Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
Post Reply
User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3987
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Post by Warhawks97 »

Idk how you feel about this doc, but i am not a great fan of it. Played arround a bit and its meh.


Tanks:
The first thing that annoys me is how the tank line is simply placed like the old terror doc. Not much effort, boring, nothing special.
Just the good old way... Tank, big Tank, Best Tank, Super Big tank.


I mean we have put so much effort into making Propaganda doctrine and BK doctrine having both the exact tanks needed and added in a very cool and special way. But that new tank support doc.... just put tanks into it, unlock them in a line, doesnt matter if it makes sense or not.

And if you go for Tank destroyer, the doc gets just as boring as the old one. In fact even more boring since you can basically play camping 2.0 with infantry that become super effective in camping as well when you put them near your tanks. And even in larger numbers than ever due to cost drop. And even emplacmants. Its far worse than the old doc in this regard and a lot more annoying and boring.

If you go tanks, you get Tiger for high CP cost, then expensive Panther D and finally KT. And as infantry support just basic grens which need 4 CP just to have an lmg which esspecially now should be considered a core element of infantry fighting.

which brings me to the next pont:

Infantry:

The next big issue. Now we get some tools that should enable the infantry to stay and fight with the vehicles and tanks easier. But why all the mobility adds like combined arms ability for vehicles to speed up your inf when for the most part they are much better off by just camping with the vehicles, Tanks and even emplacments since you only get ranged weapons for the grens (which are supposed to be the inf that accompanies the vehicles).




So, i am sorry to say this but i would get back to the working table. You did a fantastic job with all other doctrines. I love all the reworks so far.



Edit:


Alright. I thought it might be easier to get an idea of what i actually proposed and showing this makeshift proposal.

Infantry:
-As you can see, you would unlock the heavy assault grens that spawn with two STG while the rest gets MP40´s.
- Initially they are 5 men, later 6 after upgrade of squad size.
- They would cost 340 MP Initially
- After cost drop a squad would cost 315 MP
- The LMG Logo is in fact a weapons supply upgrade that enables the upgrade of STG´s for the remaining squad, G43´s unscoped for the entire squad or a single LMG42. It also gives them a Panzerfaust.
- Its cap rate is higher than that of other PE infantry units.
- The unlocked buffs will only apply to the Heavy Assault Grens. Not to other Grenadiers.

So the main goal is to give this doc a well suited infantry at hand. I know that the doc should be the supposed weakness of this doc, however, i think Tank docs need their Infantry that supports with what they need. And since this doctrine is a supposed assault doc with aggressive pushes, it does need some sort of infantry with close range weapons that can do the dirty job.

The inf forces available enforce either only camping (spamming rifle equiped infantry only) or are just not suited enough for real combat and costly to replace (Stormpios) and lacking core abilties (eg grenades).

Thus, this is why i specialized the Assault grens and stripped them off of standard Rifles and giving them a purpose which they will barely find in Luftwaffe or SE doctrine which rely on different units.

But Also i left them weak enough by not adding any kind of Veterancy and stuff. Their main job will be to stay with tanks and vehicles, not fighting prolonged infantry fights on their own.



Tanks:
The Major Change here is that one Tank IV unlocks Tank IV/J, JP IV/48 and, if needed, IV/70. IV/70, however, requires also an upgrade for MP and fuel in the Tank Hunter building.


Panther and Tiger line are now independent and have a better CP adjustment. Panther G or Jagdpanther cant be deployed together. You have to choose whether you want panther or Jagdpanther by upgrading the respective building (cost MP and fuel). Same goes for the King-Tiger and Jagdtiger. Only the Tiger is always available as well as the Jagdpanzer IV/48.

Artillery.
I would also like to bring in the idea of adding the Wespe artillery instead of the Hotchkiss to be the main stay artillery. I would find that way less OP. Hotchkiss is in my opinion too much of an "emergency i delete the enemie forces button" that just drives behind the heavy tanks and gets activated in an emergency against enemie assault attempts and infantry flanking attacks. It would make it near impossible to assault and flank arround the tanks, let alone trying a bazooka charge that would get killed right away by hotchkiss.

So get rid of the Hotchkiss in this doctrine and add something that fills the purpose of softening a certain point of the enemie defense rather than having a stupid "I barrage everything randomly to death and deny enemie attacks" unit.

So instead adding the Wespe would seem far less OP to me. It would only have standard rounds to prevent being too good of an counter arty as that would break its purpose of supporting tank advances.


Alternatively, and it may sound stupid, but even the Hummel would be OK for me. Why? Simply bc they would shoot way less often and only at really important targets. Its build cost, barrage cost and ammo upkeep would force the player to only get it when really needed and to only use it when really needed instead of "always going for it". Better a one time, 650/100 unit with high upkeep and 100+ ammo per barrage that fires once in a while than having a stupid little cheap bad ass tank constantly firing mindless rockets and that gets replaced one second after it got destroyed.
Panzer Support.jpg
Panzer Support II.jpg
Move the Hotchkiss to the SE doctrine instead.

Edit: @Tiger: Yes, removing all mark target abilities from the game. I would rather have some sort of calling in flares or something. But Mark-Target feels like it gets marked by a laser and using laser guided shots against the target.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 22 Jun 2020, 19:05, edited 9 times in total.

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4063
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

i like this proposal, but i wonder why remove Mark Target ability? Unless you are willing to remove it from RE doc as well...

Also, i totally agree that the Panther.D is over-priced in TH doc... I mean, 8 CPs and 880 MP/130 fuel whereas Blitz doc can obtain for much cheaper.
i know it costs the same in Luft doc, but only 5 CPs so it makes sense there on the other hand.. whereby nothing justifies this high cost in TH doc.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3987
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Post by Warhawks97 »

Edited first Post.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2093
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Post by kwok »

First of all. Again. I really don't think reducing squad size is a good idea at all. Point made with 4-man assault squads by british which even now are never used. I'm surprised nobody asked to bump that up to 5 man or 6 man size. Probably because the unit is new and was never in any build order so it was mostly ignored on top of being basically useless.

Second, I don't think it was intended that this is an assault doctrine. Honestly, the player community pulled this doctrine together to just be a "PUT ALL THE TANKS TOGETHER IN ONE" doctrine. It was the devs that came up with ideas to try to pivot away from the "stale super tank" idea you mentioned.

Frankly, I do see this as a replacement of old terror doc. People were already pissed propaganda doc replaced terror. This brings back terror with an even more "elite" flavor to it because the faction is called "panzer elite" (yeah I know that's a pretty silly, superficial reason... don't argue with me on this one because I already argued with players advocating for this over steam messages...). Bringing back assault grens to this doc would make this exactly old terror doc which I guess is fine... just warning how OP this might become. Because I and another dev also agree that luft is the last doctrine that needs assault grens but the amount of axis fanboys that would scream KWOK NERFED LUFT is just grating to my ears and no one has proposed its removal other than you hawks.

People had a hard time letting go of old terror. I'm not sure if deviating this doctrine further into something "fresh" when there are so many other "fresh" things in the mod existing is a good idea right now when we are so close to finishing doctrine reworks. We set out to make doctrines 1v1 friendly. I'd say given the scope of the original intention of reworks, as it stands now there is no other reason to change to doc. just to make something more fun isn't enough of a reason when we need to just finish the first mission and get players comfortable with the changes.

My suggestion: split each of your changes by topic and get some more people to vote on it (for example if you only did a topic on the arty changes i know of some people who agree and might support you separately on that). You might gain more traction that way. And get those complaining but non-participating axis players to get on the forum and vote too...

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3987
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Post by Warhawks97 »

kwok wrote:
23 Jun 2020, 06:21
First of all. Again. I really don't think reducing squad size is a good idea at all. Point made with 4-man assault squads by british which even now are never used. I'm surprised nobody asked to bump that up to 5 man or 6 man size. Probably because the unit is new and was never in any build order so it was mostly ignored on top of being basically useless.

four men is probably really to small. But i think 5 men is totally doable when they can get upgraded to 6 men quickly and are not supposed to right alone anyways. Volkssturm are also starting with 5 men and have much weaker stats.

Second, I don't think it was intended that this is an assault doctrine. Honestly, the player community pulled this doctrine together to just be a "PUT ALL THE TANKS TOGETHER IN ONE" doctrine. It was the devs that came up with ideas to try to pivot away from the "stale super tank" idea you mentioned.
Frankly, I do see this as a replacement of old terror doc. People were already pissed propaganda doc replaced terror. This brings back terror with an even more "elite" flavor to it because the faction is called "panzer elite" (yeah I know that's a pretty silly, superficial reason... don't argue with me on this one because I already argued with players advocating for this over steam messages...). Bringing back assault grens to this doc would make this exactly old terror doc which I guess is fine... just warning how OP this might become.

I dont see how this is going to be new terror doctrine for various reasons:

1. The heavy assault grens need to be unlocked first and are then not more than 5 men with mp40´s mostly, dying quick as the normal Pgrens.
2. They dont get schreck. Yes, thats a huge huge thing. So you can literally put a tank in their line and they are stopped. First much later they get a Faust but with less range, ammo cost and activation time.
3. They dont get any kind of buffs unless they are near a vehicle. So any kind of hit, run and repeat isnt possible and they are always in need of vehicles and tanks to get their full potential
4. They dont have a walking Stuka that backs them up (and no no hotchkiss hopefully)
5. They can get a unit cap of 3 or so.


Because I and another dev also agree that luft is the last doctrine that needs assault grens but the amount of axis fanboys that would scream KWOK NERFED LUFT is just grating to my ears and no one has proposed its removal other than you hawks.
I have seen only once a heavy assault gren squad being used by a luft player. But so far everyone prefers rushing luft inf and wirbelwinds.
Plus it would solve the issue of overlaying units as Assault grens can apparently fill Gebis role as well as Luft inf role, depending on what you give them.
People had a hard time letting go of old terror. I'm not sure if deviating this doctrine further into something "fresh" when there are so many other "fresh" things in the mod existing is a good idea right now when we are so close to finishing doctrine reworks. We set out to make doctrines 1v1 friendly. I'd say given the scope of the original intention of reworks, as it stands now there is no other reason to change to doc. just to make something more fun isn't enough of a reason when we need to just finish the first mission and get players comfortable with the changes.
This doctrine is going to be a sitting duck doctrine. No one is gonna pay like 8 CP for a 880 MP Panther D when he can a Jagdpanther for pretty much the same cost. And if i would really want a Panther D, i would take Luftwaffe and getting it for 5 CP´s supported by the dreaded Luftwaffe infantry. Even those two units combined would cost me just 7 CP in Luft doc, so again. Why the heck should i take this doc where i pay 8 CP just for the same Panther and some lame Standard grens which have still no upgrade unlocked at that stage.
My suggestion: split each of your changes by topic and get some more people to vote on it (for example if you only did a topic on the arty changes i know of some people who agree and might support you separately on that). You might gain more traction that way. And get those complaining but non-participating axis players to get on the forum and vote too...
will try.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3130
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Re-Thinking PE Tank Support doc

Post by MarKr »

I don't like this too much. At the start of your post you say that the doctrine is boring because it is campy and the unlocks are "meh". This is simply very subjective point of view. It is no secret that you like "fluent" games and any camping is a thorn in your eye. Good, I get it but that doesn't mean that all other players must feel it the same way. You're the first person to complain conceptually about this re-reworked (because this already is a changed version of the original player-based concept) however, I there is a guy who PMs me on Steam almost every week with messages like "When release? New TH doc is awesome! Can't wait to play live!" - I know that "I know a person" doesn't mean anything so this is not meant to be any hard-argument but it just shows that your point of view is not universal for everybody.

I also strongly disagree with Assault Grens in this doctrine. It seems that you want to add them mostly because of some "realism/theme" factor where tanks are meant to push and infantry should go with them. Look away from the historical babble and just look at at gameplay. This doctrine is meant to have access to all the strong tanks of Axis but the intended downside is meant to be weaker infantry - that is why there are no Assault Grenadiers and also the reason why the LMG upgrade is delayed so much with the unlock. It is true that with the buffs around vehicles and tanks PGrens are not all THAT weak but PGrens are still weaker than Assault Grens and you want to give to this doc Assault Grens with the bonuses that PGrens currently get? That means the higher HP of Assault Grens, more weapon upgrades, now also Panzerfaust for killing vehicles/tanks (in a doctrine where you have more than enough ways of killing vehicles/tanks with your own), the extra movement speed and defense bonuses from the "auras" of vehicles, on top of that the upgrades you can get for PE infantry in general (faster XP, capping, repairs), actually the ability to repair all the tanks and vehicles with this infantry is a huge bonus on its own and now even making them cheaper. Even without any "Veterancy unlock" it is just downright elite-level infantry performance and in that case there will be a doctrine with strongest tanks/TDs, one of the strongest infantry, pretty good arty options and we end up with a new doc that is picked 80% of times just as Luft used to have it.

The only thing I would be down with is changing the Hotchkiss for Wespe.
Image

Post Reply