[SOV] [1V1] Penals, Guards and Guard motor coordinated tactics

2456789

Comments

  • #32
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,014
    Shocks aren't general AI specialists. They're assault specialists. They don't have any DPS at longer or mid ranges because 1) they're extremely durable and 2) their short DPS is *insanely* high - to the point where they can easily wipe even retreating squads.

    Penals do not have that kind of strength or durability. Again - this is the entire point of Penals. For strong early game control but leaving you open to light and medium vehicles in mid game. Yes they'll beat any generalist you throw at them 1 on 1 at any range - because that is literally their entire purpose. Don't fight them 1 on 1 with a generalist. Either bring a Pio along to meatshield/add DPS, bring a MG to suppress or bring a sniper to drop models.

    They're far from OP.
  • #33
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @Lazarus said:
    ...Yes they'll beat any generalist you throw at them 1 on 1 at any range - because that is literally their entire purpose.
    ....They're far from OP.

    No that is not their purpose...even the more expensive ober will lose at close range because they are better designed...

    Unit that designed good excel at specif ranges and not all ranges (or they have other significant drawbacks)...

    Once again you are are entitled to your opinion and so am I, Relic does consider them to over perform and so do I.

  • #34
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @MCMartel said:
    And again, you're simply wrong.

    "nice job tanking productive discussion."

    They have no versatility, and they require a significant locking-in tier investment which makes a penal-heavy strategy very vulnerable to light vehicles or early vehicles of any type.

    Of course there are counter to a penal heavy strategy as to any unit one being spammed unsupported if there was not one the game would be broken...

    Going T1 does not lock you in in anything, it is cheap enough that one can afford building T2 also. Even if one chooses not to built t2 all the support that is available in T2 is also available in T3 contrary to other factions...Suppression is available in the quad, AT in Su-76 and indirect fire support again in Su-76...A T1 T3 built is perfectly viable a pretty common actually...

  • #35
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,014
    Lets work backwards @Vipper What do you think the role of penals are - obviously AI specialists - but what range are they designed for?
  • #36
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @Lazarus said:
    Lets work backwards @Vipper What do you think the role of penals are - obviously AI specialists - but what range are they designed for?

    When original designed (before "weapon profiles" where introduced) they where long range infantry and thus their vet bonuses.

    Then "carbines" where designed as mid range range weapon, and so where Penals.

    When they where last patched they become good at all ranges while keeping their old long range veterancy bonuses making extremely accurate in all ranges.

    A vet 3 Penal has 70%X1.3x1.3=118% 65%X1.3x1.3=109% 45%X1.3x1.3=0.76% and that is without even counting ability accuracy bonuses

    If they are going to use "carbine" weapons and flamers they should be designed for mid range.

    So the question should not be what range they currently designed for because they are all over the place but what range they should be designed for. Then one can give them the weapons, stat and vet bonuses they need to better perform in that range...

  • #37
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,014

    @Vipper okay so better question - what should they be designed for? Because Cons are short range with their high RoF + terrible accuracy so there's no point putting them as short range. That leaves them as mid range or long range. You could make a successful argument that they should excel at mid range but... that's really what you've already said. Long range they don't make optimal use of their DPS, and yes while mid has > 100% accuracy they're firing at targets that are smaller than 1.

    The reason it seems like they're so unstoppable is because they're long ranged anti-infantry specialists fighting long ranged generalist line infantry (Grenadiers/Volks) and Ost/OKW don't have anything in the realms of short ranged assault infantry (no, Sturms and PGrens are not really short ranged assault infantry - not until at least vet 3) so there's nothing that CAN outdps Penals at short range - not because Penals have too high DPS at short but because the Axis doesn't really have anything with high short DPS in their toolkit.

    Look at it this way. Obers and Grens are long range infantry. But yet, they do even more DPS at short range. Penals are long range infantry. They do even more DPS at short range. It's a non-issue because again, they're vulnerable to light vehicles, MGs and Snipers. Just like Shocks. Just like Obers. Just like every AI specialist in the game.

  • #38
    2 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289

    Having better DPS at both long, mid and short range on single unit is just poor design. Reduce their accuracy a bit, but increase their aim time and cooldown, to maintain their previous lethality the closer they get.

  • #39
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721

    @Lazarus said:
    The reason it seems like they're so unstoppable is because they're long ranged anti-infantry...

    Actually they not design as long range infantry...
    Their vet bonuses and vet 1 ability are those of long range infantry
    Their weapon (carbine) and weapon upgrades (flamer) are those of mid range infantry
    Their vet 2 ability is that of close range infantry
    and their new DPS is all over the place...

    As for my suggestion you can read them a couple of post before...

  • #40
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited October 2016

    Currently, cons are useless for anything but snares, merge, and back-capping, so Penals are the only viable fighting infantry, if they get nerfed, soviets basically fall apart as a faction. Why do you think people maxim-spammed? Conscripts are garbage, the worst infantry in the entire game. Now maxims are garbage (with a massive triple nerf) and borderline unusable, so soviet players need to lean on penals, pull away penals and the entire soviet infantry roster falls apart. If you nerf penals, you need to redesign the entire soviet infantry lineup.

    If conscripts weren't such utter garbage and tier 2 was viable again with an MG that wasn't a 220mp unit that cost 260 then I'd support a price boost of penals to 320 or maybe even 330, but right now they basically carry the entire soviet early game single-handedly.

  • #41
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @MCMartel said:
    Currently, cons are useless for anything but snares, merge, and back-capping, so Penals are the only viable fighting infantry, if they get nerfed, soviets basically fall apart as a faction.

    Soviet did just fine without Penals over-performing so they will not fall apart..

    Now maxims are garbage and borderline unusable,...

    Why did you claim that? maxim have not been touched for several patches...

    so soviet players need to lean on penals...

    No they do not, Penal simply over-perform and that is why people spam them, because they get more than what they pay for...

    If you nerf penals, you need to redesign the entire soviet infantry lineup.

    I actually made 2 suggestions:
    One is to properly design Penals so that their stat , abilities vet bonuses fit a specific range/role and that does not necessarily mean that they should be nerfed at that range. They could even get a buff at that specific range...

    The other one was to actually redesign the Soviet faction...
    Having one unit over-perform to feel the gap of other units under-performance is actually bad design since it promotes spamming specific units...

    But this is not a thread about conscripts so lest try to leave them out it.

  • #42
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,733
    @vipper a few patches ago maxins got a price increase, a build time increase and a pack up increase, typical Relic sledge to cost efficiency...

    The penal buff made it so the Soviet no longer REQUIRE 84 maxims to scrape by if they try to use a doctrine without call in infantry.

    The Soviet design of "please buy dlc" was really bad, im glad they fixed it, I may be too happy that I dont need shocks/guards to be competitive so I admit I may looking at this with rose coloured glasses (granted I do find myself playing axis nore often than not)

    Basicly with the knee breaking maxim nerfs (I would gladly support any 2/3 of them but all 3 was too much) a weakened penal would make the Soviet fall apart.
  • #43
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited October 2016

    @Vipper said:

    @MCMartel said:
    Currently, cons are useless for anything but snares, merge, and back-capping, so Penals are the only viable fighting infantry, if they get nerfed, soviets basically fall apart as a faction.

    Soviet did just fine without Penals over-performing so they will not fall apart..

    Now maxims are garbage and borderline unusable,...

    Why did you claim that? maxim have not been touched for several patches...

    so soviet players need to lean on penals...

    No they do not, Penal simply over-perform and that is why people spam them, because they get more than what they pay for...

    If you nerf penals, you need to redesign the entire soviet infantry lineup.

    I actually made 2 suggestions:
    One is to properly design Penals so that their stat , abilities vet bonuses fit a specific range/role and that does not necessarily mean that they should be nerfed at that range. They could even get a buff at that specific range...

    The other one was to actually redesign the Soviet faction...
    Having one unit over-perform to feel the gap of other units under-performance is actually bad design since it promotes spamming specific units...

    But this is not a thread about conscripts so lest try to leave them out it.

    1. No, they were consistentlyu underperforming for long periods before the patch, with only occasional periods of UKF underperformance and OST underperformance to lift them fro mthe complete bottom.
    2. Maxims have been garbage since they got triple nerfed
    3. I understand it's bad design, I want the soviets to actually had a useful infantry roster, but I'd also prefer them not to be reduced to their unplayably UP state, which they were in the period in between the maxim nerf and penal buff.
    4. Yes, people lean on penals cause the soviets have no other stock infantry of use, just like how before the maxim nerf/penal buff, they had to maxim spam cause maxims were the only soviet stock infantry worth a damn. Relic seems to enjoy balancing the soviets on a couple of useful units in a sea of crap.
  • #44
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721

    @MCMartel said:
    Now maxims are garbage (with a massive triple nerf) and borderline unusable,...

    APRIL 20th UPDATE
    Maxim HMG
    We felt the Maxim HMG was overperforming in the early game due to its fast set-up. We also made adjustments to its build time and cost so it takes longer to reach the field and so it doesnt replace mainline infantry.

    • Set-up from 1.5 to 2.
    • Build-time from 24 seconds to 28 seconds.
    • Cost from 240 manpower to 260.

    Unless we travel back in time maxim where nerfed 6 month ago as I said several patches ago..

    In the June 21 patch when Penal started over-performing, got nearly no nerf but mostly buffs. They could survive before the patch and they could survive after the patch without Penal bad design and over-performing...

    cause the soviets have no other stock infantry of use, ...

    Simply because they are design to use doctrinal call in units...

    I am not sure what we arguing here, as I have explain Penal are currently badly designed and are too cost efficient. They can be used in any range and situation. I not matter of nerfing them. It is matter of having a specific role/range that the operate.

  • #45
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    1. They didn't survive before the patch, they consistently underperformed. Your premise fails.
    2. Again ,no, that's bad design, the base army has to work by itself, not only when used in concert with doctrinals
    3. Their specific role is that they're AI specialists with a medium range focus, they can get shredded at close range by assault rifle troops or outgunned at long range by LMG troops.
  • #46
    2 years ago
    newshatterhandnewshatte… Posts: 278
    edited October 2016

    I play mainly sov last time and I don't think penals are op at start it is mainly that the veterancy makes them bit too good. At vet 3 they have so much survivability and dps. Also the flamethrower I think ignores the recieved accuracy that enemies gained.

    Still they have 0 AT so you are quite vulnerable to the current light vehicle meta with them. So guards are then a logical choice to back them up till you get some su76 or other AT. But I do not think there is any problem with how guards work currently. They cost enough for what they do and only work as defensively. Armour can easily kite them and they neither have such high dps that you would really get your light into trouble without also snairs or other dps being involved.

    Though this is then offset by cons having meh dps (--> slow vet gain) at all ranges. And that you have to buy 2x expensive upgrades just so that the 1 or 2 cons squads you have get somewhat usefull. Also there is no good non doc solutions for soviet against early game light vehicles. Which means you really need the su76 on the field as fast as possible, but untill you get that you need cons grenades to stop vehicles from driving into your squads/base and killing everythig, but this then also delays the su76 further, which makes for really akward situations when the timing or fuel possession goes wrong.

    So imo a nice tradeoff would be to nerf penals veterancy and make cons more usefull by giving them slightly better dps or something and bundeling their upgrades. That way it will be viable for soviet to field a bit more cons instead of penals to get a bit better against light vehicles (which also opens up other commanders 1v1 instead of always guards or partisans) and the axis does not get destroyed by vetted penals AI power.

  • #47
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @MCMartel said:
    1. They didn't survive before the patch, they consistently underperformed. Your premise fails.

    and the soviet got a number of other buff with the patch...all this are rather irrelevant since this about Penals and not Soviet in general.

    1. Again ,no, that's bad design, the base army has to work by itself, not only when used in concert with doctrinals

    It is actually a faction design by, that is why they have access to more call in units than other faction and why allot of those call in are very cost efficient. Again rather irrelevant since this about Penals and not Soviets in general.

    1. Their specific role is that they're AI specialists with a medium range focus, they can get shredded at close range by assault rifle troops or outgunned at long range by LMG troops.

    (no idea which units you call assault rifle troops that can shred them in close range or which unit outguns them at long range)

    According to you they are "AI specialists with a medium range focus",:

    now ask yourself should a mid range unit have a 45%X1.3x1.3X1.04X1.0X4.1.04=86% accuracy when vet 3 and with 3 entities?

    now ask yourself should a mid range units should have sort range explosive?

    and now ask yourself should a mid range unit should have a "sprint" ability?

    Finally ask yourself if the conscript already are oriented mid to far should Penals overlap with them?

  • #48
    2 years ago
    newshatterhandnewshatte… Posts: 278
    edited October 2016

    @Vipper Soviet is relying to much on penals atm to talk about nerfing penals without talking about soviet in general.

    Penals are close-mid range units because that is where their flamer works and where they perform the best (best ratio between damage given and taken against most axis squads). Sprint is mainly used for running past mgs.

    They are also ment to clear garrisions so that is where the flamer and explosive come in. Which is still an AI job.

    Conscripts have a completely different role, they have too low dps to ever be build for AI (save pssh docs), if I think the enemy overruns me with infantery I go for penals, sniper or maxim. They are there for support, by providing reinforcement, vision and a snair so that other units can get more shots off.

  • #49
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @newshatterhand said:
    @Vipper Soviet is relying to much on penals atm to talk about nerfing penals without talking about soviet in general.

    Pls read my post before replying we are not talking about nerfing them but about giving them a role and not have them good in all ranges and situations...

    Penals are close-mid range units because that is where their flamer works and where they perform the best (best ratio between damage given and taken against most axis squads).

    You will have to debate their role with MCMartel who described them as
    "AI specialists with a medium range focus"

    Close infantries should use smgs not carbine weapons.
    Flamers are best used at range 20.
    Close infantries should not have 86% accuracy at range 30...

  • #50
    2 years ago

    I don't know what all this crying is about. It's like using lmg34/mg42, or m1919. It's long range is good. It's close range is even better since it's more accurate. Should i make lmgs do 1 damage when in close range because it designed as long range?

  • #51
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @whitesky00 said:
    It's close range is even better since it's more accurate...

    "Relic
    Update September 9th, 2014
    Infantry Combat Tuning
    The intent of these changes is to better define the strengths and weaknesses of each core unit relative to one another. We wanted to better define how each core unit should engage their perspective targets. For example, in a Grenadier vs. Riflemen match up, the Grenadiers want to maintain range. This is now a valid tactic, where in the past it was not. An integral element to this iteration is the introduction of received accuracy in place of raw damage. This was used in instances where additional fire power was not necessary in maintaining the established unit relationships. For example, Grenadier long range fire power is high enough to establish the unit’s relative relationship with other units, allowing us to increase their durability instead. As a by-product of this shift, short and mid range units should have an easier time closing in on their target.

    LMG Weapon Profiles

    We adjusted the LMG profile by scaling its damage output down.
    We found that the value of long range damage, which the LMG was designed around, was more valuable than we had previously anticipated. In addition to scaling the weapon down, we lowered the damage output at short and mid ranges to make the unit more vulnerable to other units that excel at these ranges. "


    In other words a lmg is better at close range but only slightly, a JLIRS G43 is actually worse close range than it far...

    The SVT simply should not have accuracy of 45% at range 30 when the LMG42 has 38%, neither should Penals get so many accuracy buffs...

  • #52
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,733
    What about:
    Strip them of 4 of thier svts and give them nagants default and reduce price to 280
    This would have them a sort of long range unit feel, not as effective as guards due to the pair of svt and lack of mgs (and AT)

    Give them an upgrade choice for antigarrison or anti infantry focus
    Anti garrison would be 2 flamer, access to satchels, 2 ppsh and 2 avt* for a close mid range focus that is awful on the move
    (100mu)

    Anti infantry would be 4stv and 2 avt* as well as a normal grenade (shock nade?) and POSSIBLY the advancing fire ability from campaign at the cost of retreating this gives them a longer effective range than the antigarrison but not as effective as now, nor as mobile. Mid range focus(75 mu)

    *avt is the full auto variant of the svt, full power cartridge made it very hard to handle (thus the fire on move penalty and piss poor long range accuracy) but incredibly powerful (bonus damage vs garrisons) its small magazine truly makes it ineffective for long bursts

    Basicly imagine the bust potential of an lmg but inverse ideal range, its aim time at long and close ranges would be high and bursts short to keep it different from smgs who deal low but steady damage at close range and instead focus mid range dps (Basicly an lmg42 with reduced range)

    This would (I think) reduce long range and fire on the move DPs vs all svts but strengthen their mid range dps.

    Kinda swirling ideas around so lemme know what you think

    Also I HIGHLY doubt Relic will do anything but "maxim" the shit out of penals if they do decide they are OP, but hopefully being able to use existing models and familiar weapon profiles (sortof..) would allow for an easier fix than a cost increase, removal of all vet and also removing their weapons....
  • #53
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,014
    @Vipper Conscripts use the rifle weapon profile and they're short ranged or long ranged infantry depending on who they're fighting. It's the same with Penals. There's really no need to change them.
  • #54
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Dark, to be honest, that seems like it would basically reduce them to the useless troops they were before. They finally work as frontline combat troops for the soviets, if you think they're OP, maybe adjust they're vet a bit or may them a bit more expensive, definitely don' massively nerf them, the soviet faction will have no infantry game then.

  • #55
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,733
    @Mcmartel I actually think they are fine,im suggesting things so Relic doesnt just maxim them
  • #56
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @Lazarus said:
    @Vipper Conscripts use the rifle weapon profile and they're short ranged or long ranged infantry depending on who they're fighting. It's the same with Penals. There's really no need to change them.

    Conscript weapons is design intent by Relic but lets not make this about conscripts, but they still use bolt action rifles characteristics.


    " Update September 9th, 2014
    Grenadiers

    Intended to excel at long range
    Highest long range damage output for its tier
    Abilities load out geared towards long range combat
    Vulnerable at short range to all other unit types
    Versus Conscripts
    Advantaged at long ranges
    Even at mid ranges
    Disadvantaged at short ranges"


    Penal are all over the place being able to equally fight specialized units at their optimum ranges...

    They can beat LMG grenadiers at long range, PGs at mid range and Assault grenadier at close range...

    It rather simple unit should have an optimum range of fighting, their weapons stat vet abilities and vet bonuses should help them excel at that range...

    If there role is close they should have smgs
    If they are mid they should have carbine (semi auto)
    If they are far they should have bolt action and/or LMgs

    Veterancy bonuses abilities and weapon upgrades should follow the same pattern...

  • #57
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,014
    edited October 2016

    @Vipper said:
    Penal are all over the place being able to equally fight specialized units at their optimum ranges...

    They can beat LMG grenadiers at long range, PGs at mid range and Assault grenadier at close range...

    They can beat grenadiers at long range. Not LMG Grens. Grens are not a specialist unit. Beating PGrens entirely depends on vet and positioning as well as initial engagement range, and beating AGrens at close just doesn't happen unless you try to walk at them from negative cover 30 units away.

  • #58
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited October 2016

    @Lazarus said:
    They can beat grenadiers at long range. Not LMG Grens. Grens are not a specialist unit.

    Test vetted Penals in heavy cover no flamer against vetted LMG Gren at heavy cover 10 times and let as know the result.

    Also see what Relic has to say about Grenadiers, not Lmg Grenadiers...

    "Grenadiers
    Intended to excel at long range
    Highest long range damage output for its tier"
    Sound to me like a specialist unit...

  • #59
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,979
    I wouldn't necessarily say Grenadiers are specialists but they certainly have an optimal role at which they should be used because at all other roles or rather ranges they fall apart quickly. Penals don't have that. They are very efficient at all ranges with the singular weakness of not having AT-capabilities. That, however, does not excuse them to have no defined combat range. Otherwise Obersoldaten, which arrive much later and are quite more expensive, should also crush all infantry at all ranges because they have no AT and are AI only.

    That's the problem. They should not be good at all ranges. They should have a range or ranges at which they are weak.
  • #60
    2 years ago
    newshatterhandnewshatte… Posts: 278
    edited October 2016

    Unvetted penals do not win against unvetted lmg grens at longrange with cover. So their core stats are quite allright, they just gain a bit too much from vet compared to others. Grens are best used at longrange vs inf so they are "specialised" in that sense, but I would prefer to just call that a longrange unit. Since grens also provide a vehicle snair they are not AI specialists.

  • #61
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    I'd be fine with changing their vet 3 bonus, their base stats seem fine though, I'm less knowledgable about their vet 3 stats.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.