Troop Quality in preferences

[Smersh]

what do you mean their "too strong"?

[serg3d]

They are extremely overpowered if played by human. They roll over German AI so easily, that is no fun to play campain. That probaly because the game balanced to be played mostly as Germans, and Russians as AI.

[Smersh]

you didn't answer the question in what way are they overpowered? too high experiance and morale? high stats of units? what do you mean?

[Charles22]

serg3d said:
They are extremely overpowered if played by human. They roll over German AI so easily, that is no fun to play campain. That probaly because the game balanced to be played mostly as Germans, and Russians as AI.

I think what you're trying to say is that the USSR units are way too cheap in comparison to other nations. I was going to tell you that you were going about changing the USSR prices the wrong way around, and that instead you should just lower the amount of points you get in preferences (you can lower them as well as raise permanently you know), however, if you were to do that I don't think it solves your problem altogether, because it also lowers the points for the USSR enemies, therefore still giving them a much larger force.

Yes, I have the same problem somewhat with the USSR, only I think they made them so cheap because they 'wanted' to recreate something of the hordes sort of approach, however the USSR wasn't as large at numbers, as people mythically seem to think and it does make playing them difficult at times.

There is a slight way you can get around it, that is, you can purchase units and do absolutely nothing with them. Artillery not used comes in real handy for that.

I would asusme you're not buying the best that the USSR has to offer, because early in the war they didn't have a ton of T34's or KV's, so you should purchase quite a bit of the flimsy stuff too. I think you may need to do a combination of that and purchasing artillery that you will never use. When there comes a time that they are having a harder go of it, such as when Tigers come out, then you can consider using the artillery again or whatever other sort of unit you're keeping dormant.

[narwan]

Soviet troops have no extra discount on cost. A units cost is simply determined by its statisitics. This cost is modified by the nations experience and morale. Standard cost (as in the encyclopedia) is listed at experience and morale 70.
So if you start a soviet campaign at a period when the country experience/morale is 55/55 your units will be a lot cheaper. Conversely, if you then play the germans who are at that same time at 75/75 their units will be more expensive. Together the cost difference will be enough to give you significant advantage in numbers if playing the soviet side.
The AI is, IMO, less capable with using expensive high quality troops (which require some finesse to handle well) then it is with cheap low quality troops (the 'horde' tactic). But that's not just the AI; using high quality troops well (as they're likely to be outnumbered) is in my experience more difficult for human players too, especially those new to this game.

One trick you can use tomake your battles more difficult is to increase the size of your core force. This will make the AI get a larger force too. Then set-up the troops you bought as 'extras' along your own map edge. On your first turn move them off-map (into the grey). They will be retreated off map and unavailable to you for the rest of the battle. I haven't tried this myself but in theory it should work.

Narwan

[Charles22]

Yes, I hadn't considered that he may be playing with so small a force that he's not getting much quality opposition.

I'm not sure entirely what he was talking about, as the details aren't too specific, but surely the lack of USSR experience plays in there and I didn't consider that, but I do think their cost, if it's truly all performance-driven, is still out of proportion to their true performance (too cheap). For example, the KV series in the earlier years is invincible to all but the 88, and how many 88's do you anticipate he will see from the AI, especially if the force is small? Consider also that even the T34 is practically invincible if he's loading up with all the good stuff.

I understand also, that the problem may be the system, or rather, that the early USSR is an exception to the system. The problem is that you can only put so much value on armor (I'm not referring to armor in general here, but to the metal protection on armored units), since that same armored rating is ineffectual later in the game. Invincibility is priceless, but you can't give the true worth of that same armor at different periods when it's later vulnerable also, unless you make two or more of the same unit. I'm not suggesting they do that, only when you have invincible armor for a period of time it makes things very difficult to have it either a) underpriced for one period or b) overpriced for another period.

[serg3d]

Charles22 said:
Yes, I hadn't considered that he may be playing with so small a force that he's not getting much quality opposition.

Correct. I prefer battallion level battles and have 1000p allocated at the start of the campain

their cost, if it's truly all performance-driven, is still out of proportion to their true performance (too cheap).

correct.

For example, the KV series in the earlier years is invincible to all but the 88, and how many 88's do you anticipate he will see from the AI, especially if the force is small? Consider also that even the T34 is practically invincible if he's loading up with all the good stuff.

The problem not only with T34 and KV. I tried to minimize their use, but other Russian weapon have too effective price/performance ratio also. DSHK HMG, 57mm ATG, old T-35
- they are all so cheap and effective that even without T34/KV "supertanks" russian beating german too easily.
And I don't like advice about putting some force aside and not using it. It essentially suggestion to rebalance game manually for each battle. The best solution would be just having option to change player/AI point ratio.

I'm not suggesting they do that, only when you have invincible armor for a period of time it makes things very difficult to have it either a) underpriced for one period or b) overpriced for another period.

Yep, that may be a problem too. The solution could be an ability to change point alloctaion ratio per battle , like having easy/medium/hard battle option.

[narwan]

T35 M1938, standard cost is 68 points. KV1 M1940, standard cost is 66 points. T34/76 M1941+, standard cost is 62 points. I can hardly call those T35's cheap?

For comparison, Pnz IIIL, standard cost 60. PnzIVf2, standard cost is 69. StuGIIIf, standard cost is 65. Pnz38e(t) (the beefed up version), standard cost is 44.

57mm AT gun (without sabot), standard cost 31 points. Pak38 (with sabot), standard cost 35.

Nothing inherently cheap about the russians. It would seem you are more than able to compensate for the lack of experience and morale of your units through tactics and maybe exploiting the AI's weaknesses. It's why I hardly ever play battles or campaigns against the AI. Too easy no matter who I play.

Having an easy/medium/hard option for battles/campaigns might be an option although I don't know if it is possible code wise.

Narwan