SOV - All - Trip Wire Flares Vet1 ability
Patrol_Om…
Posts: 301
Problem:
In the current state of the game, there are six Soviet infantry units unlocking the same ability at Vet1 "Trip Wire Flares"
and it will soon go up to seven units with the same Vet1 ability, with the new Airborne Guards.
- Combat engineers
- Conscripts
- Shock troops
- Guard troops
- Partisan troops
- Partisan tank hunters
Airbone guards
Solution;
Replacing those Vet1 abilities at least for units from point 2 to 7, since they feel outdated.
Giving them some love by reworking their Vet1 abilities will create a sense of uniqueness for each unit.
I'm sorry that I can't come with specific abilities for each infantry unit at the moment, but I just wanted to point out what I consider to be an outdated ability spreaded through the entire army. Only Penal Batallions unlock a different ability at Vet1.
Ps: I know that there is a lot of work currently going on with the new Commanders about to be released, but It would be amazing if Team Relic could review these details.
Thanks,
Patrol Omega
Comments
@thedarkarmadillo Thanks for correcting me, I had to recheck and you are totally right. Both units get different Vet1 abilities, however, there are still 5 units left with the same Trip Wire Flares Vet1 ability.
See I feel cons are the ones who are totally fine without something else. They get received accuracy at vet 1 so they definitely don't deserve another ability there, and they come with hoorah by default. Rifleman's vet 1 ability is wasted on a snare. In a lot of cases I prefer paying the 25 fuel over needing to vet each squad up
As far as useless soviet vet abilities go, capture territory is still king in my book.
@SkysTheLimit I invite you to play with the Soviets and use that Vet1 ability to get an advantage over your opponent.
You might find out that is kind of useless 6 years after the game released. Their infantry units need 100% a rework as the Okw and Wer have gotten lately, don't you agree?
Also cap territory imo is mostly fine imo now that they have changed a few of the heavier tanks.
IMO though the is-2 should get that inspire ability and the kv-2 should get a limited barrage. That would really tune to their roles.
Yeah and I think hoorah is a worthy ability and they get it by default. Don't get me wrong Im definitely in the camp that cons need something, but I'd rather volks get toned down first before we re-work them again. I think straight up stats tweaking is the only way you can make them perform well enough to not get obliterated by OKWs infantry.
> @SkysTheLimit that's valid. If even trade flares for an oorah buff (ROF or something)
I don't. We don't need yet another infantry unit in the game outperforming Grenadiers. We already got all infantry but builders and Conscripts doing that handily. I don't care about the flares. Keep them, remove them, whatever plugs the holes in you boat to make it seaworthy. Don't throw more buffs at the unit in return, however.
More expensive infantry = better performance.
Grens are cheapest mainline together with cons.
I know it is very hard concept, but more expensive units perform better and grens are NOT more expensive.
They are MEANT to be overperformed by rifles, tommies, penals, because these cost MORE.
If you feel like grens lack something, go make a thread about it instead of derailing this one.
Cons had accuracy buffed that add nothing to them, for a reason: no weapon upgrade.
Cons doent need buff. Their utility is already great for them. And to me, Cons can be nerfed down their firepower, gain something like make them harder to hit, a truly meat shield.
It would be more tactical if letting Cons handing weapons from Elite infantry squad or weapon team. The choice between accuracy (weapons armed by elite infantry) & durable (weapons armed by Cons)
It buffs oorah with a acc or rof or damage increase for the duration on mosins only to keep ppsh from becoming to strong. At vet 3 is becomes a tad stronger. This way their utility scales and they can dish out damage although for a limited time.
The cost off oorah per use goes up to keep it balanced.
> > @thedarkarmadillo said:
> > @SkysTheLimit that's valid. If even trade flares for an oorah buff (ROF or something)
>
> I don't. We don't need yet another infantry unit in the game outperforming Grenadiers. We already got all infantry but builders and Conscripts doing that handily. I don't care about the flares. Keep them, remove them, whatever plugs the holes in you boat to make it seaworthy. Don't throw more buffs at the unit in return, however.
>
>
Thing is, grens and cons cost the same right? Grens can utilize a 1 off to greatly improve their output and cons require vet to offset that. I don't feel that a 10 second ROF buff at the cost of 1/3 a permanent dps upgrade would be balance breaking, just make cons more attractive, which at the moment they are not. Especially when they require an extra 35 fuel and 205mp to kit out.
Keep in mind if cons have to reposition during oorah they are no shooting and if they are shooting then they are static. I think that's a fair trade as a 20mu ability after vet.
A Vet1 ability that I came up with for Conscripts would be:
"Unbreakable Union" Taken from the Soviet Union first line of its hymn
After entering in combat the squad receives an increase to its defense and rate of fire for 10 seconds.
20 seconds cooldown
> A Vet1 ability that I came up with for Conscripts would be:
>
> "Unbreakable Union" Taken from the Soviet Union first line of its hymn
> After entering in combat the squad receives an increase to its defense and rate of fire for 10 seconds.
>
> 20 seconds cooldown
I wouldn't do both durability and offensive at the same time. One or the other I think.
I had the idea of it being a desperate last stand maneuver, holding the line desperately from invading forces for a couple of seconds. The overall idea is also not consuming more ammo for the Conscripts abilities since they are highly dependant on them already to be efficient (Non-upgraded Conscripts = peasants with rifles). Not to mention that they have to spend resources on HQ upgrades to unlock them.
First of all, @Katitof I'm not going to derail this thread by dignifying your statement with a reply, except I am hopeful that you will start the oral consuption of my gluteus maximus at the shortest possible notice.
I dont care. Youre throwing a buff unto an ability that itself already provides a significant utility, especially for a unit that performs better in close quarters. Grenadiers are in the unenviable position of having to fight Penals, Rifles and Sections on a regular basis. Hence the lMG is a necessary tool for them to stay relevant as they cant serve as meat shields and would otherwise get swamped. Cons, on the other hand, fight mostly Grens and Volksgrenadiere (stricktly speaking about basic infantry here, elites and late tier infantry are not taken into account). Volks need some serious toning down, but in the grand scheme of things Grens are forced to fight more formidable opponents right out of the gate.
I fear that giving Cons a buff in addition to faster movement will lead to them simply overwhelming Grenadiers through speed and volume of fire , even if the latter are given lMGs, leading to Grens becoming even more of a push-over than they are now in most engagements.
But its not only Grenadiers. Say a Conscript squad flanks an MG, they use Oorah not only to close in faster, but also to eliminate it faster, making it harder to keep that MG covered because now theres this temporarily fast-moving AND hard-hitting squad roaming about. And generally, if the MG has to retreat, the engagement is going to be tough for the Grenadiers alone, as the MG is the cornerstone of the fighting force.
Getting back on the main Topic from this post, yes Conscripts and other infantry units need a rework on their Vet1 ability.
Even T4-HQ medium tanks and call in heavy tanks need to get their outdated "Capture ability" changed for something more useful since by that time they will be always followed by infantry support ... so there is no need for that Vet1 ability as well.
Now talking by you pointing out Axis infantry, here are the new changes:
Now, you mentioned "Volks need some serious toning down" and yes it is true, at it has been said by several players around lately posts. Nevertheless, they are receiving more improvements ..
Having a small significant cost difference but being able to scale and get more weapon upgrades is going to be blast for OKW players, of course, but this will leave Conscripts barely usable as they:
Take into consideration that I'm not even mentioning that they already have restrictions on their grenades, being forced to buy HQ upgrades specificaly to unlock both them ..... not something that Axis factions to even worry about.
So yes! pointing out outdated variables to create changes is something useful to make the game enjoyable and balanced for all players.
Sorry I almost forgot replying to the Mg stuff @Hingie
> I dont care. Youre throwing a buff unto an ability that itself already provides a significant utility, especially for a unit that performs better in close quarters. Grenadiers are in the unenviable position of having to fight Penals, Rifles and Sections on a regular basis.
Seriously man? They perform "better" in close quarters because they perform worse than literally everything besides Ostruppen at all other ranges.
Grens are much better than cons and there's no disputing that. I need an extra 230mp and 35 fuel just to get a worse grenade and the same snare on a squad thats ALSO worse in combat by default and has no weapon upgrade. There's no excuse for them being this crappy WHILE they still have the side-tech costs.
> @Hingie said:
> Volks need some serious toning down, but in the grand scheme of things Grens are forced to fight more formidable opponents right out of the gate.
More formidable mainlines you mean. Is this game nothing but mainline infantry? No they also have the best MG in the game "right out of the gate" to fight next to. Meanwhile after spending 20 fuel you can unlock the worst MG in the game to support cons.
Conscripts being bad at longer ranges is mostly compensated for by having a built-in sprint. They have a tool at their disposal to close distance quickly. You dont see people complaining how Assault Grenadiers are crap at long range either. Same basic concept.
Thats a potential problem of the tech structure, not the unit itself. I consider it halfway fair, seeing how Conscripts are the only regularly accessible unit in the game to have a trinity of durability, a snare and rapid movement. But I suppose some minor adjustments could be made to the tech costs associated
Most balancing problems of the entire game are rooted in the fact that the Allied infantry is too strong and can take care of Axis infantry with enough ease to facilitate TD spam because Mediums or AI vehicles are not needed. So while not being the only units in the game, they are the root of all evil and much more of an issue than MGs. Furthermore, if Wehr didnt have good Weapon Teams, they would get swamped like noones business. That however also makes them dependend on them, and Teams are by design rather inflexible. Oorah is as good a tool agains MGs as it is against Grenadiers. The arguably poor state of the Maxim is a proportionally small problem seeing how Soviets have other units performing very well in its stead.
Builder:
Sturm at default has x1.2 repair faster than others (its a should since they take more pop cap). Upgrade minesweeper doesnt make them lost 25% of their great fire power, not mention minesweeper give them x1.6 repair speed (x2 at vet3)
=> Minesweeper should take a weapon slot, which mean CombatEng & Pion able to upgrade both flamethrower & sweeper at the same time and not able to pick up any other weapon (same with Rear & Sapper with their flamethrower doc), Rear & Sapper can only pickup one Bar or Bren after upgrade sweeper. Not apply to Sturm able to upgrade both Shreck & sweeper because sweeper give them more benefit.
East army use 20sec to build tech 1-2 & 30sec to build tech 3-4. That consume a builder squad at frontline & have to run back to teching, consume at least 3mins. At the same time West army builders always on the battle field.
=> There is noway to balance this anyway.
MG42 is on the good place, it required to fight double Bars or Brens in late game.
50cal & Maxim damage better than MG42, but they lack of suppression, which is MGs real job.
You can not deny 2 Volk & a Sturm can easily delete the 1st Maxim which come at 50sec (because it require to build tech2 to get), than a Cons & a CombatEng fight an MG42 come at 30sec.
> You dont see people complaining how Assault Grenadiers are crap at long range either. Same basic concept.
No, not the same basic concept. Conscripts are mainline infantry, assault Grenadiers are doctrinal specialists. And as Dark said, ass grens HAVE an effective range. Cons don't, they're just not AS terrible at close range.
Rifleman are MUCH stronger at close range, yet still excel at other ranges too. The only justification for conscript performance is the existence of penals, which shouldn't be as good as they are. But they need to be, because conscripts are shit.
> @Hingie said:
> Most balancing problems of the entire game are rooted in the fact that the Allied infantry is too strong and can take care of Axis infantry with enough ease to facilitate TD spam because Mediums or AI vehicles are not needed.
It probably looks that way to someone who only plays axis.
Make Oorah cheaper then. Lower cost to 10 mun and be done with it.
I would say thats more of a problem with Rifles lacking a clearly defined range in which they should operate rather than a problem with Conscripts. Perhaps if Penals werent as outstanding as they are I would be more inclined to give the notion of buffing Conscripts some room. As things are now I'm rather reluctant.
Im far from the only one thinking this. In the past this sentiment was shared with, among others, Lazarus and Armadillo. Given that Infantry balancing was not overhauled since the last time I voiced this argument and received positive feedback, Id say its not only bias speaking.
They probably wont. Then again, maybe they had a reason for increasing its cost? I dont know. I agree with the Penals part.
It's bias if you have to talk about "allied infantry" everytime we're ONLY talking about one allied squad. The US and Brits have nothing to do with THIS thread
No, I agree with a nerf of Penals being paired with a readjustment of Conscripts. How that adjustment is then done, I am not sure. I think care would be in order, however, lest we nerf Penals down only to have their current supremacy somehow usurped by buffed Conscripts. Generally I am not necessarily adamantly opposed to the concept however.
Id personally see the following:
-Penals cost reduced to 260-280
-armed with guards Mosins
-Upgrade to SVT kit for 45-60mu
-ptrs upgrade unchanged.
-packages mutually exclusive
This makes Soviet field control greater and still offers a stronger 0min aggressive conscripts alternative and time gates the powerful penals we see today
This also means that strong AI and t1 AT are a choice instead of an easy transition
For cons there's a number of ways we could see them go, my favorites are allowing them to become more cost effecient as the player techs. Things like cost reductions and what not
I'd even see oorah turned to a vet 1 and made more support, (ROF aura or cooldown or small damage/target size reductions scaling with vet as well as teching
The idea for cons being that they don't need a weapon to scale like others but instead become more expendable and amplify the units they are supporting.
I can dream