There is a difference between weak and not as strong. For example the T34 isnt weak. But its not as strong as an IS2.
I am saying soviet combined arms (at least in 1v1 in my experience) is not as strong as Spamming conscripts or sniper builds. When I say combined arms I mean support teams and I mean more than just two different units.
I disagree here. There are certain maps (kholody and crossing come to mind) where having 2 maxims worked into your build is more useful than having 2 more conscripts. On Kholody, you can use your maxim to help pressure your opponents cutoff at a range greater than the conscripts effective dps against grens, and on crossing even a single maxim has more than enough time to reposition against multiple grens trying to cross the river, try it out and tell me what you think. Most of my build orders vary depending on the map. Also, I would consider a combination of shocks, cons, maxims, and atgs an early game combined arms effort. What do you consider combined arms if not that?
Two Zis are good but 1 Pak can do close to the same job at AT. 2 Maxims when 1 MG42 well microd can do the same thing (when it comes to blob control supporting grens).
I strongly disagree with this point. A single pak cannot cover 2 flanks, just as a single mg42 cannot be in two different parts of the map at the same time. Just because the pak fills a more direct at role does not mean it is as capable and versatile as two zis guns. This is hyperbole.
Can Maxims be useful? Sure. Can Zis be useful? Well yeah its kind of neccassary and the only reason I build T2 to be honest.
People are always going to try and min max what unit is the most cost effective and spam it in every situation regardless of the map or opposing build order, that doesn't mean that there aren't certain situations where an mg is going to be more valuable than another conscript.
Zis reload 4.425
Pak reload: 2.7 to 3.1
You are judging these units in a vaccum. Without the context of where they fit in with each army these values mean next to nothing.
Do i think barrage is useful? Yeah it can be. Maybe one in 10 games ill get 2-3 entity kills with it or free additional tank damage. Do I think it would as useful to saying having the reload down to say 3.5 to 4.1? Not in the least. Would changing it that little really be too much to ask? Would it make the Zis OP? No I think not.
Same goes with the Mortar
82 MM reload of 7.4
81 MM reload of 2.4
A 5 SECOND DIFFERENCE thats just INSANE. Is prec strike useful? Yeah I can spend muni and maybe get 2-3 entity kills for my trouble. Would I just get more kills with having a reload that gets the nicname "Turbo Mortar" for good reason? Yeah I would every game. Much much more valuable.
I mean if that difference in ability doesnt make you go GOOD LORD then you have to be the biggest fanboy on this forum.
Maxim is just personal preference. I want blob control but I cant have everything that I want. The issue with the maxim is dropping the stupid gun because you got hit and then the next guy dropping it etc and you wont be able to retreat.
So I am still of the opinion when I play as Ost and use support teams I get a much better result then when I use the Soviets. Outside of maybe Maxim spam.
I think your underselling the barrage ability, it isn't meant to be spammed, and since the patch it is quite accurate and reliable. I like to open an assault with it by using it on a key mg or pak before making a push.
I agree with the points about the russian mortars, they feel extremely unreliable and the whole "whoops I dropped the gun" issue is endlessly frustrating. I wonder if it would be possible to simply put a set timer on the retreat time for weapon squads. It might look a little goofy for the weapon itself to jump to one of the models on retreat, but I would prefer that than watching a 6 man weapon team die one by one 15 seconds after issuing the retreat command.
United States
0
Uzmanoy
Relic Entertainment
