Profile of Katitof

I still think the late game indirect fire department of USF should be carried by the Pack Howie.

I would also love that, but apparently my idea of removing auto attack, giving PACK howie 6 or more shells in barrage and adjust cost/pop/aoe as needed is too radical.

PACK howi will never serve as anything else then clumsy mortar with better aoe as long as it can shoot only 3 shells.

Those vaguely similar profile images and vaguely similar names are really throwing me off... Sorry about the misunderstanding.

Np.

Where are you getting those numbers from? The accuracy values - and therefore calculations - Vipper posted are consistent with the ones listed on Cruzz's spreadsheet.

Recalculated them myself.
They are still correct values, just presented in different way.
Comparison math is relative and depending on how you want to compare 2 values, you get different results.
Ex:

3 is 150% of 2. But 3 is only 50% increase to 2(values change a bit when you do not have such simple numbers, but relations remain the same). Both are correct, I used the 2nd one, because I know how people who aren't good at math can wrongly interpret the first once, believing the high % values mean more increase then they actually do(I've worked with statistical % data and stupid people a lot).

Besides that, I still don't think you quite understand what Vipper's point in posting those specific stats was. For the point he was trying to prove, only the relative increases at each range matter, and if he tried to calculate those numbers any other way, it would simply be bad math.
An edit: for complaints about bias concerning those specific numbers, I found it interesting that Vipper rounded down every single value in a way that made the buffs appear less substantial than they actually are.

I know that, but he did choose to use bloated value(if its written like that in any documentation, Cruzzes or else it might be the reason why), but you can't talk exclusively about one value increase if another value also was modified specifically to keep first one in check.
Relative DPS increase happened in higher value at long range, that's true, but the actual DPS increase is much lower then accuracy alone would suggest and he never even hinted at that, that's what I meant in terms of bias. He isn't wrong, but by failing to provide damage decrease information and resulting dps(which isn't 166% of old value), he isn't exactly right either. Accounting overkill damage dps decrease is simply for being very detailed or picky, however you want to see it.

Don't want to actually join this conversation but note that Vipper was referring to the fact that the biggest DPS increase actually happened at long range (since you said previously that only their mid-close dps was increased). He was right on this point (and proved it), and you were wrong. Once you understand what he's actually arguing, you realize there was no intent to deceive, since it's all about the relative increases for different ranges, meaning damage numbers (and overkill damage) were not relevant.

I wasn't making that argument, Kirrik did.
I was just addressing the increase wasn't as high as was claimed due to damage being lower.
While increase might still be greatest at long range, the end value is still pretty low.

We're also talking actual 29% accuracy increase compared to base value at close, 25% increase at mid and 60% increase at long range(see how Vippers accuracy numbers suddenly deflated, while still remaining correct? That's how you use relative % increase in non biased way) with 25% loss of damage and about 6-7% loss of total DPS due to overkill damage.

It still is an increase overall, but much less significant then what Vipper claims and even 50% increase from a low value will still give low value, it just won't be dreadfully low anymore.

Volks actually have 12 damage, not 10. REs have 10 damage though.

Then same applies to their Kar DPS. Its not as visible, because they actually have a DPS AND actual weapon upgrade that isn't locked exclusively behind a doctrine.

Thanks for the correction here though, I thought it was 12, but in the context of my previous post that number seemed very odd at the end.

Nothing I posted is incorrect, DPS increase only happened at mid-close ranges and in reality Cons became worse at those range because 12 damage requires 7 shots while 16 requires 5. DPS increase was miniscule did not make up for loss of damage at ranges Cons supposed to be used at. Patch made them reliable, it didnt change the fact they were and are still bad.

Perhaps if you read my posts again my point would be more obvious to you.

There is one another thing that is quite important, but completely ignored, especially by Vipper here.

Yes, DPS was insignificantly increased, but another thing that happened is, cons now do overkill damage, inflicting more damage then is needed to kill a model, which effectively decreases raw dps.

I never understood why they went with odd 12 dmg number instead of 10 voks have. Sure, it would have made TTK at CQC longer, but that's what PPSHs are for and the unit would be even more reliable without DPS loss on overkill damage.

If someone feels like it, feel free to do the math accounting for overkill damage to readjust their actual DPS and compare that with old one to see if that DPS buff vipper clings to so hard even exists, because with 12 damage, TTK is simply not just HP/DPS as it is the case with literally every other rifle squad in game.

PLS check stat before posting:

Accuracy from 0.541/0.495/0.334 to 0.757/0.659/0.556

percentage of change: 139% / 133% /166%

Most gain is AT LONG range

Cool, not stop ignoring the damage went from 16 to 12 and post real number instead of manipulative one once again, trying to invoke bias that they are stronger then they actually are.

Imo that is an indication that USF and Soviet do not mix well and an explanation for that could be that Penals seem to be more cost efficient than Riflemen or Soviet have better units option for supporting their Penals.

That has hardly anything to do with penals.
Soviets do have reliable infantry that aren't cons.
Soviets do have early game light vehicle, indirect fire, mobile army, good elite infantry in form of guards to replace any previous squad loses, light handheld AT reliable enough to fend off lights(except FHT) and deter rushing in with tanks, reliable med tank, reliable TD.

USF doesn't mix well with soviets, because soviets have all the tools USF brings in and more.
Duel soviets have better synergy then USF+soviets as USF is per unit stronger, but overall more limited soviets.

USF mainline infantry might be strongest with upgrades and weapons, but other then mainline infantry excelent scaling, USF doesn't bring anything to soviet team mate. Maybe team weapon drops through paratrooper doctrine, but UKF can do that too and offers what soviets do not have, complimenting them well.

USF was designed around strong shock units to take early game map presence and all of that shock potential was castrated over last 2 years with constant nerfs to the point their tech structure redesign became mandatory, so I'd be very surprised if they were any popular in 2v2 - they just don't bring anything to the table compared to other 2 factions.

Once patch drops we might see them more, but until then we can only speculate. What is sure is that tech revamp and commander revamp might help then enough in team games for them to become relevant again.