Profile of Volsky

Thank you, someone who actually reads into things.

Anyway back on topic. Correct me if I'm wrong (Waiting for Nullist to jump in here or someone with good knowledge of the game statistics and tables.) but do grenadiers have a better chance of hitting targets than Penals? This would explain the apparent "ineffectiveness" of the SVT against G43s. Or are the damage tables for both guns radically different?

IIRC, Grenadier K98ks have an accuracy of 0.35 at long range and 0.65 at short range, while Conscript rifles have an accuracy of 0.25 at long range and 0.5 at short range. Penal SVT-40s have an accuracy of 0.26 at long range and 0.47 at short range.

I never understood why Guards were made into crappy Ranger knockoffs.

Give them their rifles and the option to purchase either a pair of SVT-40s and a DP-28, a single (and more effective than it currently is) PTRS, or a sniper rifle/equivilant. Guards were, if even honorific, experienced, well equipped troops by their very name and nature. Every Soviet infantry squad had DP-28s, relegating them to Guards (and making them have the same DPS as Shock Troop PPShs--seriously?) is a ridiculous notion. Conscripts should be normal, experienced troops while Penals would be your starting "Enemy At the Gates" suicide infantry, something like Osttruppen, that you can mass and run around the map to get massacred while you try to hold territory for your more useful, experienced infantry.

In the bulletins tab, Penal Troops are labeled as being 'human mine trampling units' that were given 100g of vodka and sent forward into minefields--so yeah, let's give them the most advanced Soviet rifle fielded in the War, access to flamethrowers and satchel charges and make them silly and expensive.

My take on what infantry should be (IMHO, Eastern Front mod for CoH1 got it right).

Engineers -> Should have access to ROKS flamethrowers, assault gear and PPShs (probably 1.75 armor or whatever the equivalent is to Shock Troops; this would be the infamous Sturmovie Ingenery; assault engineers), and minesweeping gear in addition to satchel charges replacing demolition charges if the assault gear upgrade is chosen (or demolition charges are granted if it's chosen).

Penals -> Current conscripts. Cheap, make them ~= to Osttruppen.

Conscripts -> Normal Soviet infantry with access to a single DP-28 for 30 Munitions or a single PPSh for 5 munitions (would still make Con doctrines that grant dual PPSh's viable, and three of them would make Conscripts fit their new roll as main-line infantry; the dual-SMG upgrade would likely need a re-price to avoid masses of PPSh-toting Cons).

Guards -> As mentioned above, get access to a pair of SVT-40s and a DP-28, a single PTRS rifle, or possibly a single scoped Mosin-Nagant (equivilant to the Soviet sniper's, but with a default range of 30 and Conscript-grade 0.25 long range accuracy).

Shock Troops -> Likely the same as is, but with the option to purchase DPs and/or ROKS flamethrowers.

New units that I can think off are Soviet Marines, especially with the Southern Front patch, the Siege of Sevastapol comes to mind. Soviet Paratroops were ridiculously effective in combat and could make fantastic single-doctrine infantry (it would be preferable to make them either glass cannons, or Guards-grade durability and improved firepower at the cost of a price tag approaching 500 manpower).

A PTRS tank-hunting type unit might also be made available as a cheaper alternative to the ZiS-3 at T2, so you could make them to counter LVs if you wished. This would take the handheld AT out of doctrines and lend them to all players, which would mean Ostheer HHAT could be put up for some buffs to make them more effective. Does this mess with the "choose doctrine with AI infantry -> go T2 OR choose doctrine with Guards -> go T1" faction design Relic gave to the Soviets? Yep. Do I think it's a silly design choice to corner players into a tiny select group of strategies based on what doctrine they choose? Really? Doctrines should augment your tactical choices, not dictate them.

On the German side of the fence, Pioniere were historically granted access to MG34/42s and were organized exactly the same as Grenadier units--squads of 10 men with a pair of MP40s and a single GPMG (gen. purpose MG). In addition, they could obviously prepare defensive positions and wielded bundled grenades and satchel charges.

Grenadiere -> Should be moved to T2 and made more effective, experienced troops (as seen in vCoH). Being the anal about historical details guy, I'd suggest access to an LMG42, a pair of MP40s, or the rifle grenade as an upgrade to a normal Stielhandgrenate ability. The 3cm grenade projector should be an anti-blob weapon that allows the squad to stand off from enemy infantry and still deal WTF explosive blows to them, not the piss-ant excuse for a marshmallow launcher we have now. Access to the Panzerfaust is a must, but their Panzerfaust should be made as effective as the effective blast and damage of a pair of Shrecks. I would also suggest a squad size increase to 5 (I'm a history nut, again, and this reflects Relic's tendency to create half-sized squads; Soviet squads were 12 men IRL, 6 in game. LATE WAR German infantry units were mostly 8 men, 4 in game. So on and so forth).

Panzergrenadiere -> Made into doctrinal, elite infantry deployed in halftracks. Arm them with K98ks and allow them to STACK upgrades for the LMG42 and Gewehr 43, with a single LMG and pair of G43s made available to each squad. Panzergrenadiere were 10 man squads (9 infantrymen, one man remained behind to man the LMG mounted in the squad's dedicated 251 halftrack) granted access to a PAIR of GPMGs, a PAIR of semi-automatic rifles (and, on paper, a scope for one of them), an MP40 for the squad leader, and, in 1943, access to it's own Panzershreck. Squad for squad, Panzergrenadiere had the highest possible concentration of firepower of any WW2 infantry formation, bar none. These guys should be MG42s without the teardown that run around and just terminate anything on legs in front of them. HOWEVER, they should be extremely expensive. Panzergrenadier divisions were incredibly rare in comparison to normal Infanterie/Grenadier divisions.

There should be a new, T1 infantry unit (Osttruppen?) that's either made up of German-affiliated Allies including Italy, Romania, and so on, or organized like Grenadiere (5 man squad, access to an LMG or pair of MP40s) but created with inferior stats.

The infantry gameplay in CoH2 is stale and repetitive, lacking none of the thrill or need for cunning seen in vCoH. Hell, they even gave us arcs of fire for ATGs and MGs when you select them. Get one squad of Cons pinned, select enemy MG, see arc of fire, send one squad around each flank, hit Ura!, run in, Molotov, rinse repeat. Waw much fun so interest, can into amazing. I'm sure I'll get a string of "no!"-s for my suggestion, but I HATE the infantry balance and concepts for the game as it stands.

I say boost the MP costs and keep the fuel costs as is.

vCoH: M4A3 Sherman: 420 Manpower, 90 Fuel
CoH2: T-34/76 (direct equivilant): 300 Manpower, 95 Fuel.

vCoH: Panzer IV: 410 Manpower, 80 Fuel
CoH2: Panzer IV (direct equivilant; waw much mindblown): 320 Manpower, 115 Fuel.

vCoH: Panther: 600 Manpower, 110 Fuel
CoH2: Panther (bla bla): 600 Manpower, 130 Fuel <- ONLY almost direct copy-over of a unit's cost, and (imho) these aren't the most common thing ever in 1v1 matches.

Reducing the manpower would just mean waiting to whore up more fuel while spamming caches and infantry to pointlessly suicide in an attempt to take out your opponent's fuel.

What really needs to change is the resources system. Importance needs to be placed on dedicated fuel and muni points, not this new system that I've hated from day one. This system just means "cap the map, do whatever", the old system meant "you can have your really, really nice terrain that's easy to defend, but the High Fuel Point is over THERE in red cover, in the middle of an open, empty field."

They are...adequate, but when the late game crunch hits and you need suicide infantry right this instant, I just build Cons. Most of the time I can arm them with PPSh's, which are actually pretty good at this point, and for 10 MU a pop I can upgrade a blob of cons for the same price as a Gren LMG. While Irregulars are actually fairly good at KILLING enemy infantry when used en masse, they drain so much MP it's rarely worth it (and using merge all the time is a massive micro hassle, let's be honest). Cons w. PPShs can also grab shrecks and dropped LMGs, with more models to parcel them out to, reducing the chance of a drop. I think of Irregulars (I haven't gotten an MG42 out of them in two weeks now) as Guards without the PTRS rifles, armor, or ability to tank damage from explosives (model count).

The issue the 'pros' had with CoHO is that there were many "I win" buttons (see: Inf Coy camo, Close Combat Volks, Venerable Volks)that wrested games away from skill and placed it with with what ridiculous unit you chose. It was all gimmicks; Elite Engies at T0 with free BARs? A terror ability that PAYS you to throw away Volks, and you get a better cost return AND fuel for simply suiciding units while it was active?

CoH2 moved in the same direction with the simplification of infantry and vehicle combat systems, cover usage and construction, area denial, and a lot of early/later game stuff. vCoH required much more finesse, CoH2 is just "what do I build to faceroll what he has?"

I whined a LOT about CoHO, but I couldn't care less for the leaderboards or any of that. I was just tired of getting smashed by poor balance.