Soviet Doctrine

Hello everyone!!

As I played a few games both against AI and players online, I'm still rather disapointed with the way soviet doctrine work.

Propaganda Strategy

This doctrine should be defensive, and should be based on "infantry-artillery warfare". In fact, there's few bonus that are really useful: only katyusha (which are rather cheap but have an awful muni-upkeep) and trench (provide early game cover for your conscript, but you loose some versatility and mobility).

-"For the motherland" ability come too late to be useful: at this time, mg42s arent the main threat to your unit. Plus, an offensive ability is kinda strange; I would rather see a bonus in allied territory (like in WH; yeah I know not very original) or something like that.

-The unfamous MG-dugout. Its a doctrinal MG, futhermore its the more expensive MG of the game (cost 380MP 15fuel and even some pop!), and its far to be the most effective!
The solution would be to at least decrease the price.

-"Red Tide" seem to be a very powerful late game ability. Every time I used this ability, it was useless: when your infantry is wiped out in late game, thats because panzer are raping them to death. Even if you are sending guards to throw AT nades and let them die, you will never get down those tanks with fresh guards. As this is my personnal opinion, and because I'm not the most experienced player (by far  ;D ), I would love to hear how to use it properly.

-"God of War" is maybe the worst late game ability ever created. Dozens of artillery battery saturating a sector for a while? What a cool idea! The sector (or the map?) is so saturated that everyone will receive a shell, even if you are faaaar away from the targeted area (merry christmas from artillerymen lads!). Germans can just ignore it by using HT and tanks, but you cant because your infantry is on-foot and its so frustrating when you loose a whole squad of assault guards with a single shell, while they were peacefully smoking far, far away! A number of interesting proposition were made on the forum, so why not test something new?

Urban Warfare

Maybe the most useful doctrine atm. KV-2 is an interesting unit, and so is the sniper ace. Partisans are even essential in bridge map, because its the only soviet unit that can actually blow up bridge effectively (I would rather switch this ability with sturmovy). The only ability that is strange and useless to my eyes is "not one step back!". When you use it, your infantry can be naded, burned, or crushed in no-time, and the so called defense boost do not help you!

Breakthrough Strategy

This is an offensive-based ability, and abilities are coherent with that. T-34 riders would be a great and balanced unit if the mechanised guards were not god on earth (or on tanks in this case). The Zveroboy is also a cool unit, maybe a bit too powerful atm with a barrage ability and insta-shot (it can actually one-shoot stug or whole squad of expensive infantry).
While mechanics receive an other ability (accelerate production of tank hall), they are still a bit worthless but, well, they are  fine enough as they are.
L-L sherman is boring. Yep, boring: every allied faction have a sherman, and this one do not fit with soviet in my eyes.  I wonder what's the opinion of players.
"Inspiring speech" is a useless ability. Whats the point of having running conscript or ingenery along the map early-game? Ok, they can reach a sector quicker and so take it quicker. And? German infantry will slaughter your conscript/ingenery anyway.
It would be far more interesting, if we had an ability that provide bonus for tanks or for combined arms forces (like infantry gaining bonus near tanks?). There was plenty of suggestion made (those from Wordsmith were especially fine), but nothing happened.


I know that dev arent going to change soviet doctrines because a single player (french moreover!  ;D) keep whining like a child, but I would want to know the opinion of the other players regarding soviet doctrine. Maybe I'm the only one to think that it need to be reworked, but still, I want to have some constructive feedback (and maybe some comment from dev?).

EDIT
I forgot: Regards  :)

Last edited January 23, 2011 at 4:34 PM by Red_Stinger

I won't respond to the whole thing because I can't be bothered but yes, there are certain abilities that still need tuning or are rather bad.

Red_Stinger wrote:
GoW - A number of interesting proposition were made on the forum, so why not test something new?

Devs were working on a new God of War that they took from the forum but didn't work out. It wasn't able to be coded but they are still looking for an alternative to the current GoW.

Ok, thanks for the answer!  :D

Red_Stinger wrote:The unfamous MG-dugout. Its a doctrinal MG, futhermore its the more expensive MG of the game (cost 380MP 15fuel and even some pop!), and its far to be the most effective!
The solution would be to at least decrease the price.

I wouldn't mind it being a bit cheaper on the fuel. It is and will be the Soviet's only MG in the entire game, and you still need to earn it.

Red_Stinger wrote:-"God of War" is maybe the worst late game ability ever created. Dozens of artillery battery saturating a sector for a while? What a cool idea! The sector (or the map?) is so saturated that everyone will receive a shell, even if you are faaaar away from the targeted area (merry christmas from artillerymen lads!). Germans can just ignore it by using HT and tanks, but you cant because your infantry is on-foot and its so frustrating when you loose a whole squad of assault guards with a single shell, while they were peacefully smoking far, far away! A number of interesting proposition were made on the forum, so why not test something new?

Yes everybody knows God of War needs to be changed, drastically.

Red_Stinger wrote:Partisans are even essential in bridge map, because its the only soviet unit that can actually blow up bridge effectively (I would rather switch this ability with sturmovy).

I personally think Partisans should be able to be called in behind enemy lines, and cloak. Perhaps vetted Partisans can cloak while moving. They are saboteurs and guerrillas after all.

Red_Stinger wrote:The Zveroboy is also a cool unit, maybe a bit too powerful atm with a barrage ability and insta-shot (it can actually one-shoot stug or whole squad of expensive infantry).

The SU-152 is notably bugged. The devs are going to fix it.

Red_Stinger wrote:While mechanics receive an other ability (accelerate production of tank hall), they are still a bit worthless but, well, they are  fine enough as they are.

Mechanics are not worthless in my opinion, they repair faster than any other unit in the game, and their observation ability really speeds up production on T-34's.

Red_Stinger wrote:L-L sherman is boring. Yep, boring: every allied faction have a sherman, and this one do not fit with soviet in my eyes.  I wonder what's the opinion of players.

I disagree, I like the L-L Sherman, it is also the only tank in the game that comes with an "AP Shells" Ability. I would make it slightly cheaper though, maybe.

Red_Stinger wrote:"Inspiring speech" is a useless ability. Whats the point of having running conscript or ingenery along the map early-game? Ok, they can reach a sector quicker and so take it quicker. And? German infantry will slaughter your conscript/ingenery anyway.
It would be far more interesting, if we had an ability that provide bonus for tanks or for combined arms forces (like infantry gaining bonus near tanks?). There was plenty of suggestion made (those from Wordsmith were especially fine), but nothing happened.

I'd have to agree, it's basically a global sprint ability with a really long cooldown, it doesn't really have any uses except allowing everybody to sprint that 1 time a game.

I wonder if Inspiring speech can be made to increase burst duration and moving accuracy? That would be unique and useful to the doctrine.

Mr. wrote:
I personally think Partisans should be able to be called in behind enemy lines, and cloak. Perhaps vetted Partisans can cloak while moving. They are saboteurs and guerrillas after all.

Don't understand your point. They can already be called in behind the lines and move while cloaked.

GodlikeDennis wrote:Don't understand your point. They can already be called in behind the lines and move while cloaked.

Heh, I guess I haven't used them in awhile then  :-X

Red_Stinger wrote:
L-L sherman is boring. Yep, boring: every allied faction have a sherman, and this one do not fit with soviet in my eyes.  I wonder what's the opinion of players.

Ahh the Sherman, yeah this ones kind of a difficult problem.  I'd agree with you that its still too expensive and seems to come in too late to play a big role.  Still, the inclusion of the AT round makes it far more tempting option than in previous versions.  The real problem is its such a wonderful model it would a pity to see it removed.

Urban:
Is fine atm but I do agree with your points on "Not One Step Back"
It's weaknesses actually never occured to me  :-X (shows how little I use it)

However there is a glitch whereas if you build a medic truck the Partisans lose the sabotage resources doctine ability possibly due to the retreat to medic truck ability.

Prop:
The MG and trench should be one ability as suggested many a times before as well as edits made to the MG to make it original and more doctrine worthy such as the past suggestion of a Maxim (to be completed in future hopefully) in a british mortar pit with smaller firing cone and the ability to rotate like Brit 17 pndr. (This was my favourite solution and of course may be different for others)

As for GOW Dev's know and no doubt will be fixed in time.

Breakthrough:
Mechanics to me have now become an infantry version of US armour doctrines... rapid deployment I think, because if I want front line repairs I will stick with Ingenery and Sturmovie.

Oh and I hope in future that the L-L Sherman has the option of the KV-1 as a reward replacement for it. (I would tick that reward box straight away)

Last edited January 30, 2011 at 7:52 PM by Raider217

Raider217 wrote:
Is fine atm but I do agree with your points on "Not One Step Back"
It's weaknesses actually never occured to me  :-X (shows how little I use it)

This ability is just useless against an experienced player... I stopped to use it the third time I got assault naded by volsk.  ;D

Raider217 wrote:
Urban:

Prop:
The MG and trench should be one ability as suggested many a times before as well as edits made to the MG to make it original and more doctrine worthy such as the past suggestion of a Maxim (to be completed in future hopefully) in a british mortar pit with smaller firing cone and the ability to rotate like Brit 17 pndr. (This was my favourite solution and of course may be different for others)

As for GOW Dev's know and no doubt will be fixed in time.

Breakthrough:
Mechanics to me have now become an infantry version of US armour doctrines... rapid deployment I think, because if I want front line repairs I will stick with Ingenery and Sturmovie.

Oh and I hope in future that the L-L Sherman has the option of the KV-1 as a reward replacement for it. (I would tick that reward box straight away)

For the soviet mg, yes this solution sound quite good and new (and even cool!). But I dont know if after all, dev are going to change soviet, since they are mainly focused on the Ostheer atm.

Dont bother for the KV-1 mate, so far dev arent going to include it in any way from what I've heard.  :P
If the KV-1 is included in the future though, I would prefer to see it as the main heavy soviet tank (wish could be upgradable) rather than the IS-2. This could lead to put the IS-2 as a doctrinal unit for the breakthrough strategy, but I'm going too far ahead  ;D

Red_Stinger wrote:

Dont bother for the KV-1 mate, so far dev arent going to include it in any way from what I've heard.  :P
If the KV-1 is included in the future though, I would prefer to see it as the main heavy soviet tank (wish could be upgradable) rather than the IS-2. This could lead to put the IS-2 as a doctrinal unit for the breakthrough strategy, but I'm going too far ahead  ;D

That would be great. IS-2 should be like Tiger I. It would make it a real beast comparing to what is now. IS-2 is like Panther... I don't like that...

Then Sovs would be like Wehr with buildable Tiger (IS 2), Panther (T34/85), Jagdpanther (SU100) and so on. So please, leave it as it is and it's fine ;)
(Please don't mind me for comparing things that can't be compared, it was just an example  :D)

MaxiKing6 wrote:
Then Sovs would be like Wehr with buildable Tiger (IS 2), Panther (T34/85), Jagdpanther (SU100) and so on. So please, leave it as it is and it's fine ;)
(Please don't mind me for comparing things that can't be compared, it was just an example  :D)

Anyway, this thread is about soviet doctrines, though soviet tank could deserve attention aswell!  :)

The greatest soviet doctrine is the breakthrough in my eyes. But i gotta agree to the threads autor and many others, that the soviets simply dont need a sherman.

Red_Stinger wrote:

MaxiKing6 wrote:
Then Sovs would be like Wehr with buildable Tiger (IS 2), Panther (T34/85), Jagdpanther (SU100) and so on. So please, leave it as it is and it's fine ;)
(Please don't mind me for comparing things that can't be compared, it was just an example  :D)

Anyway, this thread is about soviet doctrines, though soviet tank could deserve attention aswell!  :)

Thats correct! After my exams i am going to open a thread about the soviet warmachine and the use of the breakthrought doctrine. There are plenty of good ideas around. Just to name one, the KV. Nevertheless, this is not the thread i may open any time soon. so lets go back to topic and go on discussion about USSR doctrines here :)


best regards

Soviet Doctrine is at best a work in progress. Let us hope this progress is not sidetracked by the OstHeer development. My take on the current state of Soviet Doctrine:
Propaganda Strategy

Left hand Tree: Move the MG Nest to an ingenery build slot. The high production  cost and vulnerability to artillery fire and incendiaries make it a useless doctrinal unit. It should be a basic member of the TO&E just like every other faction has. Switch "For the Motherland" to the first slot. It is a very handy counter to the Wehrmacht's huge automatic weapons suppression capabilities. - 2CP.
Add as the Second slot an "NKVD political officer" that adds a global health regeneration to non-moving soviet infantry, (indoctrination and morale). - 3 CP. Alternately add Scorched Earth for 3 CP, (this is Russia after all). 
"Red Tide" seems to be OK except that by the time it is available the game has changed from infantry mode to AFV mode. If the ISU3 were to be added as a doctrinal unit for tank warfare the "beastkiller" ISU152 Doctrinal unit could be added here for Propaganda purposes. 4CP.

Right Hand Tree:
"Trenches", 1 CP, OK, but it plays into the hand of PE incendiaries.
"Stalin Organ" - (My personal favorite, operationally and Graphically. I agree with the awful mun i- upkeep though.) is too cheap. Increase to 4 CP and/or move to later in the tree.
"God of War": If the Motherland is dependent for survival  upon this Doctrine You will be able to write Russia's future history with a pitchfork on water! - 4CPs and mp cost for using it? I would rather walk my major up to a Bunker and surrender. Perhaps moving the artillery fire base availability to the second slot on the tree (without having to pay for other tooling upgrades), would work. 3CP.

Urban Combat Strategy

Left Hand Tree: Delete "not one step back", Add a Molotov Cocktail incendiary grenade to Strelky Squads for 15mp/use. -2CP. Switch the KV-2 and Flame thrower slots. Increase "Street Fighting" to 3 CP. Total CP for tree: 9 CP.

Right Hand Tree: Good as is. Maybe "Sniper Ace" should be increased  to 4 CP. Total CP for Tree 8 CP.

Breakthrough Strategy

Left Hand Tree: Excellent!
"inspiring Speech" Sprint ability may be too cheap. PE requires 6 upgrades to get it.
"Tank Riders" Add "Dankovy man the guns" ability to the guards squad so that they can re-crew any tank. Add AT grenades for consistency. 9 CP.

Right Hand Tree:
Change LL  to an M4 Sherman with low velocity 75 mm gun, (or delete and replace with KV-1) Let's talk doctrine. LL AFVs were inferior to Soviet AFVs. LL AFV's from Murmansk and Persia were a helpful stopgap until the relocated factories in the Urals were producing. The KV1 and T34/76 were superior to the Pz III/L24, PzIII/L37, PZ 38T, and PZIV (B,D,E?) in penetration and armor protection. When the T34 was first encountered in 1941 Panzer commanders resorted to shooting holes in the gun barrels of Soviet tanks in order to stop them. The M4 Sherman was an equal match to PzIV (E,F2). The M4A2(76) with AP rounds were a response to lack of penetration against PzV and PzVI. The M4 Sherman did have an advantage over its Soviet counterparts. A 5 man crew and a commander's "cupola". The Soviet's with their 4 man crews and their tendency to button up at the first sign of action was instrumental in the ability of aggressive panzer commanders to successfully engage otherwise superior AFVs. For the purposes of an EF doctrinal unit at this point of the tech tree either a LL M4 or a KV1 that does not require R&D in the armory makes sense. (No R&D no tank riders, eh!) -4 CP.
"Mechanics" I rather like the repositioning of this Doctrinal Unit, but perhaps it would be better to place it at the top of the RHT to give the player choosing this Doctrine a slight edge in tank production speed. 1CP.
"The Juggernaut" is a good choice for a doctrinal unit. Its cost should be raised to 4CP to correspond to German doctrinal unit "beasts". (Esthetically I would have preferred  a ISU3 Tank to an ATG for tank warfare but ...). The suggestion to Use the ISU2 exclusively for this Doctrine is not unattractive but would cripple the faction if T34/85 is not a match for PzV.
Summary: Doctrine choice should evince a positive effect in the chosen field of operations. Doctrines for different factions should cost the same, i.e. similar number of kills, builds for  each CP and similar total CPs for any given doctrine. From a development perspective only Breakthrough Strategy would require new units to be developed.
Propaganda Strategy: Three doctrinal units, 17CP.
Urban Combat Strategy: three Doctrinal units, 17CP.
Breakthrough Strategy: three abilities, four doctrinal units 18CP.

tpcoughlin wrote:
Urban Combat Strategy

Left Hand Tree: Delete "not one step back", Add a Molotov Cocktail incendiary grenade to Strelky Squads for 15mp/use. -2CP. Switch the KV-2 and Flame thrower slots. Increase "Street Fighting" to 3 CP. Total CP for tree: 9 CP.

Such uselessness! Add one ability to ONE squad? While I do agree to switching flames and KV-2 because flames become way too late, why would you increase CPs and add a Molotov to Strelky? While Strelky are very good infantry units, unless you plan to add Molotov's to every infantry unit's equipment, such suggestion is useless.

Quote
Right Hand Tree: Good as is. Maybe "Sniper Ace" should be increased  to 4 CP. Total CP for Tree 8 CP.

Again, why do the CPs need to be increased!?!

Quote
Breakthrough Strategy

Left Hand Tree: Excellent!
"inspiring Speech" Sprint ability may be too cheap. PE requires 6 upgrades to get it.

Potentially the most useless ability deserves a higher cost?  ???

Quote
"Tank Riders" Add "Dankovy man the guns" ability to the guards squad so that they can re-crew any tank. Add AT grenades for consistency. 9 CP.

There is a proportional difference between "Tank Guards" and "Guards" and "Shock Guards". If my infantry could magically hop onto tanks I would have just put Red Banner Strelky onto my T-34 instead of Tank Guards!

Quote
Right Hand Tree:
Change LL  to an M4 Sherman with low velocity 75 mm gun, (or delete and replace with KV-1)

It's already a M4 Sherman...Just with a 76mm Gun and a different skin. It's different than a standard sherman for the purpose that they were rarely (if at all) used on a Eastern Front battle. A KV-1 Replacement is a better idea.

Quote
"Mechanics" I rather like the repositioning of this Doctrinal Unit, but perhaps it would be better to place it at the top of the RHT to give the player choosing this Doctrine a slight edge in tank production speed. 1CP.

By choosing this doctrine you can already receive a LL Sherman before your opponent even has T3. I've demolished opponents on the bases of scaring them with a tank before they even have a PaK on the field. A quick base raid and clean up and the VPs are mine.

Quote
Breakthrough Strategy would require new units to be developed.
Propaganda Strategy: Three doctrinal units, 17CP.
Urban Combat Strategy: three Doctrinal units, 17CP.
Breakthrough Strategy: three abilities, four doctrinal units 18CP.

At this point Breakthrough and Urban probably have the best chance of set-in-stone units. Why change them?

3 Doctrinal Units for the Prop? Huh? I see one. (Two if you must count MG emplacements.)

17-18 CP for a full tree?  :o Are you MAD??? The more CPs you earn the harder it is to earn CPs.

American Infantry= 12
American Airborne = 12
American Armor=12 (With 7 to get a Pershing)

Wehrmacht Defensive = 12
Wehrmacht Blitz = 15 (See note for Terror, for similar reasoning)
Wehrmacht Terror = 16 (Rightly so because of such a powerful tank, the best in the game perhaps in exclusion to the ISU-152's sheer power but the KT can outmatch it using smart flanking.)

Increasing CP cost for units doesn't solve ANYTHING. If it takes 9 CPs to get something as good as a King Tiger, then why would you make the Sniper Ace side worth 8 CPs? While the Sniper Ace is a good unit, it can easily be killed by a MULTITUDE of methods.

Mostly in your compliance to jack the cost up of everything, I disagree with about 75% of your theories.

^^ instead of adding rather unneeded molotovs to strelky, why not make molotov (doctrinally) damage vehicles' engines.  ???

JK  ;D ;D ;D

Well, that's not so stupid.
Actually, it'd make sense. And stickybombs often fuck up engines.
It'd make sense. Actually, it doesn't make sense for it not to.

Loupblanc wrote:

Well, that's not so stupid.
Actually, it'd make sense. And stickybombs often fuck up engines.
It'd make sense. Actually, it doesn't make sense for it not to.

The practicality of adding an ability to just ONE unit, provided he isn't a doctrine specific unit or special in any kind of way, almost makes the entire ability useless.

Cranialwizard wrote:

Loupblanc wrote:

Well, that's not so stupid.
Actually, it'd make sense. And stickybombs often fuck up engines.
It'd make sense. Actually, it doesn't make sense for it not to.

The practicality of adding an ability to just ONE unit, provided he isn't a doctrine specific unit or special in any kind of way, almost makes the entire ability useless.

Tell me moar! Esp. about assault grenades  ::)

Besides, this ability is not there for molotovs, 'cause it was considered OP at the time (I think, it didn't change since then).

Making it a doctrine choice, that comes about mid-game, would, on one hand, limit its powers, and on the other, make a lot of new tactics to appear, since conscript upgrade would be a whole different thing with this doctrine ability!
Think of that: cheap to produce, reinforce and upkeep troops, that have a high chance of immobilizing/greatly decreasing enemy vehicles' speed, while unable to actually do significant damage to the latter, would make for a wonderful support unit for your AT guns!

Last edited April 2, 2011 at 6:24 PM by IJoe

I still think it should be included for all units.

Assault Grenades is an ability held by KCH when Vetted to Vet 1 without doctrine. If you pick Blitzkrieg, it's essentially extending the ability to all infantry (Volks, Grens, Stormtroopers due to doctrine call-in and KCHs) without the need for vet.

In a similar context I think if you were going to add an ability such as suggested, it should be for Conscripts, Strelky, and Guards (Including their upgraded forms), and not just for ONE UNIT.

Yes the more skilled and trained troops should have the know how to use molotovs/grenades as well. after all if the conscripts are doing it, further up in the ranks the strelky would have known how to do this too

Dudes, adding it to ALL infantry is OP, no - OP!
Penals, (and up to 5 conscript squads you may have left), are the cheapest (and yet far from being useless) mainline infantry in the entire game. In fact, you can win the game with these alone + support barracks.
Thus adding this ability (damage egines with 50-75% chance for success) to molotovs doctrinally for, like, 3 CPs is just perfect.

Last edited April 2, 2011 at 8:01 PM by IJoe

But for just ONE UNIT?  ???

For christ sake if you think it's too OP to give the ability to other mainline infantry then you might as well find another ability. An ability that supports ONE NON-DOCTRINAL UNIT is nearly USELESS.

That's like having the ability:

Bridge Repair = 1 CP Allows your Ingenry to repair a bridge instantly

For one this ability could only be used on about 1/2 the maps because a majority of maps don't even have bridges. And While it's a nice ability, who said the bridges were going to be destroyed during a legitimate match? (Legitimate meaning not: "Okay, Lyon High Resource Annihilate, lets blow the bridges and build a sim city in the middle until we're ready to go spam tanks) PLUS on the added fact that only Ingenry could preform such actions. The practicality of the ability is useless because it doesn't apply to all (or at least a majority) of matches!

So when you talk about adding an ability to an infantry unit, no, let me correct myself, THE WEAKEST INFANTRY UNIT IN THE GAME, No less, THAT is why I highly disagree! It almost FORCES you to upgrade to penal troops, and which that is useless because by the time you can upgrade them you probably already have Strelky and Guards, which unlike penals can RETREAT.

If you're calling an idea similar to the Wehr's Assault Grenades (Only AT Based) OP, then you are essentially calling the Blitz doctrine broken. It's NOT. It's given to ALL INFANTRY for reasons, one of those primarily being so you don't have to BACKTECH to a weaker unit.

Unless of course EF should change assault grenades and make them only available to Volks, that we DO have to backtech.  ::)

IJoe wrote:
In fact, you can win the game with these alone + support barracks.

And you can certainly win with Volks alone + Support and Tanks eventually.

^^ Somehow there is a doctrine slot for ingenery flamers, right?  ::)
Think game-wise:
1) strelky are shit, unless with ppsh (100 mun): they are low health, highly suppressible (compared to penals/guards) that die like flies
2) guards are expensive
The hell with all of them - I go for cheap unsuppressible (not right now - it fxcking bugged!) infantry, that can chase away mortars/Hmgs, kill-off paks, re-crew and caprture. The rest is my support troops' job.

Last edited April 2, 2011 at 8:31 PM by IJoe

60 Muni, mind you. Strelky can also use their sprint abilit to charge HMGs, Mortars, and Paks.

But why bother with penals if RBS are the most powerful unit (aside from shock guards, which btw are unsuppressable at Vet 1 if you're looking for a better unit besides penals)

Ingenery Flamers are for a specifc purpose and support a general idea in the Doctrine: Urban Combat and Building Destruction. Without flames Ingenry are not commonly used as a main infantry unit but such ability DRAMATICALLY changes that, enabling Ingenry to become quite powerful and good support for your KV-2. Even more powerful are the Sturmovie Ingenery.

Cranialwizard wrote:
60 Muni, mind you. Strelky can also use their sprint abilit to charge HMGs, Mortars, and Paks.

But why bother with penals if RBS are the most powerful unit (aside from shock guards, which btw are unsuppressable at Vet 1 if you're looking for a better unit besides penals)

Ingenery Flamers are for a specifc purpose and support a general idea in the Doctrine: Urban Combat and Building Destruction. Without flames Ingenry are not commonly used as a main infantry unit but such ability DRAMATICALLY changes that, enabling Ingenry to become quite powerful and good support for your KV-2. Even more powerful are the Sturmovie Ingenery.

50/15 (muni/fuel) for penals - 100/40 + 60/0 per squad for strelky, and these sons of bitches still get suppressed, even under charge.
Guards are awfully expensive and take a game to get to. Vet 1 is yet to be reached. (BTW they are less suppressible than strelky right away)
penals/concripts that can stop armor - this sounds quite game-braking to me (BTW molotovs are effective at clearing enplacements, paks, buildings, hold-offs right away, with no additional spendings, unlike flamers)
Ingenery never get better than sturmovye (those too can have flamers, you know)

ADD-ON: "mind you" that hitting on tanks with low level infantry is far more in "support" of "a general idea in the Doctrine" (the defensive one), that any flamers will ever be, for their part.  ;)

Last edited April 2, 2011 at 9:54 PM by IJoe

good strategies here our comrade is suggesting penals instead of expensive RBS

Im going to test this out as well, however i fear late game there is no substitute for ppsh RBS. mass penal good?

REDcomissar wrote:
good strategies here our comrade is suggesting penals instead of expensive RBS

Im going to test this out as well, however i fear late game there is no substitute for ppsh RBS. mass penal good?

Penals are not a substitute to any sort of one-type-of-infantry spam. They are dedicated troops, not for lammers  ;D
Also, see http://easternfront.org/forums/index.php?topic=5461
Comrade! Be aware: with any core changes, like that one, your game WILL become incompatible with multiplayer, uless a companero, representing our hated foe, has the same file as a replacement of a standard one
It might even be necessary to make a complete re-installation of a mod (not that one of a game itself) to restore general multiplayer compatibility.

Last edited April 3, 2011 at 12:53 AM by IJoe

But you're forgeting the KV-2 is NOT for anti tank. It's a freaking mobile howitzer. It rips buildings into shreds, but not tanks. It's weakness is AT weaponry, and Dual Flames can both kill AT guns at ease and tear buildings to assist the KV-2. Upgraded they also provide a plenthora of AI assist, Unless grens are vetted they don't stand a chance VS 3 PPSHs and 2 Flames.

::)
What does KV-2 have to do with this all, really?
Anyway, molotovs can deal with paks as well, and not much worse. These can even finish off low-health (almost none) vehicles, unlike flamers. BTW, ingenery is a four-men squad, that cost 4 pop, while penals are twice that size for same pop, and with one ppsh. Outdated (by the upgrade) conscripts would benefit to AT as well.
If penals are ever to be made properly unsuppressible, as they are claimed to be, then they would also be a far better counter to paks, since a decent player would most likely cover those with some AI unit. Well, penals can deal with Hmgs for that instance.

Last edited April 3, 2011 at 2:13 AM by IJoe

Because you complained that Ingenery get a single upgrade, and the response to that is because it fits in with a general doctrine purpose, which is building destruction, infiltration, and city combat.

If you're going to be luring infantry out of buildings, KV-2s and Flame Ingys are great benefits.

If you're going to be attacking behind enemy lines and wrecking havoc upon enemy points, wiring buildings to blow, and disarming emplacements within city streets, Partisans are excellent for this type of combat, especially since you can make them appear out of frigging no where.

THAT'S what the relevance is, the upgrade fits with the doctrine's general idea.

What I'm getting at is that Conscripts are nearly useless after you unlock strelky or guards. Yes, guards are expensive but 6 SVT 40s > 4 Mosins. Even if you do upgrade them, it doesn't resolve the fact that there are other superior infantry types. And of course, everyone will have their favorites.

^^ Man, you're turning this all into a mess  >:(
First you started off with ingenery against conscripts/penals.
Then, when I replied, that those latter are fine support, you brough in KV-2 and that AT thing with ingenery. I argued, thatc conscripts/penals fit that role as well, and probably even better than ingenery.
Now you're bringin' in guards with svt... I can't keep up the pace, nor do I follow!..

But what the in a world does this all have to do with doctrinal molotovs  ???

---

Post Merge: [time]1301695799[/time]

---

Back to the topic: I think, giving molotovs a 50-75 percent doctrinal chance of damaging vehicles' engines would make a perfect replacement for the most useless "Not one step back". It even somewhat fits the idea in the name: weak infantry against heavy armor - this sounds very stoic and tenacious.

---

Post Merge: [time]1301756529[/time]

---

OR, MAYBE
Actually add these AT molotovs to all infantry types in exchange for the "retreat" ability.
But it's an awful lot of work, and I still think, it would be OP.

Last edited April 3, 2011 at 10:02 AM by IJoe

I don't think removing the retreat would solve it. You'd have to take something away...maybe take a guy away? (For example in the Penal squad one guy exchanges his rifle for a pistol and he's the one lighting the molotovs)

Cranialwizard wrote:
I don't think removing the retreat would solve it. You'd have to take something away...maybe take a guy away? (For example in the Penal squad one guy exchanges his rifle for a pistol and he's the one lighting the molotovs)

No-o-o...
That would be:
A) Bad taste,
B) Huge amount of (most unnecessary and pointless) work to do.

Will the soviets ever be able to use a halftrack ???

bencook7 wrote:
Will the soviets ever be able to use a halftrack ???

A doctrinal halftrack won't be useful ::).

blackbishop wrote:

bencook7 wrote:
Will the soviets ever be able to use a halftrack ???

A doctrinal halftrack won't be useful ::).

soviet no need halftrack only bigger guns