You forget that in 2v2 games you team up with your mate so he can cover your weaknesses. Stuart or AEC is enough to cover you till t4 tanks.
Well... it's all situative teamplay cases. I speak about "general design and mechanics". General design of Conscripts is ridiculously poor and unreasonable bad. No additional weapons without doctrines, low firepower, bad grenades, big target size, causing fast underfire death... And for what?
If they are "utility infantry", then it's bad idea. If your real core infantry, which you spend resourses on with upgrades are just "utility", then it's reaaaaaly bad design and faction making. If my real mainline, like Mirage says are Penals, then let Penals have Molotovs and AT-nades too, with Cons, or instead of them. Otherwise, it only complicates game for USSR without any reason. |
Everything's apparently too expensive nowadays. Might as well say GG Ostheer while we're at it with their Battlephase upgrade 
Soviet tiers are kinda "lower" than Ostheer. For example - reinforcing truck in T3 for USSR and in T2 for Ostheer. Or - universal medium tank for USSR is T4, while for Ostheer it's T3. And of course, no panther-like tanks for USSR.
Personally, I don't use T4 at all, cos Pz4 are fine enough for to live with even in late. So, I can save a lot of resouses on that, but USSR can't. And of course - spend fuel on grenade upgrades.
Anyway, ostheer tiering is not that "bad and overpriced", like people prefer to think.
|
I would make that trade, Osttruppen are awesome.
Cons aren't your mainline fighting infantry, penals are.
Put penals in T0, that I wouldn't need to trade them to my Maxims and mortars and AT guns and I will accept that. Otherwise - Cons are mainline. |
I like penals. 2 flamer penals + 2 guards into kats+T85's is a good mix
2 flamerpenals require from you to say "NO!" to Maxims, mortars and only your early AT guns. Can't say, that they are so good, that I could exchange really needed support guns to "little better version of cons", snipers and trashy car. Give to Penals early AT, like PTRS pack - will use them. |
1. Burst Damage. Cons only need 5 shots to drop a model and against Grenadiers it's far more punishing as that's 25% of their DPS being dropped. 16 damage vs the 12 of Volks or 8 of Rifles. It's RNG, but it can also allow Conscripts to suddenly catch up in a DPS race at short.
2. Overstating the 1.087 when you consider most Axis early ranged infantry already have good accuracy and the fact Cons are 20 to reinforce per model vs a Grenadiers 30 or a Volks 25. You make it sound like it's the weapon team 25% which is very noticeable compared to the Conscripts 1.087. They also still have 80hp per model.
3.And? Tank Traps are harder to fit squads behind and are exclusive to Rear Echelon. Volk Sandbags also aren't exactly large while the USF needs specific docs for sandbags.
4. Conscripts are not mainline damage dealers and never have been. Doctrinal troops or the upcoming Penals are the ones who deal damage, while Conscripts take damage/draw fire and be the utility belt they are. It's how they've been for awhile.
The only thing Conscripts should possibly get is lower reinforcement costs with veterancy to maybe at 16-17 to emphasize their role as support/screening troops for the other Soviet units and possibly adjustments to their grenade packages in costs.
If we're really bored, give them a squad leader like in my mod just to mess things up 
1. That's RNG, and mostly - it works against you. 5 target hits per once - that happens really rare, specially in one model-target. Specially, when enemy grens stand in any kind of cover, at least yellow. I don't see that as something good, don't know about you. I prefer to have solid firepower, not random. Grens are solid, Volks are solid, whoever else are, but not Cons.
2. Yea, but good accuracy + high target size in that case = nice Vet farm for Ostheer units and fast forcing of retreat for your enemy, because if your Cons squad loosing more than 3 man - you have to retreat. Otherwise, with such high target size they have high chanses to be shooted in retreat, it happens pretty often, I should say. And please, don't use "cheapness" as excuse for ruining of most important part of Cons design - survivability. If unit is cheap, it doesn't mean it should suck in everything. Just in something, like firepower or survivability, but only one of that. Not both, please.
3. Oh... Sizes matters, yea. But still - it's sandbags, you can use them for covers. And it is not much harder to use them, than Sov sanbags, lol. And don't forget - non-doc trenches for Tommy-squads! Exlusive and uniqe.
4. Lol, now conscripts are not mainline damagers. And you suggest to use for that purpouse "doctrinal squads". You know how it looks like? Imagine, that Ostheer would have Osttrupens as mainline and Grens in docs. Doesn't it look ridiculous? It does, but for USSR it's fine somehow.
And I absolutely don't agree with that propagande of "Soviet doctrinal addiction", which you suggest here. Don't you think, that it is hardly broken faction, which gets all real combat units only from doctrines? Normal medium tanks are only from doctrines, normal infantry from doctrines, normal... everything! That's just broken, compare it with same UKF or OKW or whoever else, which have everything good in stock - from infantry to tanks. And from doctrines UKF geting even more powerful units, like Commandos or Churchulls-specialized and cool off-map abilites.
I think, that If Conscripts are not suppoused to be "mainline infantry" in your mind, then they should be removed from that post and should be putted and used like "rear echelones" soldiers - T0 supports to real mainlines. Real mainlines can be non-doc Guards, or some another infantry squad, but not Penals, pls.
P.S. Penals suck. Personal opinion, 21+. |
I disagree about the army sucking, but I won't convince you, so let's leave that.
Units 'support' each other. I don't mean support in the sense of team weapons.
A six man squad behind green cover is much, much more durable than a four or even five man ones, and the target size difference is negligible compared to cover bonuses.
Ok, but we can say that all units of all factions in game "support" each other fine. That's again - not specific plus of Conscritps, like building greenwalls. Grens support bad to Ostheer units? Or maybe Riflemans supporting bad? They are all good in such kind of "support", because it's general mechanic of that game - using combined arms and units. Cons are not uniqe here in that.
6 man squad is much more durable in cover than 4 or 5. Yea, thanks K.O. But... you can't and you won't always hold your infantry in greencover. Mortars or other arty forcing you to move, when you attack your enemy you usually also move and fight out of cover... And besides, even if they are more survivable in greencover as 6 man squad - they still do way less damage from that cover, because... you know, firerate, accuracy... They don't die, but they don't kill. Great, unit became much more useful, specially if we keep in mind, that it is your main combatunit of faction. |
That was obvious...
Without being rude i cant spend my time on every fanboy who is asking for attention.
Cons win close range ,grens long range if both have the same cover.
They are a 6 man squad that can build green cover anywhere on the map,do i need to say more ?
Number 1# mistake with cons and rifles is to charge in,did you do that ?
Did you take unnecessary casualties ?
99% of the time its the players fault
Em... Since I play mostly now as Ostheers on "LeFH only mode", I can't be called "USSR fanboy". I didn't play as them pretty long.
Cons win close range? Yea, with such great firerate (1 shot per 6-7 sec) they do, really. Grens are effective at range, at least. Cons suck in both without PPSHs.
6 man squad is "empty" bonus. 2 additional guys in squad instantly disappears because of highest for mainlines Target Size, so that's not real bonus, it's spoiled.
Build green cover anywhere is "cool"? Well, if it would be exclusive for USSR only, then yea, agree. But, OKW can build green covers, UKF can build green covers. USF may use as green cover for infantry tank traps, if they need them so much... I don't see anything specific for Cons in that, that's common ability right now.
And problem of cons is not in "charging in". Problem is - they are useless as combat unit, which they suppoused to be by their role - mainline infantry. They don't deal enough damage because of low stats and no additional weapon, they get too much damage because of high target size... They can't do their job good, they can't do it at all. That causes such disgusting thing, like "maxim spams", because - maxims (even if they are support guns) are better as combat units, than Conscripts, that's ridiculous. Imagine, that Ostheer would use MG-42 as mainline infantry, instead of Grens. Or UKF use Vikkers instead of Tommies for same. That doesn't happen because HMG is support and Mainline is combat - not visa versa, like it is in USSR! That's not right at all! |
I agree. Conscripts are fine within the context of the Soviet army, even more so now that Penals are getting a buff. They are excellent support for the rest of the army and fight well enough behind green cover, which they can build.
"They are fine in context of the Soviet army". For me it sounds like "Soviet army sux so hard, that bad Conscripts unit alone looks better, than entire faction in general". Well, +1 to that.
But for real - they are excellent support? I thought, that support job is for support units, like HMGs, like AT-guns or speciallized support infantry... you know. And mainlines infantry job is not support, but fight and capture and doing most imoprtant job in field. Not support.
And good news - not only Cons can build good green covers and fight nice behind them. Volks can do it, Tommies can do it, and also build non-doc trenches, lol. That's not "strength" side of Cons, try something else. |
I guess i shouldn't reply to troll threads.
Since game launch cons have been patched constantly and are finally fine now.They do not need lmgs or superior firepower to win fights,they have durability and versatility.Cons win my games.
Can you explain better - how are they fine? What's fine in them? Damage dealing - suck, damage resistance - suck. And don't forget, they are not "support infantry", like Osttrupens of Ostheer - they are your mainline, you core.
So, what's fine in them, actually? And keep in mind - that's your skill wins games, not Cons. |
If you want to use them as rifles then you need 4 units at least with both nades. Their upgrade is also great, and underpriced too.
I agree that their base RA needs to be 'slightly' lower. Howerver their vet 3 bonus needs to be toned down significantly. Having a RA of 0.8 would be broken and I would argue that it is broken for tommies as well if we consider their reinforce cost. It is too much of a boost for a baseline unit. Tommies however, are in no way spammable, unlike the cons.
The SU is a combined strat faction. I would reduce the build time and cost of their Tier 1 and 2 buildings.
So... if Tommies cost just 40 MP more and "less spammable", that's allowable for them to have nice survivability and deadly firepower + additional weapons in stock? And Cons should suffer both in damage and in survivability because they are more spammable?
Here is a problem of CoH 2. Quantity is not that better than quality here. Veterancy system makes quantity less worth, becuase - you can spam a lot of fast dying and low damaging Cons, which will be free farm-feed for same Grens or Volks or whoever else. They will rise up on them fast, and then they will deal with spam even faster, while you will lose more and more "spammable" cons at vet 1 with low chanses of rising them to 3 because... veterancy come from damage, and damage dealing of cons is very low.
Anyway, high spammability is not excuse of making unit such bad, Im sure. Something should be powerful in Cons, damage or survivability. Now they suck in both. |
Relic Entertainment
