Profile of BlueKnight

btw i like to play this card now that i did some testing

>why do cons beat pfusi even tho they cost more to reinforce and base ?

>why do cons have base snad bag and RA at vet 1 which they can achive during the fight ?

Cons have more or less 70% of far PF DPS. If your PFs lose to cons you are taking an engagement at a wrong distance or with insufficient cover. You can keep Sturms next to your PFs if you are afraid of Cons charging you.

Cons will get reduced RA at vet 1 because their scaling is being made more linear, just like PGrens' vet bonuses were adjusted last patch. The vet 1 RA bonus for Cons will just bring them to starting RA of many mainlines. Volks get RA reduction at vet 1 too and they too have sandbags and don't have to pay a fortune for basic tools like snare. Why are you so fixated about this topic?

it's u who said to compare them to those units, then u backpadle when i do ?

im not complaining about the g 43 upgrade im complaining about the base mp cost of the unit, why it's the only unit that needs to pay for the extra men twice (in the base cost and the upgrade)?

and no compared to previous PF they have 1 less men

and so what? those unit are priced fairly and it's not like fusi wins at all range, they have strictly worse dps than volks at mid and close range

You have clearly not understood my post then, I don't backpedal from it. Obers are overpriced unless you buy them an upgrade, just like PFs, but you have freedom to build PFs whenever you want unlike Obers. If you decide to implement PFs in your build too early and in masses, you are going to suffer from your build order decisions. Please, read again:

If you take a look at Obersoldaten, Paratroopers, Guards and Rangers, all these units perform rather poorly for their cost if you don't buy them any upgrades. They excell once their special weapons are handed to them. Powerful units like these can shift balance if upgraded early, so most of these units are locked behind CP or tech. PFs used to be locked behind CP as well, however a change was implemented that allowed players to field these units early so they could improve the variety and army composition and also vet early on. It was a good change. The source of the cost-performance issue you see is driven by locked-behind-tech expensive upgrade with which the unit is intended to be used.

I also explained why I think the PFs aren't straight up equal or superior to Volks in every situation as you want them to be.

i will explain my full argument:

1 we don't increase the base cost of an unit cuase of it's upgrades, we increase the upgrade cost

That's how it should be, but if you take a look at Obersoldaten, Paratroopers, Guards and Rangers, all these units perform rather poorly for their cost if you don't buy them any upgrades. They excell once their special weapons are handed to them. Powerful units like these can shift balance if upgraded early, so most of these units are locked behind CP or tech. PFs used to be locked behind CP as well, however a change was implemented that allowed players to field these units early so they could improve the variety and army composition and also vet early on. It was a good change. The source of the cost-performance issue you see is driven by locked-behind-tech expensive upgrade with which the unit is intended to be used.

2 the upgrades are priced fairly, the shreck make us lose at nades and pfusi g 43 is a mix of cons upgrade and g 43 upgrade (the g 43 are still worse tho than normal)

Upgraded early game vet 0 PFs win medium-long range (25) engagements vs vet 0 penals. For a rough comparison, vet 0 Penals performance is more or less equal to Rifleman with 1 bar at this range. This upgrade is powerful and afaik, gives very good moving accuracy. Keep in mind that Penals require teching and so do weapon racks. PFs upgrade is powerful and worth the price, no doubt about it.

3 the unit itself deals worst damage than volks and cost more, i could understand if they were better or costed similar but both worse and more expensive does not make sense

I partially agree with you. PFs could cost 250MP and the difference of the unit value could be added to the weapon upgrade cost, but then Volks would be overshadowed by PFs and this would turn into an uninteresting PF-spam. The intention of CP removal was to increase army composition variety and PFs being too appealing would have the opposite result - killing Volks. Prevention of other doctrinal infantry spam is done with either CP requirements or call-in cooldown, in this case it's a high entry cost.

The one aspect that you don't bring up is the snare platform availibility in the early game for OKW. For some players having access to the AT nade early on is a good counterplay to the M3 from Soviets. M3 has a very small window in which it can operate and if SOV players builds an M3 to bully Volks, OKW can now defend itself. This makes the enemy investment of 190MP and 15F a waste of resources. In that kind of scenario a 280MP unit is not a bad deal at all as within minutes it's going to transform into a more useful combat unit for the rest of the game.

they either need to : reduce the cost in mp as they don't perform for the price or a better base weapon to make them perform for their price

Problem with a better base weapon is that it would benefit the schreck AT upgrade and give PFs not only the top handheld AT weapon, but also some AI capability, which is what the balance team is trying to avoid based on past experience with Volks who could upgrade 1 schreck.

the argument that they have better scalling or they have versatile upgrade is worthless as we have unit with great vet and versatility that don't pay for it by being overpriced, and they are not even doctrinal

let's not forget u don't pay for nades and upgrades unlock for doctrinal units (and even then pfusi upgrade are locked behind tech)

the simple comparison is rifle, both have great vet and versatility, but one actually perform for its price while the other does not, and before u say "rifle pay for nades and upgrades", yes they do and pfusi are doctrinal and have draw backs (no at nades with shreck , unlike zook, no 6 g43, unlike bar)

Riflemen are better than unupgraded PFs while their initial cost is the same, that's true but it doesn't show the whole scope and situation which is generally higher reinforcement cost for Riflemen (28 MP Rifle vs 25 MP Volks and 25 MP PFs), cost of weapon rack unlock, etc. I don't want to turn this into a Volks vs Rifle comparison, but while vanilla Riflemen are more cost effective than vanilla PFs, Volks have always been more cost effective than Riflemen (up until double BARs), so it isn't uncommon that for the same price different factions get units that vary in performance. JLI for example are still way better than Pathfinders. Factions are asymmetrical so direct cost comparison does not always reflect unit power due to variety of tools available to different players.

Putting bazookas on Riflemen does not achieve anything but makes that Riflemen squad have bad AI while being not very good AT platform due to high armor values of axis vehicles. Please, note that any of the Superbazooka squads like Paratroopers or Rangers, that are more comparable to the Schreck squads, do not have a snare either.

so again why should pfusi cost more and be worse ?

btw pfusi vet is almost the same as penal

PFs need to compete for attention in your roster with Volks. In the mid and late game PFs are superior to Volks and can compete with upgraded allied infantry. They are a really good unit. The game pace is generally such so that stronger tools are available later in the game. PF, I believe, have poor unupgraded damage so that you need to build at least some Volks in the early game and to prevent powerful schreck blobs.

There are 3 options in current setup:
1. Build Volks and PFs to optimize firepower throughout the game.
2. Build Volks only and not benefit from the early snare and powerful late game inf. Benefit early
3. Build PFs only and have difficulties in the early game engagements. Benefit late

Option number 1 is the best from the variety and from power management points of view.

I prefer this solution of "early game unit drawbacks" over "units being locked behind CPs". Sadly, it's difficult to apply the same logic to the paratroopers as spawning airborne units (even without early access to weapon upgrades) would be problematic and benefit the USF player with insta-flank. Guards are possibly too versatile to apply this solution to them, Rangers could see similar tweaking to PFs with thompsons being locked behind some artificial requirements, Not sure about obersoldaten as these guys are nuts and stock.

TL;DR: I spent more time on this than I should. Thanks for a discussion.

well what did u expect form a 90 mun upgrade to be worse than a 60 mun ?

You compared PFs to Volks and said the PFs are more expensive and deal less damage than Volks. I then said that your claim is not always true because you should take the upgrades into account. Please, be honest about the unit performance.

So like penal to cons ?

if so give them penal rifle

Ok, but you'll have to build an additional tech structure for 160 MP and 10 FU to be able to field them. Deal?

I know they are scaling well, have loads of utility but aren’t they costing too much for what they offer and for their veterancy ?
Suggestion are
> Improve them to Volks level OR (probably the best idea)
> Reduce the G43 cost OR (Not sure abaout this)
> Reduce MP cost (this may encourage early blobbing so i am not really into that)

I think that people should supplement their early build order with PFs and not replace the volks completely. This way you get strong early game with volks with faust from PFs and better late game scaling due to fussies in your roster. Upgrading G43s should be your priority. PFs get really strong once G43s hit the field.

PFs don't need buffs, otherwise they will become a no brainer from minute 0 and Volks, who are really good infantry for their cost, will become overshadowed.