Armor doctrine

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 770
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by Walderschmidt »

OrderLordTank wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 12:53
I also don't think a match will prove anything since our skill levels are so unequal (due to me playing mostly vs expert CPUs on open basic maps).But i have nothing against a match either.Having said that i find it hard to believe that someone who is better than me believes that playing armor is as easy as propaganda or blitzkrieg.In any case i will be fine with an afternoon or evening match in the weekend,just curb your expectations accordingly...
Maybe not. But you need to understand this game is built around and balanced for PVP. The AI cheats in two ways that players do not.

1) It knows where all your units are (though it plays dumb).
2) It cheats by getting extra resources which can get ridiculous at the expert AI level.

Real life humans both play the game better than CPUs in that they learn from their mistakes and play worse, especially when starting out because they don’t know how the basics even work.

It’s still good that you post because it’s good for people to consider things from multiple angles, but since you don’t play PVP, many people will take what you say with a grain of salt.

What’s your timezone?

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

OrderLordTank
Posts: 55
Joined: 06 Oct 2020, 11:44

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by OrderLordTank »

Although i mainly play vs expert cpu (which i have stated in many of my posts) that doesn't mean that i never play vs humans.However since i only play vs human opponents among my friends the opponent pool and thus the skill cap is limited (none of us is much better than an expert cpu on an open basic map).None the less the above observations involve pvp and not pve games and most of my critiques have to deal with hard stat numbers and not advanced tactics.Finally i have already stated that these are personal opinions that reflect my basic skill play so taking them a pin (and not just a grain) of salt for advanced pvp should be the norm.Although i doubt that stat numbers (and not tactics) weigh much more or less in more advanced pvp skill levels.
My timezone is UTC+02:00.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2266
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by kwok »

I’m not saying anyone has done this, just saying this as an early warning. Guys don’t grill him too hard on his opinions just because he doesn’t pvp as often. The dude still has opinions and has played pvp before. Imagine like the Cuban players, for a long time they were pvp in their tunngle based community and when they joined the overall steam community they started weaker skyrocketed in skill (lol like pfather’s top player charts...). Use this opportunity to bring a new player into the community please. Not a way of stomping someone’s opinions and feelings out of the forum. Help his understand your perspectives and give a chance to understand his, maybe his pvp skills aren’t they’re but the essence of what he says might be. Imagine if his micro was better or something like that. We will get to a better conclusion on this thread with that attitude in mind.

If everyone is open to potentially being wrong I think we should be fine.

OrderLordTank
Posts: 55
Joined: 06 Oct 2020, 11:44

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by OrderLordTank »

I don't think any such revelation in a new pro pvp player is likely,lol.But i am old enough to get used in getting my ass kicked by better opponents plus losing teaches you way more than wining.Also i am mature enough not to care if people i have never met measure common sense in game balance just by pvp rating.Being mature enough to admit that high level pvp tactics can reform my opinion on hard stat numbers is another matter though... ^ ^

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by CGarr »

Krieger Blitzer wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 13:25
if your thoughts are mainly based on games vs Ai opponents, then you should find it "easy" to believe that you are wrong with what you think. Comp Stomp players will probably believe earth is flat until they get to play PvP and realize the truth.. eventually laughing back at themselves; without exaggeration.
@OverLordTank - Going to assume he didn't mean any offense to you by that, but yeah, comp-stomps play way differently than PVP. I think I understand now why you keep toting sherman mass production as the holy grail and why your numbers felt so off in terms of how much you opponent can field. AI gets a lot more resources than players, so they can spam way harder. In PVP, units like vsturms become a lot more viable because you can actually have more units on the field than your opponent, in a comp stomp they're kind of a lost cause since the bot will outspam you with far better units and can micro them all simultaneously. Timing is also way more important in PVP than PVE, which explains our disagreements over the various 76 shermans. Lastly, axis is super easy to play in compstomps since their units are generally stronger 1v1 and bots have terrible positioning, allowing you to just pick fights with each unit individually.

I'm actually pretty terrible at comp stomping since my attention span is like nonexistent, so you've probably got me beat there :lol:
OrderLordTank wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 22:57
Being mature enough to admit that high level pvp tactics can reform my opinion on hard stat numbers is another matter though... ^ ^
You're looking at the stats with the wrong context man, unit compositions that feel really weak in compstomp can be really strong in PVP, and things that work well in PVE generally don't in PVP.

Sherman spam, stugs, vsturms, early heavy tanks? These aren't high level strats that we're talking about, this is more like basic unit viability. Again, the only thing you've mentioned that's actually OP is the stug, and that's more of an issue with blitz doctrine than the individual unit. The only thing that should be changed on the unit itself is removing HE so that AT inf can actually hard counter it like they're meant to, as right now overwhelming firepower is pretty much your only option. As for armor doctrine being weak, the only things that need to be changed are the jackson and 57mm performance, and the recoilless jeep could probably use a nerf in the form of a rework to make it perform like the handheld recoilless rifles (more emphasis on crits, less 5 fuel banzaii super jeep that can dodge everything under the sun and 2 hit mediums).
OrderLordTank wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 22:57
Although i doubt that stat numbers (and not tactics) weigh much more or less in more advanced pvp skill levels.
They weigh the same in PVP, but the different tactics used in PVP combined with your opponent having less income than an AI would means you can get away with different things than you can in PVE, and some of the unit compositions that work really well in PVE aren't fantastic in PVP because the other player will likely try to change their approach if they start losing hard, where the AI would just keep doing the same thing until it runs out of resources.

You're not wrong at all in the context of PVE, just saying some of the balance decisions make more sense in PVP. I'm in UTC - 8h if you ever wanna bust out some PVP games to see what I mean via testing.

OrderLordTank
Posts: 55
Joined: 06 Oct 2020, 11:44

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by OrderLordTank »

Let me be clear,i repeat that although i mostly play pve all my above observations have to do with my (admittedly low level) pvp games.For example in a normal resources pvp game when i refer to stug spam i mean when you have something like 3 mg teams,2 volks squad,1 AT gun,1 nebelwerfer,2 engineer squads and something like 3 stugs while you keep building more of them as your main means of attack.I mean of course you will use the cheap infantry squads for basic scouting and the nebelwerfer to take out a well guarded enemy revealed 75mm (as i said 57mm ain't a big deal) AT gun or two but 80% of the time you will fight just using the stugs while the rest would just guard and cap.

If i was rushing a stug spam vs a CPU i could do the same with just 2 mgs,1 volks and the starting engineers.At most i might build a nebelwerfer at my leisure if i later saw a very well defended 75mm AT gun.But other than it's like 99% stugs without even replacing infantry losses apart from a single volksturm to cap and a single engineer to repair.I call both cases spamming but it is obvious that i could have the manpower required for 5-6 stugs vs the cpu instead of 3 vs a human provided i had the required fuel.Also vs a human you can't obviously keep building only stugs but you get my meaning.

For the life of me i can never do the same with a sherman spam,but i can do the same with a late pz4 spam (provided i get the mass production price reduction ofcourse).Maybe not as efficiently as with stugs but cheap late pz4 spam is definitely very viable if not even optimal.Anyway that is my personal opinion,feel free to take it with a pin of salt because of my limited pvp experience.

What i don't think is just a personal opinion is the fact that stugs and late pz4s (with mass production) are in fact both cheaper and better then shermans.Because they already have top mg and armor skirts as well as facing way fewer and softer enemy heavy armor on top of weaker and fewer enemy handheld ATs.Stugs have even better armor and range on top of that,and sure you must be static to use the range but you almost always stop in order not to miss your shots anyway.In short axis medium armor isn't just better from the get go but also scales better as the game progresses thus spamming it is very efficient.

As i said with armor doctrine specific mass production,armor upgrades and ammo crates,on top of the 3 fuel upgrades in the supply yard,and ofcourse the .50 cal unlock,shermans do become better in the end but that is never really doable in 1v1 (or 2v2) prior to already more or less dominating the game for a very long time.

Feel free to add me as orderlordtank in steam if you want to play a match or two,but as i said don't expect much.None the less i promise not to shadow anyone no matter how hard you kick my ass,provided my friends aren't available. :)

OrderLordTank
Posts: 55
Joined: 06 Oct 2020, 11:44

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by OrderLordTank »

I got served twice by wald today which was no surprise.However i was taught how much more effective handheld ATs are with proper micro compared to what i thought.So i must admit that stugs and late pz4s are a bit less of a threat the more micro skilled your opponent is since targeting AT squads with HE isn't as easy.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2266
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by kwok »

hey man, thanks for being open minded. the only thing i'd consider for balance is at what point is TOO MUCH micro killing the game. so we're still taking a lot of things into consideration. so we'll keep thinking this through. it was already on the radar of devs to look into the effectiveness of TD's in general (not just stugs). you can actually see other posts about it (hetzers, JPIV's, m10s, stugs, etc)

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 770
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by Walderschmidt »

They were in a building, well positioned.

Wasn't a micro thing.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

OrderLordTank
Posts: 55
Joined: 06 Oct 2020, 11:44

Re: Armor doctrine

Post by OrderLordTank »

It wasn't just that garrisoned AT strike,but the way you handled the riflemen around the other building in order not to get shot by HE.I mean sure THEY didn't have a faust (and even if they had sticky bombs they must be dropped closer than that) but using in them as bait was viable and not as suicidal as i thought.In short handheld ATs in urban areas are more potent than i thought and armor skirts weaker.

Post Reply