Login

russian armor

Penal Battalion a completely different approach

27 Dec 2015, 10:51 AM
#1
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1

Let me start by saying that this is conceptual idea so any number presented here might be off and and I focused more on the idea and not numbers.

Problems:
Penals have been proven rather difficult to be useful. When compared to conscripts they have far less utility, are more expensive and they even come with a tech cost.

They are compared to conscript a more elite troops although that does not fit their historical role.

Aim: To make penal a unit that see more usage and better fits it history. Historically they where used more like cannon fodder than "elite" troops.

How to: By reducing the utility of conscript, by giving a new role to Penal and by retaining the flexibility of Soviet tech.

Faction changes:
Penal move to T0 conscripts move to T1.

Changes to conscripts:
Conscripts can no longer ourah or merge, the Molotov is replaced by a grenade (with or without a tech cost). Some price adjustments or performance (size DPS) might be needed.

Changes to Penal:
Cost down to 200, they get ourah (vet 0 or vet 1), Molotov, satchel, maybe AT grenade or satchel becomes easier to use vs vehicles and merge. They can also benefit from other doctrinal abilities like "hit the ground" and rapid conscription returns Penals.

Other abilities the benefit less from cover yellow green and garrison (80-90%) they also are penalized less from red and take reduced suppression (80-90%). Could even get better firing modifier while firing on the move.

They come with 3 mosin 3 PPsh (a bit worse than conscripts at mid maybe better at range 0).

Their role is to frontally attack the enemy using their molotovs and satchel and to reinforce other units via merge.

Problem: Forces Soviet to go T1 to have access to conscripts
Solution: AT certain level of veterancy (vet1 or vet2)or is built Penals can "redeem" themselves and for 40 manpower be upgraded to conscripts.
If T2 is built conscript can be built at HQ and Penals can be redeemed.

As I posted in begging this is only conceptual approach and there might be flaws in it. But in my opinion and gives penal a viable role, it gives Soviets more starting options and make them feel more like the WWII Soviet army that did use cannon fodder tactics...



27 Dec 2015, 10:56 AM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15636 | Subs: 7

Or-now sit tight:

Instead of completely breaking a unit that works(cons), penals cost to 280-290, long dps increase by 100%.

There, unit unique in soviet army, useful at all ranges, but shines at mid or short, what it lacks in utility, makes up for in SVT being useful at all ranges.


You don't fix broken unit by breaking another one in the process.
27 Dec 2015, 11:06 AM
#3
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 10:56 AMKatitof

...
Instead of completely breaking a unit that works(cons), penals cost to 280-290, long dps increase by 100%.
...
You don't fix broken unit by breaking another one in the process.


And thus give Soviets access to a more resilient flamer riflemen with a tech cost...
27 Dec 2015, 11:08 AM
#4
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

By definistion, penalas are made from convicts.
I can imagine them as a people who enjoy to inflict pain without any hesitation, without any scruples. Therefore they should be hard fighting infantry, better than regular conscripts.

Increase the price, give them long-range buff, better rec. acc and they are good to go as a semi-elite infantry.
27 Dec 2015, 11:16 AM
#5
avatar of ATCF
Donator 33

Posts: 587

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 11:06 AMVipper


And thus give Soviets access to a more resilient flamer riflemen with a tech cost...


We can always make them cost 360mp like they originally were, but even Pgrens are cheaper now, so give them the same price and boom!, both armies have units that are good at all ranges, except Pgrens still kick Penals ass in close quaters, but Penals can crew a MG 42, and they become a unflankable machine gun team :)


(As for the Penals changes, Relic would have to hire the voice actor again to perfom other voices for the penals, and i dont think that its worth it to change Penals and Conscripts around, but if you make SVT´s to be good at long range, it will also be a indirect buff to Assault Guards)
27 Dec 2015, 11:16 AM
#6
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1

By definistion, penalas are made from convicts.
I can imagine them as a people who enjoy to inflict pain without any hesitation, without any scruples. Therefore they should be hard fighting infantry, better than regular conscripts.

Increase the price, give them long-range buff, better rec. acc and they are good to go as a semi-elite infantry.


Historically you are wrong, the majority of Penals where actually officer demoted (for not being "brave" enough lots of time)and not sadists/criminals.

They where also used as canon fodder and not as semi elite infantries. They where even used to walk over minefields.

The problem with their current design is that they have a tech cost while far less utility than conscripts, so unless someone goes over the top with their fighting performance they will probably always compare poorly to conscripts...
27 Dec 2015, 11:17 AM
#7
avatar of Luoppis

Posts: 37

Fixing satchels VS garrisons would go a long way.
27 Dec 2015, 11:19 AM
#8
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1

satchel should be fixed regardless of any other change
27 Dec 2015, 11:20 AM
#9
avatar of Stafkeh
Patrion 14

Posts: 1006

So you basicly made the Penals Conscripts and vice versa?
27 Dec 2015, 11:22 AM
#10
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 11:20 AMStafkeh
So you basicly made the Penals Conscripts and vice versa?


Not exactly. More like giving Soviet access to non doctrinal Osstruppen (to me they always felt like a unit Soviet should have) type infantries and spreading the utility of conscripts around.
27 Dec 2015, 11:26 AM
#11
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670

These 'history' lessons in this thread :snfPeter:
27 Dec 2015, 11:27 AM
#12
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15636 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 11:06 AMVipper


And thus give Soviets access to a more resilient flamer riflemen with a tech cost...

As well as stock infantry that actually doesn't need to fight with its rifles stock.
27 Dec 2015, 11:32 AM
#13
avatar of Maschinengewehr

Posts: 334

Penal battalions weren't just "cannon fodder". They were often well equipped, much better than your run of the line strelki. They were given very dangerous tasks, ones that were basically deemed suicidal, but they weren't cannon fodder. Their objective was to succeed and if they didn't then other resources would be assigned to complete the task.

And why would you use penal battalions to walk over minefields? PoWs could do that for you..
27 Dec 2015, 11:38 AM
#14
avatar of KyleAkira

Posts: 410

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 10:56 AMKatitof
Or-now sit tight:

Instead of completely breaking a unit that works(cons), penals cost to 280-290, long dps increase by 100%.

There, unit unique in soviet army, useful at all ranges, but shines at mid or short, what it lacks in utility, makes up for in SVT being useful at all ranges.


You don't fix broken unit by breaking another one in the process.


I like the idea, soviets need some kind of long range infantry.
27 Dec 2015, 11:46 AM
#15
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 11:16 AMVipper


Historically you are wrong, the majority of Penals where actually officer demoted (for not being "brave" enough lots of time)and not sadists/criminals.

They where also used as canon fodder and not as semi elite infantries. They where even used to walk over minefields.

The problem with their current design is that they have a tech cost while far less utility than conscripts, so unless someone goes over the top with their fighting performance they will probably always compare poorly to conscripts...


Well, Im not saying right no about history but about game description :P
27 Dec 2015, 11:48 AM
#16
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1

Penal battalions weren't just "cannon fodder". They were often well equipped, much better than your run of the line strelki. They were given very dangerous tasks, ones that were basically deemed suicidal, but they weren't cannon fodder. Their objective was to succeed and if they didn't then other resources would be assigned to complete the task.
And why would you use penal battalions to walk over minefields? PoWs could do that for you..


If they where used in "suicidal" missions they are "cannon fodder" in my books.

Some times they where well equipped others very poorly...

Don't ask me about the minefields but the officers that sent them...
27 Dec 2015, 11:49 AM
#17
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1



I like the idea, soviets need some kind of long range infantry.


DP Guards are long range infantry...Penals with double Far DPS would still not be long range infantry...
27 Dec 2015, 11:55 AM
#18
avatar of Maschinengewehr

Posts: 334

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 11:48 AMVipper


If they where used in "suicidal" missions they are "cannon fodder" in my books.

Some times they where well equipped others very poorly...

Don't ask me about the minefields but the officers that sent them...


Special forces get sent on highly dangerous missions too. Are they cannon fodder?

"Tramplers" weren't very common. When the abundance of PoWs proved more fruitful for the task, it was scrapped.
27 Dec 2015, 12:02 PM
#19
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8717 | Subs: 1


Special forces get sent on highly dangerous missions too. Are they cannon fodder?
"Tramplers" weren't very common. When the abundance of PoWs proved more fruitful for the task, it was scrapped.

Special forces are highly trained, have considerable support and are set to difficult mission not suicidal.

Definition of cannon fodder via wiki:
The term is generally used in situations where combatants are forced to deliberately fight against hopeless odds (with the foreknowledge that they will suffer extremely high casualties) in an effort to achieve a strategic goal; an example is the trench warfare of World War I.

If you don't like the term cannon fodder then don't use it. The essence remain the same these troops sustained extremely high loses.
Regardless of how common "Tramplers" where it demonstrates how this men where treated...

Anyway probably enough history we should try to get back to the changes suggested...
27 Dec 2015, 12:06 PM
#20
avatar of |GB| The Lnt.599

Posts: 285

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Dec 2015, 10:51 AMVipper
Let me start by saying that this is conceptual idea so any number presented here might be off and and I focused more on the idea and not numbers.

Problems:
Penals have been proven rather difficult to be useful. When compared to conscripts they have far less utility, are more expensive and they even come with a tech cost.

They are compared to conscript a more elite troops although that does not fit their historical role.

Aim: To make penal a unit that see more usage and better fits it history. Historically they where used more like cannon fodder than "elite" troops.

How to: By reducing the utility of conscript, by giving a new role to Penal and by retaining the flexibility of Soviet tech.

Faction changes:
Penal move to T0 conscripts move to T1.

Changes to conscripts:
Conscripts can no longer ourah or merge, the Molotov is replaced by a grenade (with or without a tech cost). Some price adjustments or performance (size DPS) might be needed.

Changes to Penal:
Cost down to 200, they get ourah (vet 0 or vet 1), Molotov, satchel, mabe AT grenade or satchel becomes easier to use vs vehicles and merge. They can also benefit from other doctrinal abilities like "hit the ground" and rapid conscription returns Penals.

Other abilities the benefit less from cover yellow green and garrison (80-90%) they also are penalized less from red and take reduced suppression (80-90%). Could even get better firing modifier while firing on the move.

They come with 3 mosin 3 PPsh (a bit worse than conscripts at mid maybe better at range 0).

Their role is to frontally attack the enemy using their molotovs and satchel and to reinforce other units via merge.

Problem: Forces Soviet to go T1 to have access to conscripts
Solution: AT certain level of veterancy (vet1 or vet2)or is built Penals can "redeem" themselves and for 40 manpower be upgraded to conscripts.
If T2 is built conscript can be built at HQ and Penals can be redeemed.

As I posted in begging this is only conceptual approach and there might be flaws in it. But in my opinion and gives penal a viable role, it gives Soviets more starting options and make them feel more like the WWII Soviet army that did use cannon fodder tactics...





these changes are really big but i like some of your ideas like penals redeem themselves. would be interesting if there is a mod which includes all these changes. for me it is hard to say if it works by pure numbers/stats and i'd rather test it. and one thing, what does happen to the at-nade, i dont really get what you want to do with it.

1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Netherlands 75
unknown 28
United States 1

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag |Zeva| The Angry Dutchman
  • U.S. Forces flag Nicko
uploaded by Stijndee

Board Info

256 users are online: 8 members and 248 guests
Esxile, Mr Carmine, 6evane921gr1, Vipper, SneakEye, Klement Pikhtura, FichtenMoped, blvckdream
149 posts in the last 24h
680 posts in the last week
3080 posts in the last month
Registered members: 28314
Welcome our newest member, 6evane921gr1
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM