IDK, many cases in the late game there is fairly extensive cratering -especially around any area of contention. In those cases it should be pretty easy for conscripts to get their cover bonus near any area that matters AND they can build sandbags so their availability of cover is limited only by their map control/time to build new bags.
Great answer, all other infantry units can use both cover and advanced weapons. But you use only cover.
Weapon upgrades... like.... LMG42 or Bren or DP-28 or LMG34(ok, this one is actually powerful AF even on the move)?
My point here is that with a weapon upgrade, even without a cover, an infantry unit has improved damage (and many in motion), increasing the damage of conscripts will depend only on the availability of cover. That's bullshit
The moving penalties applies to pretty much to all infatry and some infatry suffer more since some lmg do not even fire on on the move.
There is little difference here the unit does not need be motionless.
Yes, it does, but other infantry have weapon upgrades, so they do not depend on static character. Even osttruppenhave MG-42, and a cover-up bonus, but they are not so dependent on him because of the weapon improvement.
This change will actually make cons more attractive late game and increase the odds of them being built. It would be more like making the Kuble move while camod and cap territory even faster.
However the issue with cons now is that between the first weapon upgrades hit the field and t4 they are mostly dead weight. Some sort of mid game bump that makes them slightly smoother transitioning would be enough I think
No, it will not, it will make them only cheap food. Their rate of fire bonus works only in the cover and motionless, if you start moving in the cover and will give a penalty on the accuracy in motion that negates this ability. Motionless = easy target. I will continue to insist that these changes are meaningless and uncompetitive for a late game.
Ah, that Russian guy who justifies shooting German prisoners with "It's war." Great. Russians are just way too butthurt to admit that their system was almost the same shit as the nazis but in red.
Each side of WWII shot prisoners of war, do you think the simple Soviet soldier has a deal? He knows that German soldiers are burning villages, shooting civilians of their relatives, he saw it with his own eyes? Do you think they will care that this is not correct? He will absolutely not care, he just wants revenge.
Who said that we have learnt it from "Enemy At the Gates". It is in history books. So annoying when people do not know even half of the story!
Whose history books? Give me a photo report from the German or Soviet side which states that the soldiers fought without weapons? There are no such reports. If we take an example from the Enemy at the Gate, the situation was the opposite: there was an excess of weapons and a shortage of people, because 80 million Soviet people were on the occupied territory, only in 1942 1,500,000 PPSh-41s were produced.
I collected a large collection of photographs of Soviet Airborne Forces in World War II and read (and saved) a bunch of books on the subject related to the Airborne Forces (parachute containers, aircraft transports, gliders, etc.). For several years I have been browsing the sites of the Ministry of Defense, the sites of memory of the dead soldiers, and any sites dedicated to the Airborne Force, read many memories of living veterans of the Airborne Forces of the Second World War.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
