EFEastern Front Forum Archive
Read-only public archive · no login or tracking

Locked topic · 106 posts

Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Balance Discussion

#58647

Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Hey guys. Firstly I am sorry for my poor English skill as it is my second language.

And please don't get offended, since my English is too bad, sometimes it sound like I am being rude and telling people what to do. Please forgive me if that happend here. I never meant to offend anyone. Those are just merely our subjective opinion, and we just trying to discuss with everyone.

1. From the start of the game, the Soviet can build nothing but conscripts. Since half of them are unarmed, they perform poorly in a fight. And their combat effectiveness against infantry is only 2. I tried to capture a point once and encontered a term of German engineer. And my conscript term was wiped out by the engineer. (the engineers did not have the flamethrower). :-[
And most of them are getting slaughtered by the motor-bikes.

2. It is so expensive to upgrade, by the time I have the Red banner trooper, the German already have motorised machine gun units. And since both upgraded conscripts and the Red banner trooper have no anti-armo capabilities, I only find myself getting slaughtered. Also, the Red Banner trooper also have only 2 point of combat effectiveness against infantry. Aren't they suppose to be different with the consripts?

3. Since the Soviet can not have any armored support, I can only watch German take my land one after one. And since they can have the upper hand by doing so, I would have limited resource. So by the time I built my Tank factory, the German would have various panzer. And the worst part is even after I built the Tank farctory I still can not build Tanks because we have to upgrade it first. We often find ourselves have no resource to do so as Soviet Tanks are expensive.

4. If I somehow hold it out untill I can produce the T-34, I will only find my Tank be surrounded by a number of Panther. And they will Bi**h kick me up and down main street untill they gets bored and decide just charge into my base and destory me.

Since there are so many limitations on the Soviet produce line as we often have to upgrade the building before we can put it in use. It will take a lot of time and extra resources from us and that makes it fatal in the game.

We hope that if the design term agrees, and modify the game a little. Me and my friends who have less English skill have writen down a list of suggestions and hope we can discuss with everybody.

1. The base combat effectiveness of the un-upgraded Red Banner troop set to 3. But reduce the ungrade of PPsh-41 and the DP-42's combat effectiveness by 1. So the ungraded version has no difference. And also give them the RPG-43 and F-1 grenade. So they would not be slaughtered by the armored cars in the earlier of the game.

2. The shock guards as the most elite of the Soviet infantry,  it'll be nice if their number be reduced to 6, to make it look different with the Red Banner troop since no trooper can become a shock guard. ;) It will be easier for people to manage. And 2 of them use SMG plus one of them carry DP-42 for covering fire.

3. In the earlier stage of the game, Soviet troop are running arround with no support. We were hoping that we can free the medical truck so we can produce it before we upgrade the building.
Also, the Soviet is the only faction that does not have armored vehical in the earlier stage of the game to support its infantry. It would be cool if we add motorpool to the Soviet and allow them to build BA-10 and BA-46.

4. The Soviet outpost, the Soviet troopers can resupply themselves there. But there is no one in there and people can garrison it. This did not seem logical. We suggest that the outpost can not be garrisoned, and after you build it, you can see there are 3-4 logistic managers in there, and they can shoot with Mosin-Naggan rifle if enemies approach.

The main issue in the Soviet faction is just too many upgrade we have to do before we can do anything. It cost people a lot of time and resources and that make people who choose the Soviet loss its advantage. So the gap between the earlier stage weapon and later stage weapon are too big. There is almost no middle stage for the Soviet. And while Soviet is heavily rely on the infantry, they have no infantry support structure. Only of you choose the propanganda tactics you can build machine gun nest and trenches. Otherwise your infantry will be exposed out side and open for slaughter.

And the special tactics are weired too. The artilery for example: it says that it will cover a large area, and it indeed cover a large area. It practicaly wiped out my enemy, my aliance and me in one go. And it will charge 5 mins before I can use it again. It'll be good if we just use the normal artilery like the US one.

And we found some bugs too. The Soviet machine gun nest, after the gunner is killed, when you trying to send another guy in there, the nest icon will become a big purple square.

Thank for listening. If anyone thinks that what we said are not true. And what we experienced simply due to we had insufficient experience to play the Soviet faction, we hope you can teach us how to play it in correct way. Thank a lot.
Forum post image
#58650

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Let me guess, the conscripts were capping while the pioneers were shooting at them,didn't they? Or they were in red cover and the pios in green or whatever.

Anyhow, it just seems you're being severely outplayed (Multiple panthers hen you have 1 T34) and thusly t is hard to take your suggestions for face value.
One thing: The numbers under the unit pictures, they mean nothing. Literally nothing. So there's no balance problem there.
You really need to get a grip of the game first, play the tutorials, watch some replays, play some 1vs 1 automatch and you'll see your problems are not what they seem to be.
#58651

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

1. Version tag (Im guessing your reffering to 1.30 in this topic)

2. Conscripts are meant to be weak requiring the command squad to be effective and capping is about the only thing their good at apart from cannon fodder (ntm Analpirat's point)

3. Red banners are medium infantry and are good at their job if you want AT you need tank hunters and the ZIS gun's they arent like other factions where most inf can handle armour and inf they're very specific to what they can engage.

4. Again use Tank hunters and ZIS's dont try to counter their early armour with your own armour especially against PE bad mistake

5. T-34's arent an "I WIN" button support them they wont win 1v1 vs a panther.

And your english is fine btw :P

Forum post image

Last edited February 20, 2011 at 8:55 AM by Raider217

#58652

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Ok first of all, please follow the rules about posting and adding tags to the headline.

This pretty much sound like you're very new to the game and you're having trouble adjusting to the way soviets play

Please have a look some of the latest replays in our Replay section as they may help you understand how to use them better. I can assure you that soviets are anything but UP at the moment. Infact some nerfing is due in the next patch.
You definitely do not need to use all the upgrades, and they're there to provide different teching paths once you get used to them
R.I.P MrScruff - A genuine Good Guy and great artist
R.I.P Loran Korn - A very brave and talented guy
RAP NEWS http://thejuicemedia.com/?ref=nf
#58656

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Thank you guys for apply our message so quickly. It looks like we need to practice some more.

By the way, Mr Zerstörer. You said that :"Infact some nerfing is due in the next patch." What does "nerfing" mean? I check it and it is not in the dictionary.

Is that OK if you leak us some inside information about what's the next patch is going to like? Or when is it going to be out? Would the Soivet have their own speech? Because right now they don't. The T-34 is using the Sherman's speech and the T-70 is using the greyhoung's speech. Would Soviet also have the it's own winning and losing pictures? Can we have the Soviet ranks in our profile? And is the bug we mentioned earlier about the purple square machine gun nest icon going to be fixed? Would there be an animation when T-34 broken its own main gun?

Thank a lot for replying us. This forum is so friendly here. We weren't sure if anyone is going to anwser our newbies' stupid questions.
Forum post image
#58658

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Nerfing = Give less power to a unit/faction/ability.

ISU-152 will be nerfed. ;)
Forum post image

Last edited February 19, 2011 at 12:59 PM by Moonwalker

#58683

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

@Flanker1949

QuoteIs that OK if you leak us some inside information about what's the next patch is going to like? Or when is it going to be out?

We don't know yet :).

QuoteWould the Soviet have their own speech? Because right now they don't. The T-34 is using the Sherman's speech and the T-70 is using the greyhoung's speech.

Maybe in the future... if not at least at that time we could remove those speeches from Soviets units.

QuoteWould Soviet also have the it's own winning and losing pictures?

Nope, harcoded bug.

QuoteCan we have the Soviet ranks in our profile?

Nope, this is up to Relic.

QuoteAnd is the bug we mentioned earlier about the purple square machine gun nest icon going to be fixed?

Yes, we have it in our internal changelog list for the next version.

QuoteWould there be an animation when T-34 broken its own main gun?

Yeah, this will be added in the future, for all soviet vehicles/tanks. Don't know when, but it's planned.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#58816

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Wow!!!
Thank you for anwsering all our questions. This is definely one of the most friendly forum we have been to. And Mr Moonwalker, thank you for the heads up too.
Byt the way? what tool are you guys using to make the mod? I am not a very talented computer person, but we do have a unit in our university specificly teach people how to make game mod. And I know the lectureer. Me and my friends are hoping may be we can make some other mod like Italian force in north African or the Chinese Red Army (maybe not this one since the Chinese Red Army did not fight German in Europe)
We have found a website that is a encyclopedia on World War 2 vehicals:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tanks-light/t-80.asp
Hope it can provide some assistance for you guys in future mod modification.

Almost forgot, may I ask if there is a planing to create Soviet structures in the future patch? Because they are currently using the Americans structures with a new texture.

Thank you guys again. If you guys need any assistance from us, just let us know.
Forum post image
#58818

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

yeah i think russia is a bit weak at the start of the game.
yesterday we died cuase of an inf rush....
the conscripts could not hold thos huge army of inf.
Real Russian power
barrel to barrel front to front (no flank post)
one IS2 tank
confirmed 3 kills without dieing
tiger tank (no veteran) status owned
tiger tank (lvl 1 veteran) status owned
king tiger tank (lvl 3 veteran) status owned
Thad all in one 3v3 match
That's real Russian power
#58821

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Flanker1949 wrote:
Byt the way? what tool are you guys using to make the mod? I am not a very talented computer person, but we do have a unit in our university specificly teach people how to make game mod. And I know the lectureer. Me and my friends are hoping may be we can make some other mod like Italian force in north African or the Chinese Red Army (maybe not this one since the Chinese Red Army did not fight German in Europe)


For modding CoH -

3Ds Max 8
Corsix Mod Studio
Object Editor
RGM Importer
Corsix model exporter
Photoshop
Photoshop DDS Plugin

And some other stuff I may have forgotten. I personally use all those ^

Flanker1949 wrote:Almost forgot, may I ask if there is a planing to create Soviet structures in the future patch? Because they are currently using the Americans structures with a new texture.


Its planned for the future, but right now is not our priority.
Forum post image
Smells like. Victory.
#58827

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Thank you, Mr BurroDiablo.
And I don't know if this is a bug or not. Sometimes my base stoped or reduced to regenerate ammunition. My supply line isn't broken and my enemies are all regular German army, not the Panzer elite. So they are not supose to have that "scratch the earth" (I don't think I spelled it right) capabilities.

And hi there, firefox126. I totally agree with you. Soviet is weak at the start. But if we somehow hold it to the end, then the Soviet will be almost unstopable, both infantry and Armor. I have tried, there is no chance for someone to stop a full scale Soviet assault. We put the Red Banner trooper with tank hunters, upgrade them with SMGs and MGs, then mix them with T-34 and IS-2 with the support from the Katyusha. The enemies can either die for their country or surrender. :)
Except it is hard for us to hold out in the earlier stage of the game though.
Forum post image
#58830

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Advanced Soviet units have a munitions upkeep, like the manpower upkeep of all other factions, that reduces their munitions income as the number of units on the field increases. The panzer elite ability is "scorched earth" which disables a neutral or friendly point and must be repaired to be able to be used again.

Soviets are only slightly weaker than wehrmacht right at the start of the game but have an extremely powerful midgame. Their snipers, strelky and command squad vet are currently much more powerful than anything the wehrmacht player has at that stage. Their late game is on par, with both sides having excellent tanks, infantry and vet. In fact, Soviets probably have the edge in late game too since snipers are so epic.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#58930

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Oh, I see. Is there a user's manuel can tell me that which unit will cost me ammo unkeep?
But I think it is a bug as well. This morning when I played it, while no combat have occured, no lost of land and no production, my ammo number have changed itself. I think it have something to do with the fact that I ticked "run progrem in window xp". After I unticked it, it went fine. Plus the aliance AI is stupider and the Axie AI is smarter when I ticked "runs in window xp".
Forum post image
#58931

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

I believe all the tanks/vehicles (includes katyushas), mortars, AT guns, medic truck and firebase have a munitions upkeep. The exact values should be found in the 1.2 changelog.

There shouldn't be any difference between compatability mode and running it normally.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#58936

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

That is probably not fair now.
People who play the Soviet have to keep a large amout of troops in the earlier stage since we are weak as you point it out earlier. But in that case we will not be able to have any production of ammo due the ammo upkeep to upgrade out buildings and troops. How can we hold out the middle stage of the game then?
Forum post image
#58941

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Soviet abilities are free remember. A Soviet player will have more munitions midgame than an American player since he will have to pay for everything. Think about it, a Soviet player only has to pay 50 munitions to upgrade his conscripts with all rifles and free molotovs. That's equivalent to just 2 US nades. Troops don't have the upkeep either so it doesn't effect midgame. It's more of a lategame nerf to stop massive tank attacks while doing limitless IL-2 runs etc. Soviets have to make a choice on what to spend their munitions on just like the rest of the factions. They just do it differently.

Trust me when I say Soviets should have no trouble midgame. Katyushas, snipers and strelky are all extremely good in this period.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#58947

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

I do trust you. You guys have much more experience than me. But just since German normal AI always come out with a massive strike very fast. They use infantry supported by machine gunner, sniper, IFV, and stunk. It is hard  to build enough AT united by that time. And if we start to focus on buliding AT unit, we wouldn't be able to go capture lands. And if we don't go capture the lands, we would have hard time upgrade our units and buildings. Specially on a map like Kursk where there are no points for you to hold and you just can not consentrate too many of your troops at one point. If it's a map like Leningrad we wouldn't have to worry about it. We just go blow up a few bridge and hold on the last pass and wait unit we have enough upgrade and troops to overrun the enemy. Since the Soviet can not even blow up a bridge, we have to go and babwire and tank trap the bridge.
Forum post image
#58967

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Soviets used to float muni more than Brits mid late game. This gave way to spamming a gazillion mines(for those who know how good they are and don't forget to use them) as well as ll the arty abilities which were always available when the player needed them without any worry.
R.I.P MrScruff - A genuine Good Guy and great artist
R.I.P Loran Korn - A very brave and talented guy
RAP NEWS http://thejuicemedia.com/?ref=nf
#58977

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Flanker1949 wrote:
I do trust you. You guys have much more experience than me. But just since German normal AI always come out with a massive strike very fast. They use infantry supported by machine gunner, sniper, IFV, and stunk. It is hard  to build enough AT united by that time. And if we start to focus on buliding AT unit, we wouldn't be able to go capture lands. And if we don't go capture the lands, we would have hard time upgrade our units and buildings. Specially on a map like Kursk where there are no points for you to hold and you just can not consentrate too many of your troops at one point. If it's a map like Leningrad we wouldn't have to worry about it. We just go blow up a few bridge and hold on the last pass and wait unit we have enough upgrade and troops to overrun the enemy. Since the Soviet can not even blow up a bridge, we have to go and babwire and tank trap the bridge.

Try changing the game types you play.  It might change your perspective on balance.  Compstompers who play on Leningrad and other noob maps will never be taken seriously on balance.
#59094

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

It a matter of who can blow the bridge before the enemy comes kinda thing.
The Russians think there sooo tough, wait till the Ostheer comes...

Coh Name: Seeme
#59139

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerfed


1. nerfed 420 up, 25 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
The term "nerfing" comes from the online gaming world of Ultima Online.

At one point in the game, the developers reduced the power of swords in melee combat.

This resulted in players complaining that it was like they were hitting each other with nerf bats, not swords.

From then on, if ever something gets made less worth while than it had been originally, it is considered 'nerfed'
"Oh man, they reduced the dmg on the berserker class and now it's totally nerfed!"

"Damn, the Devs nerfed those axe's real good!"
by Dave Elliott Jan 11, 2005 share this
2. nerfed 88 up, 40 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
v: something that worked at one time, but was changed (usually for the worse) by someone who did not understand that particular thing's usefulness. You used to have something cool, but now your stuff
suxors. Often refers to MMOFPS's or MMORPG's, when the game designers change in-game rules and they screw stuff up.
"That game used to pwn, but now it blows. They took out the best part."
"Whatever I was doing, I'm not doing it anymore, I got nerfed."
"Our junk was so much better before the designers all nerfed it."
by CmdrAwesome Dec 29, 2004 share this
3. Nerfed 33 up, 24 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
1.To make something pointless whereas before it was productive
2.To Stop something working

Usually a term used in online games
'' Aww Gawd They Nerfed My Fave Farming spot''
nerf nef ner nerfed crap shit
by James94 Feb 24, 2008 share this

4. NERFED 8 up, 104 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
I've always wondered what exactly it means - in context it's code that's been deliberatly broken or functionality removed from a program in order to sell a higher priced alternative or also used as a general description of code that no longer works (after patching or updating)
I think it's something like "Not Even Really Functioning Effectivly Disabled/Destroyed" or something similar
You know, there are many people in the country today who, through no fault of their own, are sane. Some of them were born sane. Some of them became sane later in their lives. It is up to people like you and me who are out of our tiny little minds to try and help these people overcome their sanity
#59155

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

But there are a lot of the unit which does not have ablity and yet we have to suppend ammunitions to upkeep them.

And the Soviet is the only one without suppressing capability. Unlike other factions, they have machine gun. I tried to use the DP-27 to suppress the enemy, but it never worked. And the Soviet machine gun nest is still using the obsolated Maxim M1910? I thought they have much better stuff like the Vladimirov KPV-14.5mm.

Especialy when you versus the pazer elite. They have powerful infantry since the beginning of the game plus they have a lot very good anti-infantry vehical was well. Soviet will take a good beating. Especially since half of the conscripts are unarmed. Can we at least give them a Nagant revolver?
Forum post image
#59227

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Blob control is the role of the sniper with his callin arty. That's part of the reason he's so dominant and important to tech to at the moment.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#59232

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Also I somewhat disagree with the muni upkeep of soviet (which break the fun of playing 'em), I think however that soviet should be nerfed in mid-late game due to their very powerful combo.

Flanker1949 wrote:
But there are a lot of the unit which does not have ablity and yet we have to suppend ammunitions to upkeep them.

And the Soviet is the only one without suppressing capability. Unlike other factions, they have machine gun. I tried to use the DP-27 to suppress the enemy, but it never worked. And the Soviet machine gun nest is still using the obsolated Maxim M1910? I thought they have much better stuff like the Vladimirov KPV-14.5mm.

Especialy when you versus the pazer elite. They have powerful infantry since the beginning of the game plus they have a lot very good anti-infantry vehical was well. Soviet will take a good beating. Especially since half of the conscripts are unarmed. Can we at least give them a Nagant revolver?


Hm. Soviet in EF are based on "ennemy at the gates" movie, so conscript will remained as they are ;D

Seriously: conscript are very cheap, and so is their upgrade which enable them molotovs and full rifles. Even after their upgrade, they are still very cheap for what they do.
Against PE you should really try to obtain PTRD infantry ASAP, as they perform quite well against PE.
"Du sublime au ridicule, il n'y a qu'un pas"
-Napoléon Bonaparte
#59237

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Re: Dennis
But we hardly ever get a chance to upgrade the sniper with that ability since I have to keep a large number of troopes to keep the pressure on the enemy. Because the upkeep I needed for my troop, my ammo regeneration rate is often 0. My last game for example, I had 5 T-34s and 3 IS-2s, 2 Katiushas, 1 conscript team and 2 engineer teams. By the time the game ended, I manage to capture all of the ammo depots and build outpost on all them. But my ammo regeneration rate was still 0.

Re: Red Stinger
Yes, you are right. But in the "Enemy at the gate" movie, the conscripts are allowed to pick up whatever weapon they find. It can be pistol, rifle, SMG, MG, rocket launchers and so on. But in the game they are not allowed pick up pistols and rifles, and the enemy hardly ever drop their MGs and RLs.

Since you mentioned the tank hunter and its PTRD, I just could not understand that the tank hunter need to cost 8 manpower? Think about this way, the tank hunter is a 4 man group and they have only limited anti-tank capability. An AT-gun cost only 3 manpower and it is far more capable that the tank hunters. Of course that you may argu that the AT-gun has very limited anti-personal capability. But if I put a conscript with an AT-gun together that well make them far more capable that the tank hunter, and a conscript term and an AT-gun only cost you 7 manpower. So no one would ever bother to train the tank hunter. So we just want to suggest that the tank hunter only cost 4 manpowers.

By the way, I have got another WW2 weapon encyclopedia. Just post here to share with everybody.

From the encyclopedia, it shows that Soviet used a AT-gun which is 45mm, how come the our in game AT-gun is still using the 37mm one?
As I recall, in game we upgrade the AT-gun, may I suggest to make the upgraded version of the AT-gun 45mm.  :)
Thanks for the attention.
Post Merge: [time]1298637228[/time]

Ah.... >:(
The encyclopedia file is too big, 70MB.
OK if anyone want it, please leave you name and e-mail address below and I'll send it too you.
Or if anyone know that I can upload it somewhere else pubic for everyone to download.
Forum post image

Last edited February 25, 2011 at 12:33 PM by Flanker1949

#59238

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

My common build order (standard resources) with Soviets is:

Ingenery (Build barracks/cap) - Command Squad - Conscript X3 - Support Barracks (Long range upgrade) - Sniper team (arty upgrade)

This is usually timed so that by the time the sharpshooters are out I have the 125 munitions to upgrade it. This occurs 2-3 minutes into the game and he usually lives the whole game. Yet again it comes down to the gametype you're playing. Don't play against coms where your entire force is tanks. Even with 0 munitions, Soviets can use most of their abilities. This is the price you pay for tank spamming.

Really, this should not be in the balance forum since you honestly don't have the qualifications to make balance assessments. Balance cannot be gauged from games against coms.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.

Last edited February 25, 2011 at 12:57 PM by GodlikeDennis

#59252

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Don't worry fellas! Conscripts should be fixed on the next patch, so armed soldiers can pass their rifle to the next soldier when die and unarmed conscripts won't rush the enemy (or at least that's what we have planned).
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#59292

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Wow, that's great news.
Forum post image
#59307

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

finally
Forum post image

Lord wrote:
OSTHEER IS DONE WHEN IT'S DONE!
#59317

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

the balance issues and infantry rushes (if they were in skirmish) were probaly due to the improved AI and also i agree that the ammount of upgrades you need to get for some units are insane and that you have to upgrade to produce the tank and support however i do know there are powerful but maybe shorter upgrade times and lower upgrade cost would balance this out

can i have the encyclopedia and also is the name necsasarry anyway
Don't post email adds plz name Joshua
You can get more of what you what with a kind word and a gun than you can with just a kind word
Steam Name:JScott17
Relic Online: JScott17

Last edited February 27, 2011 at 11:06 AM by Zerstörer

#59322

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Flanker1949 wrote:
Wow, that's great news.


+1  8)
Forum post image
#59327

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

CrazyScott17 wrote:
can i have the encyclopedia and also is the name necsasarry anyway
Don't post email adds plz name Joshua


Hi, Josh. Due to the big size of the file I was unable to hotmail it to you. However I have created a torrent for everyone. (this is my first time create a torrent file, please let me know if there is any issue)
Forum post image

Last edited February 27, 2011 at 11:05 AM by Zerstörer

#59328

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Uhh Josh, word of advice. Never post your email on a public forum. You should go back and edit it out.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#59337

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Ah, I am so sorry. I was unaware of this issue. A million pardon.

And hope you successfully downloaded the file, J. If you encountered any problem, please let me know.
Forum post image
#59558

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?


Personally, I'm still having a hell of a time with Russia, so I'm definitely in agreement that Russia is overpowered, I'm just not sure its only slightly. 

Point is taken that Russia is weaker early game, and this probalby should be the point where wehr gets an edge capable of staving off the brutal onslaughts that are likely to follow as russia gets steadily stronger...controlling the early game certainly isn't going to put russia out of it(I just had a remarkable game where my opponent went early snipers, lost 2 squads to 2 of my snipers, and his command squad while I was entirely intact, and then proceeded to turn everything back around with first one, and then 3 t90's, which outclassed my feeble attempts to keep up a decent vehicle deterrent-even though I did have AT popping out when the t-90 hit the field)


So yes, russia is supposed to start out weaker, and have a hard time getting a foothold on the map, maybe.  I find too many of my games don't go that way, and the reason is just how effective these cheap units of russia's become when they are put into a building.  It makes it really easy to hold desirable points with very little. Snipers are way  too slow at getting thesse large squads out, mg's are ill suited to deal with units in buildings, especially because of the punch these units pack at long range when garrisoned.

Flamers work of course, but russia can deter attacks from an area easily, even before 50 munitions is available, making it hard to actually deprive him of resources, and even the flamers can be easily dealt with, given the surprising range and strength of the russian rifles while garrisoned.  massing volks probably works as well, but it's inflexible, and even if this is the answer, it seems problematic that ruissan play should require it.

This condition is actually fine...it's kind of interesting that these units just work so  much better when in buildngs(partly because they don't charge in to die the way they would on foot), except that it makes the mid-game against russia a nightmare, and late-game a passive experience of just watching in abject horror.


maybe some of the problem i'm having  is the vet, which will be changing,

and then some of the problem is in the effectiviness of tank hunters against infantry, which will aslo be changing(though I think they are still too good against vehicles...and so are guards for that matter, these definitely aren't PE style At grenades)

and for an army as mobile as russia, I find the retreat to medic truck also quite maddening(if cool), because a very powerful, fast blob, can be anywhere at any given moment.  given how badly i'm getting owned by everything under the sun, i'm not yet positive what the justification of this added shock value is)

T-90's make me wet myself currently.  I'm not sure how much AT it takes to handle 3 of these, but I never seem to have enough.  This is probalby a problem with my early game trials against russia.  would be nice if they did less than they do to units in cover..so that their very presence didn't push off grens(or just annihilate them in moments).  Cover does help, but it doesn't seem to help enough.

Anyway,

love the game, love the mod, but the matchup is quite exasperating at the moment, leaving me to speculate wildly at where exactly this seeming imbalance is originating from.


Yeah, I know, its all in my head.  I'm actually fine with that explanation.  hopefully after the retail beta goes live you guys can find some players to post some replays at their more impressive  level so I can finally get a handle on where I'm going wrong.

Last edited March 3, 2011 at 6:37 AM by Joshua9

#59638

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Hi, Joshua9. I partially agree with you.
(I hope the administrator can put this topic into the Red Army Suggestions section after this. After weeks of non-stopping online battling with human players in various maps, I have organised some suggestions.)

The part I disagree with you is that the enemy snipers can easily take out my teams in the building, and in a lot of map, the building is usually far away from the strategic point. So the garrison the buildings can not secure a point.

I have a few suggestions for the modification of the game to rebalance this great mod.

1: We all agree that the Soviet is a weak faction in the earlier stage of the game. The main reason for this is that the Soviet has the weakest infantry at the beginning. Mr Black bishop have told us that he is going to fix the issue of the conscripts. That is a great news, but I still suggest that the unarmed conscripts should be equiped with a Naggan revolver.

2: After the upgrade of the conscripts, all conscripts will be armed with a commissar equiped with a SMG, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. Now let us have a look at the Red Banner trooper (sorry, I can't remember the name). 6 men are all using the Mosin rifle, 1 man unarmed, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. As you can see, the upgraded conscripts are more powerful than the Red Banner trooper. Plus most importantly, the conscripts has cocktail and they only you 4 manpower to upkeep while the Red Banner trooper cost you 7. So in this case, who would train the Red Banner trooper? Therefore, I suggest that we increase the base of the combat effectiveness of the Red Banner trooper by 1 as they are the actual Soviet infantry, not untrained 3 weeks wonderer like the conscipts. But in the same many, we reduce the effect of the upgrade by 1. So if you upgrade them with the PPsh-41, the CE only go up by 3 (but only 3 men of the team will receive the SMG, not all of them). And if you upgrade them with the DP-27, the CE only go up by 1, but with the supressing capability like the Bren. Plus, they are the only basic infantry without AT capability, I was thinking that at least we can give them a cocktail.

3. And the shock guards CE should also be higher than a Red Banner trooper since they are the elite, at list they should be a equivalent of the panzer trooper, so we can upgrade their CE by 1. Otherwise, everyone will just go and train the Red Banner trooper, becaue they can by upgraded with SMG and make their CE up to 6. And it doesn't make any sence that an elite unit like them, only one man has a SMG. Do you think we can give another one or two of them a PPs-43?

4. About the tank hunters. They cost us 8 manpowers to upkeep, yet they only has a embarrass AT CE of 2. I normally let one team of conscripts go along with the AT cannon. Because a conscript team and an AT gun only cost me 7 manpower and they are much more powerful than the tank hunters in every espects. So in this issue I have 2 suggestions:
(1) the tank hunters  only cost us 4 manpower to upkeep, one man per manpower.

(2) the size of the tank hunters are reduced into a 2 men team, cost us 4 manpowers to upkeep. This way, it is much earlier for players to organise.

5. In the later stage of the game, the Soviet is too powerful for all factions. Its IS-2 can put an King Tiger into shame. Plus that German player can only call one King Tiger tank. My suggestion is that the Soviet can only have one or two IS-2 at a time, and if the German player lost its Tiger or King Tiger, they are allowed to call another one.

6. The Soviet T-34/76. As I record this tank's main gun is not as impressive as his counterparts. And the T-34/76 and the T-34/85 has no difference in the combat effectiveness. So we want to suggest that we reduce the T-34/76's AT CE or anti-building CE by 1.

7. About the panzer elite, it is a bit weak for players who did not choose the anti-tank tactics. The panzer elite is very fast and powerful in the earlier game. So they can pressurise the enemy and corner them. But if you fail to do so, you will have hard time stop enemy tanks since most of their units are lightly armored. And you have to purchase 2 tank in the same time which cost you 1000 unit of supply. So we suggest that we enable the elephant tanks for them in the later stage of the game.

Those are our suggestions based on out gaming experience, hope everyone agree with us. And we are open for feed back as well. Thanks.

Forum post image
#59641

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Flanker1949 wrote:
Hi, Joshua9. I partially agree with you.
(I hope the administrator can put this topic into the Red Army Suggestions section after this. After weeks of non-stopping online battling with human players in various maps, I have organised some suggestions.)

The part I disagree with you is that the enemy snipers can easily take out my teams in the building, and in a lot of map, the building is usually far away from the strategic point. So the garrison the buildings can not secure a point.

I have a few suggestions for the modification of the game to rebalance this great mod.

1: We all agree that the Soviet is a weak faction in the earlier stage of the game. The main reason for this is that the Soviet has the weakest infantry at the beginning. Mr Black bishop have told us that he is going to fix the issue of the conscripts. That is a great news, but I still suggest that the unarmed conscripts should be equiped with a Naggan revolver. No need. Conscripts are already decent troops. The only reason they seem so ineffective is the AI bug. Good players are able to micro them to mitigate the effect of the bad AI and can perform decently early game. They are still much weaker than volks though as intended. Also, it adds the Enemy at the Gates feeling of having unarmed troops running along which adds to the cinematic feel of the battles.

2: After the upgrade of the conscripts, all conscripts will be armed with a commissar equiped with a SMG, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. Now let us have a look at the Red Banner trooper (sorry, I can't remember the name). 6 men are all using the Mosin rifle, 1 man unarmed, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. As you can see, the upgraded conscripts are more powerful than the Red Banner trooper. Plus most importantly, the conscripts has cocktail and they only you 4 manpower to upkeep while the Red Banner trooper cost you 7. So in this case, who would train the Red Banner trooper? Therefore, I suggest that we increase the base of the combat effectiveness of the Red Banner trooper by 1 as they are the actual Soviet infantry, not untrained 3 weeks wonderer like the conscipts. But in the same many, we reduce the effect of the upgrade by 1. So if you upgrade them with the PPsh-41, the CE only go up by 3 (but only 3 men of the team will receive the SMG, not all of them). And if you upgrade them with the DP-27, the CE only go up by 1, but with the supressing capability like the Bren. Plus, they are the only basic infantry without AT capability, I was thinking that at least we can give them a cocktail. The "stats" you are quoting from the UI are meaningless. Conscript mosins do 7 damage I believe and have quite poor accuracy compared to strelky mosins which do about 12 damage I think and have much better accuracy. They are (will be) used for different purposes and are not comparable. Strelky will be your mainline infantry though conscripts will be a cheap flanking force that will be immune to suppression when upgraded, giving more strength against MGs. Strelky weapon upgrades are powerful and in line with other faction's brens and MP40s etc.

3. And the shock guards CE should also be higher than a Red Banner trooper since they are the elite, at list they should be a equivalent of the panzer trooper, so we can upgrade their CE by 1. Otherwise, everyone will just go and train the Red Banner trooper, becaue they can by upgraded with SMG and make their CE up to 6. And it doesn't make any sence that an elite unit like them, only one man has a SMG. Do you think we can give another one or two of them a PPs-43? Guards are a powerful unit because they have tools at their disposal against any threat. Their rifles are quite decent but they are not assault troops like PPSh strelky. They are more like vetted PGs with lots of upgrades. Effective at most ranges, fairly easy to blob but also flexible and able to perform multiple roles like clearing buildings, or using AT nades. They are extremely good for their price.

4. About the tank hunters. They cost us 8 manpowers to upkeep, yet they only has a embarrass AT CE of 2. I normally let one team of conscripts go along with the AT cannon. Because a conscript team and an AT gun only cost me 7 manpower and they are much more powerful than the tank hunters in every espects. So in this issue I have 2 suggestions:
(1) the tank hunters  only cost us 4 manpower to upkeep, one man per manpower. By manpower, I assume you mean population. Population isn't really a balancing factor since it doesn't mean anything unless you're capped, which only really happens in compstomps/bridge maps. That said, I have no idea why Zerst decided changing population was a good idea.

(2) the size of the tank hunters are reduced into a 2 men team, cost us 4 manpowers to upkeep. This way, it is much earlier for players to organise.

5. In the later stage of the game, the Soviet is too powerful for all factions. Its IS-2 can put an King Tiger into shame. Plus that German player can only call one King Tiger tank. My suggestion is that the Soviet can only have one or two IS-2 at a time, and if the German player lost its Tiger or King Tiger, they are allowed to call another one. IS-2s are expensive and extremely ineffective against infantry. Panthers may be slightly outclassed by them in a slugfest but are more mobile and better against infantry. Axis AT in general is better than the other factions so use PaKs and shreks to support your units when you fight tank battles. KT and panther will easily put 2 IS-2s to shame.

6. The Soviet T-34/76. As I record this tank's main gun is not as impressive as his counterparts. And the T-34/76 and the T-34/85 has no difference in the combat effectiveness. So we want to suggest that we reduce the T-34/76's AT CE or anti-building CE by 1. I don't know what this CE is that you keep mentioning. T-34/76 is rather ineffective against anything heavier than P4.

7. About the panzer elite, it is a bit weak for players who did not choose the anti-tank tactics. The panzer elite is very fast and powerful in the earlier game. So they can pressurise the enemy and corner them. But if you fail to do so, you will have hard time stop enemy tanks since most of their units are lightly armored. And you have to purchase 2 tank in the same time which cost you 1000 unit of supply. So we suggest that we enable the elephant tanks for them in the later stage of the game. Elefants will be in the OH. Panzer elite has always had a weakness to early light vehicles. Use the AT halftrack, marders or infantry halftracks in combination with shreks. AT half kills the mobility which is the greatest threat, marders do loads of damage but are easily flanked (that's what shreks are used for) and shreks in infantry halftracks are good for chasing down the vehicles on low health, since they can still fire on the move from the back of the HT.

Those are our suggestions based on out gaming experience, hope everyone agree with us. And we are open for feed back as well. Thanks.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#59674

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?


Hi Flanker,

thanks for the reply, but my complaint was that Russia seems overpowered to me, not underpowered.

godlikedennis,

if you're getting in some good games, is there a chance that you can post a couple replays?  My frustration could be out of making some bad choices as wehrmacht, rather than imbalance, but it would be nice to know what the good choices are.
#59739

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

What's your RO name?

I would gladly play you anytime since it's getting more and more difficult to get games (in my timezone). Unfortunately most of my games have been in the next patch version testing for the devs so I have no replays saved but there should be at least a couple around in the replays section. Chancellor plays T2 terror well, look up his. There might even be a couple games against me.

My preferred strat against SU is T2-T4 blitz, substituting grens for stormtroopers. I find T3 underwhelming.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#59741

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?


would be glad to play at some point...name is josh9 in game...i'm pretty mediocre though...me and my friend play at about the same level...russia is just breaking that balance for us right now
#60024

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?


the good news is I keep walking back my frustration with russia as we play more. 

I think I was jumping to t2 too early(about the time I do against america) and that transition was giving russia the field advantage he needed to make that early t-90 a guaranteed posibility, and then it was just a choice between it or the earlier sniper, both of which really make me scramble.

Also, the straight jump to t2 seems really possible against russia, and halftracks really make their lives miserable early, not to mention 3 or 4 grens following.

I'm getting used to the damage the t-90 does.  I think it should die slightly easier than it does now.  it really seems to take a punishment, definitely seems to take more damage than a skirted m8, from my unscientific experience, which might be a reasonable trade-off if it were just anti-infantry, but it is also effective against pumas, and is horribly horribly effective against infantry.  At the rate it takes to kill them, a couple fausts will not make it limp away, which means that if I don't already have some AT out when it hits, game is pretty much over.

I'm managing the tank hunter threat much better than I used to, so with their minor anti-infantry nerf to the ptrd, i'll probably be happy.

My new complaint is SU-85 and SU-100 armor.  I'm cool with their front armor being really tough, but their side armor is also monsterous.  my friend spammed about 4 of the su-100's and really did a number on everything i had.  I'd gone t-3 with storms.  after getting some vet for the misery he'd caused, he engaged my base, and my storms got to the side of a vet 2 Su-100, and were allowed to shoot it about 6 times, to negligable effect.  I also had somebody shooting shreks at it from the other side, but probably hitting the front armor.  I certainly could have used some paks, as they seem pretty effective against these vehicles, but I would expect the shreks to be a better counter.

Then there's that bleeping air-strike again.  I had a protracted engagement with my friend on langres.  We were both building tanks and losing them, which apparently was a great benefit to him because he wasn't getting too mauled on munitions upkeep.  He literally used that air-strike 7 times that game, one after the other, after the other...its a much better ability than straffing run, and yet it costs the same ammount.  I would appreciate a munitions cost of about 200 per use(though 225 would suit me better).  it can be a game making ability, even in a single use, which is as it should be, but as a perpetual contribution, there's no challenge in it.
#60028

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

In short
T-90 has M-8 armor and similar (not sure if it is the same) HP. Youre right when saing that you need any kind of gun to counter them becouse its really hard to hit a moving M-8 with a Shreck.
SU-85 and SU-100 both have Hetzer armor. That makes them really weak to rear hits, even to upgunned Pumas but OP to Stugs and Marders. This will probably change since the axis dont have much fast flanking tanks
My Ostheer concept.
#60066

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Agree with Paciat. SU-85s aren't as good as they once were since their damage output was balanced and their armour isn't so great. Shreks actually are the counter. SU-100s won't be around next patch anyway.

The airstrike was, and always will be, imbalanced. It's simply too powerful to use, even once. The cooldown was broken in one of the recent patches too I believe, allowing it to be used again almost straight away.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#60085

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?


cool, so if nothing else, there will no longer be su-100(happy day),

and they will probably fix the cool-down on the air-strike, if not the munitions cost. 

I can look forward to those changes
#60350

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

thanks guys for replying me, especially for the Dennis to anwsering me our questions. But there is one more thing I want to know is I could not understand this part of your anwser to well since my English problem: "Population isn't really a balancing factor since it doesn't mean anything unless you're capped, which only really happens in compstomps/bridge maps. That said, I have no idea why Zerst decided changing population was a good idea."
So we still voting for the reduce of the population for the tank hunters.
Because it is really big disadvantage for us in a pop-caped game.


And to Joshua9:
What do you mean??!!!! I just left the forum for a few days and you are voting to deleted the SU-100. Did we do anything to you in the past life??? The Soviet is weaking enough for the first half of the game especially their lacks of AT capability.
Forum post image
#60367

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

By no means Soviets are weak. Whether the SU-100 is going to be kept or discarded isn't going to be discussed here. For now wait until the next patch is released and then express your opinion after reading it's changelog.

There's no reason to discuss uncommitted changes.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#60411

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Flanker1949 wrote:
...
"Population isn't really a balancing factor since it doesn't mean anything unless you're capped, which only really happens in compstomps/bridge maps. That said, I have no idea why Zerst decided changing population was a good idea."
...


Basically I mean that changing the pop cap doesn't REALLY balance a unit since in 1v1 balancing (the primary balance concern), pop cap is rarely an issue since you don't really come close to it often. The same can usually be said for 2v2AT as well, the other realm where balance is important.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#60890

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

And why is the Soviet tank hunters are using the British AT rifle??? The Soviet AT rifle is way better than the British one. The PTRS-41 can penetrate 25mm steel at the range of 500m. While the British BOY AT rifle can only penetrate 21mm (0.827 in) at 302m (330yards).
Forum post image
#60894

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Tank hunters will be getting their PTRD model soon.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#60913

Re: Does anyone think that the Soviet is a bit too weak?

Flanker1949 wrote:
And why is the Soviet tank hunters are using the British AT rifle??? The Soviet AT rifle is way better than the British one. The PTRS-41 can penetrate 25mm steel at the range of 500m. While the British BOY AT rifle can only penetrate 21mm (0.827 in) at 302m (330yards).


Because gameplay has priority over realism.
Forum post image