Login

russian armor

Conscript Utility

PAGES (14)down
31 Jan 2019, 00:21 AM
#41
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3170 | Subs: 1


Ok, as always thanks for setting me straight.
Side bar, do g43s lock out weapon slots too? Or is it just a volks stg thing?


No G43s don't use up any weapon slots. You just can't buy the LMG42/pschreck/mp40s alongside buying G43s. You can pick up weapons though.
31 Jan 2019, 00:27 AM
#42
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 1



No G43s don't use up any weapon slots. You just can't buy the LMG42/pschreck/mp40s alongside buying G43s. You can pick up weapons though.


Thanks!

So it's just a volks stg thing then eh? Seems reasonable.
31 Jan 2019, 01:05 AM
#43
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 6251 | Subs: 1




The real vet 3 stats are: Cons 0.71 and Grens 0.7


I just checked the vet guide (which is outdated). Forgot they reduce it and changed it around.

Veterancy 1 now grants 0.92 received accuracy

Veterancy 3 Received accuracy from 0.6 to 0.707
31 Jan 2019, 02:49 AM
#44
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3170 | Subs: 1



Thanks!

So it's just a volks stg thing then eh? Seems reasonable.


The volk StGs just take up 2 slots. There was a test in DBP in 2017 where they changed it to only 1 slot, and then they could pick up another weapon. OP as all hell. Quickly changed back to 2 slots.
4 Feb 2019, 16:27 PM
#45
avatar of mons7erz

Posts: 78

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2019, 07:03 AMullumulu
i dont get why ppl complaining about side tech fuel costs.

pls take a calcualtor and calc the following:

ost tech t1 and build t1 = ?
sov build t1 and tech nades + molos = ?



To be fair, Mollys are really only good at cover denial and static targets.
Also, this is like comparing apples to oranges, sure your T1 upgrade is 5 more Fuel expensive, But what do you get from it?
Rifle Nades, And LMG42s-AKA Arguably the best non-doc weapon upgrade in the game.
So I'd honestly say that balances things out.
8 Feb 2019, 17:53 PM
#46
avatar of Sussenka

Posts: 8

In my experience the biggest problem with Conscripts is the sideteching. I'm fine with them being more of a utility focused unit. I actually think it is an interesting design. Cons aren't too capable in terms of AI in the mid and late game but there are other units like Penals, T-70, Maxims (although it probably could use a slight buff), Guards, Shocks, T-34s to do the killing for you. Or you can use a doctrine with PPShs.

But the problem is, that if I'm getting a squad mainly for it's utility I don't really want to build to many of them. Such an army will struggle with insufficient firepower. And that's when the sidetech comes into play.
Can you build a single squad of conscripts to have something to snare enemy vehicles?
Well yes, you can. But you're gonna be paying 365mp/25fu (240/0 Cons + 125/25 AT nades) for it. Even with 2 cons it come to about 302/12 per squad, and at that point you're much better off just calling in some Guards.

In short having to sidetech makes the Conscripts more cost effective if you get a lot of them, but they're a unit that would ideally be used in a combined arms composition.

My suggestion to fix this is to have the AT nades unlock for free when any of the tier buildings is constructed and then shift a part of the sidetech cost to T3 and/or T4 (changing the cost of T1/T2 would mess with soviet openings). This would result in:
  • Conscript builds would get armour earlier
  • Penal and Maxim builds would get armour later
  • Most soviet builds would get AT nades earlier
  • It would be viable (or at least more then presently) to build just a couple of Cons to support you army with snares


If 3) creates balance issues we could experiment with locking AT nades behind the T3 instead or even something like make T3 cost less but have it require either of the grenade sidetechs in addition to an earlier tech being built (some changes to sidetech costs might be required).

Molotovs could recieve a similar treatment but imo they're niche enough and cheap enough that they might as well stay as is.
8 Feb 2019, 20:22 PM
#47
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 1638

To me, its better if cons came with molotovs unlocked. AT should be still a sidetech bcos they can sprint and thats a very powerful combo
8 Feb 2019, 22:24 PM
#48
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 1

Well, tbh I think the molotov feels like a vet ability, not an unlocked one. Could put oorah in its place and reduce the AT nade cost slightly so that HAVING oorah and AT nades is an investment but one or the other is more manageable. I still think even with those changes a price reduction would be needed for cons but that's me
9 Feb 2019, 02:55 AM
#49
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1662

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2019, 07:03 AMullumulu
i dont get why ppl complaining about side tech fuel costs.

pls take a calcualtor and calc the following:

ost tech t1 and build t1 = ?
sov build t1 and tech nades + molos = ?



Time is also a factor.
9 Feb 2019, 06:25 AM
#50
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2679

IMO its pretty much fine how it is. Conscripts should have to unlock their utilities if only because they're already a dirt cheap squad with 6 men and sprint, and get really tough with vet. Sure, their utilities are what keeps them in the game, but I never found the sidetech to be too much of an issue with soviets for whatever reason.
9 Feb 2019, 07:01 AM
#51
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 1

IMO its pretty much fine how it is. Conscripts should have to unlock their utilities if only because they're already a dirt cheap squad with 6 men and sprint, and get really tough with vet. Sure, their utilities are what keeps them in the game, but I never found the sidetech to be too much of an issue with soviets for whatever reason.


Hardly "dirt cheap" at 240mp.
Tbh cons wouldn't seem so trash if volks couldn't do nearly everything they can, but better for nothing but an extra 10mp and thr desire to get tanks.
Comparing cons to volks you end up paying almost the same, for less. The you dump extra resources into sidegrades that preform worse.

Cons should be cheaper if they are to remain as an unbundled squad plain and simple. They are supposed to be a choice for early map control... One that is matched by both enemy factions base squads (both of whom out fight and out scale cons) their costs simply don't reflect their performance. Oorah doesn't offset STGs.

Perhaps swapping oorah into the ppsh doctrines and making hit the dirt cons vet 1 could make them a bit more attractive by making iy so they maybe at some point CAN hold ground by out lasting the enemy instead of bleeding mp by dying in mass while killing nothing?
9 Feb 2019, 23:32 PM
#52
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2679



Hardly "dirt cheap" at 240mp.
Tbh cons wouldn't seem so trash if volks couldn't do nearly everything they can, but better for nothing but an extra 10mp and thr desire to get tanks.
Comparing cons to volks you end up paying almost the same, for less. The you dump extra resources into sidegrades that preform worse.

Cons should be cheaper if they are to remain as an unbundled squad plain and simple. They are supposed to be a choice for early map control... One that is matched by both enemy factions base squads (both of whom out fight and out scale cons) their costs simply don't reflect their performance. Oorah doesn't offset STGs.

Perhaps swapping oorah into the ppsh doctrines and making hit the dirt cons vet 1 could make them a bit more attractive by making iy so they maybe at some point CAN hold ground by out lasting the enemy instead of bleeding mp by dying in mass while killing nothing?

I'm more talking about the 20 mp reinforce cost.

In general, I find cons to be great if supported by elite infantry. They don't do a lot of damage but they're cheap to reinforce and get pretty tough with vet and have good utility. Team weapons work too, but the maxim kinda sucks so :guyokay:

I think volks are able to do too much tbh. Not sure how I'd change that, but I don't think that they should be able to have as much utility as they do and still be able to go toe to toe with more expensive allied infantry. Although cons do have an extra man and can sprint, so that's the one thing they have over volks.
9 Feb 2019, 23:44 PM
#53
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 1


I'm more talking about the 20 mp reinforce cost.

In general, I find cons to be great if supported by elite infantry. They don't do a lot of damage but they're cheap to reinforce and get pretty tough with vet and have good utility. Team weapons work too, but the maxim kinda sucks so :guyokay:

I think volks are able to do too much tbh. Not sure how I'd change that, but I don't think that they should be able to have as much utility as they do and still be able to go toe to toe with more expensive allied infantry. Although cons do have an extra man and can sprint, so that's the one thing they have over volks.

The 20mp reinforce would be better if they were more than just bodies to die. Don't get me wrong, I don't want them to fight better, but when the enemy is paying the same as you for a squad that will in time absolutely shit can your squads there is something wrong and sprint doesn't make up for that. If cons were THE utility squad that would be fine, but again, Volks can do almost everything cons can AND fight. Sandbags used to be a very powerful and unique trait that made cons desirable and a trade off for lower combat power--and again we run into volks having that advantage with no sacrifice.


Cons arnt ~~BAD~~ just comparatively ineffecient.
10 Feb 2019, 15:14 PM
#54
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 315

Volks can fight have strong field presence and scale while also having cons level of utility. And dont eat muni to be at full potential.

Cons cant fight dont scale without doctrines and eat muni to preform on a base level while also requiering specific side tech. but have same level off utility as volks and can give field presence to other units. And can become durable through vet.

All in all volks punch way above their price class off 250 mp. Cons are actualy balanced imo. Volks need to loose either utility or dps/scaling in some way.

10 Feb 2019, 16:11 PM
#55
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 1638

...volks punch way above their price...

Not this again...
:banned:

10 Feb 2019, 16:40 PM
#56
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 315

When you compare them it becomes obvious that they do just that. 10mp does not equate how much better volks are overall.

Their combination in the levels of utility and fighting power are to high for that price. 10 mp diffence does not cover or justify this.

Yes cons are cheaper to reinforce but they drop models like crazy. require specific tech to get basic abilities. And they require doctrines to scale.
10 Feb 2019, 17:24 PM
#57
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2679

Volks can fight have strong field presence and scale while also having cons level of utility. And dont eat muni to be at full potential.

Cons cant fight dont scale without doctrines and eat muni to preform on a base level while also requiering specific side tech. but have same level off utility as volks and can give field presence to other units. And can become durable through vet.

All in all volks punch way above their price class off 250 mp. Cons are actualy balanced imo. Volks need to loose either utility or dps/scaling in some way.


I kinda agree with that. IMO they should be 27mp to reinforce considering utility and the fact that they really do practically trade with riflemen until the very late game and 120 muni investment into each rifleman squad. Add onto that their much better timings for weapon upgrades and grenade access and some nicely timed vet bonuses (-10% RA at vet1, better than "unlocks AT rifle grenade" or "tripwire flare").

Not this again...
:banned:


Calling for bans on people who disagree with your opinion? Seems levelheaded and reasonable.
10 Feb 2019, 18:48 PM
#58
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 1638


Calling for bans on people who disagree with your opinion? Seems levelheaded and reasonable.

Oh wait, this is the first time someone plays the cheap card saying volks are the problem. Yeah there are 5 threads for that, you can go cry yourself to sleep there.

Edit: Lets start to get some constructive discussions. If not Always the grass is greener on the other side, and this forum will not be other thing but toxic discussions of nonesense people bashishg each others heads
10 Feb 2019, 20:25 PM
#59
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 1


Oh wait, this is the first time someone plays the cheap card saying volks are the problem. Yeah there are 5 threads for that, you can go cry yourself to sleep there.

Edit: Lets start to get some constructive discussions. If not Always the grass is greener on the other side, and this forum will not be other thing but toxic discussions of nonesense people bashishg each others heads


Like it or not, Volks are the common denominator. Cons v grens are balanced but vs volks cons fall flat. Rifles vs grens are balanced, but volks trade well against rifles which they shouldn't give what volks can do an what rifles can do (sandbags, deny cover, self heal with vet) and the main thing is without any outside costs.

When threads about allied infantry not performing according to cost people don't compare them to grens because they have a clear role and clear cut limitations. Volks less so.
10 Feb 2019, 20:45 PM
#60
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6271 | Subs: 1


Like it or not, Volks are the common denominator...


Yet the benchmark was and should be again grenadiers and not volks.
PAGES (14)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Thank you everyone for making WCS possible!
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • The British Forces flag [c.B] Guard2707
  • Soviets flag [c.B] Brosras
  • Oberkommando West flag 女性主意
  • Ostheer flag 101 Airborne Divison
uploaded by koreanmaphack

Board Info

229 users are online: 10 members and 219 guests
Crecer13, Endeffektdelirium, Mr Carmine, RagnarTheGamer, Sander93, Dexn, SeductiveCardbordBox, aboud_ama, MMX, Cresc
147 posts in the last 24h
1417 posts in the last week
7073 posts in the last month
Registered members: 65797
Welcome our newest member, Ingegnerise9
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM