[1.11] Soviet Infantry Problem

[HansBlix]

Hey,

I was playin this Mod for a few days now, and I've read a few threads about the balancing problems.

I think there is a basic problem in the strength of soviet infantry squads. They are way too strong.

Historically soviet infantry was very weak, bad training, poor equipment, low fighting spirit. Of course it changed during the war, but still average german infantry was WAY STRONGER than average soviet infantry. A Grenadier squad should be able to beat everything up to soviet guards. The idea behind the army should be quantity rather than quality. Though I see the intention of the devs to get there, ATM it has both: Strelkys, Flame-Ingenerys, Command-unit (with Artillery!?!?), Guards (unsupressable?!?!), no cost nades & weapons make the red army's infantry way to strong. Historically and regarding the balance.

I know that for a game history is not everything, but in this case the balancing problems go hand in hand with the historical inaccuracy.

I suggest: Grens Vet3 > Guards = Grens Vet2 > Strelkys Vet3 > Volks Vet2 > Grenadiers > Strelkys > Volks > Conscripts = Pioneers > Ingenery

Since SU-Infantry has more men it makes things pretty even. When pop cap for both armies is reached, Wehrmacht should count something between 2/3 - 1/2 of soviet infantry in men.

The basic concept behind the infantry should be:

Wehrmacht = few high specialised elite soldiers

vs

Soviet = many low skilled footmen + a little amount of good soldiers

Best & Keep up the decent work. There are just a few steps to get this awesome mod to be one brilliant piece of gameplay.

Hans

[Red_Stinger]

The infantry of soviet union is not overpowered, but its obvious that a strelky section can beat volks and even grens if they do not use nades, because its a 6-man squad (or more)! You should use MG42 to suppress soviet infantry every time you can, or they will flank your infantry more easily.

The basic concept behind the infantry should be:

Wehrmacht = few high specialised elite soldiers

vs

Soviet = many low skilled footmen + a little amount of good soldiers

Thats exactly how EF is made. And thats sometimes against historical accuracy. I dont understand why every people seem to think that red army was composed of weak but numerous troops, and ostheer was entirely an elite army. There was in both army elite high-skilled troops and less skilled one!

Soviet Union is well-made atm. Am I the only one to think this? I mean, there is known problem, like 'super ptrd' unit which can rape everything, but soviet infantry (conscript, strelkys, guards, command squad) seem to be balanced in regards to Werhmacht infantry.

[HansBlix]

The infantry of soviet union is not overpowered, but its obvious that a strelky section can beat volks and even grens if they do not use nades, because its a 6-man squad (or more)! You should use MG42 to suppress soviet infantry every time you can, or they will flank your infantry more easily.

Sry, but I completely disagree. MG42 of course works excellent against Soviets (at least til guards appear) but i tested a lot squads in 1on1 fights and got the impression i mentioned above.

There was in both army elite high-skilled troops and less skilled one

Yes, but the percentage of skilled troops in quality and quantity in the german wehrmacht was by far higher than in the red army. There were also other reasons for the strenght of german ground forces. The basic training was way better and more complex, the equipment was better and the commando structure was more efficient which increased maneuverability of german infantry. There are a lot of books about this ("Fighting Power" by van Creveld is one of the most scientific), but a simple look on the ratio of casualities of battles during the russian campaign gives an answer to this question.

And yes, the devs are on the right path. But i got the impression that they slightly overstepped the line, regarding the fighting power of "their" russian infantry. A completely understandable flaw, but sure has to be fixed to get this mod to become a smooth and nearly balanced game.

[Red_Stinger]

If you fight against AI soviet thats normal. AI got bonus. Over a "real" player, I'm pretty sure that forces are much more balanced 

Once time, I was playing werh against soviet AI. I hunted a sharpshooter team with a puma. When it discovered them, it take a longgggg time to kill one of two, and the second retreated. Then I tried to play as soviet against werh AI. I made a sharpshooter team and I tried to engage a puma with. They have been slaughtered within a couple of second! 

Yes, but the percentage of skilled troops in quality and quantity in the german wehrmacht was by far higher than in the red army. There were also other reasons for the strenght of german ground forces. The basic training was way better and more complex, the equipment was better and the commando structure was more efficient which increased maneuverability of german infantry. There are a lot of books about this ("Fighting Power" by van Creveld is one of the most scientific), but a simple look on the ratio of casualities of battles during the russian campaign gives an answer to this question.

I disagree ! Lol

The basic training in Red Army was very similar to any other army, but the Purge of stalin decrease global training and discipline in most of reserve unit. When the war began, it takes a long time to have good officer. But that's not the main point in a defensive war, and when the tide turned in 1943, soviet officer were at least as good as any german/american officer, thats why Bagration was so successful. Same is applied to command structure of soviet army, due to stalin's purge. By the end of 43 it was enough to coordinate millions of soldiers.

Ratio casualties? lol
USSR lost about 25 millions people. About 8 millions were soldiers. And about 3 millions of them were captured in first months of the war by germans forces, and then died of hungry. So about 5-6 millions (maybe 7-8, depend of the political side of historians lol) soldiers were lost in combat.
German Ostheer lost about 4 millions (maybe 5, depend again of the historian  ).

Also, Ostheer outnumbered Red Army until the end of 1943. Red army has only more reserve than Ostheer expected, so when a division was destroyed, it was rebuild on completely new,inexperienced recruit.

In 1944-1945, Red Army was far more efficient than the Wehrmacht: when Ostheer was composed of inexperienced soldiers supported by few german veteran (due to heavy losses and lack of trained reserves), Red Army was composed of numerous veterans! The situation was totally inverted! And no one seem to care about this. The 'german efficiency' was real, but its now very mystified by historians. And ratio of losses, as I've noticed, cant be correct: propaganda have always changed numbers, and the scale of the eastern front is so enormous that numbers given were already wrong.

And I dont speak about weapons. Every one know differents weapons of both side, and soviet equipment were not as bad as we can imagine. 

There is certainly more qualified guy than me on the forum to discuss about this in the history section. Sorry to be off-topic! 

[GodlikeDennis]

If you fight against AI soviet thats normal. AI got bonus. Over a "real" player, I'm pretty sure that forces are much more balanced 

...

History lesson is correct but not this. Soviet AIs only get a resource modifier and not a unit modifier like in regular CoH. Also, it'd be pretty hard to test units 1v1 against an AI, they're usually pretty uncooperative . I've also done extensive testing to find that the Soviet units punch above their weight. Unupgraded strelky are better than grens for example. NKVD conscripts are currently bugged to do 10dmg and should do 7 so that's also something to consider. Above all this though, Soviets are balanced around not having the ability to retreat. This is a huge factor to consider in the balance equation. So strelky>gren is there but so is strelky=gren+retreat.

Also, Soviets do not have vet at the moment and the veterancy stars simply imply which global upgrades are researched. Rifles can buy bars which are roughly equivalent to gren vet 2 but still attain vet on top of this. Soviets will be the same next patch.

[Red_Stinger]

Good point GodlikeDennis! I've forgot the conscript problem, it would be balanced in next patch. But I am pretty sure that AI unit receive bonus. I remember clearly my example with Sharpshooter and Pumas, and that was very disappointing.

[GodlikeDennis]

Just a lucky/unlucky situation. Soviet AIs have only ever received resource modifiers unlike regular CoH. They used to get huge ones at that but were toned down in a recent patch. Maybe the com popped smoke or the cover was different?

[Red_Stinger]

Nope. I remember it was on Prokorhovka. No cover, no smoke, and my puma just cant kill them. My next game was on Angoville, on a similar situation, except that sharpshooter get instantly killed! 

[GodlikeDennis]

All down to luck I guess then.

[Zerstörer]

There is a good reason why we don't make balance based on AI matchups...no matter what, it always feels differently that it does vs human opponent.

[HansBlix]

Thx, Godlikedennis, i really hope the devs turn this Strelky > Grens around after the next patch.

@Red_Stinger - Your History lesson is factually correct but your interpretation is just not right.

I think to get the history straight would support the mod to apply it for its use. So not really off-topic.

Lets say I agree with your theory of the "inverted situation" towards the end of the war, and take a look on the casualities of some major battles (all numbers from history books, but you'll surely find them on Wiki):

STALINGRAD 41-42
Wehrmacht deployed 850.000 - SU deployed 1.700.000
WM lost 150.000 - SU lost 500.000

KURSK 43
WM deployed 800.000 - SU deployed 2 mio
WM lost 50.000 - SU lost 180.000

SEELOW-BERLIN 45
WM deployed 1 mio - SU deployed 2,5 mio
WM lost 300.000 - SU lost 350.000

Its funny that you mention Bagration because this was one of the worst defeats of the german army since 1914. Caught by surprise by an overwhelming russian force which applied FOR THE FIRST TIME a combined arms strategy and imporved infantry maneuverabilty, Wehrmacht Heeresgruppe Mitte still caused more casualities then had losses.

BAGRATION 44
WM deployed 850.000 - SU deployed 1.600.000
WM lost 400 - 550.000 - SU lost 500 - 760.000

Here another intersting statistic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_%28World_War_II%29#Casualties:

If you look at the plain number of KIA (no prisoners) its 4.2 for WM vs 6.9 for SU. This are pretty much the 2/3 I recommended at the beginning.

There are reasons why the german Wehrmacht though paying a high blood toll during the campaign still remained a highly qualified fighting force. Again I recommend van Creveld who compares the Wehrmacht with the US Army in WWII (in a paper for the pentagon) and concludes that the WM, due to infrastructure, social design, tactics, training and spirit, was the "best army of the 20th century". 

At the same time the red army had diverse problems, even in the late period of the war. You mentioned the lack of officers due to Stalins purge, something not fully compensable in 3-4 years. Soviet had no light metal industry due to mass production of "easy to handle weaponry" = bad target optics & radio communication, simply all the little gadgets making things easier were not available for the red army druing the war. And finally russian generals towards the end were racing for the favor of Stalin and caused massive casualities by trying to overrun german forces, having in mind the sheer endless reserves of SU.

All in all, despite an overwhelming superiority regarding soldiers and material of the SU, the german Wehrmacht still inflicted at least the same amount of causalities like it suffered, even in 44/45.

Therefore I suggest to mirror that fact in the mod by making the WM troop numbers count 2/3 of SU and therefore individually stronger.

[GodlikeDennis]

Could the ratio have remained true though, even in 44-45 when the Germans were losing their veteran divisions, because they had the defensive advantage from this period onwards. There's an awful lot of stuff other than training/weapons to consider. The German tank destroyers were very effective during these defensive operations as well.

So for argument's sake, say the Germans had great training and equipment at the start of Barbarossa and the Soviets had poor training/poor weaponry and did not utilize their defensive advantage because of lack of trained officers, and in 44-45 Germany had poorly trained troops but made use of the defensive advantage available to them, the 2:3 casualty ratio can still hold true even if the level of individual troop training differs radically between the times. The environmental and situational factors still apply regardless of troop training so if the average German recruit of the late war was lesser than the average Red Army soldier, the use of the defensive advantage and other factors lets him still kill just as many Soviets as his highly trained predecessors at Stalingrad did.

I'm by no means a historian but to me this seems logical. I do actually agree that the German Wehrmacht of the early war period was the most effective fighting force of the 20th century. I also think that, despite the fact that the Soviet Union fought 9/10 of the German forces, the Allied bombing of German infrastructure was what truly won the war in Europe. This is my unqualified opinion though.

In game terms, I think the Soviet Union is pretty much perfect as is and just needs some minor tweaks like vet and certain unit balancing. Also, I do actually think that the higher up doctrine abilities should cost munitions. I'm sure the Ostheer will perhaps have 1-2 more men per squad than the Wehrmacht, putting an "Ostgren" (fictional at this point in time) squad at 5 men. 5 Ostgrenadiers to 7-8 strelky is pretty much the 2:3 ratio anyway. Soviets will also be slightly rebalanced to take into account the retreat function they will gain.

[Red_Stinger]

HansBlix, I do not give history lesson. As I've said there is more qualified guy in this forum.

Bagration was not the first time Red Army used combined arms strategy: soviet use it to liberate St-Petersburg, Moscow and Stalingrad, but less effectively than Wehr because of lack of proper equipment and trained officer/troops.

I dont want to use numbers given by historians, because they cant be accurate. In wikipédia, numbers of casualties on battle-article depend of the language settings.

There is numerous reason for the ratio you mentionned:

-In 1941, Barbarossa relies on the surprise effect. Purges and other stupid decision of stalin (like dissolve tanks corps, and re-create them just before the invasion) weakened the Red Army. Also, there was NO defense available for red army (except for the brest fortress, stalin's and molotov's lines, which werent furnished in ammunition) during the retreat, and population wasnt supporting it so much (and even helped germans). Wehrmacht simply broke a cracked wall.

-Some people will contest it, but facts are here: during battle, freshly captured soviet soldiers were (very) often simply executed, and were counted among KIA soldiers by germans. Also, Luftwaffe often bombed hospital, and strangely (its an administrative particularity I guess), wounded soldiers who were killed in hospital by germans were counted in KIA. It represent thousands and thousands of soldiers, due to the scale of the war. Red Army was less inclined to bombed hospital and execute germans (at least until the liberation of Belarus and Ukraine, I'm not saying they were angels).

-In 1943/1944, Wehrmacht etablished several lines of heavily fortified areas. Its a major factor, because Red Army have never defended such fortified area, even at Moscow or St-Petersburg. Thats a reason of heavy soviet losses at that stage of the war. And German Army fought a huge defensive war over France and Britain during WW1, they were very experimented. Even Americans have more difficulties with germans fortification in Italy and Normandy!

-During battle in big town (like stalingrad), soviet often formed militia unit with inhabitants and others. They give them rifle, perhaps nades, and an area to defend. Are they real soldiers? Thats the question because germans counted them among soldiers, and btw, KIA soldiers. Again it represent thousands of men.

There is others reasons, but you can see that the situation is way more complex than people expected after war. Germans historians supported by americans, during the cold war, made soviet army less effective than reality, and soviet historians did the same. 
Obviously, Soviet army suffer more losses than the german Army. But less than western historians think.

[HansBlix]

I always find it very intersting to discuss with plp who have a decent knowledge about the topic. And like many times it is the interpretation of the facts what constitutes the difference in our opinions. Something very difficult to conclude...

Though i could argue that russians did build huge fortified defense lines (f.e. Stalingrad, Kursk), captured germans (especially Waffen-SS) were also immediatly shot and germans too had their late war militias (Volkssturm), I wont, because it wont lead to an end.

My point is that the german Wehrmacht as an army concept was way superior to the red army's concept. During the war the red army adapted to the situation therefore became a quite strong force BUT never reached the level of professionalism of the Wehrmacht in 1941. This oppinion derives from a few books I've read about this in the course of writing a paper for my study. Van Crevelds decent analysis in "fighting power" is just the tip of the iceberg backing this statement (and led to a structural change in the us army after vietnam war).

And I actually get the impression that you guys basically agree on that.

In game terms, I think the Soviet Union is pretty much perfect as is and just needs some minor tweaks like vet and certain unit balancing. Also, I do actually think that the higher up doctrine abilities should cost munitions. I'm sure the Ostheer will perhaps have 1-2 more men per squad than the Wehrmacht, putting an "Ostgren" (fictional at this point in time) squad at 5 men. 5 Ostgrenadiers to 7-8 strelky is pretty much the 2:3 ratio anyway. Soviets will also be slightly rebalanced to take into account the retreat function they will gain.

Yes, yes, yes! Thats exactly the result this discussion should cause. If 5 Ostgrens (= 4 WM Grens) can hold up to 7 Strelky's, history will smile at us. xD

You already mentioned the correction for Ingeniery and Conscirpts - so this is why I opened this thread. SU Infantry is OP and therefore should get rebalanced a bit in next patch. And I agree, SU is very close to perfection - therefore I try to help to get it there. Like said before: Just a few steps. xD

[Red_Stinger]

Though i could argue that russians did build huge fortified defense lines (f.e. Stalingrad, Kursk), captured germans (especially Waffen-SS) were also immediatly shot and germans too had their late war militias (Volkssturm), I wont, because it wont lead to an end.

You can argue with that. But the volkssturm were never as numerous as soviet militia, and if waffen-SS were shot when captured, they rarely surrendered to soviet!
Also, as I've write before, soviets began to capture german soldiers in 1943/1944. German began to capture soviet in 1941, with the ideas of "extermination", "Untermenschen" and others... it does not help to respect captured soldiers already regarded as barbarians!

Soviets did build huge defense lines, but never as efficient as the germans one. Germans have the experience of the Great War. They know how make unsurpassable lines. Soviet dont!

I agree with you that the Red Army dont reached the level of Wehrmacht in 1941. But in 1945, it was the most powerful army in the world, with modernized command structure, doctrines, equipment, and numerous highly motivated veterans, when Wehrmacht was totally disrupt in 1944 between 2 fronts!
Again I agree that Wehrmacht was very powerful and organised, without comparison in the world in 1941, but thanks to the experience of their commanders, when soviet army losts them, and when others western countrys have 'old-fashionned' officers.
If we take this in account, Ostheer/Wehrmacht should be powerful in early game, and Soviet Union in late game. Thats not, and thats fun!
The ratio who mentionned GodlikeDennis look pretty fine. So I will not discuss on this. But without the inclusion of retreat, soviet infanry look pretty balanced for me, at least over a player who can create mg.