I do wish they at least gave the OST sniper a scoped K98, and the PGs/Storms/Jager Command non-scoped G43s (And leave JLI with scoped G43s) to communicate the fact that these two (three) units absolutely do not share similar weapons in the slightest. I don't know if unscoped G43s, or a scoped K98 exist in the files, however.
They don't, and in fact, the Kar98 and G43 are reused from CoH1. The G43 has a scope because it was the weapon of the Wehrmacht Sniper, which was later reused as an upgrade for PE Panzer Grenadiers. That concept was similarly used for Ostheer Sniper and the optional Grenadier and Panzergrenadier JLI upgrade, but the scope was never removed because it was presumably not worth the time to delete.
Aren't flames technically projectiles? Is it possible the flames are actually colliding with the raised ground infront of the trench and not actually reaching the squad inside?
Put the ML-20's damage back to 250 and just make it to -50 damage to OKW Trucks and Emplacements. It was always the underdog between the two guns due to inaccuracy and shorter barrage, and then it got hard nerfed to prevent it from being too useful vs OKW, but now it just kinda sucks against everything.
I think you are trying to shoehorn a unit based on historical flavour. Power and timing is weird. You say you want to improve midgame but they are effectively an Assault Grenadier that requires tech. AssG shines because they are an excellent opening unit combined with the effects of tech rushing. Not due to their scaling.
I am not sure of OP's suggestions. I would like Soviets to somehow reflect the more offensive nature, on the other hand I really don't like adding yet another "normal" infantry unit into the Soviet rooster. Shock troops and the PPSH upgrade are meant to reflect the SMG production, I think it is better to reuse these options instead of creating more overlap between units/upgrades.
I don't feel that is represented in-game, in fact it's the opposite. MP 40's and StG's are far more represented currently than any SMG, let alone the PPSh. Conscript Assault Package is expensive and only grants 3, while Shock Troops are costly elite troops meant to be employed surgically for effect. This combined with there not being any PPSh's in the stock roster portray PPSh's as an uncommon weapon, rather than something that outnumbered every other SMG combined. Soviets without PPSh's, to me, are like Germans without Machine Guns (Volksgrenadiers don't count, they were organized differently and their portrayal with StG's is reasonably accurate, if a tad optimistic).
I see it in that way:
1. Penals and their voicelines goes to Commissar (since their voicelines sounds like you speak with stereotyped commissar) and penals replace guards 3D model in that squad.
2. Penals as unit in tier 1 renamed into Riflemen and get voicelines from conscripts (since they have voicelines with "Strelky") and Guards 3D model without poncho.
In that case we have:
1. Commissar with voicelines (currently has none)
2. No stereotyped units in core tech
3. Red Army finally got unit, which can be called as backbone of the army in term of design (mainline infantry unit like riflemen, IS, grenadiers and etc.)
4. Penals assets still in use.
This seems palatable to me, we were always on the same page with this. I would still love for them to have access to PPSh's through an upgrade. But SVT armed Infantry Troops would be a welcome addition. Still the Satchel and PTRS Package seem a bit odd, especially since the Satchel is actually a part of the Penal's soldier model. It is an imperfect solution but not a bad one.
I like how you first accept that penal units were not used as Hollywood portrays just to ignore distinction between penal companies and battalions and feed right into Hollywood meme anyway.
There was nothing expendable about penal battalions, in case you haven't read it first time - they were made out of trained OFFICERS, not random potato farmers who said wrong word or ran wrong way.
I'm not sure what this distinction of "Penal Battalion/Penal Company" comes from, I'm not aware of such a distinction. To my knowledge Penal Battalions are made up of Penal Companies, just like a regular Battalion is made up of regular Companies. I did see a reference to an "8th Independent Penal Battalion" which was allegedly made up of disgraced officers, you may be thinking of this one in particular.
And I did literally just say Penal Troops were equipped and used not much differently than Infantry, so I don't know how that's "Hollywood". They got the often jobs with the highest mortality rate, but those jobs would have been done by the Infantry anyway.
1- We had 270mp Penals with flamers for years and they were still bad. Cause 190/200mp CE (which were worse than current CE) were doing a better job while providing utility.
2- RET/RE Flamethrowers can still get another weapon upgrade/minesweeper. The problem is not the flamer, it's what the unit which get access to them has. Rifles had smoke, HE grenades and snares. The issue was never the amount of models the squad has.
I suppose that is true, I forgot Riflemen had smoke at that time or they they could combine it with a BAR. I would gladly give the SVT's back to Penals, perhaps as part of the Flamer package so that the squad's initial price may remain low and there can be no arguments about PTRS Penals having "too much AI".
The 2/3 PTRS end up been not enough in the light vehicle phase, specially in 1v1. FHT/Flak HT can do too much dmg and P2 can move around the map and the moment you are forced to retreat your whole line collapses.
The obvious solution here would be to buff the PTRS, then. Another solution would be give them explosive resistance, but I would prefer this be added to their Veterancy to replace Received Accuracy.
Whatever you are designing, you have to think the following thing:
Why would i bother going on a tech with a clowncar, a sniper and a infantry unit vs playing with Conscripts + CE and T2.
That is a good point, Assault Troops and ZiS would overshadow Penals and I'm not sure what to do about that.
Its not even historical flavour.
Penal BATTALIONS were composed of officers and had supply priority over regular army troops, they had highly trained military personal in them and were very well supplied. They both, make sense and do deserve elite/semi-elite infantry status in historical context.
Penal COMPANIES are the "run into meat grinder" meme.
Relic having battalions in name, but describing companies in flavor text isn't helping here either.
The "run into the meat grinder" meme was real, but not the way Hollywood has shown us, and not actually limited to Penal Companies. Soviet Command would choose whatever option had the highest projected success rate with the lowest projected casualties. Sometimes this option was having infantry (not necessarily Penals) charge at fortifications or even over minefields, because this was seen as the best option given the options available.
Penal Troops for the most part were equipped and fed the same as anyone else, the draw of having Penal Troops for a Soviet Commander was that you could take your own men off the most dangerous part of the line and put Penal Troops there. Someone's going to be there regardless, but it may as well be the "expendable" troops rather than your own.
I can’t say i am for additional squads to the Soviet tech, but i really want to see Penals redesigned visually to be like regular soviet Riflemen (changed model and adjusted description and etc.). 3D model like on attached screenshot in post #1.
My main issue with that would be that the Penals, although their portrayal is at-odds with their role, do have some things that fit the bill. Tossing bags of explosives and charting tanks with Anti-Tank rifles both seem like very 'suicide-squad' type attacks which would seem odd for Soviet Riflemen to be doing. That's the sort of thing you give to Penal Troops who will probably get themselves killed or Elite Troops who at least have the experience and training to survive such madness. It would also be a shame to see the unit completely deleted, since I do quite like their voices and attitudes.
Agreed on additional Soviet squads, especially since I prefer the patch preview version of Penals. However I'm surprised that Assault Troops don't use the MG crew models. In my opinion they look far more "aggressive" with those ammo belts on ther chests, plus they aren't used for anything beside MGs.
I didn't use the MG Crew Model because I figured a Maxim HMG belt wouldn't have much use for a PPSh-armed soldier. I did consider the generic crewman model, but he too has a bandolier for Stripper Clips which he wouldn't need. The 'Elite Rifleman' model was my third pick and he looks good rockin' a PPSh, so it's what I went with!
1. Why would you bother spending 160mp + 230mp for a worst Conscript squad (5 models with Cons Mosins).
2. Penals with flamer were oppressive only when they had sprint + Elite levels of stats. At that price point/performance, a CE squad performs much better at 170mp.
3. You give them a long build time, therefore making them more useless as an opening unit compared to conscripts.
4. Comparing to preview patch, you are making them a worse unit. What is the reason to get T1? A single pair of PTRS won't cut it against LV so you still need either wasting 460/500mp + munitions when you can just play with Conscripts and a Zis gun. That won't bleed you as much, scales much better and doesn't require muni investment.
If Penals are not meant to be a strong opening unit nor have great usage on late game, there's no reason to bother getting them. At that point you have a much worse non doctrinal Guard with no utility by the timing you are thinking of getting them.
1. My goal was for them to be a undesirable as a mainline, but to choose their role via upgrades. The main reason they are 5 men is because of the Flamethrower upgrade since upgrades cannot reduce squad size, only increase it.
2. My balance point for the Flamethrower Upgrade was taking into account that Riflemen Flamethrowers were removed, and the fact that Vet 3 RET's are the only 5-man Flamethrower squad. I was concerned that there would be pushback against a 5-man Flamethrower Team with SVT's, or a 6 man Flamethrower Team at all.
3. The long build time was a bit of an afterthought, I added it when I was imagining how things would be used and became concerned about Flamethrower spam being too strong. It may not be necessary.
4. I think 2 PTRS Rifles is sufficient for Light Vehicle phase, that's what they currently get and that is what Guards get. At T4 they would get an additional pair of non-droppable PTRS for free to help chip away at heavier units, maybe make it the Guard model so they don't lose out what little AI they had before, purely for self-defence. The PTRS's can be adjusted to be stronger against vehicles if they need to be.
The goal is for Penal Troops to fill Light AV/AT and Light Assault roles, but not overshadow Conscripts or be used as a mainline. Perhaps I was too concerned about them being overpowered and made them too weak. Although 6-man Flamethrower Teams seem excessive, I would gladly return the SVT to them and/or reduce their cost considerably.
Assault Troops:
Adding one more unit feels like it will clash with the different types of infantry squads Soviets have access through doctrinal means.
It's basically competing with PPSH, SVT, Shocks.
You are basically giving them Assault Grenadiers that require 160mp invested on tech to work. The question this unit creates is basically, would a worse version of current live Penals be good if they were added in T2?
They're not worse than current Penals, having an SMG armed unit that is worse than the weakest SAR armed unit would be an accomplishment! Roughly they're on-par with Assault Grenadiers, but they have Oorah and a Grenade. For improved scaling they gain the Shock Troop PPSh's with MR in addition to whatever veterancy bonuses they might have. The reason I add these is because although many do, not every doctrine has Shock Troops or Guards, and the Soviets struggle through mid-game as it is. Plus the Red Army quite frankly just feels wrong without SMG's, like Germans without any Machine Guns.
The Soviet Faction feels incomplete to me and the themes are often contradicted by it's unit designs. Penal Battalions trade army size for a small cadre of premium troops, which contradicts both the unit and army themes. Conscripts are defensive support infantry that struggle with scaling, especially if T2 is built. The Red Army itself uses very few PPSh Submachine Guns, in fact Sturmgewehrs are much more common in this game than PPSh's!
In this concept, Conscripts are the utility unit envisioned by the developers, building cover, holding the line, and reinforcing other units. Penals are expendable attackers, they get assigned the jobs that you don't often come home from (attacking Panzers with PTRS, or using a flamethrower (flamethrower troops had an exceptionally high mortality rate). Assault Troops grants them an offensive Submachine Gun squad which strongly fits the theme of the Red Army, as well as a real Grenade, and something for Conscripts to support if Shocks or Guards aren't available.
Penal Battalion:
The Penal Battalion is a point of contention in the community, starting off as a Panzergrenadier counterpart and eventually settling as an AI/AT unit that excels in neither capacity.
Penals Troops are now a 5 men armed with Conscript Mosin-Nagants and priced in the 200-220 range.
They can be upgraded with a Offensive Package or a PTRS Package. The Flamethrower will grant a single ROKS-3 Flamethrower and a full compliment of SVT Rifles. The PTRS Package will grant a pair of PTRS Anti-Tank Rifles and increase the squad size to 6, an additional pair of undroppable Guard's PTRS are available for free with Mobilize Reserves.
Penals equipped with the Airborne Guard's Weapon Drop will be equipped with Shock Troop PPSh's and have their squad size increased to 6.
This gives the Penal Troops a role as an unit that is expected to take on the most dangerous objectives (using a flamethrower or attacking a tank with a rifle) and get results at the cost of their own lives.
Assault Troops:
The Soviets are a faction that is lacking in offensive infantry firepower, ironic considering they produced more SMG's than all other armies combined. This results on them crutching heavily on the T-70 to bridge the gap into SU-85's and Mobilize Reserves. Assault Troops are meant to give them an assault unit to help them succeed against upgraded enemy troops, and an offensive unit for defense-oriented Conscripts to support.
Assault Troops are a 6 man squad armed with PPSh's slightly below Conscript PPSh effectiveness, priced around 270-290. They have Oorah and are also equipped with a weak F1 Grenade with stats similar to the Panzerfusilier Grenade. They gain Shock Troop PPSh's with Mobilize Reserves.
Assault Troops armed equipped with the Airborne Guard's Weapon Drop will gain 2 SVT Rifles with Panzergrenadier G43 style DPS.
Although initially I wanted this to be an HQ unit, the idea is flawed as putting Assault Troops in an M3 would be far too powerful. Forcing them to buy their PPSh's helps to alleviate this, but then the unit crossed PPSh icon is misleading and something else has to be done for the Crate Drop. Given that T1 Flamethrower Penals should be sufficient for offense, I feel it is best to place these guys squarely in T2.
I also agree with the reason behind the change but not with how they decide to change it.
In COH 1, The system they had in place was a bit complex but it worked. Essentially all Infantry was placed into certain armor classes. There was I believe 6 Armor classes (Been a number of years since I played COH1)but essentially you had Infantry, Soldier, Elite, Heroic, Airborne and Sniper armor types. Essentially this allowed a system where certain units where strong/weak vs other units based on what type of armor that they have.
For example a Mortar could do say 100% damage to regular infantry while against Team Weapons (the things its supposed to counter) it would do extra damage.
At this point in the game it would be too late to add a system like this into COH 2 but what we can learn from this system is that you can/should tweak units based on unit matchup rather than apply broad buffs/nerfs that have unintended consequences that create further balance issues down the line.
Here is how a typical COH2 balance issue plays out as an example:
-OKW Volksgrenadiers struggle vs Maxim Spam.
-Community Agrees Maxim Spam is a problem
-LEIG gets buffed to deal with Maxims while Maxims get nerfed at the same time
-Maxims become useless and cannot fulfill its role, then LEIG turns into ranged sniper with suppression and gets spammed where it rains death and no single infantry squad could survive if they stopped moving for 0.5 seconds.
So rather than create a situation like that, looking at COH 1 system, it would be easier to simply just add a modifier to LEIG. Say a random number like 20%. So LEIG does 20% more damage vs Maxim, it gets tested and seems to work well/adjusted to the proper number. Now OKW can deal with Maxim Spam without a nerf to maxims and without making LEIG into ranged terminators.
Anyway back to Grenadiers. Grenadiers usually fair well vs Soviets. It is USF/British that they struggle with. Rather than come out with crazy upgrades like the 5 Man Grenadier and then nerfing it into the ground when the Units are able to take out more expensive call in units, it would have made more sense and be better overall if Grenadiers instead got say 15% (any suitable number) damage buff or damage resistance buff vs just Rifleman/Infantry Section and adjust the number so that each squad is fairly even in terms of performance/cost.
By creating a band-aid upgrade (5 man grenadiers) to help solve a problem, they ended up creating more problems when higher end units and even Machine Guns get death looped when charged in the front.
Relic intentionally swore off Target Tables after CoH1 because while they did work, they were extremely messy, and the variables you had to remember to play efficiently got to be crazy. You had all sorts of weird shit like British being more flammable than Americans/Germans and Panzer Grenadiers are weak to Combat Engineers even though Combat Engineers are awful against all other frontline units and Panzer Grenadiers can fend off Riflemen. It's okay to have an exception to the rule every now and then, but CoH1 had as many exceptions as it did rules.