And yet you forgot about scripts...which is the problem. How do we get penals without overlapping scripts when penals can be built at the same time?
Also, since you didn't see it before, the problem with a long range garrison clearing unit is that it is too potent (rifles with flames). Stand at range and your opponent has to close the gap to fight, but once they close they get lit up by the flamethrower, what are other infantry supposed to do?
Another issue to look at, if Penals win long range how does Ost compete early game? Or if penals have anti-garrison with more survivability how do they not become too good on urban maps? Also you make it look like you will get all three units, shocks, guards, penals, when obviously you will have 1 or at most 2 in any game. This means that changes to your simple set up would leave a Soviet player significantly handicapped at some range. Instead the goal is to offer Soviets many tools and allow good decision processes to choose who wins the game, not who has more tools in the toolbox.
Stop acting like balance is obvious, it takes a lot of work to come up with ideas about how to work the game.
Hmm, are Conscripts meant to be long range anti-garrison?
Here I was thinking, they were meant to be a cheap, disposable squad with both acceptable anti-tank and anti-infantry abilities. Guess I was totally wrong! /s
Sure, there are problems with a long range + garrison clearing unit. If we pretend that this is a one unit vs one unit game, played in a vaccuum with zero supporting squads, and you know, all the other stuff that occurs in reality in this game..
It's almost as if thinking about where to set up a covering MG completely stops a Penal squad moving in, in their freaking tracks. They also absolutely can't push across open ground towards LMG units either.
Now, onto the bolded part: This is the most ass-backwards reasoning I have yet to hear regarding this.
You want the Soviet's to have a clear choices regarding what units they want to focus on given the combat situations on a given map...
WTF are Doctrines even FOR then?
Basically, what you're saying is this "I want the Soviet's to be completely tactically flexible, regardless of doctrine choice." And to that I say absolutely, unequivocally, jump in a river. It's completely stupid.\
is this really?
"Hmm, close range map with tight spaces and garrisons. I should probably focus on Shocks/Penals, and not so much on Gaurdsman. I should probably be careful in the few open parts of the map."
"Hmm, more open map? Few garrisons? Maybe some guards a few conscripts?"
But apparently, you want to have your cake, the entire fridge, the next door neighbors dinner, and eat it ALL too.