( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
Constantino
Posts: 43
Joined: 16 Jun 2019, 12:58

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Constantino »

MenciusMoldbug wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 08:18

Actual most OP doc in the beta is as Constantino says blitzkrieg doc.
Hey man, don't put words in my mouth lol; I think Blitz has always been the best doc in the game and I only bring it up because I think it should be the standard by which all other docs are balanced. I'd rather not see it nerfed.

Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 12:26


I also thought about having stugs and stuhs in this doctrine. These units would be ideal for supporting infantry which in some ways was apparently the goal of this doc. If i would make a doctrine where tanks and inf should work together, stugs and stuhs would be the first units for me to be implemented.


But instead we got a lame cheap OP Panzer IV F2 spam doctrine with superman 50 mm armor plates.


Suggestion:
1. Reduce the ammount of infanty orientated unlocks to 3, max 4 in total. Remove mass production bc srsly, no one ever mass produced rifle inf (which still cost 300 MP) just to get shreded by greyhounds and shermans. Just remove this nonsense unlock.
- First would be vehicle/Tank buff when close to them.
- Second is vet training that also affects the heavy assault grens and that perhaps also unlocks assault ability for them (not a necessity though).
- Last one is AT effort that adds second schreck and Panzerfaust 100 to them.

2. Remove mark target. Its just not needed and if you get it, it just is an overkill bc it makes you hit the tanks even through smoke with the already accurate german tank guns. Its not needed.

3. Wespe should be unlocked after observation Panzer IV. So the bottom unlock line is all about vehicle/arty support.

4. Can we get different icons for the various buffs when near tanks or vehicle so that its more clear what kind of buff they actually got? That star doesnt look that great and doesnt fit so much to PE.

5. Panther G is supposed to cost more than a Tiger? It should be the other way arround. Or lets say, 880 MP and 130 fuel for a Panther G is weird. It should be more like 850 and 150 as it used to be.

6. The Panzer IV H for 50 fuel is an overkill, esspecially with the low german upkeep. "Panzer reserves" should in my opinion make the H a bit cheaper and the F2 should require this unlock but then comming right away with the low cost. The F2 would no longer be a 0 CP tank.
It should also be kicked out of BK doc (which with Panzer III, stugs and P IV H/J has already an impressive ammount of tanks available). In Luft and SE it does require CP unlock as well.
Agree 100%; I would love to see the Stug III and StuH 42 in this doc instead of Panzer Grenadier and Marder/Panzer IV price reductions CPs. There should be no reward units and let Blitz just have the Sturmpanzer while Panzer Support gets StuH 42.


I only disagree with Panzer IV pricing, I think the problem isn't the price, but that it's armor is too good. It has the same armor as a Stug, but for some reason, 76 mm guns have a higher chance to pen Stugs.

MenciusMoldbug
Posts: 295
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 12:57

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by MenciusMoldbug »

Constantino wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 20:04

Hey man, don't put words in my mouth lol; I think Blitz has always been the best doc in the game and I only bring it up because I think it should be the standard by which all other docs are balanced. I'd rather not see it nerfed.
Ah, my bad. To be honest, I'd like stuff to be balanced around how blitz is too, because you get 10-20 different play styles you can do with it and that's what makes it really fun to play (and why I don't make a thread about blitzkrieg doc, because I don't want to change either other than some tweaks here and there).
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 12:26
mofetagalactica wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 10:07
Pretty much every upkeep should be checked and revised for WH and PE.
yeah... especially fuel. It bothers me to see shermans eating all your fuel and also brits tanks with their like 5 fuel upkeep (firefly) while a Panther eats sometimes just 2 fuel. Thats mad.

The Jagdpanther costs less fuel upkeep than Firefly (far less) and sherman and less MP upkeep than a sherman.

I said a long, long time ago that as long as german tank upkeep is not fixed, making german tanks cheaper is a double-whammy against allies. So axis gets cheaper tanks AND cheaper upkeep on their tanks while brits have to struggle a lot more trying to keep a tank armada on the field. At least US can get supply yard upgrades, but sometimes even that isn't enough to get close to the super low upkeep of german tanks like the panther/jagdpanther.

This isn't a problem with only axis, some of the allies expensive tanks share the same upkeep as tanks cheaper than them. So some tanks are really bad to spam, but other tanks are as-much/more spammable despite being more expensive.

For now, I just want the jagdpanther's upkeep to be fixed, because it allows PS too easily to get more fuel for tanks when they already have 2 JP's on the field.

User avatar
crazzy501
Posts: 57
Joined: 04 Feb 2017, 10:43
Location: Russia
Contact:

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by crazzy501 »

Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
Thing is these casemate tanks dont breach anything the normal Panther or KT cant breach.
IDK why but in my games panthers and tigers sux as fuk against US 76mm AT guns loaded with AP and especially it sux agains 17 pounders of Brits. But if I got IV/70 or JagdPanther - game becomes more interest
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
They are just hard to hit as fuck and sit arround ambushed. Barely saw anyone pushing hard with IV/70. Its just go to the next crater and wait.
Yeah! That's it! That's is the unique playstyle. U need to capture positions in more thoughtful way than just spam-rush Tigers and/or Panthers. For me, as example, that spam-rush is boring. U just need to wait for gain critical mass and then end the game despite the losses
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
What Tigers dont have in armor they have in HP.
yes but this force u to play aggressively until opponent will become incapable of resist anything. Again, for me, this playstyle is boring because of u unable to catch an eye on every point. Rush to the base until opponent leave is not fun for me :( And u have better doc for it: WH Blitzkrieg, witch also have buffs for economic like munitions trade. TH Doc haven't it for now and it can't loose tanks coz it's unable to recover if attack die out. That makes TH Doc more of "1 single risky try", witch is unfair alongside, for example, US Armor with their ultimate ability to instantly recall all of crushed shermans.
That's why TH Doc must have better front armors for their cazemates
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
The Jagdpanther does not provide better protection than normal Panthers, exceptions are 90 mm guns against which it is much better but thats probably just a bug or mistake bc against all other guns the normal panther offers a better protection.
I really hope it's not a bug and it don't need to be fixed. Because of written above
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
Spamming casemate tanks and expecting to break through defenses was never practiced in pvp.
They also lack the HE.
Yeah. And that's is not what this doc about. I already written above about different playstyle: u must take positions with your buffed infantry + armored cars and halftrucks + any of tank u have (P4 or JagdP4) and then go next. It's not about rushing. It's about tactical move
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
The IV/70 offers better armor protection than tiger when it comes to 90 mm guns but but not that much more than panthers.
The Thinking that the german casemate tanks are there for assaulting is a myth except for the stugs. The Jagdpanzer IV´s and Hetzers were purely defensive. The Jagdpanther was thought to provide long range heavy anti tank fire for the attacking inf but not to break through heavy AT gun lines and trenches. They got just missused for it.
looks like u just missed my point of what this PE doc must be. It has good infantry with buffs. It has good and any kind of light armor vehicles and heavy tank destroyers. Capture points with your nice infantry. Support your infantry with cazemate destroyers. If your tank will be damaged your infantry can instantly repair it right on a field. This ability just intended to be in the way it was in old TH doc: to support cazemate tanks from being immobilezed
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
I would like to see the F2 to be reduced to certain docs that have tanks just as small support like SE.
Its a stupid, outdated in-game OP spam tank with 50 mm of magic armor.
I think that if some kind of unit is was core of germans, better to see it represented in the game. Just because this game about WW2 and it tries to looks more or less realistically. Same as with Shermans.
Problem for this spam looks like in fact, that this is only way, that PE can counter US infantry or armor spam. They have cheap, fast and well powered for early game tanks with 50cals that meals your infantry. What PE have to counter them for now? Only P4 F1/2.
If u want to reduce them for PEs, than think something about US spams.
One point more: 50cals shred even armored cars and Marder3 but available as starting jeep for US airborne and infantry command. What PE must to do with them?
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
An here it comes, since this doc is tank orientated to assault with tanks, and not just casemate defensive orientated tanks like in the past which dont have really better armor than the normal tanks (in fact, the IV/48 and Hetzer have worse armor than the Panzer IV H/J against 76 guns), it should have the creme de la creme of german armor.
U wrong in my case. This doc is tank oriented but not for assault-rush, like Blitzkrieg doctrine. Looks like u want Blitzkrieg-like doctrine for PE but it's wrong way for balance factions in my opinion. If u want Tigers, than go for Blitzkrieg. Why u trying to turn TH Doc into Blitzkrieg Doc with different infantry units, that can repair things right on the field? Factions must have their own unique features and downsides
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
it should have the creme de la creme of german armor.
Yeah sure... Let's give it Nashorns, Hummels, King Tigers, Elephants in that case.... Maybe add some more futuristic top-tier german tanks from World of Tanks?.. // sarcasm
Doctrines must have only what they need to fight agains opponent in the way, that expands base faction abilites. Core of PE is Assault Grenadiers, that have good weapons, well trained and can repair vehicles on the field. They have support of various armored cars and half trucks to any purpose. The only thing to differentiate Doctrines must be in adding some special units and abilities for mid-late game. For tank-oriented doctrine for PE it can be cazemate tanks and they fits perfect there unlike Tigers and Panthers. Tigers and Panthers not intend to fight along with infantry that can repair them on the field. They can rush forward, do damage and go back with all of their abilities, like smokes, tank-shock and HE shells
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
In terms of arty yes, off map strikes from vehicles and command tank IV will probably be enough for this doc, but not when it uses only casemate tanks that dont have better armor or HE rounds to support the infantry against fortifications.
as far as I know Germans have some kind of "command jagdpanther" that have dummy main gun but have additional radio stations and sights. I think it will be nice to see that tank for that purpose here
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
Removing H/J would make this doc even worse and more campy with casemate tanks than old TH doc and while killing the fun of the game when every shit runs arround with these stupid broken F2´s.
There is no any kind of fun with rushing opponent with tanks, u know. If u like that - go for Blitzkrieg doc, that better fits your playstyle
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 19:32
And when it comes down to units being and more docs:
shermans, 76 shermans, M10´s, churchill tanks, priests etc... they are all in various doctrines and factions.
Why is axis not allowed to have same units in various docs.
Esspecially the Tank IV H/J and Panthers are so iconic and german mainstay that you cant put each of them in just one doc.
We already have situations with multiple BK docs in one game simply bc its the only doctrine that has the german core units and workhorses.
I think, that P4 early should be well enough for this doc just because of idea of downsides for factions. Yes, in some case we can have Panthers here but what's point for them there? U already have JagdPanthers witch better fits there and doesn't fits anywhere else.
Point in thing that every and only unit in your build tree must have their purposes. But now we have doubled tech tree without any really reason with just copy-pasted tanks from WH.
Again: u need to choose what u like (panthers or cazemates) and what fits your playstyle before game starts. Not in a battle.
But now build tree more complicated and raises weight of mistake. If I just get fooled by opponent and choose "wrong" tree I will just leave the match. It's what u want for?...

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4210
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Warhawks97 »

have you played old TH doc?

It was boring as fuck for both sides. For allied bc they couldnt do anything bc in every corner sat a silly low profile casemate TD.

There was no "critical mass"... just place a hetzer at every crater and bomb your enemie.
It was only camp and bomb, everytime. I prefer to deal with charging panthers rather than with "sitting tanks you cant see but you know they are there but you cant make them run so you have to die a stupid arty death".


It might have been funny for you, but generally it was super boring and frustrating and pure camping shit.


And why should the Jagdpanther be twice as good vs 90 mm guns but more vulnerable to 17 pdr and 76 guns? I dont get this logic dude.


When it comes to jagdpanther IV/48 or Hetzer, they do have worse protection vs 76 guns than Panzer IV H/J and far worse when compared to tiger.
The IV/70 is about similiar to tiger but has way less HP.


The games were never about "take points strategically"... it was just a line of Hetzers sitting in every crater and more a "broad front slowly creeping forward" gameplay.


Generally, handling rushes and deep strikes and then counterattack with your own tanks perhaps elsewhere or at the same location is more fun to play bc you have a realistic chance with your allied tanks to flank them or to make pushes. Facing a wall of casemate TD´s is super frustrating to play against bc you have tanks but you cant do anything against them and every step can be your last one.




Lastyl, i dont get your logic. First you want to keep the F2 and saying something like "US has shermans with cal 50". Like here:

I think that if some kind of unit is was core of germans, better to see it represented in the game. Just because this game about WW2 and it tries to looks more or less realistically. Same as with Shermans.
Problem for this spam looks like in fact, that this is only way, that PE can counter US infantry or armor spam. They have cheap, fast and well powered for early game tanks with 50cals that meals your infantry. What PE have to counter them for now? Only P4 F1/2.
If u want to reduce them for PEs, than think something about US spams.
One point more: 50cals shred even armored cars and Marder3 but available as starting jeep for US airborne and infantry command. What PE must to do with them?
The F2 was btw no mainstay. it was a stop gap of a handfull produced.


I want to give them Panzer IV H/J´s as a main stay over the F2 but then you come up with:
There is no any kind of fun with rushing opponent with tanks, u know. If u like that - go for Blitzkrieg doc, that better fits your playstyle

Ultimately, the PE when it was introduced in coh was meant to be the offensive doc. It had no defenses except for luftwaffe but just slight one.
Right now the entire faction is quite defensive with exception for luft (which is funny given that this one was the actually defensive doc in PE).
PE represents more or less the SS and the overall design original layout is about pure speed, flexibility, micromanagment and hard hitting attacks (vcoh it had the Panther battlegroup). Its just hurtfull for me when PE becomes a "sitting/bombing" faction when it was about hard hitting brute force attacks.


And there is a vast difference between these two docs (BK and this one). BK is about speed with medium tanks that flank the enemie or attacking soft or bad defended areas. You could have watched countless of games where i used it with big success and comming from the flank and surprise the AT guns and using sneaky inf to swiftly clear emplacments and what will be left.


This doc would be more about frontal hard hitting brute force charges with well armored tank and no sneaky arround with lots of high speed medium tanks.

So basically, the only units BK and this doc would have in common would be Tank IV H/J and stugs. Panthers, yeah, but different versions.


But what you say is like saying Inf and armor are the same bc both have Shermans, 76 shermans, jacksons, jumbos and M10´s. Same units do not mean same gameplay.



The facts speak for themselves. Most play BK doc coz it has a good TD, Panzer IV H/J and Panthers. TS doc? only a few prior to the change recently.
And reviving a casemate tank only doctrine wont make it more attractive and for the allied just once more super frutrating.

User avatar
crazzy501
Posts: 57
Joined: 04 Feb 2017, 10:43
Location: Russia
Contact:

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by crazzy501 »

Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
have you played old TH doc?
I'm playing since 4.6 version. And casemate tanks is what I loved in Blitzkrieg mod long time
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
There was no "critical mass"... just place a hetzer at every crater and bomb your enemie.
U miss my point again... I said that about spam-rush tactic that u like
crazzy501 wrote:For me, as example, that spam-rush is boring. U just need to wait for gain critical mass and then end the game despite the losses
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
It was boring as fuck for both sides. For allied bc they couldnt do anything bc in every corner sat a silly low profile casemate TD.
man if it was boring for PE players so they wont play it! For thous, who like that playstyle that is comfortable. And I'm one of that players. And I really doesn't mind about your problems to fights against that. It's really only my opponent problem and he must find the way to solve this coz I have problems about fights against US factions as well. And not by whining on forum for remove this unique playstyle from a single doctrine of 6 (WH + PE)
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
It might have been funny for you, but generally it was super boring and frustrating and pure camping shit.
So don't play it. Go for BK Doc and vise versa. Don't make any doc like Blitzkrieg Doc
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
It was only camp and bomb, everytime. I prefer to deal with charging panthers rather than with "sitting tanks you cant see but you know they are there but you cant make them run so you have to die a stupid arty death".
Yeah, man, then I prefer to see my clones all around the whole world. But that is nonsense. Much different peoples, much different playstyles, u know. That's what gives us challenge
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
And why should the Jagdpanther be twice as good vs 90 mm guns but more vulnerable to 17 pdr and 76 guns? I dont get this logic dude.
Coz of shorter barrel and less penetration power as example. 17pdrs possible to penetrate at longer ranges than Pershings 90mm. And that's described even in the in-game tips
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
When it comes to jagdpanther IV/48 or Hetzer, they do have worse protection vs 76 guns than Panzer IV H/J and far worse when compared to tiger.
The IV/70 is about similiar to tiger but has way less HP.
I'm talking preferable about IV/70 in any case so... Yes - that's what I like in that doctrine and why I don't want to see Tigers and Panthers here
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
The games were never about "take points strategically"... it was just a line of Hetzers sitting in every crater and more a "broad front slowly creeping forward" gameplay.
That's only a problem of opponent. If PE player wants to play in that way - why u think it's boring for him? For other playstyles we have other doctrines
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Generally, handling rushes and deep strikes and then counterattack with your own tanks perhaps elsewhere or at the same location is more fun to play bc you have a realistic chance with your allied tanks to flank them or to make pushes.
with current state of CP tree it can't be comfortable, because, as I said above
crazzy501 wrote:Rush to the base until opponent leave is not fun for me :( And u have better doc for it: WH Blitzkrieg, witch also have buffs for economic like munitions trade. TH Doc haven't it for now and it can't loose tanks coz it's unable to recover if attack die out. That makes TH Doc more of "1 single risky try", witch is unfair alongside, for example, US Armor with their ultimate ability to instantly recall all of crushed shermans.
Yes, u can add some economic buffs in this doctrine but how it will differentiate from Blitzkrieg doctrine and not become OP?
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Facing a wall of casemate TD´s is super frustrating to play against bc you have tanks but you cant do anything against them and every step can be your last one.
Last updates gives much arty units for almost any faction. Even US Armor have Calliopes, Jeep Calliopes and 105mm to fights against emplacements and what's wrong to use it against emplaced cazemate tanks? If u don't use your units in right way, maybe smthng wrong with your playstyle
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Lastyl, i dont get your logic. First you want to keep the F2 and saying something like "US has shermans with cal 50".
...
The F2 was btw no mainstay. it was a stop gap of a handfull produced.
I want to give them Panzer IV H/J´s as a main stay over the F2 but then you come up with:
My point is to not give all available German tanks to single doctrine. Instead of this I just want to see some basic cheap unit just a little more powerful than Halftruck with AT gun to fill the gap in tech tree between armored car and JP 4/70, that will be used as counter for early Shermans with 75mm or vs armored cars. Just for balance case.
Sure we can have this Panzer 4 J/H, but why I need it for 60 fuel, when I already have JP 4(48) at same costs which have more accuracy, can hide in cover and/or dig in at vet2? Make it cheaper and it will become OP.
BTW that's why I suggested somewhere on the forum to remove JP 4(48)
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Ultimately, the PE when it was introduced in coh was meant to be the offensive doc. It had no defenses except for luftwaffe but just slight one.
Right now the entire faction is quite defensive with exception for luft (which is funny given that this one was the actually defensive doc in PE).
PE represents more or less the SS and the overall design original layout is about pure speed, flexibility, micromanagment and hard hitting attacks (vcoh it had the Panther battlegroup). Its just hurtfull for me when PE becomes a "sitting/bombing" faction when it was about hard hitting brute force attacks.
I see. But I think the only reason why PE has become defensive doctrine was is fact, that they has very weak infantry in past.
In current beta state we have some infantry buffs and have Assault Grenadiers and I'm already tested to play offensive in the way I talk above. And that was more funny than in early beta state just because of combination infantry with halftrucks and JP IV/70. Now we have expensive TDs with good stats, that we won't loose and have much infantry, that can be easily reinforced. And that gives us less risks to loose whole match by just one wrong move and gives us gameplay variation
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
And there is a vast difference between these two docs (BK and this one). BK is about speed with medium tanks that flank the enemie or attacking soft or bad defended areas. You could have watched countless of games where i used it with big success and comming from the flank and surprise the AT guns and using sneaky inf to swiftly clear emplacments and what will be left.
the way u talk about what u want to see in PE doctrine is the same, as u said there. U want lots of P4 and Panthers, just like BK Doc. And u said that's rushing is "the only way to play for fun"
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Its just hurtfull for me when PE becomes a "sitting/bombing" faction when it was about hard hitting brute force attacks.
that's a good point of view for changes. I already mentioned above about remove all arty units from this doc and give them just Stuh42. With support of JagdPanthers and JT u can easily brute force any u want. But, as I said, we need downsides for this. For now, JT with support of P4 J/H will become ultra powerful combination of antitank/antiinfantry force, that can't be penetrated in front or outmaneuvered. Switch P4 J/H for something less powerful, that has lack of MGs and that become less OPed
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
This doc would be more about frontal hard hitting brute force charges with well armored tank and no sneaky arround with lots of high speed medium tanks.
witch tanks u want to see for that purpose? Same as Blitzkrieg doc? So what's the difference with it? That's why I offer you to play BK Doc instead of making PE-BK clone with advantages of Panzer Grenadiers
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
So basically, the only units BK and this doc would have in common would be Tank IV H/J and stugs. Panthers, yeah, but different versions.
Ok. Your right about making Panthers as core unit of German factions but I think we need to split tech trees of Tanks/TH ealrier in time. Let's say, we can't build P4 J/H if we decided to go for TH line. So we can't combine both powers from two sides. Just for balance purposes. And, again, I must to say that Tigers and KT are not fit this doctrine and must be removed. I think better to remove Panthers limit instead of having Tigers there in a case of representing a "Elite SS Battle group"
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
But what you say is like saying Inf and armor are the same bc both have Shermans, 76 shermans, jacksons, jumbos and M10´s. Same units do not mean same gameplay.
yes. That's why US Armor doc have a lot of buffs for Shermans, like field repairs, sandbags, cheaper production and more, that differentiate them from any other faction. For now I don't know how u want to differentiate P4 and Panthers from BK Doc and for now it's looks like u just want PE-BK clone doctrine
Warhawks97 wrote:
24 Aug 2020, 22:42
The facts speak for themselves. Most play BK doc coz it has a good TD, Panzer IV H/J and Panthers. TS doc? only a few prior to the change recently.
And reviving a casemate tank only doctrine wont make it more attractive and for the allied just once more super frutrating.
BK doc haven't any of good TDs u know.. It's have tanks, that only intended to use for rushing and flanking. Stug4 can only fights against early Shermans or Shermans without sandbags around, but not vs Easy Eights coz of their good accuracy and well survivability.
I'm playing mostly PE TH Doc just because of casemate tanks. I like how it looks. I like how it plays. And only thing them needed is good infantry support.
And yes, I'm played all factions allied and axis just for interest and have a view on them all

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4210
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Warhawks97 »

Spamming casemate tanks in teamfights easily counters any allied tank spam which btw isn't even as good as the German tank spam currently. Old th doc produced more td than US could build Shermans. That was a pure joke. And casemate tanks have no real enemies... Zooks fail to hit them or even pen. Arty isn't a typical tank killer anymore. Gl using calli and 105 Sherman vs hidden tds.
This doc basically made any tank production pointless right away. There was no counterplay except using heavy arty with RA priests in every single game.

And stugs in bk doc are the most cost effective tds. They do kill even Shermans e8 and Pershings and can be spammed in huge numbers.
It's often just double bk doc using lots of stugs and deny all armor... Then panthers to finish the job. I have barley any reason to play docs like Def doc bc bk doc is a good example of how deadly huge numbers of low profile cheap casemate tanks are.

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 721
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Shanks »

Warhawks97 wrote:
25 Aug 2020, 08:37
Spamming casemate tanks in teamfights easily counters any allied tank spam which btw isn't even as good as the German tank spam currently. Old th doc produced more td than US could build Shermans. That was a pure joke. And casemate tanks have no real enemies... Zooks fail to hit them or even pen. Arty isn't a typical tank killer anymore. Gl using calli and 105 Sherman vs hidden tds.
This doc basically made any tank production pointless right away. There was no counterplay except using heavy arty with RA priests in every single game.

And stugs in bk doc are the most cost effective tds. They do kill even Shermans e8 and Pershings and can be spammed in huge numbers.
It's often just double bk doc using lots of stugs and deny all armor... Then panthers to finish the job. I have barley any reason to play docs like Def doc bc bk doc is a good example of how deadly huge numbers of low profile cheap casemate tanks are.
The 76 mm shermans can kill the stug of bk, they can even destroy them with a single shot and I wonder why ... will it be 5% of rng? I see that here many say that the stug is too strong and it is not like that , the only really strong stug is the stug last version, the only thing I question about the stug tank in general, is that they are able to go through the pershing's armor ridiculously, even so in games 3v3 armor doc has an advantage over bk doc mainly because of the SP and m10 APCR shots (they can destroy panthers and effectively penetrate an elephant) and I'm not complaining about it, but I don't like players skipping this German anti-armor alternative

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4210
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Warhawks97 »

Shanks wrote:
25 Aug 2020, 19:01
Warhawks97 wrote:
25 Aug 2020, 08:37
Spamming casemate tanks in teamfights easily counters any allied tank spam which btw isn't even as good as the German tank spam currently. Old th doc produced more td than US could build Shermans. That was a pure joke. And casemate tanks have no real enemies... Zooks fail to hit them or even pen. Arty isn't a typical tank killer anymore. Gl using calli and 105 Sherman vs hidden tds.
This doc basically made any tank production pointless right away. There was no counterplay except using heavy arty with RA priests in every single game.

And stugs in bk doc are the most cost effective tds. They do kill even Shermans e8 and Pershings and can be spammed in huge numbers.
It's often just double bk doc using lots of stugs and deny all armor... Then panthers to finish the job. I have barley any reason to play docs like Def doc bc bk doc is a good example of how deadly huge numbers of low profile cheap casemate tanks are.
The 76 mm shermans can kill the stug of bk, they can even destroy them with a single shot and I wonder why ... will it be 5% of rng? I see that here many say that the stug is too strong and it is not like that , the only really strong stug is the stug last version, the only thing I question about the stug tank in general, is that they are able to go through the pershing's armor ridiculously, even so in games 3v3 armor doc has an advantage over bk doc mainly because of the SP and m10 APCR shots (they can destroy panthers and effectively penetrate an elephant) and I'm not complaining about it, but I don't like players skipping this German anti-armor alternative

the stug IV has 636 HP so it usually survives a 76 hit. Sure, going 1 vs 1 vs an 76 is risky. But you can spam the stugs right away basically after little tech. From ambush they have 70 range, good rof and with first strike and AP they are posing real threat to pershings as we saw in many battles.


So you can basically lock down allied armor with BK doc. Even easier as with def doc. In teamfights you can just go double BK and easily get like 4-6 stugs out. So you are locked down as armor doc and Pershing has a long way to come. By then there will be plenty of panthers.


So whats left? SP... one tank to beat BK doc? Which might simply overrun you with two panther and BK ability?

M10 has that HEAT round but thats after some tecing and each time its a huge ressource investment. M10 in theory can beat a lot, but you just dont have that ammount of ammo to always use AP or HEAT rounds which you need to kill any tiny shit of german armor.

My stugs for the most part get only HE rounds or perhaps skirts but barely AP. You place them in ambush and they do the job unlike M10 which needs constant micro and babysitting and res-investments.



Stug IV and Stug IV late share same armor and HP. Just the late costs 80 MP more just for having a 360 degree top mount MG.



I felt that BK is handles armor doc better than for example Terror doc or even def doc. Def has on paper bigger guns but its units are pretty specialized and expensive. The better armor on IV/48 doesnt make this tank better than stug and doesnt justifiy this price gap, esspecially since this one needs constant anti infantry cover.




so much so to the off-topic part.


In the very long run Def and TS doc can handle armor doc better, but most of the time the battle is over long before you can get enough pershings and shermans to slowly bleed down BK doc. But up to this point, BK was from my experience the better counter to armor doc than def doc with its super expensive, very specialized units.

MEFISTO
Posts: 177
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by MEFISTO »

Can someone give me a reason to play SE after Wespe 105mm SP Artillery removed? a 105 morter? Hotchkiss Light Tank ? non of this is an artillery counter for Allies Artilleries doctrines, and this become worst when you waste more than 6 cp and get a 150mm Hummel Self-Propelled Artillery and you need 100 amunition to use it. This doctrine is allready boring in the current beta is even worst. I think you should give 1 wespe to TH and give 2 wespe to SE, remuve Hotchkiss from TH and give them a 150mm Nebelwerfer Rocket Battery.

User avatar
Mantis
Posts: 65
Joined: 28 Dec 2019, 12:37
Location: Czech Republic

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Mantis »

MEFISTO wrote:
28 Aug 2020, 03:02
Can someone give me a reason to play SE after Wespe 105mm SP Artillery removed? a 105 morter? Hotchkiss Light Tank ? non of this is an artillery counter for Allies Artilleries doctrines, and this become worst when you waste more than 6 cp and get a 150mm Hummel Self-Propelled Artillery and you need 100 amunition to use it. This doctrine is allready boring in the current beta is even worst. I think you should give 1 wespe to TH and give 2 wespe to SE, remuve Hotchkiss from TH and give them a 150mm Nebelwerfer Rocket Battery.
My words bro. How we can now counter allied arty with hummel? No chance. Too high price for shooting. Is it only long shot arty in SE doc and price is too unplayable. Every enemy arty doc beat you like nothing. Wespe in PS doc is biggest fail in this beta. Remove it back pls or reduce price of the hummel to half(buying and shooting price).

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2237
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by kwok »

sigh.... man... where were all of you when we spent months discussing the panzer support changes... weeks discussing these specific recent changes...
structural changes are LOCKED. we can try to balance it in minor ways before full release but for right now you'll have to learn how to get along with what you got. THIS IS WHY FORUM PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT. YOU CANT JUST SAY SOMETHING WAS A BAD IDEA AFTER 4 PEOPLE SAID THE IDEA WAS GOOD 4 WEEKS AGO AND WE COMMIT THE CHANGE.

MEFISTO
Posts: 177
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by MEFISTO »

kwok wrote:
28 Aug 2020, 17:27
sigh.... man... where were all of you when we spent months discussing the panzer support changes... weeks discussing these specific recent changes...
structural changes are LOCKED. we can try to balance it in minor ways before full release but for right now you'll have to learn how to get along with what you got. THIS IS WHY FORUM PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT. YOU CANT JUST SAY SOMETHING WAS A BAD IDEA AFTER 4 PEOPLE SAID THE IDEA WAS GOOD 4 WEEKS AGO AND WE COMMIT THE CHANGE.
I did not see that post, you know bro I am busy, working, I get home late, must of the time I can’t read all staff, I don’t know who ask for this change, I am agree that TH needs a bit of artillery but this is too much, may be a PIV commander artillery, and please give SE the Waspe they need it. Make SE great again 🤣🤣🤣

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 721
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Shanks »

kwok wrote:
28 Aug 2020, 17:27
sigh.... man... where were all of you when we spent months discussing the panzer support changes... weeks discussing these specific recent changes...
structural changes are LOCKED. we can try to balance it in minor ways before full release but for right now you'll have to learn how to get along with what you got. THIS IS WHY FORUM PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT. YOU CANT JUST SAY SOMETHING WAS A BAD IDEA AFTER 4 PEOPLE SAID THE IDEA WAS GOOD 4 WEEKS AGO AND WE COMMIT THE CHANGE.
If the structural changes are definitive, only a few brainless people say +1 to that change (who surely did not test the beta as much as we did), and then this group comes and indicates that the change is not good with valid agurments (many games in the beta, more than 15 minimum), then this forum is shit ... why do you capitalize the answer? what does it mean? that you are angry and no matter what is said more?

Maybe we are not active in the forum, but there are people in our group (most of them) who only use their little free time to test the beta, and not to be reading a library in the forum, we test the beta many times, and your answer in my opinion is totally inappropriate...people here come to try to find their balance and get hit in the face

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 722
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Walderschmidt »

Shanks wrote:
29 Aug 2020, 22:25
kwok wrote:
28 Aug 2020, 17:27
sigh.... man... where were all of you when we spent months discussing the panzer support changes... weeks discussing these specific recent changes...
structural changes are LOCKED. we can try to balance it in minor ways before full release but for right now you'll have to learn how to get along with what you got. THIS IS WHY FORUM PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT. YOU CANT JUST SAY SOMETHING WAS A BAD IDEA AFTER 4 PEOPLE SAID THE IDEA WAS GOOD 4 WEEKS AGO AND WE COMMIT THE CHANGE.
If the structural changes are definitive, only a few brainless people say +1 to that change (who surely did not test the beta as much as we did), and then this group comes and indicates that the change is not good with valid agurments (many games in the beta, more than 15 minimum), then this forum is shit ... why do you capitalize the answer? what does it mean? that you are angry and no matter what is said more?

Maybe we are not active in the forum, but there are people in our group (most of them) who only use their little free time to test the beta, and not to be reading a library in the forum, we test the beta many times, and your answer in my opinion is totally inappropriate...people here come to try to find their balance and get hit in the face
You are not active in the forum, so the devs rarely hear any of your criticisms. If you had been more active maybe the TH doc would have been made differently.

But the devs asked the forum what the forum would like it to be. So if you hate the new TH doc, be mad at people on the forum or yourself for not giving your input until now.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 499
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by CGarr »

Walderschmidt wrote:
30 Aug 2020, 04:51
Shanks wrote:
29 Aug 2020, 22:25
kwok wrote:
28 Aug 2020, 17:27
sigh.... man... where were all of you when we spent months discussing the panzer support changes... weeks discussing these specific recent changes...
structural changes are LOCKED. we can try to balance it in minor ways before full release but for right now you'll have to learn how to get along with what you got. THIS IS WHY FORUM PARTICIPATION IS IMPORTANT. YOU CANT JUST SAY SOMETHING WAS A BAD IDEA AFTER 4 PEOPLE SAID THE IDEA WAS GOOD 4 WEEKS AGO AND WE COMMIT THE CHANGE.
If the structural changes are definitive, only a few brainless people say +1 to that change (who surely did not test the beta as much as we did), and then this group comes and indicates that the change is not good with valid agurments (many games in the beta, more than 15 minimum), then this forum is shit ... why do you capitalize the answer? what does it mean? that you are angry and no matter what is said more?

Maybe we are not active in the forum, but there are people in our group (most of them) who only use their little free time to test the beta, and not to be reading a library in the forum, we test the beta many times, and your answer in my opinion is totally inappropriate...people here come to try to find their balance and get hit in the face
You are not active in the forum, so the devs rarely hear any of your criticisms. If you had been more active maybe the TH doc would have been made differently.

But the devs asked the forum what the forum would like it to be. So if you hate the new TH doc, be mad at people on the forum or yourself for not giving your input until now.

Wald
^
@shanks We openly asked for criticism and added suggestions when posting suggestions for TH(PS) changes in an effort to avoid this kind of issue, don't complain now if you weren't going to participate then. Many of the people that posted are also busy, and if you have enough time to playtest 15+ games since the wespe got moved to PS doc, you've definitely got more time than I do, yet I've given more feedback than you by a longshot. Don't try to downplay how much testing those who made the initial suggestions did, I definitely saw Walder, Menicus, Tiger, and even Warhawks on the beta more often than I saw you or anyone from this group aside from Mefisto.

Anyways, why are people freaking out about PS doc having a wespe instead of a hotchkiss somehow being OP? It makes more sense when considering what targets they realistically need arty against. Their frontline troops are strong enough to deal with inf and armor, the targets they'd need arty for are static ones like team weapons, emplacements, and enemy arty. The hotchkiss is overkill in the sense that it is extremely effective against all targets, so it got replaced by the wespe, which is less effective against mobile targets due to its slow-firing barrages with longer time-on-target.

Giving SE the hotchkiss improves it in 3 ways:
-It addresses the redundancy of having both the Wespe and Hummel in one doctrine, as both are slow firing with high ToT, thus they are both generally used in the same role (counter-arty and clearing defensive hardpoints).
-With the hotchkiss, SE now has a much more effective option for stalling enemy advances with arty. A wespe might scare away some inf in a small area during an enemy advance, but a hotchkiss salvo will completely halt an entire advance, even if only momentarily. With a well aimed/timed, it will heavily damage or even kill pretty much anything the rockets land near. With a missed salvo, the enemy still has to wait for the salvo to end rather than going around it or rushing through like they would with a wespe barrage, as it covers a much wider area and every individual rocket has incredibly high damage potential.
-The hotchkiss comes sooner than the wespe in terms of teching.

The only issue I can see is dealing with a camping PS doc player, and even in that case, a priest/sexton will win against a wespe and most allied docs generally will outlast PS doc in a static fight due to how cheap their units are. PS doc is optimized for either breakthroughs (via the heavy tank line) or AT defense (via the TD line). A static player will likely take the TD line, meaning they will have a much harder time making pushes, and a Wespe alone will not be enough to hold out against allied arty. They also won't be able to stall enemy pushes the same way they could with a hotchkiss, so it will be easier now than before to just overrun the jagdpanther with inf. Assault grenadiers will not win against allied elite inf and the hotchkiss is no longer present to help weaken enemy pushes, so trying to camp with this doc the same way one would with the old TH doc will probably not be nearly as effective.

With all this being said, keep in mind that multiple people in this thread (myself included) suggested that this doctrine should only have off-map arty. Both the hotchkiss and wespe are overkill when you have strong inf, strong tanks, and tank commander arty for dealing with defensive hardpoints. Warhawks made a really good suggestion in that the wespe should only be able to fire indirectly through the command tank, thus negating the range advantage and reinforcing this doctrine's focus on the use of arty. The wespe would still be a good alternative to the tank commander barrage in that the victor target ability used to call in it's barrages could be made cheaper than the tank commander barrage.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2237
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by kwok »

With all this being said, keep in mind that multiple people in this thread (myself included) suggested that this doctrine should only have off-map arty. Both the hotchkiss and wespe are overkill when you have strong inf, strong tanks, and tank commander arty for dealing with defensive hardpoints. Warhawks made a really good suggestion in that the wespe should only be able to fire indirectly through the command tank, thus negating the range advantage and reinforcing this doctrine's focus on the use of arty. The wespe would still be a good alternative to the tank commander barrage in that the victor target ability used to call in it's barrages could be made cheaper than the tank commander barrage.
Honestly, the reason why I personally argued to not go down this route is to cater to not as good players. We know this doctrine will attract a lot of players because it's the only place to get all heavy tanks now that terror got replaced. Direct arty only makes the skill requirement for the doctrine much higher.

I've got an idea brewing in my head on how to counter the current PS doc (with all docs but armor doc) but haven't gotten a chance to try it yet. I'm putting a 1v1 challenge out there for anyone/everyone.

Now I just have to wait for mencius to come online and out-micro ANY strategy i pull off while telling 50 facts about corsix. "Kwok, did you know I can just... ______". What mencius and i need to do is play "Brain-and-Hand" BK. Two players of equal micro play against each other while mencius and I can only talk to our players with screenshare.

User avatar
Sparrow
Posts: 104
Joined: 07 May 2016, 18:57
Location: Cuba

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Sparrow »

We have been playing every night since the last update and yet...allies werent able to defeat axis team with PS in all 3v3 or 4v4 matches...there is no way this new update get the well balance we are searching for...is far from that now...thats my opinion, from my point of view and all the cubans and a few players of South America

If we have been playing all these days...and we are telling you guys that PS is OP...will you listen our reclaims? I hope this BETA comes to Live soon, but I hope more that a new patch comes to remove that Wespe from PS...this version is more for camping and volleyball arty than the strategy we want for this mod

You will realise this fact...
Last edited by Sparrow on 02 Sep 2020, 16:27, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3313
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by MarKr »

Wespe can be changed in some way so that it is not so strong but any unit moving form a doctrine to another is out of picture.

The beta has been running for almost 2 years. Every conceptual change requires another beta version and that means postponing the release of the beta to the live version. We've already postponed once because of the AA reworks, then another time because people had some complaints about the TS doc (not having assault grenadiers, Hotchkiss problems + some other stuff). If we postpone it again because Wespe, I am 100% sure people will find some other problem so we'll need to work on that and postopone it again, the next version will have some issues and will need to postpone the release again and so it will go on over and over and over - trust me, we've been there before.

Please note that when the beta changes into live version, it does NOT mean that there will be no more changes. More updates will come but we just have to turn the beta into the live version at some point and we cannot keep postponing it forever.
Image

User avatar
Sparrow
Posts: 104
Joined: 07 May 2016, 18:57
Location: Cuba

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Sparrow »

MarKr wrote:
02 Sep 2020, 15:23
Wespe can be changed in some way so that it is not so strong but any unit moving form a doctrine to another is out of picture.

The beta has been running for almost 2 years. Every conceptual change requires another beta version and that means postponing the release of the beta to the live version. We've already postponed once because of the AA reworks, then another time because people had some complaints about the TS doc (not having assault grenadiers, Hotchkiss problems + some other stuff). If we postpone it again because Wespe, I am 100% sure people will find some other problem so we'll need to work on that and postopone it again, the next version will have some issues and will need to postpone the release again and so it will go on over and over and over - trust me, we've been there before.

Please note that when the beta changes into live version, it does NOT mean that there will be no more changes. More updates will come but we just have to turn the beta into the live version at some point and we cannot keep postponing it forever.
Ok MarKr, you are right...lets get this BETA comes to live already...we want that too, but there are still some changes to be made on the road

PS: When will be released as official current BKmod?

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3313
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by MarKr »

When the last beta update was released we said the beta would turn to live version in 2 weeks...so in about 4 days? It also depends on how much time will kwok need to finish the tournament map but it will be most likely in those 4 days.
Image

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 499
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by CGarr »

kwok wrote:
02 Sep 2020, 09:09
Honestly, the reason why I personally argued to not go down this route is to cater to not as good players. We know this doctrine will attract a lot of players because it's the only place to get all heavy tanks now that terror got replaced. Direct arty only makes the skill requirement for the doctrine much higher.

I've got an idea brewing in my head on how to counter the current PS doc (with all docs but armor doc) but haven't gotten a chance to try it yet. I'm putting a 1v1 challenge out there for anyone/everyone.

Now I just have to wait for mencius to come online and out-micro ANY strategy i pull off while telling 50 facts about corsix. "Kwok, did you know I can just... ______". What mencius and i need to do is play "Brain-and-Hand" BK. Two players of equal micro play against each other while mencius and I can only talk to our players with screenshare.
Oh yeah, I'm not saying everyone agreed on having no on-map arty being a good solution, just saying that there was plenty of pretty well made arguments for only having off-map arty on PS doc, so whatever arty unit that doc ends up with is always going to be overkill since it'll be present alongside incredibly strong armor and decent inf. When it became clear that having no on-map arty would not be an option, we settled for the wespe replacing the hotchkiss as a more forgiving nerf to PS doc's indirect fire strength, and it looks like the dev team agreed.

It's funny to me that all these people complaining about the wespe being on PS doc didn't have a problem with the hotchkiss, even though the hotchkiss is much better at clearing wide areas of AT presence or even well spread-out groups of inf (the only 2 things that realistically prevent this doc from making breakthroughs). The wespe is good for use-cases that are more dependent on precision like counter arty fire, but the hotchkiss is much better at creating openings for pushes, as well as allowing PS doc to stall more easily by providing an easy means of stalling enemy pushes.


User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 721
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Shanks »

CGarr wrote:
02 Sep 2020, 01:28
Walderschmidt wrote:
30 Aug 2020, 04:51
Shanks wrote:
29 Aug 2020, 22:25


If the structural changes are definitive, only a few brainless people say +1 to that change (who surely did not test the beta as much as we did), and then this group comes and indicates that the change is not good with valid agurments (many games in the beta, more than 15 minimum), then this forum is shit ... why do you capitalize the answer? what does it mean? that you are angry and no matter what is said more?

Maybe we are not active in the forum, but there are people in our group (most of them) who only use their little free time to test the beta, and not to be reading a library in the forum, we test the beta many times, and your answer in my opinion is totally inappropriate...people here come to try to find their balance and get hit in the face
You are not active in the forum, so the devs rarely hear any of your criticisms. If you had been more active maybe the TH doc would have been made differently.

But the devs asked the forum what the forum would like it to be. So if you hate the new TH doc, be mad at people on the forum or yourself for not giving your input until now.

Wald
^
@shanks We openly asked for criticism and added suggestions when posting suggestions for TH(PS) changes in an effort to avoid this kind of issue, don't complain now if you weren't going to participate then. Many of the people that posted are also busy, and if you have enough time to playtest 15+ games since the wespe got moved to PS doc, you've definitely got more time than I do, yet I've given more feedback than you by a longshot. Don't try to downplay how much testing those who made the initial suggestions did, I definitely saw Walder, Menicus, Tiger, and even Warhawks on the beta more often than I saw you or anyone from this group aside from Mefisto.

Anyways, why are people freaking out about PS doc having a wespe instead of a hotchkiss somehow being OP? It makes more sense when considering what targets they realistically need arty against. Their frontline troops are strong enough to deal with inf and armor, the targets they'd need arty for are static ones like team weapons, emplacements, and enemy arty. The hotchkiss is overkill in the sense that it is extremely effective against all targets, so it got replaced by the wespe, which is less effective against mobile targets due to its slow-firing barrages with longer time-on-target.

Giving SE the hotchkiss improves it in 3 ways:
-It addresses the redundancy of having both the Wespe and Hummel in one doctrine, as both are slow firing with high ToT, thus they are both generally used in the same role (counter-arty and clearing defensive hardpoints).
-With the hotchkiss, SE now has a much more effective option for stalling enemy advances with arty. A wespe might scare away some inf in a small area during an enemy advance, but a hotchkiss salvo will completely halt an entire advance, even if only momentarily. With a well aimed/timed, it will heavily damage or even kill pretty much anything the rockets land near. With a missed salvo, the enemy still has to wait for the salvo to end rather than going around it or rushing through like they would with a wespe barrage, as it covers a much wider area and every individual rocket has incredibly high damage potential.
-The hotchkiss comes sooner than the wespe in terms of teching.

The only issue I can see is dealing with a camping PS doc player, and even in that case, a priest/sexton will win against a wespe and most allied docs generally will outlast PS doc in a static fight due to how cheap their units are. PS doc is optimized for either breakthroughs (via the heavy tank line) or AT defense (via the TD line). A static player will likely take the TD line, meaning they will have a much harder time making pushes, and a Wespe alone will not be enough to hold out against allied arty. They also won't be able to stall enemy pushes the same way they could with a hotchkiss, so it will be easier now than before to just overrun the jagdpanther with inf. Assault grenadiers will not win against allied elite inf and the hotchkiss is no longer present to help weaken enemy pushes, so trying to camp with this doc the same way one would with the old TH doc will probably not be nearly as effective.



With all this being said, keep in mind that multiple people in this thread (myself included) suggested that this doctrine should only have off-map arty. Both the hotchkiss and wespe are overkill when you have strong inf, strong tanks, and tank commander arty for dealing with defensive hardpoints. Warhawks made a really good suggestion in that the wespe should only be able to fire indirectly through the command tank, thus negating the range advantage and reinforcing this doctrine's focus on the use of arty. The wespe would still be a good alternative to the tank commander barrage in that the victor target ability used to call in it's barrages could be made cheaper than the tank commander barrage.

The work of all the developers is good, I regret my attitude, thanks for the great work, the balance will only be achieved when the official version comes out, so everyone will play and see what is wrong again, I will try not to publish anything more in the forum, it may not be active now in the forum, but before it was, and a lot

Note:sorry for the other publication, I did not know how to shorten what you wrote, and I get tangled up, sorry

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 499
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by CGarr »

Shanks wrote:
03 Sep 2020, 04:07
The work of all the developers is good, I regret my attitude, thanks for the great work, the balance will only be achieved when the official version comes out, so everyone will play and see what is wrong again, I will try not to publish anything more in the forum, it may not be active now in the forum, but before it was, and a lot

Note:sorry for the other publication, I did not know how to shorten what you wrote, and I get tangled up, sorry
You posting to the forum is fine man, wasn't saying you shouldn't post. I was just saying that it's a bit too late in the current development cycle to argue against the changes suggested, especially while insulting people. Your opinion is 100% valid, you're just late enough that getting this mad over the changes is unreasonable, it'd be better to wait until after the beta goes public.

I personally disagree with the idea that the hotchkiss makes more sense on PS doc than the wespe, as the hotchkiss is objectively stronger in most scenarios and this doctrine wasn't originally meant to have strong arty. With that being said, I'd be on board for a different unit like the StuH or Stupa. I still think the most interesting option would be more widely available smoke options, as the flame hetzer would be a much more interesting solution to dealing with emplacements, but it is generally very difficult to close distance with said unit without it dying. Smoke would help this. The flame hetzer clears out emplacements and kills off inf and support weapon crews extremely fast, and in terms of counterplay, I'd much rather deal with it than a wespe or hotchkiss.

Diablo
Posts: 130
Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 22:40

Re: ( BETA) New Panzer Support OMG

Post by Diablo »

Good point about smoke and flames.

Post Reply