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

Locked topic · 84 posts

[[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Balance Discussion

#71516

[[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

The conscripts were praised as amazing in the donors forum with their veterancy. Unfortunately I have a hard time seeing them being good at anything. Most of my time I have them back at some point reinforcing them or healing them, as they die of practically right away.

Now, I do realise that they are supposed to be bad, but it leaves the soviets at at such a disadvantage early on. The Wehrmacht have MG teams, snipers and the absolutely fantastic MP40 upgrade. A player with any kind of micro skill can easily beat the soviets with a MG and a mp40 volks squad.

I also realise that the molotov cocktail is supposed to be a counter to these problems, but at 50 munitions and 20 fuel (I think it's roughly that fuel cost at least) it's much better to tech for a sniper/AT gun or a PTRD/mortar squad which will get the job of clearing out those pesky MGs much faster than a costly charge and throwing a molotov.

I am also concerned with their veterancy progression. From what I gather they earn recrewing capabilities at vet 1, a full set of rifles at vet 2 and become un-suppressable at vet 3. I've so far managed to get a squad to vet 1 in a match, and that was at the very end destroying the enemy's base. Even if one puts a great deal of effort into vetting them the unit is still far weaker than easier options.

I'd like to suggest changing the vet 1 and vet 2 bonuses around. This will make it easier to give the squad veterancy, and it does make sense in terms of weapon experience. The squad starts off with minimal training and only a handful of guns. At vet 1 they've managed to acquire regular rifles (perhaps even looted kar98k's?), and at vet 2 they've earned enough combat experience to know how to operate a heavy weapon.

I'd also like to suggest removing the molotov's munitions cost, and instead giving it a manpower cost, on par with the Panzer Elite's incendiary grenades.
#71519

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Dot.Shadow wrote:
The conscripts were praised as amazing in the donors forum with their veterancy. Unfortunately I have a hard time seeing them being good at anything. Most of my time I have them back at some point reinforcing them or healing them, as they die of practically right away.

They are fine, I'll gladly show you in a game. You still get strelky after 35 FU if you don't like them.

Now, I do realise that they are supposed to be bad, but it leaves the soviets at at such a disadvantage early on. The Wehrmacht have MG teams, snipers and the absolutely fantastic MP40 upgrade. A player with any kind of micro skill can easily beat the soviets with a MG and a mp40 volks squad.

I also realise that the molotov cocktail is supposed to be a counter to these problems, but at 50 munitions and 20 fuel (I think it's roughly that fuel cost at least) it's much better to tech for a sniper/AT gun or a PTRD/mortar squad which will get the job of clearing out those pesky MGs much faster than a costly charge and throwing a molotov.

I am also concerned with their veterancy progression. From what I gather they earn recrewing capabilities at vet 1, a full set of rifles at vet 2 and become un-suppressable at vet 3. I've so far managed to get a squad to vet 1 in a match, and that was at the very end destroying the enemy's base. Even if one puts a great deal of effort into vetting them the unit is still far weaker than easier options.

I'd like to suggest changing the vet 1 and vet 2 bonuses around. This will make it easier to give the squad veterancy, and it does make sense in terms of weapon experience. The squad starts off with minimal training and only a handful of guns. At vet 1 they've managed to acquire regular rifles (perhaps even looted kar98k's?), and at vet 2 they've earned enough combat experience to know how to operate a heavy weapon.

How you describe it was initially how it was. It was a last minute change to swap vet1 and 2. Instead I would suggest to keep it the way it is but lower the vet requirements to 6/12/24.

I'd also like to suggest removing the molotov's munitions cost, and instead giving it a manpower cost, on par with the Panzer Elite's incendiary grenades.

No reason to.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#71547

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

GodlikeDennis wrote:

They are fine, I'll gladly show you in a game. You still get strelky after 35 FU if you don't like them.

Bring it on mate ;) I'm called Manslayer3 ingame. The first few units in the match can make or break an entire game. CoHO showed this clearer than ever before.

How you describe it was initially how it was. It was a last minute change to swap vet1 and 2. Instead I would suggest to keep it the way it is but lower the vet requirements to 6/12/24.

I suppose this could work as well. What are the requirements now?

No reason to.

I'd say there is a reason. Especially if the vet requirements are not lowered. It would give the Soviets a proper counter to their problems.
#71608

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

The vet requirements are currently 8/16/32 I think, which is too high for lowly Soviets.

The change you propose to the upgrade is meaningless.
Dot.Shadow wrote:
It would give the Soviets a proper counter to their problems.

This makes no sense. It doesn't actually change anything but make molotovs easier to get. Molotovs are actually quite OP. They need their cooldown increased.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#71611

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

^^ right after axis hmgs get some fair nerf (like slower movement, or higher cost)
As for xp, it NEEDS to be set lower - these guys are 37 hp ffs.
As for mp cost, I don't think soviets need yet another mp draining upgrade.
Forum post image
If you want a picture of the future,
imagine a boot stamping on a human face
— forever.
#71612

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

yeah conscripts got nerfed, they died in hordes to begin with and STILL they give 2XP a kill, when facing PE they give vet faster than US or Brit, it should be changed and lowered

the correct vet bonus' are as follows

vet1  .95 received damage
vet2  rifles
vet3 unsupressable

and its 8/16/24 vet, which is actually very hard to attain - Im not so sure it should be changed however if anything I think there nerfs should be reversed
Soviet is OP
#71613

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Actually I agree with a nerf to MG42s. There's no longer any skill to using them if they just pack up and rotate faster than you can flank. I was disgusted at how easily a rather crap player fought off my rifles yesterday. The pack up speed should be reverted.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#71614

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Actually I agree with a nerf to MG42s. There's no longer any skill to using them if they just pack up and rotate faster than you can flank. I was disgusted at how easily a rather crap player fought off my rifles yesterday. The pack up speed should be reverted.


mods plz make sure dennis' account hast been hacked this must be some imposter  :P ;D

I've always agreed with that dennis if you put a few mg42's in the right place it will effectively win you the game, and that early on the game shouldnt be decided by such a mindless unit
Soviet is OP
#71615

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Actually I agree with a nerf to MG42s. There's no longer any skill to using them if they just pack up and rotate faster than you can flank. I was disgusted at how easily a rather crap player fought off my rifles yesterday. The pack up speed should be reverted.

There wasn't much of that to begin with, IMO. But ATM it's just fxcking insane  >:(
Forum post image
If you want a picture of the future,
imagine a boot stamping on a human face
— forever.
#71631

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Actually I agree with a nerf to MG42s. There's no longer any skill to using them if they just pack up and rotate faster than you can flank. I was disgusted at how easily a rather crap player fought off my rifles yesterday. The pack up speed should be reverted.


You dont need a nerd yo mg42, you need to do a 2 - 3 sides atac. MG 42 only can atac to 1 flanks.

The nerf will sopose an anothoer advedtange to soviets men, also you have 2 sniper men team! if you can kill a mg team with 1 usa sniper, or only with british sniper hability, with 2 men snipers you cant ?!?! O.O you need a neerf to the mg42!! OMG the Wer is suposed to be little defensive at first and need a good mg because if it dont have Wer player can lose all ground! The prices of the units are too expensive (volks 280 -> USA riflemen 270) Riflemen are better and are more cheaper because you can use volks with sniper or with mg at early game but when you have this usa player have 3 squads you understand? and you cant take ground if usa player dont do mistakes.
With USSR snipers are shit vs 8 men squads, then you only can do a MG with volks and moto or swin. with wer you are limited to a concrete tactic and you want to nerf the wer unique early tactic to nerf all wer players early game or what?
#71632

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

This is not a personal attack but it seems like you've missed the point, and have an unsatisfactory understanding of balance as a whole
Soviet is OP
#71648

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Now why you guys think the soviet mortar has it's mortar ability again. Btw remeber: Research the molotov cocktail upgrade. They will burn the shit out of those MGs. Also use the charge ability of your Command squad...
I identify as a four-eyed bird man. /s
#71752

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Guys, could we keep it to the conscripts? ^^

I've noticed as of late that the molotovs seem to have a near 100% chance to damage a vehicles engine. This seems rather OP, and is extremely annoying. A fair chance is okay, but the near 100% is really annoying.
#71761

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Yeah they were supposed to have only a small chance but I theorise the damage over time aspect of molotovs lets them reroll this chance 8 times a second (once per tick). It's yet another OP aspect of the molotovs now.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#71768

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Hamasei wrote:
GodlikeDennis wrote:
Actually I agree with a nerf to MG42s. There's no longer any skill to using them if they just pack up and rotate faster than you can flank. I was disgusted at how easily a rather crap player fought off my rifles yesterday. The pack up speed should be reverted.


You dont need a nerd yo mg42, you need to do a 2 - 3 sides atac. MG 42 only can atac to 1 flanks.

The nerf will sopose an anothoer advedtange to soviets men, also you have 2 sniper men team! if you can kill a mg team with 1 usa sniper, or only with british sniper hability, with 2 men snipers you cant ?!?! O.O you need a neerf to the mg42!! OMG the Wer is suposed to be little defensive at first and need a good mg because if it dont have Wer player can lose all ground! The prices of the units are too expensive (volks 280 -> USA riflemen 270) Riflemen are better and are more cheaper because you can use volks with sniper or with mg at early game but when you have this usa player have 3 squads you understand? and you cant take ground if usa player dont do mistakes.
With USSR snipers are shit vs 8 men squads, then you only can do a MG with volks and moto or swin. with wer you are limited to a concrete tactic and you want to nerf the wer unique early tactic to nerf all wer players early game or what?


Dispite the very messy appearence I think I get what he's trying to say:

Use 2-3 way attacks to "flank the MG42" (The pack up time and set up makes it harder to micro manage.)

You can't do it with two men sniper team (kill MG42 crew members). Alright I'm going to have to cut you off there. The sniper team has 1 sniper and 1 observer. In other words, there's only one man that "snipes" the other has the binoculars and uses an ordinary rifle! If you haven't grasped that fact you can't argue that point, you understand? They have no more advantage than recon sections really.

He reckons the wehr is very defensive at the start because of the riflemen blobs can take more advantage cause they are cheaper and easier to reinforce and there are just so many of them. Therefore the nerf of the MG42 does not make sense. But my question is what about the players that do WSC (weapon support) starts and not Barracks?

He then literally says "The wehr relies on concrete tactics and now you want to nerf that for all wehr players" I'm sorry, your line of logic aint follow.

My conclusion: Nazi fanboy (plz ignore his post) Balance > Nazi fanboys

However, as awesome as you are GodlikeDennis, are you sure you haven't overlooked something?  :-\

Conscripts are cannon fodder. It even says so in their description. People that rely on them too much will be in trouble. I agree with you that the vets should be made easier at 6/12/24 but can you really demand a nerf because they are not like that?

No, I am not a Nazi fanboy (I much prefer allies) and perhaps I haven't seen the bigger picture but I don't really think they need to be nerfed since .30 cal also has a similar stat now. If I have missed something could you please enlighten me. Oh and that game vs crap player. Can you post it?
OIY! Get your filthy hands off the Maus!
http://easternfront.org/forums/index.php?topic=5672.0

Hee hee, I added colour to the avatar. Isn't it nice?
#71770

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Dot.Shadow wrote:
Guys, could we keep it to the conscripts? ^^

I've noticed as of late that the molotovs seem to have a near 100% chance to damage a vehicles engine. This seems rather OP, and is extremely annoying. A fair chance is okay, but the near 100% is really annoying.

I've replaced those criticals (kept them for red damage level) for destroy secondary weapons ones. Also doubled the recharge time.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#71779

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

If it weren't for insane molotovs, conscripts would be perfect the way they are. They're decent but the impetus to upgrade to strelky or other better troops would still be there. At the moment, insane OP spammable molotovs means everyone blobs and charges throwing fireballs at everyone who resists.
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#71786

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Now, what exactly is OP about these molotovs?
Forum post image
If you want a picture of the future,
imagine a boot stamping on a human face
— forever.
#71814

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

IJoe wrote:
Now, what exactly is OP about these molotovs?


Well, damaging engine of vehicle almost everytime is OP, especially for a 224mp squad.
With 3 molotovs, I managed to destroy a puma in some second. And remember that CS and N.I also get them.
"Du sublime au ridicule, il n'y a qu'un pas"
-Napoléon Bonaparte
#71816

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Red_Stinger wrote:
Well, damaging engine of vehicle almost everytime is OP, especially for a 224mp squad.

Why? It doesn't immobilize a vehicle. You can still drive away, if you wish. And the upgrade cost has been risen, and it no longer gives you 7 rifles 1 ppsh UNSUPPRESSIBLE squad. And after all that NERFING you say those pathetic molotovs  are OP? Give it a brake, people!
Red_Stinger wrote:
With 3 molotovs, I managed to destroy a puma in some second. And remember that CS and N.I also get them.

That is impossible, unless the puma was already dead.
Replay to the studio!!!
Forum post image
If you want a picture of the future,
imagine a boot stamping on a human face
— forever.
#71864

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Come on! Dont get so angry, we are discussing about balance, and everyone can throw his impression/ideas. It's for a constructive objective!

You can still drive away a vehicle with a damaged engine; its easy when you are facing only conscript that cant do much by themselves after their molotovs. But when you are facing an AT gun, or TH/guards with AT nades, the lowered speed mean that your vehicle will take more damage from them. It wouldnt be a problem if a single molotov would almost always damage the engine.

I'm not saying that the molotov shouldnt damage the engine at all; its nice that you can expect at some point to stop a tank, but a FREE molotov which can slow down for a while a KT (or whatever) each time is OP, at least for me.

As for the puma, I dont usually keep my replays anymore. You can accuse me of being a liar, a hypocrite or whatever you want, it wont hurt me. It's just a lesson, and the next time I will keep replays when strange thing happen. Consider my previous statement with the puma wrong. 'nuff said.
"Du sublime au ridicule, il n'y a qu'un pas"
-Napoléon Bonaparte
#71867

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

I'm not angry :)
I'm just saying, that a more powerful molotov, which it is, is a mere (and far from fair) compensation for all the drawbacks done to soviet tier1. So, if you want it reversed, it would only be right, that all the nerfs, or at least most of them, should be reversed as well.
Forum post image
If you want a picture of the future,
imagine a boot stamping on a human face
— forever.
#71868

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

AFAIK, it was never intended that molotovs destroy engines so, that will be rolled back in the next patch.
Mors Indecepta

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

Last edited May 29, 2011 at 6:52 PM by blackbishop

#72231

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

blackbishop wrote:
AFAIK, it was never intended that molotovs destroy engines so, that will be rolled back in the next patch.

I think damage engine criticals are in order for Molotovs. Reducing the chance of a critical engine hit may be jn order but I've found that micro is the most effective way to avoid the problem. When a Sov squad throws a molotov dance away from it. One idea that might be considered for Petrol Bombs is adding a 5 Fuel cost per use. The coctails were developed as an ad hoc anti-vehicle weapon and extensive use should delay the production of vehicular units. This would be a fair trade off to compensate for all those damaged engines. The comment was made that the molotov upgrade comes too early. I tend to agree with this. I think the armory upgrade cost needs modified to place it more in line with PE's incendiary grenade research cost. (Increase the fuel cost not the muni cost).

Why is it necessary to increase squad size to conscripts when the petrol bombs are introduced? The commisar is no longer there and the upgrade effects three different squads.

It was stated that conscripts become unsuppressible at vet 3. Why? A low grade infantry unit shouldn,t have this ability. Why not reduce the received damage a little?

As far as balance concerns go how do the stats for PE incendiary grenades damage/duration stack up to molotovs? Gasoline burns pretty quickly.
孫 The
EF_v1.7.10

子 Art
Illegitimi non Carborundum -"Vinegar" Joe Stilwell

兵 of
Sun Tzu says: In warfare one compels and is not compelled by others

[b] 法 War

Last edited June 6, 2011 at 5:50 AM by Otto 213

#72263

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

blackbishop wrote:
AFAIK, it was never intended that molotovs destroy engines so, that will be rolled back in the next patch.

As far as I remember, it was one of the most popular ideas having to do with molotovs. And I regret, it is going to be taken away, especially since all those t1 nerfs are there to stay.
Forum post image
If you want a picture of the future,
imagine a boot stamping on a human face
— forever.
#73025

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

what does everyone think of the new conscript vet? is it any good or is it useless? is it too hard to obtain or too easy?

ive personally never gotten a vet3 con squad in pvp Im looking for some feedback I have a hunch that vet values should be lowered a tiny bit
Soviet is OP
#73040

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

IJoe wrote:
blackbishop wrote:
AFAIK, it was never intended that molotovs destroy engines so, that will be rolled back in the next patch.

As far as I remember, it was one of the most popular ideas having to do with molotovs. And I regret, it is going to be taken away, especially since all those t1 nerfs are there to stay.

Molotows work the same way as Incendiary nades of rifles damaging all light armor up to a Stuart. The only difference is that allies use less really light armor (like BREN carrier or Sdkfz 22x) and that molotovs are free.
My Ostheer concept.
#73296

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

RedGuard wrote:
what does everyone think of the new conscript vet? is it any good or is it useless? is it too hard to obtain or too easy?

ive personally never gotten a vet3 con squad in pvp Im looking for some feedback I have a hunch that vet values should be lowered a tiny bit

Tovarich,
I like the vet1 and vet2 alot. There seems to be a problem at vet two where you not only lose the vet1 advantage of weapons pick-up but previously acquired weapons as well. The notion of an 8M/8R squad with with rifles, light weapons pick-up (do they get the un-natural suppression from moving while firing Sov LMGs like Guards and Naval Infantry too?), molotovs and no suppression is a horrible idea. I.E. A five squad run up the center, (with maybe the ability to suppress infantry in its path), molotov the 88s, recrew them, and just for kicks add The Red Tide at 4 CP. Conscripts? Balance? I don't think so.

At vet3 a lower received damage from direct fire weapons might be appropriate to offset the low hit points. Maybe not, (PE  55/210HPs/255 MP cost vs Consripts, (37/296HPs/224MP cost)?

I don't think it is necessary to decrease the vet requirements. Vet1 and vet2 conscripts are fun to play with. But in all fairness they are no longer meat shields.
孫 The
EF_v1.7.10

子 Art
Illegitimi non Carborundum -"Vinegar" Joe Stilwell

兵 of
Sun Tzu says: In warfare one compels and is not compelled by others

[b] 法 War

Last edited June 8, 2011 at 6:25 PM by Otto 213

#73311

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

At vet 1 they have a 5% received dmg bonus, but i added that as place holder, they could have a 15~10% i guess :-\.

Currently i'm not able to find a way to give them the capture weapon ability at any given time without crashing the game (it works, but when they get heavy fire coh crashes) XD.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73317

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

blackbishop wrote:
At vet 1 they have a 5% received dmg bonus, but i added that as place holder, they could have a 15~10% i guess :-\ .

Currently i'm not able to find a way to give them the capture weapon ability at any given time without crashing the game (it works, but when they get heavy fire coh crashes) XD.

The -5% received damage at vet1 seems OK at this point.

I have retrieved several weapons with Conscripts at vet1. They frequently don't make it back to a reinforce point but I've not had a crash because the squad is eliminated. I sorta think when you lose a squad that is heavy fire.
孫 The
EF_v1.7.10

子 Art
Illegitimi non Carborundum -"Vinegar" Joe Stilwell

兵 of
Sun Tzu says: In warfare one compels and is not compelled by others

[b] 法 War
#73326

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Otto wrote:
blackbishop wrote:
At vet 1 they have a 5% received dmg bonus, but i added that as place holder, they could have a 15~10% i guess :-\ .

Currently i'm not able to find a way to give them the capture weapon ability at any given time without crashing the game (it works, but when they get heavy fire coh crashes) XD.

The -5% received damage at vet1 seems OK at this point.

I have retrieved several weapons with Conscripts at vet1. They frequently don't make it back to a reinforce point but I've not had a crash because the squad is eliminated. I sorta think when you lose a squad that is heavy fire.

Oh, that only happens with my current conscripts so don't worry about it.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73334

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

And they STILL supress grenadiers when focus firing. Seriously, please reduce the supression to Volks/Riflemen values. It's ridiculous how a bunch of guys with 4 rifles and 224 can supress wehr/pe t1 units.
Forum post image
Abuse is abuse and has to go.
#73347

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

dArCReAvEr wrote:
And they STILL supress grenadiers when focus firing. Seriously, please reduce the supression to Volks/Riflemen values. It's ridiculous how a bunch of guys with 4 rifles and 224 can supress wehr/pe t1 units.

They already have the half of the suppression values of those units.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73348

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

blackbishop wrote:
dArCReAvEr wrote:
And they STILL supress grenadiers when focus firing. Seriously, please reduce the supression to Volks/Riflemen values. It's ridiculous how a bunch of guys with 4 rifles and 224 can supress wehr/pe t1 units.

They already have the half of the suppression values of those units.

Then I don't understand why they still supress :/
Does that have to do with nearby supression modifiers maybe? Or with the supression modifiers from command squad/ingenery?
Forum post image
Abuse is abuse and has to go.
#73350

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

dArCReAvEr wrote:
blackbishop wrote:
dArCReAvEr wrote:
And they STILL supress grenadiers when focus firing. Seriously, please reduce the supression to Volks/Riflemen values. It's ridiculous how a bunch of guys with 4 rifles and 224 can supress wehr/pe t1 units.

They already have the half of the suppression values of those units.

Then I don't understand why they still supress :/
Does that have to do with nearby supression modifiers maybe? Or with the supression modifiers from command squad/ingenery?

I don't think so :-\. I've made a test without commissar and they still suppressed a pioneer squad.

Perhaps I'm looking at the wrong part, i'm looking at the suppression table located on the weapon file.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73352

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

[quote author=blackbishop link=topic=5959.msg73350#msg73350
I don't think so :-\. I've made a test without commissar and they still suppressed a pioneer squad.

Perhaps I'm looking at the wrong part, i'm looking at the suppression table located on the weapon file.
[/quote]

Strange. Have you changed every value? Like nearby supression value etc?
http://dow2.info/coh/Weapon_Wehrmacht_Kar98K_Elite.html
That's an example for the supression tables of the Gren Kar98k. Maybe it helps. Dunno though.
Forum post image
Abuse is abuse and has to go.
#73355

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

This is the current suppression table of conscript and engies rifles:

L 0.003
M 0.002
S 0.0005
Nearby Supp. Multiplier 0.1
Nearby Supp. Radius          10


Suppression values for Grens:
L 0.006
M 0.004
S 0.001
Nearby Supp. Multiplier 0.1
Nearby Supp. Radius          10
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73367

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Suppression modifier for target types?
If you get into an argument with me, you're wrong.
#73371

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Suppression modifier for target types?

Yeah, i forgot about those.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73477

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

At vet3 the conscipts are unsuppressable, right?

Why not give the squad the commissar with PPS at vet3? He takes care that no soldier runs away

Vet1: recrew
Vet2: every soldier gets gun
Vet3: unsuppressable by commissar

The molotovs stays an independent upgrade (and will be hopefully nerved in the next patch)

Last edited June 10, 2011 at 2:38 AM by Killar

#73479

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Killar wrote:
At vet3 the conscipts are unsuppressable, right?

Why not give the squad the commissar with PPS at vet3? He takes care that no soldier runs away

Vet1: recrew
Vet2: every soldier gets gun
Vet3: unsuppressable by commissar

The molotovs stays an independent upgrade (and will be hopefully nerved in the next patch)

That's the idea :-\... but it's the same reason that is keep us from add capture at vet2 that doesn't allow to add a commissar at vet3.

Hopefully conscripts suppression bug is now fixed.
Mors Indecepta

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

Last edited June 10, 2011 at 3:20 AM by blackbishop

#73480

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

When i remember correctly the Landsers should get a officer too as upgrade

Last edited June 10, 2011 at 3:11 AM by Killar

#73896

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

I've changed my mind. The conscripts are as they are, with the exception of the vet requirements.
#73899

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Killar wrote:
When i remember correctly the Landsers should get a officer too as upgrade

Nope, it's not the same, not even similar.

You got a 5 man squad, and the upgrade grants the squad leader a  MP40 and grenades, that's all. No change needed.

The Conscript upgrade will require a different soldier, in this case the commissar that is a total different entity than a conscript. Hence not possible.
Mors Indecepta

Might controls everything, and without strength you cannot protect anything. Let alone yourself...
#73970

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

blackbishop wrote:
Killar wrote:
When i remember correctly the Landsers should get a officer too as upgrade

Nope, it's not the same, not even similar.

You got a 5 man squad, and the upgrade grants the squad leader a  MP40 and grenades, that's all. No change needed.

The Conscript upgrade will require a different soldier, in this case the commissar that is a total different entity than a conscript. Hence not possible.

If I understand correctly, You have a 7 man squad, and the upgrade grants the squad leader aka commissar, a pistol or smg, still a 7 man squad, thats all; no change needed?
孫 The
EF_v1.7.10

子 Art
Illegitimi non Carborundum -"Vinegar" Joe Stilwell

兵 of
Sun Tzu says: In warfare one compels and is not compelled by others

[b] 法 War
#73971

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

one of soliders would have to chnage his skin, model and so on... maybe give them at Vet3. additional solider to reinforce - the Commisar?

Oh, and please, make Conscripts' number of guys in squad like the others ones, no 0/0.
Forum post image

Lord wrote:
OSTHEER IS DONE WHEN IT'S DONE!
#73974

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

The Conscripts pop count is 0 and COH is unable to display the number of squad members if pop count is zero. I think that's how it was.
Forum post image
Lemberg - Baraque de Fraiture - Smolensk - Heiligenbeil - Nobel Dynamite Works - Lorient - Poltawa
#73979

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

just a question, but why don't you do it like the PE squads when you reaserch incresed squads sizes. you just make it so the need to reinforce to get the commissar and new squads will get him off the bat?
#73980

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

MaxiKing6 wrote:
The Conscripts pop count is 0 and COH is unable to display the number of squad members if pop count is zero. I think that's how it was.

If the pop count is 1 would the number of squad members be displayed properly? If so this might be incorporated when the upgrade occurs.
孫 The
EF_v1.7.10

子 Art
Illegitimi non Carborundum -"Vinegar" Joe Stilwell

兵 of
Sun Tzu says: In warfare one compels and is not compelled by others

[b] 法 War
#73981

Re: [[IP address redacted]] Conscripts

Otto wrote:
blackbishop wrote:
Killar wrote:
When i remember correctly the Landsers should get a officer too as upgrade

Nope, it's not the same, not even similar.

You got a 5 man squad, and the upgrade grants the squad leader a  MP40 and grenades, that's all. No change needed.

The Conscript upgrade will require a different soldier, in this case the commissar that is a total different entity than a conscript. Hence not possible.

If I understand correctly, You have a 7 man squad, and the upgrade grants the squad leader aka commissar, a pistol or smg, still a 7 man squad, thats all; no change needed?

Nope, the idea is to see the NKVD officer as part of conscripts. That is not possible (at least for now) unless you use it as part of the squad since the begining.


Otto wrote:
MaxiKing6 wrote:
The Conscripts pop count is 0 and COH is unable to display the number of squad members if pop count is zero. I think that's how it was.

If the pop count is 1 would the number of squad members be displayed properly? If so this might be incorporated when the upgrade occurs.

Nope, they cost zero pop, if you increase it to one, they will cost 8 pop and they don't worth it.


GATHRAWN wrote:
just a question, but why don't you do it like the PE squads when you reaserch incresed squads sizes. you just make it so the need to reinforce to get the commissar and new squads will get him off the bat?

There's no such thing in CoH. You will only get one more member for each soldier loaded in the squad. E.g. PGrens have 3 soldiers of the same type, if they get one more member, will be of the same type of the existant one.
Mors Indecepta

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

Last edited June 13, 2011 at 4:39 PM by blackbishop