Can we stop making more and more threads about same f*cking problem ?
the other threads are bout penal not T1 viability which is actually the issue and not the Penals. I hardly mention Penal here on purpose...
Once more a fix for diversity (buffing Penals) turned into a serious balance issue, one should stop trying to fix the problem by only changing Penals. |
|
In 21st June Patch Penal where buffed as way to make T1 more viable and to add diversity to the game. A solution to diversity issue become a major balance issue.
Now efforts are focusing in fixing the Penal balance issue. But maybe that is not actually the issue we are going the wrong way about it.
Penal where actually pretty balance before the 21st June Patch.
Now one has to keep in mind that Soviets have more starting options than any other faction.
They can built infantry, built support weapon, make sniper vehicles semi elite infantry and its rather difficult to make all option equally attractive especially since the commanders are not equally balanced and some built work better with some commanders.
So part of the solution could be making some of the commander that provide support weapon like Dshk and M-42 more attractive and actually making T1 more viable with these commanders.
Another way to make T1 worth building or back teching is actually providing more utility and option that soviet luck.
For instance scouting abilities:
M3 could have it's fuel cost drop to 5 or removed, its DPS lowered, share veterancy, some sight bonus via veterancy and the ability of unit firing from it removed.
The new role/utility would be to spot, counter kubels, move troops behind enemy lines. Maybe have it a later upgrade to m3 HT quad (if possible) for fuel and MU so soviet can have AA with less MU investment.
Sniper team could get a Recon mode where they would change sight radius for no fire.(Or could even be purchased as recon squad without the sniper rifle for 280 and have the upgrade for 80)
Another idea for utility for T1 is to increase the Price of Soviet call in or their CP but allow them to be built in T1 with a discount to normal price or at their normal CP mitigating the cost of T1 if ones want to go heavy call-ins. Or T1 could offer some other bonuses to Call-in infantry allowing the to perform better like a reinforcement cost reduction, or grenades for call-in units could require either molotov upgrade or T1.
For Penal I ready have suggested Osstturpen approach...This approach has the benefit of not competing with Soviet call in infantry. Or simply revert to pre 21st June Patch Penals (probably without the flamer)
The good thing about these suggestion is that most of them are actually within the scope of the WBP...
Snipers have been changed M3 is a light vehicle and Panals also.
|
Penals have to be OP on individual basis otherwise T1 doesnt worth investment. - GG
Actually no. Having OP units early has proven problematic. When Shock and Guards where moved to CP 1 Soviet dominated the field, simply because OP unit early are have great impact and are too cost efficient. The only reason riflemen that are actually OP did work was that they did lose from grenadier max range and because they had less cost efficient support weapons.
I would actually argue the exact opposite. The (only) way to make T1 work is provide a cheap osstruppen style infantry so the the actually cost of building a T1 is mitigated by access to a cheap cannon fodder infantry. In addition the existence of such an infantry fits the Soviet faction and also fits the Penals historically and thematically.
|
All mixed weapons do to penals is making them harder to use and thus more ballanced. But generally I'm not a fan of neither short range / flamer upgrade nor the PTRS upgrade.
I am not a big fun of flamer either but imo if they go for it they should at least make it with 5 ppsh shock troops curve around 75% DPS |
That way they become shocks that picked flamer without armour.
The problem being?
PPsh are 2 type the one shock use with normal smg Curve and the Conscript one with higher DPS at range 10-15.
mixed weapon (ppsh /svt/flamer) Penal are actually more powerful since because they have more DPS at range 20 the optimum range for flamer...and making the unit behave inconstant since optimum range will change depending which model dies...
moving their optimum DPS to close (5) actually makes the unit better balanced...
Way too much overlap and way too good for the price.
I could claim the same about PTRs Penal and Guards...
|
I haven't had the chance to really playtest this; is this always the case? Don't the two types of models mix randomly, depending who died?
i.e., I don't think that the SVT/ppsh mixing is predetermined.
The only other option is make PPSh a slot items, which means you will get frustrating behaviour like Vet3 Tommies 
why 3 different weapons with different optimum ranges?
Flamer optimum range 20
SVT optimum range around 25(?)
Cons PPsh optimum range 10
Is it not possible to replace all SVT with PPsh? (5PPsh +1 flamer) |
|
Why do we want to mess with faction design?
Soviet have more starting option than any other faction and some of them are bound to be better than others...
Having cheap access to all 4 Soviet buildings mess with faction design for no good reason. |
I think it's too complicated, especially for this patch. It sounds more complicated than 1.3 version. I think that we need small changes that don't change too much but put units in their intended position.
If it too complicated for this patch simply revert to before (JUNE 21st) move zis to T1 and M42 to T2...
And PLs revert the PTRs deflection damage boost... |
|
Number of Ideas suggestions:
A)The multi-role Penals:
The concept here is that Penal are there to fill the role left by Commander choice. They are not good early but are worth back teching to.
Penal start as a 4 men squad costing 200 manpower with bolt action rifles and balance around grenadiers. The role if one chose to invest in T1 first a decent AI unit with the cost of the building counterweight by cheaper buy cost, and cost efficient via conscript merge.
Available upgrades:
T1 offers 3 different upgrade for Penal once a second building is constructed, but only can be chosen.
Long range upgrade:
1-2 DP become available for 60 MU.
Anti garrison upgrade:
For 60 MP and 90 MU Penal gain +2 member, ourah, 6 PPsh (shock curve) (or 5+1 flamer), AT grenades, molotovs.
Anti light/vehicle upgrade.
For 40 MP and 40 MU they gain +1 member 2 Ptrs conscript model, AT grenades with range 25.
AT in T1 approach:
Goal to make both openings provide some AT
Penal reverted to (JUNE 21st) stat flamer removed satchel replaced by grenade.
Zis moved to T1 improve barrage slightly especially vs garrison,add M42 to T2.
Reason makes both opening viable. Penal are a 280 infantry, zis can counter vehicles and provide indirect fire support help clear garrison.
T2 has access to cheap AT to counter light vehicles that can dominate vs hmgs.
The combined infantry approach:
Goal here is to make 2 types of stock infantry available to Soviet.
1)Penal the aggressive infantry
2) Conscripts the defensive infantry
A new role for Penals and conscripts, Penal are now a cheap flanker anti-garrison unit. Conscripts are now mid range defensive infantry.
Current Cost:
T1 160 MP/15 Fuel
Molotov 125/15
AT grenade 125/15
total 250/30
Changes
Penal cost 200,
Weapon PPsh (at pioneer level),
Abilities: Ourah, ourah scales with veterancy, at vet 0 +10 damage +10 suppression, at vet 1 +5 damage +5 suppression, at vet 2 0, at vet 3 -10 target size,
molotov
vet 1 ability unlock AT grenade
vet 3 Penal can now be redeemed cost 100 MP Penal upgrade with 6 SVT (slightly bellow riflemen level)and become mid oriented.
Conscripts
Target size 1
can no longer ourah
molotov unlock replaced with a normal grenade
AT grenade has more Range
Vet ability "hold the line" -15% R.E. cost 15 MU duration 60 sec.
With these changes Soviet player can choose to invest in conscripts or build T1 and have access to to molotovs and AT grenades without unlocking conscripts upgrades.
Conscript have the role of defending while giving the time to Penals to flank. |
|
Can we stop questioning the motive of the people behind the patch and actively try to help them improve the game? |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
