Then I suppose I just see things.
I suspect that if Penals were available in another tech structure, they would be seen more often. As it stands, you only go T1 if you intend to go sniper or clown car; going T1 specifically for Penals simply is not worth it. And if you are going sniper or clown car, that is where you will sink your MP.
If Penals were moved to T2 or T3, which most Soviet players in most games are going to build anyway, then they will be available to more players in more games. Not as "elite" infantry, but as a tool for solving specific problems. If you are on a map with a lot of buildings, or facing off against many MG's, or just want to replace a squad that was wiped, Penals will be there and available to use.
Penals don't need a buff, and Soviets as a whole don't need yet more elite infantry. They just need to be available as as option in more games than they are at present.
Well, back to the point now.
... and that sounds exactly like what you are arguing for: more powerful infantry that come out early.
That is pretty much exactly their role.
Utility stripped, combat squad. Firepower support for conscript that has plethora of counters already and is reliant on cover, especially later in the game because of low rec acc vet bonuses.
Penal design and role since day 1 is a more powerful infantry that comes early, but can't operate effectively without con support.
Yes, that's exactly what I said. Which is why I suggested that if Penals were simply moved to a tier that Soviet players are likely to build, they may get more use - not because they are more powerful, but because they are available.
And again, as I've said, they still be ignored, because they provide nothing that cons and CEs can't do by themselves, therefore regarding them useless.
People wouldn't build them at current state even if they were T0, because they don't do much over cons while having utility limited to garison clearing, which both, cons and CEs can do by themselves.
And I'm pointing out that I think you're wrong about that; I think their price is fine for their effectiveness, and that we don't see the because so few people go T1, and those who do are doing it for snipers and clown cars... as I already explained.
Believe me, a LOT of people tried them, tried building strats around them. That do include a number of TOP players who played with them for some time and all came to the same conclusion-they are not worth it in that state.
It became highly ineffective the moment they hit top 200 players.
This is why only people who played for the lulz(Lenny) or no-meta-or-death(sexywingz) used them and even then, they couldn't compete at all with players of equal skill unless opponents threw hard.
People don't go for T1, because units there do not perform cost effectively. That is all.
Similarly with USF, T1 is not meta, but its definitely not POS and everyone goes for it for certain matchups.
Penals are old 222. It doesn't matter if they are "balanced" around their current cost if they don't do the job at all. |
I have not said you CAN'T buff them. I've said that buffing MAY not be the best way, and that buffing them to point of replacing Cons would be futile. So what are you objecting to?
Seeing as you seem to be wholly unaware of what I actually suggested, I'll reiterate; I worry that you would have to give Penals a mega-buff for them to be so attractive as to prompt players to spend Fuel to build T1; and that if they are so attractive, they may overshadow Cons.
Well, I know that you DO NOT want to buff them and believe that moving useless unit to another tier will somehow make it less useless.
It won't. It will be just as useless dead-weight unit and we still have a dead tier, so your suggestion doesn't fix anything, but creates even more problems.
Since you seem to be unaware of what I've suggested previously, I'll repeat it:
Mirror penal dps to rifle DPS(on squad level, not model to model level), adjust cost if needed, done.
Nothing will overshadow cons as long as they are the only ones with AT nades and no one in his right mind uses them for actual damage since they do none without ppsh, vet or not.
I would spend fuel on AI dedicated tier because I'm not a fan of maxim spam(which is a case of my recent lose streak in 1v1-yes, I play 1v1 again), teching later on to T2 isn't super expensive and I need units that actually can stand up to axis infantry early game AND scale into late game. I don't want to be forced for a doctrine only to get working infantry, its bad enough I need to do it if I want working armor.
It's quite difficult for you to "prove" a point that I made myself. I did not say that "100% of the units are fine"; I said that buffing and debuffing are not the only ways that a unit can be affected to make it more accessible.
I agree with you on that one, but the accessibility is NOT an issue here.
There is no problem at all accessing T1 and T2 as soviets since they are relatively cheap techs. The problem is you're paying premium price of tier and are delivered subpar options in return, sniper being best out of three and still being behind one man snipers in terms of RoF, camo and survivability(1 man snipers can take mortar to the fact, sov scout team can't, what was advantage in vanila became disadvantage now).
Price of T1 or penals was never any issue, it was always about penals NOT delivering much in return for the price ever since march deployment patch was introduced.
That is three years since the unit is a POS. Even SU-76 got love. |
That would drop down volks to the bottom of the food chain. As soon as allied infantries start to get their weapons, volks could not keep up with them.
That is different from how it was... ALWAYS how again?
You know, there is a REASON why OKW have 5 dedicated AI squads covering absolutely every single effective range and situation, 2 of them being stock.
Imagine the veterancy buff that is required to keep up with double LMGs. Not to mention you just decreased the number of munition sinks for OKW.
How many muni sinks soviets have in comparison again? OKW have plenty of muni sinks, you just need to pic a doc for that.
And no vet buff makes unit without weapon upgrades compete with one with it, vet3 cons still lose miserably to vet3 LMG grens.
Also there are 3 allied faction. Each represent kinda different options and gamestyles. While on axis side there are only two factions, and this change would just make them more similar.
The two axis armies can cover all the playstyles of three allied armies with exclusion of emplacements, but schwered+med+ISGs cover for that role nicely anyway.
It doesn't matter how many armies there are on the both sides if both have all the tools needed.
Ost and OKW are flexible and have multiple playstyles.
Allied factions dedicate themselves to one or two completely. |
...snippage. The 222 was buffed to make it more attractive for players, not to displace an already existing unit. The fact that this could be done and was done without making the faction significantly more powerful is great.
Cool.
Can we now buff penals to make it more attractive for players?
It wouldn't displace any unit in any way because:
-it doesn't have AT(guards still needed, PTRS cons still an option)
-it doesn't have AT snare or doctrinal support(cons still needed)
-it doesn't have suppression(maxims still needed)
-it doesn't have great durability scaling as any other sov infantry(less rec acc/armor then shocks/guards/cons)
So, they solved the aesthetic problem without having too significant effect and overall power parity. That's precisely the sort of approach I'm suggesting for Penals, as opposed to one that makes Penals inherently superior to the stock infantry.
My solution solves the problem of unit being useless, keeps synergies, grants it a new, unique role, completely prevents any kind of overlaps with any other sov infantry and is extremely simple to implement.
Penals would be superior combatants to cons, but why wouldn't they? They are AI specialists in AI tier, they cost more then cons, but cons would still be needed for AT support and map presence.
As someone who opened a thread asking if the /76 needs love, your attempted reductio ad absurdam cuts no ice. The /76 is NOT in a good spot as evidenced by the fact that it is so seldom seen. Again, that needs a much more delicate approach than simply "buff the unit", because Sovs are doing fine.
I've already proven to you with multiple examples that because faction overall does fine it doesn't mean that 100% of the units are fine. I find it hilarious that you even attempt to discuss that. |
None of which MATTERS because Sovs are performing well in the charts and in tourneys. So whatever issue this is, it's fundamentally AESTHETIC and not one of balance.
Cool, so can we revert 222 buff as ost did ok without it?
Lets also forget about brummbar, army does fine, so the unit is balanced.
Flame hetzer is performing 100% up to the cost too, because OKW does good, therefore flame hetzer is balanced.
M-42 is perfectly fine and valid AT gun, because soviets do well too.
We see IS-2 or T34/85 every single game, which means T34/76 is in perfect spot.
And according to ESL statistics thread, we sould buff brits ASAP, because they are clearly most underpowered army in game, I suggest starting with emplacements.
If it turn out that when something is done about Maxims, Soviets fall off, THEN it will be time to proposes boosts to Cons or Penals or something else. That is not the case now.
Last time devs responded to question about maxim nerf, they have confirmed that nerf won't happen without buff in other area of sov early game and they are aware of under performance of stock units, no need to wait until anything changes, because maxims would have to be removed from the game for players to start using different units instead because these different units DO NOT WORK. |
Clearly untrue. Either way, you should, and probably do, know that the over-effectiveness of Maxims is to be looked at. Just as once before it was Maxims that were never built.
Well, two wrongs doesn't really make a right.
Con based strats are extinct, there are con openings, but there are not con based BOs. It always boils down to maxims or elite inf.
Rest snipped; as I've already indicated, the wipe-resistance of cons alone makes them arguably better than any other late game infantry.
Even king tiger wouldn't be useful if it had command P4 gun.
This is the state of cons atm, they can take punishment from small arms, but at the end its them who are getting attrition as they can't inflict any of their own. It gets even worse against okw call-ins and ost upgrades.
Can penal long range buff fix that? Quite possibly.
This way cons will be needed to screen and deter assaults on squishy, but accurate penals with none of them being able to work independently(well, cons can to a point with ppsh only). |
Which they are intended for in the first place.
I'm quite sure the goal wasn't to beat multiple times more expensive units single handedly.
With current cost and for what it does, well, imagine if T-70 would beat P4.
But since the focus was on volks AT, yeah, OKW gets much better deal then ost here. |
I think you missed the point; if Penals were just better cons - which would be the case if they had AT etc. - then you could end up where Cons never get built, and you;re back to the same problem: one of the units in the roster has no function.
I like how you imply that cons are actually a thing.
Cons are already never build, because they don't work, unlike maxims.
This "backbone" of soviet army has no spine at all and bents like a wet noodle against anything that isn't vanila gren squad, DOCTRINAL upgrades, compared to axis upgrades(say G43) come much later and perform poorly, but they are mandatory to even consider cons a combat squad as they are just more numerous engineers for sandbag placing without them.
They are supposed to work well in numbers, but because of comparable axis infantry cost and much greater scaling and performance of it, getting any kind of numerical advantage to overcome greater firepower is not possible, because axis will always have comparable number of squads, unless the player deliberately stops building infantry.
Hell, CEs have more combat capabilities then cons. Had they 6 men, we'd never seen cons anyway for anything else then AT nades.
And no, we're not back at the same problem.
Previously we had 2 useless units, now, it would be just one. |
Penals and TH Partisans work well together.
Not half as well as volks+pfussies or any other elite inf. |
|
You're using hotkey to get out of garrison I assume? |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
