SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

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
CGarr
Posts: 706
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by CGarr »

The bergetiger is fine as is in the sense that it has a purpose and fills that purpose well, but I feel that through added functionality, we could leverage it as a means of improving PE docs where needed. One such example of this is Scorched Earth doctrine. This doc heavily emphasizes the use of mines/explosive charges and traps, but these tools are often extremely difficult to use effectively because the units that can deploy them are very squishy and consequently cannot operate in high traffic areas of the map where said explosives or traps would be useful.

My suggestion for the SE bergetiger to address this issue are as follows:
1. Allow it to quickly construct roadblocks once they are unlocked, possibly for free.
2. Allow it to quickly drop mines and demo charges (incendiary and standard).
3. Allowing it to dig trenches after the roadblocks are unlocked would be fitting since they can fill similar roles in limiting access to certain areas to armor. Trenches wouldn't block enemy inf form getting through, but they would have the obvious added utility of providing cover for your own inf and could also be used in conjunction with the explosive charges as traps.

It has the armor to do all of these tasks in combat, and if these abilities are OP on their own, they could potentially be tied into an existing CP unlock so that they aren't available immediately. As far as realism goes, the purpose of this tank is debated since the crane wasn't strong enough for tank recovery purposes and it lacks other equipment associated with that role, with some even suggesting that it was instead used to drop explosives, so it isn't too far fetched to think that it could be used for the above suggested purposes.
Last edited by CGarr on 07 Dec 2020, 03:42, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 1266
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by Walderschmidt »

I’d be cool with it getting more use.

Make it do everything much faster.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 745
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by mofetagalactica »

Roadblocks build hability once you upgrade shermans with shovel would be nice too.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 706
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by CGarr »

mofetagalactica wrote:
07 Dec 2020, 04:04
Roadblocks build hability once you upgrade shermans with shovel would be nice too.
I think the M10 is the one with the dozer upgrade, but yeah I agree.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2516
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by kwok »

Personally, I like the general idea of improving the bergetiger's utility. Specifics, I'm not sure yet. /Personal.

There's a bunch of other proposed SE changes posted as well. Sounds like another potential revisit on doctrine structures. Are we at a comfortable state with the current doctrines? I know armor doc is still open. Would it be worth closing the thoughts on that before tackling SE (and what I assume will follow is RE...)?
Tarakancheg: I want volkssturmm to upgrade to knights cross holders at vet 5 so that I can just show players how bad they are.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 706
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by CGarr »

kwok wrote:
07 Dec 2020, 05:05
Personally, I like the general idea of improving the bergetiger's utility. Specifics, I'm not sure yet. /Personal.

There's a bunch of other proposed SE changes posted as well. Sounds like another potential revisit on doctrine structures. Are we at a comfortable state with the current doctrines? I know armor doc is still open. Would it be worth closing the thoughts on that before tackling SE (and what I assume will follow is RE...)?
This and the other post I made are both more just aimed at making SE attractive as a doctrine choice, as neither were really addressing balance issues so much as just the fact that the other docs are just way more attractive in pretty much any scenario. As such, armor doc's balance work should probably take priority over this.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 5395
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by Warhawks97 »

As for the realism, just saying, only three were ever build. Usually they used a Bergepanther.

As for gameplay: Idk why this tank is even in every PE doc. It would be fine if it would only be in TS doc for quick tank recovery.


Constructing roadblocks with this thing is worth an idea though, laying mines and stuff not so much.
Build more AA Walderschmidt

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 4101
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by MarKr »

Warhawks97 wrote:
07 Dec 2020, 10:04
As for gameplay: Idk why this tank is even in every PE doc. It would be fine if it would only be in TS doc for quick tank recovery.

Constructing roadblocks with this thing is worth an idea though, laying mines and stuff not so much.
I think it repairs faster than any other repair unit, which isn't really helpful to doctrines that are not tank-oriented, as you said. It is also the only unit in PE roster that can scavenge resources from wrecks, which can be quite useful for every doctrine but it is true that not everyone would build it just for the resource scavenging so some added utility would be a nice addition.

I am not sure about the mine-laying either. Ammo halftracks can already do that and SE doctrine is very likely to build the HTs because they lower Hummel barrage costs. On the other hand, if Bergetieger had more functions, people would probably use it more and then they might use the mine-laying too.
Image

User avatar
crazzy501
Posts: 120
Joined: 04 Feb 2017, 10:43
Location: Russia
Contact:

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by crazzy501 »

One thing: it's have Tiger armor.

It's more durable than half or so PE vehicles.
In current state it's feels just forgotten by devs and coz of that - buggy: very durable tank w/o fuel income that can _only_ repair and scavenge things.

If u want reworks for it, it must be fully overviewed from all directions:
Why it's a Tiger? I prefer to see BergePanther in all PE docs and only tank oriented PE TS doctrine can access to Tiger.
Do things with mines it's good idea for late game unit coz of it's durability. HTs can be just wiped out in a second in lates.
Do things with roadblocks, emplacements and other field stuff must work like Engineer HT for WH: Berge-thing must buff build speed for build units around it but not build things itself.

Also BergeTiger need to review model 'gun' length or position (or something like that) - it's very often start to drive around target trying to find 'best' position for repair instead of just come closer and start to repair
Last edited by crazzy501 on 07 Dec 2020, 15:12, edited 1 time in total.

H.Drescher
Posts: 88
Joined: 03 May 2019, 12:26

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by H.Drescher »

I actually really like this idea. An engineering tank that allows scorched earth to do its role safely and quickly in the mid and late game. That role being area denial, defenses, and repair.

The tank's previous role in company of heroes was having the fastest repair in the game, munitions and fuel salvages, and finally the coup de grâce, being able to revive any dead tank in the game. It was very easy to formulate an entire strategy around it in Vanilla Company of Heroes which was very fun.

It's purpose in Blitzkrieg mod is a glorified repair only engineer that can't die to small arms fire and is used as a punching bag/forward scout. This is very boring, especially for such an expensive unit.

For realism? Its had a crane that was "supposively" capable of lifting ten tonnes. It's possible the purpose was to yeet tank turrets up and commit repairs to the transmissions and other engineering bullshit. Others speculate land mine clearing, etc. This tank's exact purpose is a fairy tale, so I wouldn't be too concerned about "historical accuracy".

Giving this unit Construction and mine laying capabilities, as well a construction buff aurora could breath a lot of life into Scorched Earth again and allow for a lot of fun strategies that would revolve around the tank. It also gives the opportunity for other factions to viably buy their bulldozer/mine clearing upgrades.

The only thing I would do is lower the Bergetiger's healthpool to not be similar to a Tiger 1's to push its role away from being a super soaker of damage after giving it so much utility.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 706
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: SE doc Bergetiger Change Suggestion

Post by CGarr »

H.Drescher wrote:
07 Dec 2020, 21:06
The only thing I would do is lower the Bergetiger's healthpool to not be similar to a Tiger 1's to push its role away from being a super soaker of damage after giving it so much utility.
I'm kinda torn on this, as I'd personally rather see the price go up a bit than the healthpool lowered. If the devs are actually considering implementing this I'll get a poll going so we have a better picture of where the community would stand on the issue. Lower health would probably be fine balance-wise, it'd just be weird to see something based on a Tiger getting one shot by weapons that normally take multiple, especially when you have the Tiger ace on the other side of the spectrum just eating shots left and right because of its magic extra health. The Churchill croc compared to normal Churchills is similarly jarring, although I believe the normal churchills are going to be revamped to have similar durability through being 'replaced' by the later model (same as croc's base).
MarKr wrote:
07 Dec 2020, 10:22
I am not sure about the mine-laying either. Ammo halftracks can already do that and SE doctrine is very likely to build the HTs because they lower Hummel barrage costs. On the other hand, if Bergetieger had more functions, people would probably use it more and then they might use the mine-laying too.
I see what you mean, but keep in mind the Bergetiger can go to a lot of places where the HT wouldn't be able to, either through use of it's heavy crush to clear obstacles or it's armor to survive in contested parts of the map where an HT would be at far greater risk. The Bergetiger also has the added benefit of enticing enemy players into bringing their heavy AT over to kill it since it is slow and somewhat pricey. This either allows you to bait them into your own trap or distract them and push in other places. Minelaying capabilities would add to this by making the the Bergetiger a legitimate threat if left unchecked, which on it's own would warrant the high cost.

In other words, there would be plenty of reason to build it if it could drop demo charges/mines and build, but it currently is nothing more than bait that can repair/salvage (on a faction where a large portion of the inf available can also do so).

Post Reply