Profile of Firesparks

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1930

General Information


Thread: Idea for Penals27 Mar 2016, 07:34 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Mar 2016, 23:50 PMMyself The success of flamer riflemen was that the where T0 with access to flamer, grenades smoke grandees, AT grenades, AT weapons and assault rifles, with buying veterancy and great veterancy bonuses and better DPS mid and far. Riflemen remain relevant for the duration of the game while Penal don't. In their current state Penal lose most of their utility pretty fast and compare pale to the very versatile conscripts. Not sure increase their DPS will be enough to make them attractive...a vet 3 Penal is still not very useful in late game... The suggestion aim to give some of the utility of Conscripts to Penals leaving room for both units to work...Cheap infantry Penals, decent infantry Conscripts... how is cheap infantry penal and decent infantry conscript going to be different than cheap infantry conscript and decent infantry penal? All that's doing is swapping the skin and model of the two unit. The t2 infantry is going to need a buff either way, might as well buff the penal. Moving the conscript to t2 and then buffing it is hardly better than just buffing the current penal. The suggestion is just going to needlessly complicated matter. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Penal Battalion a completely different approach27 Mar 2016, 07:32 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Mar 2016, 23:37 PMVipper Sort of more like Penal to Osttruppen and Conscripts to a better unit...an Osttruppen type unit fit a soviet armor more than Wer... this new arrangement is not really an improvement over the current setup. It's basically a skin and model swap. The t2 infantry is going to need a buff either way, might as well buff the penal. Moving the conscript to t2 and then buffing it is hardly better than just buffing the current penal. The suggestion is just going to needlessly complicated matter. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Idea for Penals27 Mar 2016, 05:56 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Mar 2016, 00:10 AMthedarkarmadillo Would it actually be so bad having a fighting unit as a t0 and a high utility unit behind 10fuel? Their price could go down (cons) if behind a tier... Cheap useless units feels more like a..not core infantry anyways..m because it would screw t2 build if the at nade and molotov got locked behind a separate building. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Penal Battalion a completely different approach26 Mar 2016, 22:33 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 10:51 AMVipper Let me start by saying that this is conceptual idea so any number presented here might be off and and I focused more on the idea and not numbers. Problems: Penals have been proven rather difficult to be useful. When compared to conscripts they have far less utility, are more expensive and they even come with a tech cost. They are compared to conscript a more elite troops although that does not fit their historical role. Aim: To make penal a unit that see more usage and better fits it history. Historically they where used more like cannon fodder than "elite" troops. How to: By reducing the utility of conscript, by giving a new role to Penal and by retaining the flexibility of Soviet tech. Faction changes: Penal move to T0 conscripts move to T1. Changes to conscripts: Conscripts can no longer ourah or merge, the Molotov is replaced by a grenade (with or without a tech cost). Some price adjustments or performance (size DPS) might be needed. Changes to Penal: Cost down to 200, they get ourah (vet 0 or vet 1), Molotov, satchel, maybe AT grenade or satchel becomes easier to use vs vehicles and merge. They can also benefit from other doctrinal abilities like "hit the ground" and rapid conscription returns Penals. Other abilities the benefit less from cover yellow green and garrison (80-90%) they also are penalized less from red and take reduced suppression (80-90%). Could even get better firing modifier while firing on the move. They come with 3 mosin 3 PPsh (a bit worse than conscripts at mid maybe better at range 0). Their role is to frontally attack the enemy using their molotovs and satchel and to reinforce other units via merge. Problem: Forces Soviet to go T1 to have access to conscripts Solution: AT certain level of veterancy (vet1 or vet2)or is built Penals can "redeem" themselves and for 40 manpower be upgraded to conscripts. If T2 is built conscript can be built at HQ and Penals can be redeemed. As I posted in begging this is only conceptual approach and there might be flaws in it. But in my opinion and gives penal a viable role, it gives Soviets more starting options and make them feel more like the WWII Soviet army that did use cannon fodder tactics... that just seems like turning penal into conscript and conscript into penal. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Idea for Penals26 Mar 2016, 22:28 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Mar 2016, 10:52 AMMyself Penal are not jack of all trades (that is the role of guards) they are specialized anti-garrison and anti-fortification unit. The flamer upgrade available to them restricts there optimal range to 20 and below. As long as they only have the flamer upgrade available to them they will benefit more by mid DPS bonus than by far DPS bonus as suggested by Katitof... What they need in their current state is different vet bonuses and different vet 1 ability (and maybe more mid dps)... Redesigning them is a different approach which imo is better. They role of cheap T0 troops with some of the utility of conscripts suits them better...combined with a new role for conscripts... "jack of all trade" here mean decent at all ranges, like the American m1 carbine and m1 garand. US flame rifleman already proved that semi-auto rifle were a good match with flamethrower. Penal just need a general boost in dps at the mid and long range to make them more similar to the old US flame rifleman. and your suggestion at redesigning them would just just the penal into conscript and conscript into penal. We are just back at square one. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Idea for Penals26 Mar 2016, 08:27 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 10:57 AMMyself Actually imo it is great design instead of having to know the weapon profile for each weapon you get a rough idea from the weapon type. Stugs are irrelevant. The concept still is in place and even the case of the G43 does not demonstrate that the concept is not used anymore but the exact opposite. G43 does use the carbine profile having good dps mid to close and only slightly better than K98 far. DPs g43/k98 wer: 181% 205% 176% 141% 120% 109% 104% 101% The change did not roll back, DPS spread of weapon is still according to type with some changes to weapon upgrades to better fit the role of specific units. The G43 is simply a better weapon than the K98 at all ranges but much better at mid to close because it is a weapon upgrade one has to buy, as I have explained in the PPsh example with conscripts and shocks... Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 11:08 AMMyself That is an issue because one can upgrade cheaper infantry with weapon using MU while one has to pay manpower/pop cost reinforce time for these units to come with better weapons and bleeds bad... (has been suggested that PG become cheaper and come with 2 k98 2 St44 being able to upgrade with 2 ST44 more or 1+1 Shrecks or 2 G43 (doctrinal)) To sum up weapon profiles are still in use having the DPs spread according to weapon type and if Penals need an increase in DPs that should effect more their mid DPS and not their dps far as suggested by Katitof. The penal is a more expensive unit than the conscript, they should be better at dealing damage. It's not like the conscript have excellent dps to begin with. The flexibility to go long range combat is what the penal and panzergrenadier lack. A successful "mid-close" range unit are more accurately described as jack of all trade. The American rifleman is a successful "mid-close" unit because it's decent at long range combat as well. a good close range unit have durability and tricks to get close, like the commandos or the shock. a good long range unit rely on formation to whittle down enemy before they get close (or hmg). a good mid-range unit rely on good all-round dps to be decent. The US rifleman is a good mid range unit. the panzer grenadier and penal are not good mid range unit. the flexibility is important because mid-range unit like the penal, panzergrenadier, and rifleman typically lack the durability of close range unit like commandos and shock. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Royal Artillery + Sexton Balance25 Mar 2016, 18:38 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 15:51 PMSkabinsk Fireparks, are you insane? the priest is 140 fuel and the sexton is 80 or 90.....the performance should NOT match at all due to cost. If anything, cost paste priest to sexton and cost. but that would still be dumb. the priest is 115 fuel, not that much more difference than the sexton's 90 fuel. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Idea for Penals25 Mar 2016, 10:29 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 08:40 AMMyself When weapon profiles where introduced each weapon type was designed to perform better at certain range as clearly stated in patch notes... "Small Arms Weapon Profiles The goal is to improve tactics by better defining unit roles; thereby, increasing the importance of unit positioning relative to cover. A weapon profile defines the distribution of damage over distance. Previously, the profiles were generally flat and did not fully characterize the strengths and weaknesses of a squad. Now, a Pioneer squad with a MP40 submachine gun has a very high damage output at close range but a substantially lower damage output at max range. The distribution of damage is no longer blended between ranges; this combined with the increased weapon lethality should reduce the tendency to rush infantry at one another." The issue that derived from that was that some weapon upgrades ended up reducing DPS of a unit at certain ranges and thus some of them had their DPS improved at some ranges like the conscript SMGs at mid which is why a Conscript smg is better than a shock SMG are range 15 and above (which makes little sense because you have elite vs mainline infantry)... (someone forgot the PG G43). Note now that both the weapon you mentioned are weapon upgrades you buy... In general the weapon profiles principal stands for non upgrade weapons: Bolt action infantry are best used mid to far, carbine infantry are best used mid (to close vs bolt action, mid to far vs SMGs) and smg are best used close... that patch was over 2 years ago. The stug was a "generalist" unit back then before it got changed into a tank destroyer roughly one year ago. The western front armies wasn't even released back then. It's also obvious from the grenadier g43 and k98 that the whole carbine vs bolt action is no longer universally true. It was a flawed design that got quietly rolled back over the years. Design drift over the year, stop clinging on to them. The exact reason why the penal is rarely use because of that design decision . The boost in close-mid firepower for the penal is not worth the increase in cost and the lower long range dps. It's also for a similar reason why the panzer grenadier is rarely used except for schreck spammer. the increased in close range dps is not worth the lost in long range dps and the increase in price and pop cost. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Idea for Penals25 Mar 2016, 08:25 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 08:22 AMMyself No it is not it a weapon profile choice. Carbine weapons are meant to be mid to close while bolt action mid to far and SMG are meant to be close weapon. where did you get that idea? the grenadier g43 is a flat upgrade from the gren k98. the panzerfusilier g43 is a flat upgrade from the panzerFus k98 (and the volks k98). Neither the american nor the british have access to both weapon to provide an example. regardless of what the svt40's are meant to be, it is not working. It's time to rethink the svt40's designs. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Idea for Penals25 Mar 2016, 08:12 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 07:53 AMmiragefla If they were turned into DPS units, then you can have Conscripts in front to soak damage/merge to maintain firepower. It works quite well in the mod I've worked on where Conscripts can screen and Penals deal the damage. And don't say "But focus fire." Because a lot of units die very quickly to focus fire. using the conscript as meatshield for penal doesn't make sense. the svt40 have the same range as the mosin nagant, and the flamethrower even shorter. Merging is also a questionable tactic for non conscript troops. The difference in survivability can be a liability. the conscript would really been a distraction as the penal try to sneak up on enemy, but to be a distraction the conscript needs to be reasonable threat to begin with. Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2016, 07:56 AMMyself Yes I know but the result would be pretty similar... Most factors one can change have a MID values like accuracy and since MID range for SVT is 16 increasing the FAR value does not help that much at ranges 20 and bellow where the flamer comes into play... That means that if a flamer Penal fights at range 20 it will see little benefit and it it fight at 16 and bellow it will see no benefit. Finally at range 20 and above it will have an entity not firing at all... if the penal are to be "mid-close" range units, then they should have been given smg. Right now the svt40 is stuck being equally poor at both long range and short range combat. Either their svt40 should get a buff, or they should just be redesigned with smg. where did you get the idea that svt40 should have poor long range capability anyway? the g43 is basically an upgrade from the kar98. The grenadier g43 is a flat upgrade for the gren kar98 and the panzerfusilier g43 is a straight upgrade for the panzerfusilier kar98 (and the volks k98( In: COH2 Balance