are necessary for T1-T4 play, soviets need some stronger non-doctrinal infantry to take on pgrens and lmg grens. T2 you have maxims for suppression at least. Obviously penal battlions are not designed as a suicide unit, regardless of historical context. They are a 360 mp unit. Second, the satchel charge has a 3 second timer, easily dodged in the open field. Obviously the design of the satchel charge is to get rid of key positions. Think mg42's in houses or troops in bunkers where they will have a hard time dodging the satchel in time.

The flamethrower upgrade is a good idea because it allows them to take on pgrens if they manage to close the gap and not just from long range. However I think they should also be given the option to upgrade to the antitank rifles to help T1-T4 play with early FHT/AC pushes. That way the soviets are faced with a decision to make. Either they will have a pure AI unit if they don't upgrade, an AI unit with decreased ranged dps for increased close quarters dps, or an ability to fight light vehicles for decreased AI capabilities. They should not have the ability to upgrade to both a flamethrower and antitank rifles though.