Login

russian armor

State of the Soviets

PAGES (17)down
4 Dec 2019, 18:57 PM
#1
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 281

This thread is specifically for the discussion around the Soviets that took place in the WCS Stats thread before it was derailed by flaming and talk about Brit balance.

It seems most people universally agreed that the Soviets are too overtuned right now. I argued in the other thread that was mainly because the Soviets at present do not have any weakness or phase of vulnerability.

Penals have been almost completely phased out and replaced by Conscripts. That means Soviets usually start with four conscripts that allow them to take and hold large chunks of the maps. Guards or oorah cons effectively deal with light vehicles, so those don't work.

Then comes the T70, which is by far the biggest power spike in the game. In the past, when Penals were meta, that usually left Soviets vulnerable because they couldn't get a tank of their before the P4 hit the field. Nowdays though, with Conscripts being the new meta, a Soviets will usually tech t2 and get double Zis guns to hardcounter any Axis medium tank.

And then, of course, there is the IS2. Unlike Allied tank destroyers, which have enough range and penetration to reliably deal with Tigers (And King Tigers), Axis tank destroyers (StuG and JP4) don't have enough penetration to reliably deal with the IS2. The result is that you're almost forced to go Tiger, because the Panther can barely hold off the IS2, and is definitely outclassed when the IS2 hits vet 2.

The other issue is that 7 man cons are not just potent main line infantry, but also incredibly difficult to kill, while barely bleeding MP due to the reinforcement costs.

Which begs the question, how to fix the Soviets?

To be clear: This is about 1v1 and 2v2.
4 Dec 2019, 19:03 PM
#2
avatar of blancat

Posts: 788

nerf 7 man conscript reinforce cost (17mp->20mp)

nerf shock troop (6 man -> 5 man, cost 360mp -> 340mp)

nerf Is-2 cost (640/230 -> 680/240)

T-70 need no change
4 Dec 2019, 19:08 PM
#3
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3605 | Subs: 1

It's very difficult to say what you can do to soviets without major reworks. Penals and conscripts will always fight for their slot as mainlines, and if penals are not OP, they will not be used because they're behind a very AI based tech structure that pushes you out of AT practically.

I'll wait a bit to see what other people say about the faction, however I think although the T70 is easily the best light in the game, I don't think it requires a change. Its damage is decent and cannot be ignored, but being properly prepared with mines and AT guns can hamper any LV well enough.
4 Dec 2019, 19:15 PM
#4
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 618


And then, of course, there is the IS2. Unlike Allied tank destroyers, which have enough range and penetration to reliably deal with Tigers (And King Tigers), Axis tank destroyers (StuG and JP4) don't have enough penetration to reliably deal with the IS2. The result is that you're almost forced to go Tiger, because the Panther can barely hold off the IS2, and is definitely outclassed when the IS2 hits vet 2.

The other issue is that 7 man cons are not just potent main line infantry, but also incredibly difficult to kill, while barely bleeding MP due to the reinforcement costs.

Which begs the question, how to fix the Soviets?

To be clear: This is about 1v1 and 2v2.


+1 and thx for the good post.

I could live with the stronger conscripts but the IS-2 is a real problem imo. The problem starts with the fact that the unit turns the SU faction in a strong late game faction although this phase of the game should be the faction's weakness. The IS-2 is not only super strong, soviet players can also back it up with self spotting tds.

That being said i also want to point out a fact that did not get much attention:
Factions who are designed to be superior in early and midgame should NOT get their heavies at the same time like axis factions or brits.

My suggestion:
IS-2: CP increase to 11 CP, small cost increase like Blancat suggested




4 Dec 2019, 19:16 PM
#5
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 3

And again, a tug of war between Conscripts and Penalties, who would have expected such a problem between two starting infantry units? It’s long time ago to get rid of one unit, but this will never happen - because there are no balls to take such a step.
4 Dec 2019, 19:18 PM
#6
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3217

The IS-2's armour value is an issue because OST and OKW have pretty middling penetration on their tank destroyers.

The Tiger is a solid strategic counter, but that's not good for commander diversity.

If you take the current IS-2 out of the picture, Soviets are fine.
4 Dec 2019, 19:19 PM
#7
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 281



+1 and thx for the good post.

I could live with the stronger conscripts but the IS-2 is a real problem imo. The problem starts with the fact that the unit turns the SU faction in a strong late game faction although this phase of the game should be the faction's weakness. The IS-2 is not only super strong, soviet players can also back it up with self spotting tds.

That being said i also want to point out a fact that did not get much attention:
Factions who are designed to be superior in early and midgame should NOT get their heavies at the same time like axis factions or brits.

My suggestion:
IS-2: CP increase to 11 CP, small cost increase like Blancat suggested






This is a good point I would like to emphasize. Soviets used to be an early-mid faction, but have now become the strongest late game faction in addition to still being incredibly strong in the early to mid. For obvious reasons, that is problematic.

And again, a tug of war between Conscripts and Penalties, who would have expected such a problem between two starting infantry units? It’s long time ago to get rid of one unit, but this will never happen - because there are no balls to take such a step.


While this would be interesting, I think it's too late in the game's cycle for such a huge change.
4 Dec 2019, 19:23 PM
#8
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2041

What makes Soviets a bit too good is the late-game. It's almost impossible to fight against IS2/KV2+SU85+Katjusha+7man Conscripts unless you have a significant resource advantage. Soviet early and mid-game are fine. ISU in 2v2 is also questionable IMO. Maybe to a lesser extent in premade games but in random 2v2 without Ele it's a nightmare to deal with.

Airborne is also a questionable doctrine IMO. I hate the rocket attack + ram cheese that is abused at the moment and I also don't like that you can give endless SVTs and Dhsk to your teammate in 2v2.
4 Dec 2019, 19:26 PM
#9
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 281

What makes Soviets a bit too good is the late-game. It's almost impossible to fight against IS2/KV2+SU85+Katjusha+7man Conscripts unless you have a significant resource advantage. Soviet early and mid-game are fine.

Airborne is also a questionable doctrine IMO. I hate the rocket attack + ram cheese that is abused at the moment and I also don't like that you can give endless SVTs and Dhsk to your teammate in 2v2.


Agreed on all counts. I don't mind if they're strong in the early and mid game, but when they become even more powerful in the late game there is a problem.
4 Dec 2019, 19:27 PM
#10
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1435

Problems with SU:

- 7man cons too good.
-zis barrage too good.
- IS2 overall is balanced but in 1v1s they are much better due to disparity in pen values between axis and allied TDs, so IS2 stall (and KV2 stall for that matter) in tournaments is actually a solid strat. 375 armor on allied tank is more valuable than on axis tank.
- People complain about T70, but T70 is actually fine. It comes quite late for a light tank and hence why its the best light tank in the game.
4 Dec 2019, 19:34 PM
#11
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2041

Regarding the IS2. People are right when they complain about it being OP but so is Pershing and Tiger. They all need to be toned down a little.
4 Dec 2019, 19:36 PM
#12
avatar of Stormjäger

Posts: 2636

Conscripts: Remove all combat bonuses (but not xp gain) from 7 man upgrade, make it a global upgrade from HQ for about 40 fuel after T4 is built.

Tier 1: I’d like to see T1 as an optional addition to the normal meta rather than an either or scenario.

T70: raise fuel cost by 10

SU76: Free barrage, but all su76 on the map share a global cooldown. Increase rotation speed by 10%.

T34/76: Increase penetration by 10 at all ranges.

Penals: Increase price to 340mp, give back flamethrower.

M3A1: Increase build time.

Maxim: Double build time, increase cost to 300mp, make it a competent MG that does its job.
4 Dec 2019, 19:38 PM
#13
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1435

Regarding the IS2. People are right when they complain about it being OP but so is Pershing and Tiger. They all need to be toned down a little.


IS2 is most op in 1v1. 375 armor vs 300 or 270 is a MAJOR advantage of the IS2. Tiger and Persh are fine. And I think TA is actually overpriced for what it does. Regular Tiger is much better.
4 Dec 2019, 19:41 PM
#14
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 817

Regarding the IS2. People are right when they complain about it being OP but so is Pershing and Tiger. They all need to be toned down a little.


The IS2 and Pershing seem much cheaper than other heavies b/c they don't require more tech than a medium. KT, Ost tiger at least cost more to unlock than say a p4.

Soviets seem quite strong in the vehicle phase b/c the infantry all blows up the same and Soviet infantry is cheapest. Plus they are not missing units or mechanics in their roster like some other factions (rocket arty, TD, heavy tanks) as blvckdream mentioned the 4-5 units that are strong for soviets late game.

They are however quite weak until they get t3 units out since t1 and t2 don't offer much in the way of good bridge units.

Looking at a lot of other factions they have clear problems that might be fixed to bring them in line more easily than changing soviets just b/c they can win games (ost no light tank, okw healing or light vehicles, usf weak late, brits :luvDerp: )
4 Dec 2019, 19:48 PM
#15
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2041



The IS2 and Pershing seem much cheaper than other heavies b/c they don't require more tech than a medium. KT, Ost tiger at least cost more to unlock than say a p4.



OKW Tiger costs no extra fuel either. OKW Tiger is actually cheaper to unlock than IS2. It costs OKW 195 fuel when going mech and even less with T1.

Ost Tiger costs 200 fuel with BP1+2+3 plus T1+T2+T3 building. IS2 costs 210 fuel with T2,T3,T4 and Conscript upgrades. Pershing costs 200 fuel with Major+one officer+ one LV upgrade, ambulance and weapon racks.
4 Dec 2019, 20:02 PM
#16
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 7104 | Subs: 1

Copy paste from other thread.

Heavies:

-Delay heavy vehicles by 2 CPs

-Tiger and IS2 vet 2 extended range removed. Swap 10% reload from vet 3. Vet 3 goes to -23% from -30% (basically similar numbers total).

-IS2 armor from 375 to 350

-I'll abstain giving specific numbers but probably small cost increases to all heavies (Tiger, IS2, Pershing, TA) and/or pushing them back a bit further on tech whether one option is better.

NOTE: values could go down further but too many drastic changes at same time generally are bad.

SU:
-Remove the upgrade on 7 man conscript from T3 (did anyone actually tried to get it early at all?)
-Option1: nerf the offensive bonus on cover, to 15%
-Option2: when at T4, Conscript can upgrade to 7 man. For the mp, vet and cover bonuses, they have to unlock it.

-Su85: Reduce the penetration bonus at vet 2 from 30% to 10%.
This makes the unit effectively be able to fight equally at vet 0 vs vet 0 PV and at vet 2 vs vet 2 PV if i did the math right. The 10% increment is also enough to push the pen over 100% against PIV (right now there is a really small chance at max range at vet 0).
TDs are at a good enough level at vet 0 ATM that i don't think they need to tip the scale so heavily once they vet.
4 Dec 2019, 20:05 PM
#17
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3217

Would dropping the IS-2's armour to 350 really have a substantial impact on the StuG and JPIV's pen chances?
4 Dec 2019, 20:08 PM
#18
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 897

Cons vs. Penals
Penals could go for a SLIGHT (+10mp) price increase (and increased reinforce along with it). More importantly, Vet requirements need to increase. They currently level incredibly quickly, and losing even a Vet 3 squad in late game isn't as impactful as it should be.

Cons need their Vet 2/3 bonuses toned down a bit so they don't become so resilient in the late game, especially with the 7-model upgrade. Alternatively, the 7-model upgrade needs the reinforce cost and cover bonuses removed.

Ideally, the choice should come down to having a cheaper but better mid-game unit that falls off late-game (cons), or a more expensive unit that scales slower but better into late game (penals).


T70
Needs to be either be delayed even further, or toned down a lot. Personally, I'd prefer the later of those two options. The cannon needs to be less effective vs infantry than it currently is; copying the stats of the M5A1 or AEC cannons might be enough of a change. Additionally, if needed, remove "recon mode"; this gives the unit tons of late game utility (especially at Vet1) that other comparable LVs don't provide (LOS, Capping).


M3A1
Probably lesser known, but moving accuracy for the units inside needs to be lowered a LOT. Chasing retreating units with a flamer engie squad inside is simply too cost effective, and far too strong. Putting a flamer in the HT should make it effective vs. garrisoned or stationary units instead (i.e. avoiding suppression), where moving accuracy isn't really an issue.


IS2
Front armor to 300 (-75), vet 0 range to 45 (+5). Yes it's a dramatic change, but it's warranted. Axis simply doesn't have the super high pen, high mobility/range TDs allied factions have access to. The added range is to standardize it to other call-in heavies (Tiger, KT, Pershing) and provide is a bit of a bonus for losing all that armor. Additionally, the range vet bonus would need to be adjusted down slightly, so it's total range with vet doesn't increase.

4 Dec 2019, 20:24 PM
#19
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 618


And I think TA is actually overpriced for what it does. Regular Tiger is much better.


+1
TA comes later than the IS-2 but costs way more fuel although the impact is basically the same. And Allies can counter Tiger/TA better than Axis can counter the IS-2.

slight cost decrease for TA is needed: 720 MP, 240 fuel, 10 CP

IS-2: CP increase to 11 CP, small cost increase (because Soviets should not get heavies at the same time like factions who are supposed to dominate the late game)
4 Dec 2019, 20:28 PM
#20
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2369 | Subs: 5

T70
[…]
Additionally, if needed, remove the "recon mode" vet bonus; this gives the unit tons of late game utility that other comparable LVs don't provide (LOS, Capping)


Odd statement, to be frank. Scaling because of utility is exactly how all light vehicles should have been designed, so they are still useful in the late game when they can't fight effectively anymore. The utility scaling of the T70 is great, and other light vehicles should've been designed like it (Puma and AEC are to some extend, with handy disable abilities to help fight enemy tanks). Not the other way around. Players should be rewarded for keeping their light vehicles alive, instead of being encouraged to send them off to die because they just take up popcap.
PAGES (17)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
UTT2 Main Event

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag T.R. 6 squads, 4 maxim 2 engies
  • U.S. Forces flag °NOSMarkov.-
uploaded by KahootKing

Board Info

155 users are online: 8 members and 147 guests
Olvadi, suora, Colonel0tto, Katitof, Vipper, Baba, Muad'Dib, DonnieChan
108 posts in the last 24h
974 posts in the last week
4665 posts in the last month
Registered members: 22654
Welcome our newest member, glass024yy
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM