And why you don't compare it with the total gain with vet 3 as well. Accuracy and receive accuracy are meant to cancel each other. A 30% accuracy increase is meant to be cancel by a -23% RA. A 40% increase, by a -29% RA.
If Penals were to see their extra accuracy removed or nerf at vet 3, it would be in line with all the other squads.
At vet 2, their scaling is in inferior to:
Conscripts, AT partisans, Guards, Assault Guards, Grens, PG, Assault Grens, Osstruppen, Storm, LT, Cpt, Ass Eng, Pathfinders, Volks, Ober, PF, Falls n JLI.
Once they lose 2 models, they are in line with or on top of them. So to actually be good you should be fighting at 3/6, hence the "risky" role of using them.
Vet 3 accuracy + Flamer combination with SVT and Oorah are the issues atm.
About cooldown/reload:
While i haven't done an exactly test for each type of weapon and range, in the past i did a test with Grens mid range Kar. Now i did the test with SVT. In comparison to it's value, cooldown represents a 25/33% and reload a 25-10% increase. Say you get a 20% cooldown reduction, it's would be roughly translate to a 5%-7% increase on DPS.
Thats false dude IS still perform average outside of cover but the cover bonus is a 'bonus' its not there to make them perform normally its there to give them the advantage when engaging from behind cover. I think you are getting mixed up with the moving accuracy penalty on IS who are extremely inaccurate whilst moving (35%) whilst gren are (50%).
You are the one been confused.
Tommies have a debuff of *1.4 reload and *1.2 cooldown while OUT of cover. Tommies have a *0.25 accuracy and *1.5 cooldown multiplier while moving
Vet1 RE gain 0.5 reload n 0.3 cooldown while IN cover
PD: values might be off by 0.1 if i didn't remember correctly.
As the other guys already alluded, we will be taking a closer look at the super-light vehicles for v1.4.
So there's hope for M3, 250, Greyhound, Dodge and Kubel (vet requirements at least as starter)
I was wondering at the beggining, since the scope is light vehicles, why they weren't include?
PD: same with my SU flare sniper suggestion. I mean it should enter in the stealth mechanic department right ?
Not exactly, Penal get more DPS bonuses and less defensive than the majority of other units. In addition the type of DPS bonus fits different weapon types only accuracy bonuses would help Shock very little but would benefit fast firing weapons with decent accuracy far too much.
Penals receive an extra 30% acc bonus at vet 3. For the other vet bonus at vet 2 and vet3 is the standard (same as Grens regarding RA).
Regarding accuracy, that's not how it works. Due to how the formula to calculate DPS is done, changing either damage or accuracy translate directly into DPS gain. It doesn't matter the type of weapon. Reload and cooldown are worst because they have less weight in the formula.
TIL note: in fact, it's actually worst for high accuracy weapons gaining accuracy as they can sometimes go over 1.0 value. As i said before, most of the time this is offset by cover and squads RA, but there are instances on where this happen due to vet and ability/auras.
Just because the spamming penal did not work does not mean that the unit was not balanced. One got what he paid for...
T1 and specially Penals, saw absolute 0 action in a broad sense. Why would you spend resources on tech for a unit which doesn't perform much better than conscripts (0-15 Penals, 15/35 Cons), it's more expensive and has 0 AT capabilities.
I do not actually agree with the attrition argument since Penal where cheap to reinforce and could become even cheaper via merge.
I don't really agree with the glass-cannon characterization either since 6 men squad are not really "glass-cannons". Osstturppen are more durable than grenadier although of the huge difference in target size. Penal have more EFH than conscripts and if they are glass cannons conscripts are more glass and less cannons.
There was not much difference in cost between Penals and Cons (so no much more benefit on merge). Even when they fixed the veterancy bug, Penals remained useless. Cons got access to -40% RA at vet 3 which makes them more resilience on top of their cost and lack of teching requirement.
Glass cannons on the sense that they drop their damage fast in comparison to most other squads. Till vet 2, you can't hoorah to get closer and do damage. By the time squads get vet2, your models are gonna get focused down by your opponents vet2 LMG squads.
How do you fix this? By vetting them early on with an M3 and flamethrower and chasing down units on retreat.
But after extensively playing 2v2 at that time, IIRC, my conclusion for 90% of the games was that i'll rather go 2 Cons + 2 CE rather than trying to play with Penals. At most a single one for utility (satchel). If i ever lost it, i'll rather get a Guard or another conscript.
On the other hand almost doubling the far accuracy of semi-autonomic weapon (instead of replacing it with a bolt action) for a unit that gains mostly accuracy bonuses was like asking for trouble..
That's your personal opinion. Semi automatic rifles doesn't mean that it has to be ineffective at range, neither in the game (look at G43 vs Kar) nor IRL. Gaining accuracy or any other type of offensive stat is the same. It affects DPS but at that point it is either offset by enemy veterancy or in the battlefield (yellow cover everywhere).
If I understand correctly you do seem to agree Penal need minor adjustments and T1 can become more viable either for start or for back tech by fixing the other units in it.
Yes. Already nerfing vet requirements and vet 3 Acc is a good start. I don't want Penals converted into Rifles/Guards 2.0, but i want to nerf mass productio of them and sustain. With the nerfs to guards on top, we should be on the right track.
Making T1 viable.
First of all, i'll rather go for a T1 AT less design. This means:
Penals: leave them as a strong unit. They should be good, not spamable.
-Remove the extra accuracy at vet3 and fiddle with reinforce cost/build-reinforce time/popcap.
-AT wise, if needed, keep the AT satchel gated behind the AT nade.
-Flamethrower, at first leave them with PPSH (cost around 75). If still too strong, you could lock it down behind molotovs (with or without PPSH) or increase price.
Just change the upgrade names to Anti garrison package and Anti vehicle package.
Sniper: i've already suggested a more deep sniper/spotter theme while the unit focus should be sight.
-Squad retains cloak for half the time of other snipers (OH/UKF) after leaving cover so they can actually move around. (If unit is too strong this is the first thing to remove)
-Sniper rifle is not transferred to remaining squad member. Each model will work differently in the same fashion as squad with officers.
-Make sniper model (M1) get normal infantry sight (35). Increase HP to 82.
-Make spotter model (M2) get increased sight (45>50). Doesn't shoot hits Rifle, reduce HP from 68 to 48, in charge of firing flare. Spotter model reinforce cost to 60 from 90
-Flare are vet 0 again. Reveals cloaked units. Cost from 45 (?) to 35/30
-Vet1: spotter gains +10 sight when still n cloaked.
M3: utility for late game is an option.
-Regarding the unit itself i see 3 approaches.
A)Keep the current model (clowncar) and improve vet requirements.
B)Nerf clowncar capabilities. Say can't shoot while on the move but can while stationary (nerf to PTRS/flamethrower) or heavily increase penalties while on the move (mostly cooldown so PTRS/Flame can still shoot but few burst). Reduce fuel cost from 15 to 10.
C)Units can't shoot while inside (somehow kills the soul of the unit). Reduce fuel cost to 5 or 0.
-About utility for late. Once medics are unlocked and T3 built, unlock medical supplies (current LIVE version of Sturms vet1, not the improved one).
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.
That's both the strength and weakness of the SU faction design. When you have 21 commander which all of them share abilities, the one with the strongest combination for the current meta will be used.
We are moving from "every faction has bs units so it's balanced" and more towards a more fair environment although it's harder to achieve. Problem is when you nerf something into fair/slightly bad and you still have bs, then you completely forget about using it. Just to mention a few things which WERE heavily used: KV8, B4, 152 Howtizer, Shocks.
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.
the "penal" subpar meatshield troops design has just been thrown way out the window and butchered like no other... Jeez. Just make them meatsheilds and turn cons into what you're trying to make penals.
But if cons aren't in "scope.." honestly I question the point of that...but meh
Hmmm, this was never the case?
I think on the past 4 years we have already been over the case of Penal battalions =/= Penal companies. They had been always expensive (360-280mp), they used to have the best flamethrower (didn't explode) and always on the higher end of the DPS curve. Reason? Maybe cause they aren't conscripts but rather officers fulfilling a sentence.
Yeah Soviet design choices have always been a little contentious.
I feel like Guards always should've been the style and model of Soviet T1.
Hmm if you talk about Guards with DPs/PTRS then i'm afraid that at that point, you have to leave M3/Sniper/Shocks.been barely usable.
At this point, we are just tring to over-engineering a solution to a problem which is solved by adjusting other factors which aren't Penals.
Regarding Winter mod:
I think there are problems in the direction on what they want Penals to be and specially the interpretation of what is the problem with the unit. I don't think it's bad for Penals on been a good AI unit, i think it's bad that you can spam them on live.
If I've to suggest something taking into account Preview v1.3 doesn't exist...
Penals:
-Popcap from 7 to 9
-Reinforce time from 5.4 to 5.9 Build time from 32 to 35 seconds Penals shouldn't be your main infantry unit and if so, it should take a hit on the number n timing you can produce as well as map control early on
-Penal Veterancy 3 accuracy reverted from 1.3 to 1.15
-Penal Veterancy 3 received accuracy from 0.85 to 0.77 This is basically reverting the scaling change but nerfing only the extra accuracy Penals get at vet3. Since they vet requirements had been increased, i do think it's fine to get an extra 15% at vet3 to offset weapon upgrade/dps increase at that stage of the game
-Penals keep oorah at vet 2
-Flamer package cost increased to 75 munition. Includes 3 Conscript PPSH.
-Oorah and AT satchel is lost upon upgrading flamer package The PPSH should had been included when they buff Penals to avoid the whole current situation of Rifle flamers 2.0. Oorah was added when vanilla Penals were still bad, so removing it when upgrading with PPSH flamer is a safety measure. This CCQ package should be a strategic option, not a must have.
Now the controversial. I don't think it's bad for T1 to be AT-less but if the design direction is to open up more possibilities with T1 and not hang as much with Guard/AT-sans commanders then... Option 1:less intrusive
-Remove PTRS on Penals.
-AT satchel is unlocked after researching AT nades. AT nades name changed to AT package (more of this later). Option 2: current model
-AT package tech unlocks PTRS n AT satchel. Once T3 is unlocked, possible option to buy a 3rd one. Option 3: less likely to be implemented but IMO preferred to option 2
-AT package unlocks AT satchel and M42 to be built on T1
M42:
-At first, just test the live version with retreat.
-Change vet 1 tracking with camouflage + ambush bonus. When shooting out of camo, increase damage from 80 to 120 and pen to other AT guns level.
I don't think the current M42 is as bad as a stopgap unit IF it's on T1 as opposed to a commander option. Further changes could be tried later but for the moment, i think it would be fine as it is.
PD: i still hope that utility based changes can still be applied to either sniper or M3 scoutcar. I know i've suggest before things that require way more work but for now could something small like this be implemented?
-Sniper flare cost reduction and reveal of cloaked units
-M3 scoutcar lower vet requirements. Bonus: Removal of overdrive munition cost and improve loading troop time (simil to what has been done to HT).
Put Penals back to where they were pre-pwnage, and you're done.
Penals are still good for the ability to flush units out of buildings or destroy buildings outright with a satchel if you want.
Then we are back to the point where now one builds T1 unless they want to go non competitive meta on 2v2+. If you need to move units out of buildings you go T2 mortar or flamer on CE.
Someone said it before and i coincide. They are trying to fix T1 by just adjusting what they are permitted (Penals) and i think this will just generate problems on the long run when they try to revisit other things.
I do think this current implementation is a mess.
-OKW Flak HT: if the unit is good/god tier on it's own (specially on the scope of all LV been changed) i think it's fine to delay the unit but delayed only because it counters certain tier is not good
Following that train of thought I don't agree USF T1 is defenseless and i'm convinced that it's better to keep the current 3 SU T1 units AT-less (i'll prefer testing M42 with the CURRENT LIVE version than PTRS, keep the AT satchel)
-Adding molotovs back is pointless with flamer been brought back.
?
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
