Not to Mention like... Molotov and AT nades are absolutely extra-the price paid directly inflates the cost of cons as it does nothing else. Rifle nades for grens are locked behind vet, molotovs are EXTRA. You build 4 cons and get molotovs those cons don't cost 240mo they cost 280mp. Strap in the snare and suddenly your 240 mp initial cost covers a lot less.
Dont grens require tech to even produce? And tech that isnt necessary if you don't plan to use grens?
And going by the utility argument that's been brought up, conscripts should be much more expensive since they have non doc sprint have merge and can build sandbags.
Personally I dont think conscript cost needs to be nerfed but theres no question they provide more utility then grens. |
Sounds amazing until you realize vet 0 Guards are far superior to vet 0 cons and cons squads have better veterancy, so merging into guards essentially gimps your squad.
To put it in perspective I tested vet 3 guards vs vet 3 guards with 5 merged models and the non merged squad won consistently with 50% health left.
Exactly, yet I find people keep referring to that awful merge guide on reddit that recommends merging into guards 24/7 and not reinforcing them. This is what happens when rank 600s make community guides.
I'd like to see these tests. Regardless though, I still standby what I said about the cost effectiveness. And I'd also like to add that this is from my own play experience and not from some guide on reddit or steam forums. |
It is inline with pioneers...
Imo reinforcement costs are all over the place for allot of units and I would rather have return to rule that associated reinforcement cost with the value of unit. But the rule should have exceptions according to categories. For instance SMG troops should be cheaper to reinforce since they are expected to have higher casualties, something like 15-25%.
As it so happens, I think pioneer reinforce cost is too high. |
Axis OP.
I charged my Riflemen across red cover vs Volks in sandbags and only barely won the fight.
Worse still, I charged into an MG42 headfirst with my Riflemen and lost the engagement.
With the IS buff, USF no longer has the strongest, most cost-efficient mainline. This is made worse by getting free officer squads with teching, which results in less MP income. Something needs to be done about this.
I hear vehicle crews are also a huge problem as you can only repair with them if you take them OUT of the vehicle. Imagine if Ostheer was saddled with this burden. |
they do not, anyway just try merging and you will se how trash it is
Yes they do. The only thing they do not inherit is the base model stats-which is armor and RA.
And I merge all the time. Soviet 1v1 is my most played game mode. |
no xd, conscript are worse from guards, also you talk about non vetted guards
The merged models benefit from the vet of the unit they merged into. So If you merge a vet 0 conscript into a vet 3 guard, those conscript models will instantly get additional accuracy and RA. |
5 men PF are less cost effective even to VG and that is why spamming PF does not work.
It's more that if you go straight penals, by the time you have your 3 squad, I(as OKW) will have my fourth already on the field. |
Think the c. trap is meant to used to reduce the damage they take but I would have no problem to be replaced by booby-traps (although I would rather have BT do DOT damage). But I suspect it would be a nerf since BT need to placed in owned territory.
I am not claiming that Partisan are great but they come with lots of utility and dirty cheap price, the unit performs very good for its price.
The concussive trap must also be placed on owned territory. I guess the idea was that you stun the enemy unit then close the distance. But honestly, either the enemy will retreat once they see the partisans coming, or are powerful enough to just stand their ground and shred the partisans. Either case needs your partisans to be camping the cap for it to be effective.
Booby traps will have a similar usage(it'll give the partisans the upper hand) except it will cause damage instead and that will be useful against any squad- even if the partisans aren't around to engage.
I do think 210mp is a good price to call them in. Its the reinforcement cost that gets me. |
merging into any other squad i mentioned before will reduce their combat effectiveness and is just stupid to do
I disagree. It's a matter of cost benefit.
If you merge 7 man conscripts with guards, the models will have an RA of 1.09(vs 0.97) or 12% greater then guards do normally. HOWEVER, 7 man conscripts cost 18 to reinforce vs 27 for guards which is 33% less.
So its 12% lower durability, but 33% lower cost. That is absolutely cost efficient. Obviously if you are swimming in manpower you may as well just reinforce normally, but if you are trying to save on your MP at all, it is quite obvious that merging with 7 man conscripts is the way to go. |
you merge only to CEs, svt conscripts and support weapons or to save the squad from wipe
otherwise you dont merge into any other squad and why would you field conscript and a penal
Merge when you have 7 man conscripts can actually be an extremely cost efficient way of bringing squads back to full HP. For example, if you have a guard squad down to 1 man at your base and you reinforce with your 7 man conscript, you save 45 manpower-plus it will get your guard back onto the field earlier then if you just reinforced it like normal (conscripts reinforce faster than guards).
The only squad I would still avoid doing something like that to is shocks, since the body armor on shock models is where their durability comes from-and cons don't have it. |
United States
λυκεπραισεστονε
Serrith
Conscript reporting
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
Heartless Jäger 
