[1.72]SU vs PE

I have been playing some AI games latley as the Soviet Union (Im having trouble with trying to get multiplayer) and in my experience it appears that PE can have more of a problem against the Soviets than the Soviets do against the Wehrmacht.

In early game, Conscripts that cost 35 less manpower than a PG squad and can simply charge them head on and win, especially the molotovs which devastate PE infantry due to their low health and armor type.  Also, it is easy to get early AT gun and tank hunters which could easily counter the AC rush and even a P4 too.  Also, in a battle of 2 PGs and 1 Strelky they can take 1 PG squad before they retreat assuming equal cover, not to mention 350 manpower command squad can take on 2 PGs.  Even if you stick a inginery squad in a building, it could do some damage against the PG too.  I don't know if it is me, or is Soviet Infantry > PE infantry?  Not to mention they got access to devastating SMGs and snipers/Guards which would render Assault Grenadiers useless?

I find Panzer Grenadiers kill my Strelki. Guards and Snipers no Contest. I find AT guns too weak for AC and the PZIV. I use my Tank Hunters which can get killed by the Panzer Grens. Only time I can win is when I get my first T-34/85s out or 2 Guards, 2 TH and 2 T-90s

I played a lot of games Rus vs my friend (EXITIITemplariusz, 16 1v1 PE) and PE is better than Rus. His grens can have 10 kills and don't loose a man. AC's are really strong if your enemy is good.

QuoteI don't know if it is me, or is Soviet Infantry > PE infantry?

Not in early, but all infantry > PE infantry. US Riflemans have the best vets on infantry in game. Also riflemans have 6x55 hp, pg's 3x55. Wh have vets, strong storms, cross.  Brit have OP blob. Rus have strong cs and guards.

QuoteAlso, it is easy to get early AT gun and tank hunters which could easily counter the AC rush and even a P4 too.

In next version tank hunters will be delate. Alone ATG can't fight with AC's.

And what are the lvl 1v1 of your opponents?

You're getting rid of Tank Hunters!??!?!?!

What is this blasphemy?

neosdark wrote:
You're getting rid of Tank Hunters!??!?!?!

What is this blasphemy?

Jupp. Tank hunters are too weak and have no chance to fight armour. The system was changed.
Russian Strelkys will use anti tank grenades. Combination of a "tank stun grenade" - used by your infantry -
will allow your ZiS-anti tank gun to deal with enemy's armour.
When u need "strong anti tank infantry" u can play propaganda doctrine with naval guards.

U wont miss TH that much, dont worry :P

Do we get a new unit in return for the AT boys?

New unit - yes; in return for the AT boys - no

Lord wrote:

neosdark wrote:
You're getting rid of Tank Hunters!??!?!?!

What is this blasphemy?

Jupp. Tank hunters are too weak and have no chance to fight armour. The system was changed.
Russian Strelkys will use anti tank grenades. Combination of a "tank stun grenade" - used by your infantry -
will allow your ZiS-anti tank gun to deal with enemy's armour.
When u need "strong anti tank infantry" u can play propaganda doctrine with naval guards.

what?I use tank hunters most of the time,and ]this is just not true at all, tank hunters are great vs light vehicles,marders, even tanks like stugs when they are upgraded. I even destroyed a panther with 3 squads of tank hunters! 3 or 4 tank hunter squads (upgraded) are serious threat for all enemy armour!they can just blast light tanks and vehicles into shreads very easily!Also,they are cheap, and definetely much much better than idiotic american rangers that cant hit anything,they are just awful anti tank infantry..anyway, if you think that tank hunters are weak, then make them a bit stronger, kicking them out of the game is just not good.

neox88 wrote:

Also,they are cheap, and definetely much much better than idiotic american rangers that cant hit anything,they are just awful anti tank infantry..

But rangers are not meant to be AT, they their 'zookas are meant to give the finger to every and all vehicles and light tanks. And let's not forget the Ranger's actual role as anti infantry.

(Now someone please put this back on track. :V)

Wow,

yeah, tank hunters are absolute beasts against vehicles with the support of...anything really, and as an added bonus have an uncanny ability to assasinate snipers at range from lucky ptrd shots. I will second that they are insanely cheap and produce really fast!  They are also an early, multipurpose and scaling, non-doctrinal answer to enemy bunkers.

They get owned by oswinds and acs(PE PIV's absolutely suck against them though), and will do a poor job of advancing on vehicles that aren't overextended(though with the breakthrough sprint boost or the command squad rush they can often put any big tank trying to run home in its grave).  Thankfully they get chewed up by infantry, but if you can gain map superiority(which you should do) before the big tanks start appearing, you can place a few good tank mines and deny the enemy any shock value for that vehicle hitting the field.  Bring up an at gun, or a doctrinal SU?(the breakthrough AT option) or an upgraded t-34 or two and your opponent will seriously have a hard time pushing back onto the map, until something big pops like a tiger ace in support of a panther or 2(kt is just so slow it isn't going to have the same impact, especially if it hits a mine).

That said, I'm interested in seeing how the game might play out without them.  They were at one time my most hated unit.  Cut them though and I'm wondering how exactly you expect russia to handle early PE IHT rushes.  You going to force the t-2 tech to the mortar/at gun option?  Units that have to get close to throw grenades are going to fail, which is why stickies are not a functional deterrent to the infantry half-track rush with americans.  Tank hunters do a very effective job of at least keeping the half-tracks back of the army for nothing more than reinforcement(the rush still feels strong inspite of that).

Last edited February 15, 2013 at 9:56 PM by Joshua9

neox88 wrote:

Lord wrote:

neosdark wrote:
You're getting rid of Tank Hunters!??!?!?!

What is this blasphemy?

Jupp. Tank hunters are too weak and have no chance to fight armour. The system was changed.
Russian Strelkys will use anti tank grenades. Combination of a "tank stun grenade" - used by your infantry -
will allow your ZiS-anti tank gun to deal with enemy's armour.
When u need "strong anti tank infantry" u can play propaganda doctrine with naval guards.

what?I use tank hunters most of the time,and ]this is just not true at all, tank hunters are great vs light vehicles,marders, even tanks like stugs when they are upgraded. I even destroyed a panther with 3 squads of tank hunters! 3 or 4 tank hunter squads (upgraded) are serious threat for all enemy armour!they can just blast light tanks and vehicles into shreads very easily!Also,they are cheap, and definetely much much better than idiotic american rangers that cant hit anything,they are just awful anti tank infantry..anyway, if you think that tank hunters are weak, then make them a bit stronger, kicking them out of the game is just not good.

You almost completle explain why they are OP and why its a good call to remove them  ;)

I guess I'm not updating EF anymore.

When u need anti tank rifles u can still play Propaganda-doctrine and call-in navalguards. This guys can still be equipped with PTRDs.

But at 2 command points, that's not a solution against the infantry halftrack rush.  You aren't likely to even have 1 cp by that point in the game, so your only bet is to get as fast an at gun as possible. I don't kow that this is bad neccessarily, but it does really seem to lock in your tech choices in this matchup.  This will basically be the same and only path against a potential fast armored car.  And there's no such thing as stall teching to a t-70 as a counter because it takes longer to get to than the american m-8, by which time the damage should be done.

I know this is all hypothetical because I haven't played this myself, but for those of you who have, you've looked at this in testing and haven't seen a problem with it?  If there's not a problem, I won't miss them.  My worthy opponent on the other hand, may have quite the hissey fit when he sees the change as they are clearly his favorite unit in the game.  Maybe he'll just gravitate to the Ostheer.

The last test games showed that there is no problem when red army had no more tank hunters.
U got early enough anti tank (anti tank gun or "something" different) power to counter a half track or an armoured car.

U can start the game with building T2 and unlock the AT gun , so you have AT on the field from 1st game minute if you want...

ah, I see,

cool!  look forward to it, thanks

It's sad that more and more units are being removed from EF during these last few patches.

Lord wrote:
When u need anti tank rifles u can still play Propaganda-doctrine and call-in navalguards. This guys can still be equipped with PTRDs.

yeah, but you need to upgrade them, and that cost precious amunition!and not to mention they are doctrine optional, so if you choose other doctrine, you dont have luxury of calling these guys, not to mention that they die like flies in comparison to tank hunters, they are just weaker...

Lord wrote:
U got early enough anti tank (anti tank gun or "something" different) power to counter a half track or an armoured car.

for example?throwing antitank grenades to light vehicles is not always working since they are darn to fast, and even that costs ammo...

Dreamerbg wrote:

neox88 wrote:

Lord wrote:

neosdark wrote:
You're getting rid of Tank Hunters!??!?!?!

What is this blasphemy?

Jupp. Tank hunters are too weak and have no chance to fight armour. The system was changed.
Russian Strelkys will use anti tank grenades. Combination of a "tank stun grenade" - used by your infantry -
will allow your ZiS-anti tank gun to deal with enemy's armour.
When u need "strong anti tank infantry" u can play propaganda doctrine with naval guards.

what?I use tank hunters most of the time,and ]this is just not true at all, tank hunters are great vs light vehicles,marders, even tanks like stugs when they are upgraded. I even destroyed a panther with 3 squads of tank hunters! 3 or 4 tank hunter squads (upgraded) are serious threat for all enemy armour!they can just blast light tanks and vehicles into shreads very easily!Also,they are cheap, and definetely much much better than idiotic american rangers that cant hit anything,they are just awful anti tank infantry..anyway, if you think that tank hunters are weak, then make them a bit stronger, kicking them out of the game is just not good.

You almost completle explain why they are OP and why its a good call to remove them  ;)

are you reading these comments?they are removing them because they are "too weak vs armour" not too strong...my point was that they are good as they are and they have important purpose in the game..

Last edited February 16, 2013 at 3:30 PM by neox88

132 wrote:
It's sad that more and more units are being removed from EF during these last few patches.

+ 1

Joshua9 wrote:

But at 2 command points, that's not a solution against the infantry halftrack rush.  You aren't likely to even have 1 cp by that point in the game, so your only bet is to get as fast an at gun as possible. I don't kow that this is bad neccessarily, but it does really seem to lock in your tech choices in this matchup.  This will basically be the same and only path against a potential fast armored car.  And there's no such thing as stall teching to a t-70 as a counter because it takes longer to get to than the american m-8, by which time the damage should be done.

good point +1

Dreamerbg wrote:
U can start the game with building T2 and unlock the AT gun , so you have AT on the field from 1st game minute if you want...

Yeah but who starts a game with only AT guns and a CS? You will die very fast. And you could get snipers but buying sniper and at gun is expensive, and you are very vulnerable if u mess up or lose one.

5 posts in 7min? Editing post no.1 wasnt possible?  8)

About the anti tank value of the red army:
Like i said; Red army had a lot of anti tank power. The ZiS is one of the strongest early available hard counters. A fast tank hall rush will give u acces for a T-70 or a Su-76 against enemy's armor. And 2 doctrines had lot ep cost anti tank call ins (like the naval guards or the Su85/KV-1).
Removing the tank hunters was decided by our "head balance" devs.
In future u will use the basic combination of at gun ans strelky to defeat enemy's armor.
How this will work; well... we will show u - - - later ;)

And keep in mind; we can implement the tank hunters again when we see that they are really needed.
At the moment all pvp battle we fought or analysed (replay uploads) showed that tank hunters are redundant.

Last edited February 16, 2013 at 3:55 PM by Lord Rommel

Who said that the only one change is removing Tank Hunters...
Guys calm down  :)

Lord wrote:
5 posts in 7min? Editing post no.1 wasnt possible?  8)

About the anti tank value of the red army:
Like i said; Red army had a lot of anti tank power. The ZiS is one of the strongest early available hard counters. A fast tank hall rush will give u acces for a T-70 or a Su-76 against enemy's armor. And 2 doctrines had lot ep cost anti tank call ins (like the naval guards or the Su85/KV-1).
Removing the tank hunters was decided by our "head balance" devs.
In future u will use the basic combination of at gun ans strelky to defeat enemy's armor.
How this will work; well... we will show u - - - later ;)

And keep in mind; we can implement the tank hunters again when we see that they are really needed.
At the moment all pvp battle we fought or analysed (replay uploads) showed that tank hunters are redundant.

yeah, but i was going like read/answer, read/answer kind of way  :D but i ll try to put this answer in one post  ;D I just hate seeing a good balance unit like tank hunters ( at least in my eyes) just go away without any good reason(haven t seen one so far). Tank hunters are as strong as the player who plays with it, not Op(weak vs infantry) or Up(strong vs armor) as i see it.  I dont know, i rest my case, i said everything...i m really interested to see how will this effect the balance of the game...

No tank hunters mean no non-doctrinal infantry AT.  I don't like being forced to go Propaganda just for their infantry AT.  It's just like removing the Panzerschreck upgrade for Wehrmacht Grenadiers.  If that did happen, Wehr would need to go blitzkrieg for Stormtroopers to get schrecks.  Ofcourse Schreck is much more effective than PTRD at tank hunting so I would understand why that would never happen but you get the point I'm trying to make.  You know.  A better picture and understanding.

Last edited February 16, 2013 at 7:30 PM by 132

The USA has no tank hunter too ;)
And it works with the USA.
Think no one will tell me that USA cant counter enemy's armour.

Lord wrote:
The USA has no tank hunter too ;)
And it works with the USA.
Think no one will tell me that USA cant counter enemy's armour.

yeah, and USA cant produce heavy tanks, so let us remove IS 2 , it s just not needed since USA doesnt need it...wait, why dont we make soviets like USA, that will be the best!

I am, too, starting to question many of these decisions. I get the feeling that Lord Rommel is getting a large hand in balancing, considering how often he is posting to back up these decisions made by the new balance team, something never down when the previous one was in seat.

I normally have nothing against Devs who want to be balancers, you are more than welcome, but I have never ever seen you play Rommel, nor heard anyone discuss your playing style, etc. As such I don't believe you have the right to decide/defend/attack the actions of any balancer. Let the balancers speak for themselves, in full light.

What I've heard so far from Dreamerbg and Bandaro (who I assume are balancers) is the elimination of Tank Hunters, and addition of some new unit.

Dreamer also mentioned about being able to use SSC (Tier 2) of the bat and as such access the AT Gun, but if memory that has been the case since ~1.4 or so.

There is a mention of a test game, but the general public hasn't seen it, thus no one may agree or disagree to the balancers' decisions.

I will wait and watch, but to me this change of events seems quite a bit like a travesty.

I must profess, despite the fact I normally get into balance arguments with many of these ppl, they raise valid points.

Quotewait, why dont we make soviets like USA, that will be the best!

I think since they are so similar factions that, Soviets would have made the best skinpack for USA in vCoH :P

Anyways lets get back on topic.  So the point was Soviets had an upper hand against PE in infantry battles most of the time.  Going back to this earlier statement that has affected this thread in a very topic changing way:

QuoteIn next version tank hunters will be delate. Alone ATG can't fight with AC's.

:P

Last edited February 17, 2013 at 4:17 AM by 132

The problem is that someone said only that the TH are removed... and this is maybe the worst way to introduce something... just wait a bit more and you will see all of the changes , then you wont be so dissapointed  :P

Meh. I dont use THs anyway that is because I always go propaganda and Naval Infantry look much cooler and they are tougher  ;D

The only real reason to use TH is their powerful AT mine. And yeah that's all, in old patch, 2 AT nades of them can kill a HMG team instantly but they're quickly patched that ;D

neosdark wrote:
I am, too, starting to question many of these decisions. I get the feeling that Lord Rommel is getting a large hand in balancing, considering how often he is posting to back up these decisions made by the new balance team, something never down when the previous one was in seat.

Well. The point is; I'm not balance dev  ;D I'm too noob-like to be a balancer  ;)
I just talk quiet often with our balance devs (welcome to mumble ^^).
I see the "effectiveness" of the tank hunters ingame. I see a number of replays with the tank hunters.

But the good news is; we will test a lot of new stuff in the beta. This feedback will influence the final decisions
for balance and units. Till this point the dev balancers try to find the best configuration.

I'm confused, so there are Devs that are also balancers, and there are just regular Balancers that aren't devs?

Also I like TH.  they aren't a must have unit, but they aren't completely useless.

132 wrote:
I'm confused, so there are Devs that are also balancers, and there are just regular Balancers that aren't devs?

Also I like TH.  they aren't a must have unit, but they aren't completely useless.

hej, 132, are you also discussing on this forum maybe? :-)
http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?271151-2v2-America-is-Fundamentally-Flawed&s=db38739d0cb9be6784dd26f92586a954

132 wrote:
I'm confused, so there are Devs that are also balancers, and there are just regular Balancers that aren't devs?

Pretty much. Ideally we'd all regularly take part in the balance process but we all have different workloads to be taking care of, on the mod and elsewhere, which is why we need dedicated balancers. That said, I think Devs are taking a more active role in balance testing these days, when they can.

Will the KV-85 be added again?  :D

Let's wrap some things for now:

1) Tank Hunters removed: They were never really balanced, either OP or UP, and most of the time they replaced Strelky role because were easier to get and provided AT measures. The addition of the "stun grenade" was because of this inbalance, which added even more AT stuff to the already big Soviet AT stuff (AT nades, Stun AT nades, AT mines, THs, ZiS2s), too much IMO; it wasn't possible to balance THs and we also tried merging them with Strelky, which didn't work very good and needed a lot of tweaks. We removed them for testing and they play fine without it.

2)

neox88 wrote:

Lord wrote:
The USA has no tank hunter too ;)
And it works with the USA.
Think no one will tell me that USA cant counter enemy's armour.

yeah, and USA cant produce heavy tanks, so let us remove IS 2 , it s just not needed since USA doesnt need it...wait, why dont we make soviets like USA, that will be the best!

Yeah, and because it only has the ZiS2 for AT duties it becomes automatically the new US faction. Because everyone knows US has sturmovie ingenery squads, commissars and Guards as additional infantry, ZiS2 in T2 and no HMGs. Do not confuse an offensive faction with an US cloned faction.

You are entitled to have your opinions but some times I can read a lot of sarcasm being written, and most of the time it doesn't help a topic move forward. The idea of letting everyone know that THs were removed was not a good one, nor something it should have been spoiled right now. Because we still have some time left until the Beta goes live, and players will only speculate unnecessary thoughts/will be concerned due to this. It could have been chosen a more close date to the Beta to say this so they could judge by themselves soon-ish after hearing the news :-\.

I liked THs as well, but I always thought they weren't really needed. The truth is than they have been a problem since 1.0, regardless the changes they got.

Wekwekboris wrote:
Will the KV-85 be added again?  :D

I'd hope to, depends of many factors.

132 wrote:
No tank hunters mean no non-doctrinal infantry AT.  I don't like being forced to go Propaganda just for their infantry AT. It's just like removing the Panzerschreck upgrade for Wehrmacht Grenadiers.

Light tanks cost was decreased. Now it is 45 fuel as i remember, not 55. I usually play armor and i don't need propaganda for infantry AT. More, i don't need infantry AT because firstly i have light tanks, then medium tanks/at guns. Also sometimes i go to KW.

QuoteYeah, and because it only has the ZiS2 for AT duties it becomes automatically the new US faction.

You've got light tanks, su-76, doctrinal kw/su-85, doctrinal navals, with russian op on fuel you can have early t-34... (and camping on op and then tanks is really good tactic)

QuoteI am, too, starting to question many of these decisions. I get the feeling that Lord Rommel is getting a large hand in balancing, considering how often he is posting to back up these decisions made by the new balance team, something never down when the previous one was in seat.

We're balancers. So we balancing and talking in close-team. Not in forum. I sometimes put post, but i won't always reply about users questions. As i see devs usually do it. Anyway don't worry, the biggest part in balance have people which can play good in CoH.

Russians have a big range of AT.
I do sometimes use the TH when AI spams them armoured cars but thats it.
T-34/85 can destroy most tanks with ease while having a decent amount of health and armour to survive encounters long enough with Panthers and Tigers to get away.

Naval Infantry. Much tougher than TH but you dont get the mines and AT grenade (which is okay IMO but I do like the stun AT nade)

IS-2 can destroy any German tank/Vehicle with enough micro. Just close the distance and have slugfests with Tigers/Panthers. Also eats Marders and G-Wagons along with Stugs and Armored Cars for breakfast.

SU-76. Great early AT tank. I support my T-34/85s with these if I didn't go breakthrough, speaking of which....

SU-85. Much better gun than the Hetzer's and has quite good health. Only problem are going to be paks and shrecks (unless you have cage armour) but you don't use TDs for tank destroyers right???

ISU-152. They don't call it beast killer for a reason. (Though the barrage shot right now is utterly useless unless the enemy is on full stop)

Strelki. They have AT nades that are just as effective or better than the PE ones. (IF you went urban)

ZiS-2 AT Gun. Better than all the AT guns. (Except 17 Pdr but that is immobile)

ZiS-3 AT Gun. Good starting AT gun that has same punch with most AT guns (And you could upgrade to the ZiS-2....)

Guards. AT NADES.

Tank Hunters. They do much more damage to tanks than regular inf and I also liked them but it is not like the only change in the upcoming patch.....

*Formerly SU-100. Upgraded Version of the SU-85

*Formerly KV-85 Upgraded Version of the T-34/85

So that is 13 AT units? Technically 11 as of the patch right now and then 10 at later patches.

Yeah, aside from my initial concerns about the infantry halftrack rush, I won't be sad to see this many-tooled anti tank unit go, wich inspite of being the earliest at weapon to pop out, often becomes the mainstay anti vehicle unit, backed up by something heavier like an AT gun or mobile AT units.  The fact that there is "something" not yet disclosed(I actually think russia has too many unit options as is, but it still does seem to play out okay), coupled with the fact that light vehicles have been reduced in tech cost, allowing for quick cap and stall tactics until a t-70 against pe(theoretically), alleviates my concerns that Russia will be shut down in the early game against PE.

Nixing tank hunters will probably force you to play "better" as a russian player, rather than just popping out an answer to fast vehicles on the fly, and rather than just mine spamming around the map so that you need to build up a serious anti tank response only after an enemy has failed to gain shock value from his initial oswind or panther.

Aaaand Soviets are pretty much fucked against PE armour car rush on open maps. Great, just great. You blow of the similarity between the US and the USSR faction to be trivial, but I've seen this worrying trend going on for a long time. The first big step I saw towards making the two factions the one and same was the removal of the sniper team. Was the unit OP? With the artillery strike, yes - Without it? No, not at all. Sure, you couldn't countersnipe it, but guess what - It's called adapting to a new situation. It was very easy to kill using more mobile units. CoH2 also features a Soviet Sniper team, which is far, far, FAR from OP. The removal of THs is sad yes, but what worries me more is that the PTRDs are now NI only. You pretty much have to go Propaganda if you want decent infantry at this point. Partizany are *still* too costly with 3 CPs to get out there, and the rest of the tree is rather poor. Don't give me the "it's a situation command tree", as that's a bullshit lazy excuse (pardon the expression!) for not bothering making a proper command tree. It just shouldn't be that way, no tree should be limited to a few situations and maps.

Soviets have been getting raped for quite some time now, and it's starting to get frustrating.

And what is Urban supposed to do against armour now? Footslog AT guns after their Partizany, who now no longer can be combined with THs to provide some minimal protection from tanks? The slow nade from Strelky is hardly a worthy replacement, seeing it barely does any damage.

Last edited February 23, 2013 at 4:46 PM by Dot.Shadow

Dot.Shadow wrote:
Aaaand Soviets are pretty much fucked against PE armour car rush on open maps.

Since rr and ptrd missiles phase through armoured cars and Pumas (and we won't change that because of no-changes-to-vanilla policy) Tank Hunters are completely worthless against them. Actually, a single strelky squad deals more damage against an AC than the tank hunter squad. So this is no valid argument for keeping htem.

QuoteGreat, just great. You blow of the similarity between the US and the USSR faction to be trivial, but I've seen this worrying trend going on for a long time. The first big step I saw towards making the two factions the one and same was the removal of the sniper team. Was the unit OP? With the artillery strike, yes - Without it? No, not at all.

The problem was not that it was op, but that it didn't work properly. Countersniping was impossible if the sniper was in a building (only 50% chance to kill the sniper, so you could be countersniped with a high chance after hitting the spotter in the building). Second point was, that a dual wehr sniper usage could instakill all soviet sniper teams, but it's impossible to kill a whole sniper with only one wehr sniper. 120mp drain wasn't much compared to a countersnipe vs USA, which costs 340mp instead. The camouflage system was flawed also.

QuoteSure, you couldn't countersnipe it, but guess what - It's called adapting to a new situation. It was very easy to kill using more mobile units.

The squad had - because of the 2 man design much more total hitpoints compared to the single sniper squads from other factions. We did around 200 testgames with the old sniperteam, and it was broken. Use 2-3 mines on likely vehicle paths and you could NEVER kill Soviet sniperteams. So it was finally decided to remove it to fix all the problems caused by it.

Quote CoH2 also features a Soviet Sniper team, which is far, far, FAR from OP.

Afaik squads are larger in CoH2 than in CoH 1, so snipers are less of a problem anyways. Plus, it's a different game, with diffrent teching and different gameplay (true sight and blah). Not comparable.

QuoteThe removal of THs is sad yes, but what worries me more is that the PTRDs are now NI only. You pretty much have to go Propaganda if you want decent infantry at this point. Partizany are *still* too costly with 3 CPs to get out there, and the rest of the tree is rather poor. Don't give me the "it's a situation command tree", as that's a bullshit lazy excuse (pardon the expression!) for not bothering making a proper command tree. It just shouldn't be that way, no tree should be limited to a few situations and maps.

That's why strelky are getting tweaked. They're available at 35 fuel into the game and are cheap, have a similar combat performance like grenadiers and are cheap to maintain. Idk what you would want more?

QuoteSoviets have been getting raped for quite some time now, and it's starting to get frustrating.

Afaik soviets pretty much steamrolled most axis players in the last tourney, barton raped everyone by using conscripts only... how do you explain that to yourself?

Quote
And what is Urban supposed to do against armour now? Footslog AT guns after their Partizany, who now no longer can be combined with THs to provide some minimal protection from tanks? The slow nade from Strelky is hardly a worthy replacement, seeing it barely does any damage.

Strekly slow nade is getting buffed in terms of damage, at least against armoured cars, halftracks and other units which tankhunters were supposed to be used.

Anyways. Urban with their new CP arrangement is extremely potent at putting pressure on the enemy by throwing nades everywhere, so it should be easy to put back RBS until you can field tanks or AT guns. The AT guns + strelky slow nade are more than enough to kill off tanks or at least scare them away. IS 2 and T34 also receive some changes to perform better against axis t4 units in general and so far it plays out decently.

Last edited February 23, 2013 at 5:07 PM by dArCReAvEr

*sigh*

I wrote a long reply, but it got erased somehow.

I'll try to rewrite my points:

About the slow nade - I view it somewhat like the Wehr faust. Everything I know about the faust is that you only use it when a) To finish off an enemy b) You're desperate. The slow nade is supposed to fulfil the entire Soviet infantry capability of destroying tanks outside of NI (which are doctrinal) - This worries me a great deal. It will leave the Soviet's extremely exposed. They have enough weaknesses already, and adding one more will do them no good. I can go along with HT perhaps not being the best solution, but I don't think removing schrecks from Wehr and telling them that they've got to stick to fausts instead would be a fantastic upgrade for that faction either. Cuse that's what being done to the Soviets.

Sniper Team: Seems I can never let this debate go. I simply miss seeing one of the most original units in the Soviet faction. The Soviet sniper team had some things it was better at, and some major flaws. For an example, using a mortar to take them out was extremely easy, seeing that they had to remain stationary to have stealth. You did some scouting, and you pretty much could kill off the team long before it was capable of doing any real damage. CoH2's squad are of comparable size, the Germans remaining fairly similar to their current numbers. The Soviet's feature both squads smaller, larger and equal to yours. While the game plays differently, I still think it serves as a pointer to the fact that it actually works.

The sniper team was remove simply because people fail at adapting. You can excuse it away with whatever you want to, but in the end, it comes down to human inability to adapt, and ability to whine. Use a mortar - It's gone. Walk around it - It's only effective in one location. Also quite easily rushed with MP40 volks.

About the Soviet's being raped: This is more than a balance issue I speak of here - Sure, all early game potential in the faction was obliterated many patches ago, but this is more of a issue of ever decreasing originality and refusal to accept issues like the ones with the Urban doctrine (I'm curious to see what changes were made though!). I'm not sure if there's any point to discussing this. You've got enough with the Ostheer as of now, and you seem fairly set upon the path the Soviets have been taken down the past... year?-ish?

I also have a hard time believing that conscripts did well. I'll take a look at the replays later. What I wonder though is - Why didn't someone just get anything at all that kills infantry? Conscripts die like flies to so many things.

Last edited February 23, 2013 at 5:58 PM by Dot.Shadow

Dot.Shadow wrote:
*sigh*

I wrote a long reply, but it got erased somehow.

I'll try to rewrite my points:

About the slow nade - I view it somewhat like the Wehr faust. Everything I know about the faust is that you only use it when a) To finish off an enemy b) You're desperate. The slow nade is supposed to fulfil the entire Soviet infantry capability of destroying tanks outside of NI (which are doctrinal) - This worries me a great deal. It will leave the Soviet's extremely exposed. They have enough weaknesses already, and adding one more will do them no good. I can go along with HT perhaps not being the best solution, but I don't think removing schrecks from Wehr and telling them that they've got to stick to fausts instead would be a fantastic upgrade for that faction either.

No. It's used so your enemy cannot flank your at guns. It has fairly large range compared to stickies. So, it's easier to use and has a larger area of denial to your enemy.

About your schreck argument: Schrecks cost ammunition, not manpower like tankhunters. You can upgrade them on any grenadier squad and they are mediocre at fighting light vehicles. Tank hunter PTRDs as always-penetrating AT weapons were never really intended. The tank hunters, albeit their name, should not have been the mainstay of stopping enemy tanks.

And as I already said, Soviet lategame will be slightly buffed again, especially the T34-85 main cannon to deal with axis t4 units. AT guns + a stun nade + t34/IS 2 should be enough to go head-to-head with axis lategame armour.

Quote
About the Soviet's being raped: This is more than a balance issue I speak of here - Sure, all early game potential in the faction was obliterated many patches ago, but this is more of a issue of ever decreasing originality and refusal to accept issues like the ones with the Urban doctrine (I'm curious to see what changes were made though!). I'm not sure if there's any point to discussing this. You've got enough with the Ostheer as of now, and you seem fairly set upon the path the Soviets have been taken down the past... year?-ish?

moar originality =/= moar better. You can have 10.000 original, unique ideas and hte gameplay will still suck.

I mean, take a look at PE.

So much original stuff like - shared veterancy! How awesome is that?! Or getting AT vehicles which can damage enemy treads so you can shoot the sitting ducks? Very cool indeed. Or having machine guns after 50 fuel, so much pressuring power for this aggressive gameplay. Early halftracks and mobile mortars!! great!!

And after playing: "Omfg so mcuh broken sh*t wtf is that?! How could someone be as braindead to put stuff like that in a game like CoH? It destroys ze gameplay" - I hope you get my point that originality <<< working gameplay. Sometimes it's better to steal well rather than failing yourself.

So much ranting..

But nontheless, soviets will receive a lot of tweaks with 2.000 also. And maybe...  If we remove some units we're putting other units in as a replacement? ;)