Armor doctrine

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
Team Member
Posts: 2031
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by kwok »

Agreed on Warhawks assessment plus a few additions. Munitions carried into a fight itself is a tradeoff, especially back when HE shots were a pay per switch ability. Depending on the map and resource situation, the opp cost of sending your tanks in with other abilities to increase the chance of a successful assault (like commander arty strikes, m20 command car buffs, and even passive self repairs) outweighed the hedge to get replacement tanks that are unupgraded and non vetted (as Warhawks said). That's personally why I don't use it. The supply yard upgrades help me replace a tank army fairly quickly anyways.

User avatar
Posts: 307
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

So what to do with it?

I mean, what i was trying to point out, is that there is something, that is being not in use by most of players (some who are mostly Armor players), while doctrine is plain on CP unlock root and unlikely to surprise neither the opponent and player itself.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Posts: 3934
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by Warhawks97 »

What we could do:

1. That ability cost to 200 if not 175.
2. Replaces only shermans, vehicles and m10/18. Nothing else
3. Replacing at least 5 units. If not more. But no Jackson or jumbo etc.

4. Put together with global repair. Both abilities are rarely used due to cost and bad efficiency. Global rep rep slow and units that are not on combat. Means when they are at a place to repair anyways with pio squads. Sending g tanks to Base to be repaired there makes often more sense then. Besides that due to bk engine there is little between full hp and dead. So both abilities shall require one unlock +reworking

When I am back home I can write more

Post Reply