Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1623
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 29 Jan 2019, 01:26

No I am not upset, I’m glad. Do you have the replay and when we played this game?

Regardless, even if i win or lose a game it doesn’t change my view of over hundreds of games.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 408
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 29 Jan 2019, 07:44

even if shanks only has the score picture and lost the replay file.
i still saw many good players lose 1v1 with luftwaffe. only the panther is too much.
and for anyone who think hetzer with 3 ambush shot is op. no, it is not.
because unlike the allied tank destroyers. they can "hit and run" with flank speed.
hetzer only has the option to hit. running or flanking is not possible.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2773
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby MarKr » 29 Jan 2019, 12:53

Viper wrote:even if shanks only has the score picture and lost the replay file.
i still saw many good players lose 1v1 with luftwaffe. only the panther is too much.

Could people in general try to think if there is some logic behind their arguments? What does this argument prove? That Luftwaffe can be beaten. Well, ofcourse it CAN be beaten. Having a doctrine that can never lose a game is by every definition OP. Also the argument that has been discussed here has NEVER been "Luft cannot be beaten", it is about what the Luft doctrine has and how it is available compared to other doctrines and THAT is what makes the concept poor (not unbeatable but POOR). If you further look this topic you will also see what kwok meant by the word poor. If you look closely, you'll see that in this topic "poor" does NOT mean "weak" or necessarily "OP". It is more about the fact that there is no real progression in streangth of units compared to other doctrines where you get units which are initally relatively "weak" or "normal" and become really good later with upgrades and unlocks, Luft gets stuff that is really good from the start and in some cases options to be even better later. So it is not about some games where Luft lost or won, it is about the overall structure and the way the Luft doc is made.

Viper wrote:and for anyone who think hetzer with 3 ambush shot is op. no, it is not.
Your personal opinion which is based on an argument that continuously keeps ignoring what has been said here over and over.
Viper wrote:because unlike the allied tank destroyers. they can "hit and run" with flank speed.
hetzer only has the option to hit. running or flanking is not possible.
Just as I said - over and over:
MarKr wrote:If you build Hetzer, the chances are that most of the things the opponent can throw at you, the Hetzer will be able to reliably deal with frontally and in case the opponent brings one of those that Hetzer cannot deal with frontally, most Axis docs have something stronger which can kill those tanks. On the other hand when you play as US, the chances are that the most things the opponent will throw at you, M10/M18 won't be able to realiably deal with frontally (and 2 out of 3 US docs don't have any stronger gun than the 76mm), thus they need to hit sides/rear and thus they have speed advantage to be able to actually hit the side/rear.
Image

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 408
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 29 Jan 2019, 14:36

MarKr wrote:Could people in general try to think if there is some logic behind their arguments? What does this argument prove? That Luftwaffe can be beaten. Well, ofcourse it CAN be beaten. Having a doctrine that can never lose a game is by every definition OP. Also the argument that has been discussed here has NEVER been "Luft cannot be beaten"

could you check previous pages again?

look:

kwok wrote:Personally I haven’t lost a match as luft in a 1v1 yet, I would feel better if I did lose.

I would like to lose just so I can propose a less biased rework.

shanks replied with the picture and said he defeat him at least once. and i said i saw many good players lose 1v1 with luftwaffe too.

so. why do you quote me to say luftwaffe is of course not op? you should quote kwok to tell him that.........not me :!:

MarKr wrote:Your personal opinion which is based on an argument that continuously keeps ignoring what has been said here over and over.

sorry. but i am afraid it is you who ignore the arguments. you said:
MarKr wrote:And if anyone comes now with the "but Allies can rush you with zookas" crap, I swear that person will be the next on my ignore list.

and you did not even tell why "allies can rush hetzer with bazooka" is bad argument. although im not repeating this argument.
but you should see who is ignoring.

what im trying to prove is same as what you are trying to prove. but for no reason, you quote the wrong person.

SnowLeo
Posts: 34
Joined: 15 Feb 2017, 21:08

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby SnowLeo » 29 Jan 2019, 14:47

I totally agree with Viper. When you need something, penerbit :) especially the Axis - this is because historically have :)) but at the same time, for allies it is in the interests of balance :))) how many copies are broken about the fact that the Tiger is weak, so what ? Now get to the Hetzer ) Give Luft nashorn and get the Panther and everyone will be happy :))))

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1623
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 29 Jan 2019, 15:23

Ooh I remember my match with shanks more clearly now. I think in that game I specifically tried playing without the Hetzer (and obviously without panther). Lol it’s more of a comfort to know I can be beat rather than a disappointment. Let’s see if we can find that replay though.

Either that or it was before a time I “figured out” luft.

Erich
Posts: 130
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 20:51

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Erich » 29 Jan 2019, 18:24

Why not give 30 days, so everybody can post their screenshots, the side that have more screenshots can tell what is OP and not.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3871
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Tiger1996 » 29 Jan 2019, 19:12

kwok wrote:I’m starting to feel people would rather play vcoh instead of bk.

Not exactly.

I think people would rather play Bk Mod that they have been familiar with since years... I mean the "old good known" Bk Mod.
instead of the "new world order" or in this case.. the "new BK order" which is currently being cooked behind doors, by some corrupted intentions.

At some point, I even wish if the Bk Mod development would just stop. No need for further development if it becomes wicked...

SnowLeo
Posts: 34
Joined: 15 Feb 2017, 21:08

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby SnowLeo » 29 Jan 2019, 19:41

Tiger1996 wrote:
kwok wrote:I’m starting to feel people would rather play vcoh instead of bk.

Not exactly.

I think people would rather play Bk Mod that they have been familiar with since years... I mean the "old good known" Bk Mod.
instead of the "new world order" or in this case.. the "new BK order" which is currently being cooked behind doors, by some corrupted intentions.

At some point, I even wish if the Bk Mod development would just stop. No need for further development if it becomes wicked...


Again i agree... The opinion of developers is important, and the opinion of all the others is practically not taken into account, there is always an opportunity to say that this is historical, and in another case - it is for the sake of balance...

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3476
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 29 Jan 2019, 20:08

Tiger1996 wrote:
kwok wrote:I’m starting to feel people would rather play vcoh instead of bk.

Not exactly.

I think people would rather play Bk Mod that they have been familiar with since years... I mean the "old good known" Bk Mod.
instead of the "new world order" or in this case.. the "new BK order" which is currently being cooked behind doors, by some corrupted intentions.

At some point, I even wish if the Bk Mod development would just stop. No need for further development if it becomes wicked...



:lol:

good old days.



1. M1 had less accuracy AND lower rof than bolt k98
2. Jeep used vcoh values
3. US had vcoh MG emplacment that got shred by three bursts of lmg while its Mg also used vcoh stats.
4. 76 gun had less than 40% pen vs tank IV H/J.
5. Luft reinforce was super cheap, cheaper than rangers
6. Broken upkeeps
7. US 57 mm had 7 sec reload and pen stats that made it near pointless vs 5-6 seconds of pretty much all axis tanks (Tank IV to Elephant etc)
8. Jackson had just roughly 60% pen chance vs Tank IV´s
9. Allied AB was usless doc bc its inf was totally useless but more expensive than luft with over 60 MP reinforce cost per men for 82nd and over 40 or 50 for the 101st vs 39 for Luft inf
10........


I could continue this list with over 20 stupid flaws where allied played sometimes with vcoh stats against some "super genetic axis soldiers" with secret Krupp Titanium armor protected by a deflector shield.


Yes... We miss these times so much... not corrupted and biased at all.... and tons of other broken shit units.




And this "hetzer vs zooka stuff". Luftwaffe shreds infantry like no other.... sd2 and gebis with 20 mm car will shred just everything... and you want to tell me that a dude with a zooka can just like that rush to a hetzer?

Anyway, further arguing seems quite pointless with same repetitions and ignorance with same arguments that already got more or less falsified (in many ways).

I stick with Kwok and Markr and others who see the entire design flawed compared to most other docs.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3871
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Tiger1996 » 29 Jan 2019, 20:15

Definitely didn't mean those old days. You got it all wrong...
I mean that the current good days, are going to become good old days very soon.. if the development becomes corrupted and wicked.

Warhawks97 wrote:I stick with Kwok and Markr and others who see the entire design flawed compared to most other docs.


Fine though, Hawks. You can stick with whoever you want to stick with.. but you should know, I'm only sticking by myself, and not in anyone's tail.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3476
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 29 Jan 2019, 20:20

well, i share their opinion, i didnt say i always stick with them, but in this case we agree on something.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2773
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby MarKr » 29 Jan 2019, 20:22

Viper wrote:so. why do you quote me to say luftwaffe is of course not op? you should quote kwok to tell him that.........not me :!:
Just as he said - one game which was more of a test to see how well the Luft would do without Hetzer or Panther.

Viper wrote:sorry. but i am afraid it is you who ignore the arguments. you said:
(...)
and you did not even tell why "allies can rush hetzer with bazooka" is bad argument. although im not repeating this argument.
but you should see who is ignoring.
Because that argument has been used by Tiger several times and I have said on those occasions why I don't consider it valid.
In short: Hetzers have armor which can deflect shots even from 76mm guns while Hetzer can easily kill most tanks (Jumbo being the exception) that are armed with the 76mm gun. This means that it is not very smart to go after the Hetzer with your vehicles because you're most likely to lose them. So as a US counter to this unit, they can use the bazooka squads. M10 can deflect a 75mm shot only with a huge amount of luck, M18 can never deflect it. This means that Axis don't even need to use the same tactics (schreck rush) against them - their tanks can already do it with higher chance of survival than the "US vs Hetzer" scenario - that's stats which is true in general for any PE faction, Luft has also very good ways to repel infantry amd protect their Hetzers but Hawks already spoke about those so no need to repeat it.
Image

User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 63
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Death_Kitty » 29 Jan 2019, 23:24

I cant understand why the "luft=balanced/needs-no-changes" side of the debate ignores how the game actually works so hard?

Do you guys just build hetzer's to counter allied units? Or do you also build 20mm cars, Falls, shrecks, AT guns? Like its not a question of just 1 unit at this point; its a question of axis having multiple responses to every US possibility that is also better than the US equivalent. Lust has better infantry than any US doc, they have a squad that murders in assault, one that murders in defense, access to an instant bomb strike that doubles as a flank-securing minefield, Emplaced AA and 88 cannons, a broken TD that can pen any US vehicles except for, what, 2-3 (pershing, SP and Jumbo 76?).

Like this ridiculous idea that the wolverine and the hetzer are equal: Lets boil this down to the simplistic:
By the very nature if its camo, and it gun penetration, not to mention it can bounce/take a couple of 76mm hits, you park the hetzer in camo with a clear line of retreat, and fire away.

By the very nature if the m10 , its weaker gun, lower armor, 1 camo shot, you get 1 shot then have to charge out and hope you can flank and there is nothing that will destroy your m10, or retreat - though the second option wont net you a kill.

Which play-style is inherently more high risk? Its the 2nd one. Now if that hetzer is supported by a 20mm car, falls, and a BB field, what then? What is Jumbo/pershing/insert counter here is not unlocked yet, a VERY real possibility given that luft unlocks its full potential stuff very quickly, while every UK/US/Even wher have to go through multiple unlocks to get to their full potential. This is what caused this whole rework thing to go through, am I right? Notice, the panther isn't even a problem here; I'd even say it's not even a problem in what makes this doc so strong (I assume you lot know that, hence why you are so willing to sacrifice it to keep your current "metas")

The whole idea is to slow down the progression of the luft tree. So what do you want to sacrifice to make luft equal? Do you want to remove the hetzer? Or nerf it to maybe actual reasonable gun range, armor (penetrable by 76) and camo shots (2). (i.e. why even get the jagdpanzer over the hetzer RN? at least now it would actually be a trade of armor vs price)
Do you want to remove girbs and nerf fall values? Or just seem them brought down to not- KCH levels of BS.
Do you want to limit massive airstrikes, or delay emplacements?

Because some combination of that has to be done. For the record, I said I thought I was biased. Looking at some of the actual bias here, i realize I'm not. Want some proof?
-I can get behind nerfing the jumbo. Or maybe tweaking the tiger.
-I can get behind Limiting the 17 pounders in UK.
-I can get behind some nice reworks to blitz and terror to make them stand out more as individual docs.
At the end of the day, its the US vs PE interaction that are an issue. Not any other match up, at least not to that extent. Maybe make UK and Wher docs more specialized and less general, but that's another topic.

Here is what this boils down to; the people against this rework don't want to have to learn new strategies, have their matches get any harder, or experiment with new ideas. Maybe this applies just to German docs, but I suspect it applies to all the docs they play. The people for the rework want the game to change out of a stale meta, into something hopefully fresher. I stand with the latter.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3871
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Tiger1996 » 30 Jan 2019, 00:44

Death_Kitty wrote:I cant understand why the "luft=balanced/needs-no-changes" side of the debate ignores how the game actually works so hard?

I'm sorry to disappoint you.. but this is just your first sentence in the text, and you are already hallucinating...
Because this side of the argument; aka "luft=balanced/needs-no-changes" does not actually exist.

Let me now tell you the actual sides of the argument on this topic:

- First side:
Thinking Luft doc is pure OP, unbeatable in 1v1, and nothing can stop it. Thus, this side is suggesting Gebrigs, Hetzer AND Panther as well as SD2 to be ALL removed.. in addition of delaying Flak88s AND making Panzershreck require CPs unlock. (aka; Kwok proposals) which sounds like trolling.

- 2nd side of the argument:
Thinking Luft doc is not OP, beatable in 1v1 even now. However, being a bit too strong... Thus; changes are welcome, but nothing so catastrophic.
Accordingly, this side of the argument is suggesting to remove either the Hetzer OR the Panther, and that's about it.

- 3rd side of the argument:
Drunk people thinking themselves sane enough to call other veteran players in this discussion that they ignore how the game actually works.

Hope it's more clear to you now...

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 673
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 30 Jan 2019, 01:11

kwok wrote:No I am not upset, I’m glad. Do you have the replay and when we played this game?

Regardless, even if i win or lose a game it doesn’t change my view of over hundreds of games.



surely your hundreds of games are against players who do not know how to play, I also had hundreds of games, and I do not think that luft is OP ... here I leave you the repetition

doctrine of inf vs. your luft
Attachments
2p_angoville farms.2018-12-25.23-46-09.rec
(1.14 MiB) Downloaded 4 times

User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 63
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Death_Kitty » 30 Jan 2019, 01:16

I'm going to assume the 3rd side is me? Cool. I see why you left these forums Tiger. This ins't your little echo chamber.
Okie, lets make it clear which side I'm on.

Thanks for responding to my points with actual commentary...

Perhaps I was a bit too confrontational, but the point stands:

When I said "ignore how the game works" I meant to describe the tendency to just focus on comparing 2 units that share the same role, i.e. m10 and hetzer, without taking into condition of how those units work, and what they are combined with. I'm not saying you don't know how to play the game. You obviously do. Better than me. You just seem to be omitting a lot of what happens in the game in your posts here, for whatever reason.

Here is where I stand on Luft:
-Keep panther and Gebrigs. they define the doc. I like that.
-Remove hetzer from luft, and nerf it.
-rework snipers to make it less of a strategy vs luft
-reduce the bonuses of luft infantry so they don't come onto the battlefield at max power, but gradually gain it like in every other doc. And nerf the grand total of said bonuses
-Delay 88, as well as every other branch that grants all of its stuff after 1-2 unlocks. Should be 3-4 like in every other doc. Like how AB need 3+ unlocks to hit full power. Or grens. Or commandos. Or tanks/TD's. You know, everything else in this mod.
-Deal with the stuka patrol, to make it less of a "click to erase army" button. If you wanna reign in allies airstrikes/airstrikes across the board, that is also something I can get on board with.

I don't think any part of that is unreasonable. I'm even willing to trade off some allied strengths so that luft isn't bricked by this. kwok may have gone a bit overboard on his first iteration of ideas, but that is why this discussion exists. Right now, everyone seems to be hung up on the hetzer. Is it OP or not. I say yes, for the reasons I've described, and others described. Your side has yet to respond adequately to any posts.

Also, get your toxicity out of here. I don't care for it, and quite frankly, it makes you look bad.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3871
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Tiger1996 » 30 Jan 2019, 01:50

Ehm.. well, okaaay! :P

I appreciate how you have now provided your actual point of view.. with more objectivity.
Sorry if I have been too aggressive.

And ya, something must be wrong with this forum... I don't act similarly in other places.. but whenever I come here, I gain some heavy load of toxicity!

Guess I need to leave this place once again, for some good amount of time. Gonna get some high quality tissue and attach it to my classic suit :D

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 673
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 30 Jan 2019, 11:26

Tiger1996 wrote:
Let me now tell you the actual sides of the argument on this topic:

- First side:
Thinking Luft doc is pure OP, unbeatable in 1v1, and nothing can stop it. Thus, this side is suggesting Gebrigs, Hetzer AND Panther as well as SD2 to be ALL removed.. in addition of delaying Flak88s AND making Panzershreck require CPs unlock. (aka; Kwok proposals) which sounds like trolling.

- 2nd side of the argument:
Thinking Luft doc is not OP, beatable in 1v1 even now. However, being a bit too strong... Thus; changes are welcome, but nothing so catastrophic.
Accordingly, this side of the argument is suggesting to remove either the Hetzer OR the Panther, and that's about it.

- 3rd side of the argument:
Drunk people thinking themselves sane enough to call other veteran players in this discussion that they ignore how the game actually works.

Hope it's more clear to you now...



it's true, and I'm on the side that says luft is not OP, and in any case, just needs the removal of the panther

User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 63
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Death_Kitty » 30 Jan 2019, 16:06

Shanks wrote:
Tiger1996 wrote:
Let me now tell you the actual sides of the argument on this topic:

- First side:
Thinking Luft doc is pure OP, unbeatable in 1v1, and nothing can stop it. Thus, this side is suggesting Gebrigs, Hetzer AND Panther as well as SD2 to be ALL removed.. in addition of delaying Flak88s AND making Panzershreck require CPs unlock. (aka; Kwok proposals) which sounds like trolling.

- 2nd side of the argument:
Thinking Luft doc is not OP, beatable in 1v1 even now. However, being a bit too strong... Thus; changes are welcome, but nothing so catastrophic.
Accordingly, this side of the argument is suggesting to remove either the Hetzer OR the Panther, and that's about it.

- 3rd side of the argument:
Drunk people thinking themselves sane enough to call other veteran players in this discussion that they ignore how the game actually works.

Hope it's more clear to you now...



it's true, and I'm on the side that says luft is not OP, and in any case, just needs the removal of the panther


I think we can all figure out which side we are on, thank you. Also,, unless you have replays vs every person here (or ever), 5+ times in every matchup involving luft and allies, I don't think you will manage to invalidate this thread with, what, 2 games you won vs kwok's luft? Just because a doc can be beaten does not make it balanced.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 408
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 30 Jan 2019, 16:36

Death_Kitty wrote:I don't think you will manage to invalidate this thread with, what, 2 games you won vs kwok's luft? Just because a doc can be beaten does not make it balanced.

i dont think he is trying to invalidate the topic. he is trying to invalidate exaggeration. if you say "i never lost with luft" it means you are exaggerating or lying. there should be no place for exaggerations like these when judging balance. or it will be biased. so we all need to remove the double standard. and become more honest.

and it is not about 1 player. i saw many good players lose with luft in 1v1 which means it is not op. this does not mean it is balanced. but it just means it is not op.

MenciusMoldbug
Posts: 140
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 12:57

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby MenciusMoldbug » 30 Jan 2019, 16:42

@MarKr

Afaik, the Wirbelwind isn't really better than the quad 50cal in terms of damage. When you take a look at the total damage each of these weapons are doing. You will find that the Wirbelwinds gun in a duration of 3 seconds has a rate of fire of 32 and a damage of 3-4 on each bullet. The quad 50cal however has the duration of 3.5-2.5 seconds with a lower rate of fire of 24 but each bullet does 20-15 damage. The Wirbelwind does have better accuracy than the quad 50cal but if the gun isn't doing that much damage it doesn't make much of a difference.

The AA guns feel really weird to me because the quad 20mm is not actually much better than the single 20mm (might even be worse because the single 20mm can somewhat 'reliably' penetrate and damage a Cromwell from the front but I think that's more of a bug involving target tables). And the quad 50cal isn't really that much better than a single 50cal because of how the aim times work. I think the Wirbelwind in particular is really underpowered right now because it's slow, has low maneuverability, and armor not strong enough to deflect 37mm guns. While also taking a long time to kill a single model on a infantry squad because of how the guns stats are set. The saving grace for the Wirbelwind is that the HE mode version of the gun suppresses and pins squads very easily; but I would rather see it do actual damage than be a mobile suppression vehicle.

User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 63
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Death_Kitty » 30 Jan 2019, 18:32

I'ts because of that accuracy and suppression that the wirbel is better than the quad. Luft have many other things that do more that a good job of clearing out infanty

@viper, no one is saying that you cant lose with luft. Also, keep in mind we are not balancing by 1v1. we are balancing by teams. At least that is what community vote determined anyway. The idea is that it is *easier* to win with luft that another doc, steaming from a couple of OP units, and how their doc unlocks work. Whether that's easier because easier micro, or the fact that the doc can respond to new threats so quickly, or both, as I would argue, is what we are trying to determine. That is where the "poor" design kicks in.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2773
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby MarKr » 30 Jan 2019, 19:51

Basically Death_kitty is right. The accuracy advantage makes it hit more often and because of that it deals more damage in smaller "doses". Also the Wirble can activate HE ammo which increases efficiency of damage and suppression vs infantry + it also makes it a lot more effective at killing/clearing emplacements.

It is overpriced at this moment, I can agree with that.
Image

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 673
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 31 Jan 2019, 00:49

Death_Kitty wrote:
I think we can all figure out which side we are on, thank you. Also,, unless you have replays vs every person here (or ever), 5+ times in every matchup involving luft and allies, I don't think you will manage to invalidate this thread with, what, 2 games you won vs kwok's luft? Just because a doc can be beaten does not make it balanced.


kwok lies, he said he never lost with luft, and I just showed that he lost with luft in 1v1, and it's not the first time he loses with luft, I do not have the reps but I can say that he lost like 5 more games with luft in 2v2, and not only kwok lost with luft, there are also other pro players that lost with luft even in a regrettable way; "you can say that luft has this or that, and I can say that inf or re has this and that", but at the moment of demonstrating something, they are shown with facts, and the facts indicate that luft is not OP ... ... you have to keep in mind that tiger, bk champion, viper and I are saying that luft is not OP, tiger and bk champion play almost all the year, I also ... to kwok and hawks I do not see them playing very often , so, I think that those who are playing with more frequency can tell you that it is OP and that it is not OP ... even if you watch the repetition that i play with inf doc vs the luft of kwok, you will notice that i did not even use the Jumbo or long tomp or M10 to win, which means i was not yet using all the power of inf doc ... so why do people complain so much about a doctrine that is not the big deal? ... more, I can tell you that I almost do not use luft, because the weakness of luft is that it requires huge amounts of MP, which makes it vulnerable to the infantry spam or tanks that can make you lose territory quickly, I prefer SE or TH that has the hoctkiss
Last edited by Shanks on 31 Jan 2019, 08:32, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest