Your thread is titled a core faction discussion, and you refer to a complete Sov overhaul in your thread many times, but you seem not to be actually suggesting any complete overhauls in detail. Though the OP is long, its just a subjective description of units, in a vacuum, that ends with just a few actual suggested changes.
Napalms Balancing Recommendations
- PPSH becomes a unlock ability when the Soviet's build T3 or T4. This will allow conscripts to serve a purpose beyond AT nades come late game. Will this ever happen? Doubtful.
- Penals receive a weapons profile update between the range of 15 and 35. This will help fill the gap of non-doctrinal infantry which are decent at range. Even .3 a SVT will make a difference and further define the roles of Conscripts vs Penals.
- T70 to get a fuel cost reduction. From 70 to 60.
- SU76 becomes a mobile ZiS with the same weapons profile as the ZiS. I still wouldn't build this unit due to no serviceability but at least it fills a role.
- SU85 is revisited given Blitz's reintroduction and the Puma. A surviveability buff would go a long way to making this unit something to be feared.
.
1) This has been discussed since launch. Among the reasons why this is not possible, are that Cons are a 6man unit and what that equates to in durability, especially mid-lategame, as well as their native Merge and Oorah.
2) Penals are indeed a persistant "squished" unit that also has been a point of discussion since launch. Even tier cost changes did not result in the entry of this unit to meta. Personally, Id suggest around a G43 equivalent profile with mid-long range impetus (and perhaps less moving accuracy)(also as mitigated towards smaller model count units) as native, and a full spectrum of upgrade options to choose 1 from, as 1) 2xPTSR 2) 2xDPs (which btw need buffing) 3) Flamer+full PPSHs. This way Penals can form a flexible non-callin option alongside Guard/Shock Commanders AND non- infantry callin Commanders, to fill in the "gap". Im ok with them keeping Satchel in all variants.
3) Im not sure why you include this. I suppose perhaps T70 could use a slightly (and your change is quite small) earlier window vs OKW as a subsequent interbalance change since WFA launch. Perhaps it the cost decrease was met with an equally small reduction in AI efficacy so as to make it earlier vs OKW, but not raise the old AI spectre vs Ost?
4)In aperfect world, yes. I think the SU76 basivally being a mechanised and lightly armored ZiS, as you propose, "makes sense". But from an Ost perspective, I chafe at the thought, cos it makes Stug seem quite shit in comparison. This is a very difficult unit to fit in. Suggestions have been made to swap SU76 with T70, but have met with very interesting and diverse reactions. Many prominent players where concerned with T70/SU85 builds, which is not something I personally saw problems with, but I have to defer to their more experienced judgement. I was more concerned with walls of SU76/ZiS builds that can both facepunch armor, and lay down a continuous barrage of indirect saturation AI fire. That was rebutted by stating its actually already possible, and hasnt happened, which is true, though it sounds powerful on paper. SU76 is definately a unit I would like to see more discussion on.
5)Can you elaborate on why SU85 should be buffed universally, just for purposes of engaging especially this specifically mentioned Puma unit? I ask this, because it seems to me, that though SU85 can deliver terrible dmg when positioned against a Puma, the Puma is actually, by its nature, a SU85 counter. Know what I mean?
On a general note to yourself, I appreciate how exhaustive your OP is. The graphs are priceless, and I took the time to really look at them. Thanks for including those.
I also appreciate how younhave cultivated this thread. Youve consistently updated with changes and have controlled your temper to sometimes negative reactions. As seems to have become an informal policy on CoH2.org (and which I applaud, though I dont know its origin), the idea of "OP moderates his own thread" has come very true here. Well done on that. Especially on such a volatile subject with fanbois abounding on all sides.
I "get" what you mean with your comprehensive analysis, unit by unit, of every Sov option. But I have to render some critique here. I sincerely wish you would take time, and make it a point, to play more Axis. You clearly care about balance, and are prepared to go the extra mile in your posts to deliver as full a picture as you can. But there is a certain, undeliberate, but still there, incipient and accidental bias in your unit analysis that belies a faction specific perspective that has developed in a "vacuum" without having to face the units you detail, from the otherside.
Anyways, I hope I have managed to present my opinions conducively, and supportively of the effort you have taken.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
