His post didn't say anything about only old factions being affected. He only mentioned that Riflemen were not bugged.
Maybe some models in your squads still had the veterancy bonus because they didn't die, but it could also just have been RNG or imagination. Or the bug didn't affect everything as you said, but it is impossible to know now what has been affected and what not and for how long if we won't get additional information.
http://www.twitch.tv/relicentertainment/b/567569238
Listen from 19 minutes on and you will see he mentions it was mostly the non-WFA armies that suffered from that bug so it was unlikely that Volks were affected. He doesn't mention specifics but just from what he says we can see it was a bigger problem for Soviets and Ostheer. |
That is the most funny part for me. If this bug really existed, and let's assume it lasted already for a while, all the statements saying how great Volksgrenadiere etc. are at Veterancy 5 in comparison to unexperienced ones were probably garbage because chances are we didn't even see proper Veterancy 5 Volksgrenadiere until now  Unless people never lost models on their squad, it was just the power of imagination.
Gokkel I think you misunderstood PQ when he explained the veterancy bug. It was mostly only affecting the non-WFA armies i.e. Soviets and Ostheer. I have definitely noticed vet 3 conscripts and even penal troops performing better than they previously had been after the fix. |
Scripts suffer the same fate that Kubel or M3. Although they can be useful in the very early game, they can't scale at all and from midgame onwards they're just a nuisance.
The difference is that you only need one Kubel or one M3, but you need at least 3 conscripts to do something. Thats a 720 MP investment + ATnades + Molotovs. Close to 1000 MP and 50 Fuel for a unit that can't even fight when your enemy reaches 2 CP and starts calling elite infantry. Even more, you must add the cost of reinforcing them, as they die like flies.
It's not strange that most soviet players prefer to struggle with maxims or snipers in the early game and use Shocks as basic infantry. At least maxims and snipers are useful all the game and don't bleed manpower like crazy.
Choosing Maxim/Sniper spam it's not the easy road to victory that OztheWizard claims.
Against equal skilled enemies, making conscripts is a big handicap right now that seriously affects your chances of winning.
I was a T1 player too, with conscripts+penals as the backbone of my build, but right now is stupid to play like that. Midgame, you feel like you're playing with ostruppen against an army of shocktroopers.
EDIT: Funny thing, now conscripts are thought to fight at mid range in cover, but their only upgrades are the short range PPsH or the overnerfed and useless ability Hit the Dirt. None of them seems to combine well with their new stats.
I think since WFA came out Relic are really having trouble with trying to figure out the Soviet faction and certain units. Since WFA, long range dps has gone up and up. conscripts were designed for close range dps and now they are trying to back track on that with strange results. |
Perhaps but as we know the soviet union didn't rely on unit preservation and veterancy to win, though of course I know that this is a fun arcade game not a historical re-enactment. The problem I see with your argument is that you think conscripts should be more like grens or volks and that way we lose the asymmetry.
Cons will die in you charge them from long range at grens (no fun) so you have to make it fun by finding the other ways to play them - forcing the grens from cover with your mortars then oorahing them in - flanking with multiple cons squads over fences and round buildings, using true sight to ambush etc. An issue with this is the cost relative to grens - they are not cheap enough to be able to afford 2 con squads per gren but they would probably need to be nerfed even more to reduce their price so...
To contradict some of what I have said the changes made the cons cause more dps at mid range than they did which makes me think they are also intended to be played in cover vs advancing infantry rather than having to always rush in close. This still fits with the concept of massed sub-standard troops as a strategy
Which is all well and good but in terms of micro required then it is heavily in favour of the axis player. They have to control smaller numbers of higher dps units and generally keep in green cover at far distance. So you as the Soviet try your best to flank, find weaknesses in the axis player while they sit in green cover. I find this gameplay to be fun but as the game progresses and veterancy starts to shine the lethality of long range combat really makes it harder to do this. Not to mention as you reach pop cap as Soviets you are going to have a larger number of generally inferior fighters.
I like asymmetrical balance but if that is the case why do conscripts cost the same as grens? If we want to go the route of chaff infantry then why not go 100% and nerf them more and decrease cost as you said. If you think about it reinforcing conscripts from 1 to 6 men costs 100MP. To get grens back to 100% it is a max of 90 MP so that MP is a problem. Even at 50% squad number it is 60 each for gren and cons so the higher reinforce on grens per model is misleading.
I agree with you that it seems they want cons to be used in cover at medium distance and that is how I will start playing them as right now trying to get in close is asking for a dead unit. |
You are right in the danger if feeding too many to the enemy but you are meant to overwhelm early game in this way. As we know they don't scale.
Going back to the ww2 theme argument Volks were rarely used in the way soviet conscripts were. They tended to be in secondary defensive roles whilst core german infantry made all the offensive attacks.
The numbers may or may not be right but I respect what I think relic is trying to do. The real problem is the rest of the soviet faction infantry design which has been muddled and chopped up as witnessed by the early changes if penals from long range damage to short range glass cannons overlapping roles with cons and the move of guards to a doctrinal choice. In hindsight I think what would have been fun would be fodder conscripts giving way to a stronger AI guard unit later in the game which the cons would act as support to. I guess this kind of happens if it weren't for the halfway house of guards as semi AT and a bit meh vs inf. plus being doctrinal
My feeling is that relic may work further on the other soviet faction once these changes have settled
There's just one thing wrong with that vision of the conscript squad. Veterancy and unit survival are key to winning games in CoH2 and making conscripts that unit that is meant to die in droves goes against that not to mention it's not fun to play. Nobody likes seeing their units drop so quick and just feed the long range axis infantry vet to the point where closing in becomes extremely difficult.
Funnily enough if we talk about the 9% penalty buff on cons and the 0.91 bonus on grens it's like 5.5 cons vs. 4.4 worth of grens now in terms of small arms fire. Conscripts still have the advantage in tanking explosive damage but the lines are starting to blur in terms of survivability. |
But do the other AT Guns have it? Someone should check that.
They didn't have it before, but if the pak now has that penalty it will die to a stiff breeze lol! |
Just to be clear, the Sturmpioneer along with every other infantry unit did not see a value change. They are worth the same, their stats were just optimized to better reflect their intended functionality. i.e. Sturmpioneers lost damage for durability. The idea is that when they close into an enemy unit, they receive less damage, therefore increasing the likelihood of having a whole squad over a partial squad. Their short-mid range damage output is already high enough in most cases that the reduction in damage that was applied will not result in the squad losing the given engagement.
Could you delve into that a bit further and explain why Conscripts received an incoming accuracy penalty? Being best suited to close range combat that 9% penalty makes it harder to get them into damage dealing range without suffering losses that greatly reduce their ability to perform. I'm not giving out I just want to know the thought process behind the decision. Unless conscripts intended functionality is to die (Are conscripts the only core infantry to have an incoming accuracy penalty?  It seems keeping them at mid range in green cover is the best way to go now, that way they can actually do some damage back and hold their ground for a while. |
Well...the hotfix fixed the soviet weapon crews. And also added 25% received accuracy to ZiS and the miniatgun, which they never had before. Hooray.
Really? So now the Zis gun is poor in terms of AT when compared to Pak and just as vulnerable to small arms fire? 6 man squad only helps against explosives but the gun blows up in 3 hits from a tiger/ktiger so it doesn't matter how many are crewing it. I don't even care about the doctrinal 45mm as no one uses that seriously... |
I find it hilarious that people keep talking about how great Penals are now. Penals didn't get changed at all.
I will say one thing, penals in the clown car are still useful against OKW as you can bully volks and sturmpioneers in the early game giving your penals a good chance to vet up. Until they get AT you can pick off lone squads or even a volk and sturm squad if you focus the sturms first. |
That was one issue, the other one was armor. Before the last nerf (Apr 24) the SU85 had a front armor value of 180 (p4 had very hard time penetrating). Since then it was reduced to the current 140.
High armor values should not be so prevalent in the game. They make game play stale when your AT guns' and tank destroyers' shots constantly bounce. And in the Panther's case it's even worse because the tank has good speed and high armor. That tank needs its cost/teching reduced not its armor increased.
I completely agree with you on this point Abdul. Making these units more accessible will increase gameplay variety and avoid this issue where costly units become very hard to take down or as I like to call it the ''heavy vehicle effect''. Rather than increasing armour (to the point where dedicated AT really struggles) the price should have been reduced. |
Nigeria
NokAmnesia
King Cashew
MrSir
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
