What's next?

[Krieger Blitzer]

AB strafe would be fine if it just costed more.. i mean; significantly more.
Both the strafe run from the panel & the strafe patrol in FHQ.

[MenciusMoldbug]

Give RE the mk 7 churchill as a buildable unit (without the flamethrower).
viewtopic.php?t=2806

Give RA the Achilles back.
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3972

Bring back the 95mm cromwell.
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3972

[Krieger Blitzer]

Give RE the mk 7 churchill as a buildable unit (without the flamethrower).
viewtopic.php?t=2806

Can support that, but not earlier than 6 CP and they shouldn't be any cheap; i would say.

Give RA the Achilles back.
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3972

I disagree.. and that's why:

Luft lost access to Hetzer and Panzer Support has Hetzers delayed from 1 CP (in v5.1.7) to 3 CPs now. I don't think RA doc should get Achilles back just like that! Unless it loses access to 17pdr emplacements in return then...

Bring back the 95mm cromwell.
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3972

Agreed, but must be without flank speed.

[kwok]

Ack. I'm not saying that these ideas are bad. But can we not make these shit-list posts? It's so hard to keep track of who agrees with what and why. The ideas here have no dependency on each other at all.

I'm trying to keep maintenance on the the ideas and this long list makes it really hard to review.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

[Hetzer 1992]

I am against camping style and i think airstrikes to help a lot preventing them.

Since i play BK i used to face RAF pretty much everytime i faced more than one CW player. And several infantry units got whiped out sometimes in a single airstrike. Just like in a game yesterday on a small map that killed three of my units. Mass destruction airstrikes used to be the most normal thing back then and the units at that time cost a lot more.

And i am used to be prepared vs players that use air docs which means using aa units which by accident do also quite well vs the infantry. So building an AA unit does not only make sense vs the airplanes, but also vs their inf. On Top of that, no AA unit costs CP´s, so while you go for AA units and spending CP´s elswhere, the enemie wasted their CP´s for nothing.

In total and in the long run its not really what actually decides the game. Players that spend lots of CP into their airstikes run low on ammo early on, have no boosted/unlocked units and whatsnot while i can plan my next steps without fearing the enemie has unlocked something crazy. Like when he got strafe runs, i have gotten Panzer IV´s and i know that he got barely anything to counter me.


So its not like "unlock planes easy gg" or that it is not connected to a drawback. I know lots of good AB and RAF players that unlock other stuff first such as Commando Training and M10, radio beacons (also super usefull in early game and easy to plant before map gets crowded) or using the mortar off map strike and 101st along with M10´s and shermans. Thats for example my prefered combo. 101st, off map mortar, recon plane and M10. You can do crazy things with them. And if your enemie has then wasted res into AA stuff because he expected it, well, i have a free field in front of me.



I have faced AB and RAF in most matches recently, i lost lots of stuff against it but it didnt helped my enemie that much as my counter push with tanks and stuff could throw their core units back.




So listing up the points why i dont feel its currently too crazy:

1. Yes, strafes kill stuff, but proper AA makes their CP investment a fail investment and AA helps also to kill their inf.
2. If they spend CP early on into airstrikes, means they have not much to counter possible counter attacks with Tank IVs etc as they wont have M10´s and stuff
3. Other combos feel in the long run a lot more powerfull like smart RAF guys going for early inf training and proper AT to have an advantage in late game. Or go for 101st/off map mortar strike/Tank combo instead.
4. Over the years many units became a lot cheaper. I used to play games in the past where an RAF cluster bomb strike easily whiped several squads costing over 400 or even 500 MP. Now all these units cost just 360 MP, max 450.
5. The AB HQ can be build once for 450 MP, yes, but is often on open fields and arty target anyway. In towns people have to spend 400 MP into it+ all the ammo to use them. For that price he could get other denial weapons as well.

AB's starfe run simply destroys infantry-based doctrines and playstyles, specifically Luftwaffe. I'm a big fan of AB and still believe the latest changes have ruined the doctrine's unique playstyle, but starfe run is making using elite troops and halftracks useless.

AB was a doctrine only few in the community were willing to play as its power lay on heavy-micro on the ground. Nowadays literally most people go straight for AB for easy win. No sign of effective paratrooper role, just bleeding the opponent through non-stop ammo drop and starfe run later accompanied by bombs.

I've played around 10 games as Luft against AB in 2v2s and 3v3s lately, the math just doesn't add up!

400 mp for Faljs, 150 ammo for weapon upgrade, vet3, which basically means this is a key squad that the fate of the game sometimes relies on >>> AB way of countering: 125 ammo = 125 mp thanks to ammo drops >>> Starfe run >> Killing the entire squad again and again.

375 mp + 35 ammo for mortar halftrack >> Starfe run boom

350 scout car to secure a point >> Starfe run booom
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●

My suggestion? Make AB the same hard-to-play doctrine it used to be! It's become noobs' favorite doc these days.
Give its paras their former HP and power and nerf the Starfe run.

AB's key factor should be 101sts and 82nds not Starfe runs.

[Mantis]

Hetzer: Agree with strafe run. This is killer anti Luft ability.

Not agree with boost 101. This squad is multirole, you can buy longrange weapons for very low cost, you can buy close combat weapons, or double AT. I think is not problem in 101. now. If is for you "hard to play doc with sprint and throw flame nade"... so for me not. This is not about HP, but its about proper use.

[Warhawks97]

At times AB was played by very few, it were not just by very few but very very very very few people and even less could handle it properly.


The only thing i noticed about the strafe is that garriosned units inside buildings get killed quite easily by it apparently. Thats the only thing that is annoying to me.




But as long as there are docs like Prop and BK or even TS doc that can counter AB doc with sheer masses, spam and tanks, i dont see why AB couldnt be the way to go against inf based docs. I personally didnt test luft vs AB in particular, but why should i?

I recently had games with AB as enemie and teammate and in both cases AB hit hard with Strafes and Pack howitzer. But as soon as Pumas came out, Panzer IV´s or Ostwinds the situation changed quickly. And when Panthers came out the Situation continues to get more and more dire for AB.


Luft is fine as it can support a team in many ways, is quite adoptable and so on.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I think AB bomb run should be as effective against tanks as it used to be. With 2 proper AT strikes, you can have better chances against late game Panther/Tiger spam. It will be still way weaker than it used to be with patrol but should be fairly effective.

Also turn back the AB HQ squad into a normal combat unit with 6 men, if you didn't like the sniper before, then leave it out and drop the cost to 450-500 MP, but I still think that the old HQ squad was perfect and actually the best out of all officer squads. It was indeed expensive, but durable and multirole, which made them the only true front-line officer unit that could actually fight alongside the units it provided command aura to. I don't like 4 men HQ teams as they are a too easy target, 2 sniper shots or one rocket from something and you always have to retreat. Hence the utility of those units is very limited. Storms commander team is the best one at the moment so far because you can crawl around avoiding damage and still take advantage of command aura.

Then something needs to be done with 101s, those nerfs were terrible and very badly thought. They have never been uber units (like luft or raf can still be in late game) and you mindlessly nerfed every single aspect of them (weapon loadout, HP, flame nades, recoiless). I think they should definitely get their HP and the possibility to upgrade 3 Bars back. Right now you need nothing more than Volks with mg34 in order to beat 101s, not event talking about PE inf or elite doc spezialized inf. Flame grenades will be available only to 82nd squads and the HQ team, CP points upgrade can be removed.

I also like the idea of a specialized AT team that someone mentioned above, 2 M36 zooks + camo + all AB perks.

[Krieger Blitzer]

AB's key factor should be 101sts and 82nds not Starfe runs.

+1

I also like the idea of a specialized AT team that someone mentioned above

Ya, i also think ALL air docs should have specialized AT teams.

So, fjr loses access to panzershreck.. but they get specialized AT team Fjr with 2 Shrecks.

SAS loses access to Zookas, but they also get specialized AT team Commando squads.. etc.

[Mantis]

AB's key factor should be 101sts and 82nds not Starfe runs.

+1

I also like the idea of a specialized AT team that someone mentioned above

Ya, i also think ALL air docs should have specialized AT teams.

So, fjr loses access to panzershreck.. but they get specialized AT team Fjr with 2 Shrecks.

SAS loses access to Zookas, but they also get specialized AT team Commando squads.. etc.

Really nice ideas!

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

AB's key factor should be 101sts and 82nds not Starfe runs.

+1

I also like the idea of a specialized AT team that someone mentioned above

Ya, i also think ALL air docs should have specialized AT teams.

So, fjr loses access to panzershreck.. but they get specialized AT team Fjr with 2 Shrecks.

SAS loses access to Zookas, but they also get specialized AT team Commando squads.. etc.

Well, Fj. are good like this in my opinion. The game becomes boring if you give similar units to all the doctrines.

As for SAS, I would honestly change them to something completely different. At the moment they come too late and are too similar to normal commandos. I don't have any ideas for now though.

[mofetagalactica]

I would suggest to put gerbs price down to 400 MP and move the equipment unlock to another slot since still dosn't make scense where its set.

[CGarr]

Ack. I'm not saying that these ideas are bad. But can we not make these shit-list posts? It's so hard to keep track of who agrees with what and why. The ideas here have no dependency on each other at all.

I'm trying to keep maintenance on the the ideas and this long list makes it really hard to review.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Agreed, I both agree and disagree (mostly agree) with a lot of the stuff that was brought up here but I don't want to try and discuss like 50 different unrelated issues from 3 different people in one thread. Kinda hoping this either gets split into topics or goes nowhere in terms of influencing balance decisions on its own.

I don't see why we should go through the effort of making posts focused on the discussion of single topics if these stupid zero-effort giant list posts are going to be taken seriously just because a ton of people each replied "+1" or added their own 5 extra suggestions. Lists aren't terrible if there is a specific common goal among all of said suggestions, like "lets do X, Y, and Z to make this unit or doctrine viable/counterable", but vomitting out like 50 separate points with the only common goal being "general game balance" is dumb since it discourages any sort of discussion of individual issues. That being said, individual topics are generally far better at generating a balanced discussion on whatever issues are brought up.

I'm not going to name any names, but the more Axis-biased members of the community tend to be the ones that make these big aimless lists. I think that says a lot about the points they are making, as if they are so unsuccessful with pushing individual ideas that they have to take this approach to avoid any counterarguments being made, maybe those ideas are poorly supported and shouldn't be implemented until someone can actually make good arguments to support them? Again, many of these ideas aren't even bad, but this practice of trying to push a bunch of completely unrelated stuff at once is flat out dumb and it's demoralizing to those who put effort into individual threads to see it taken seriously.

[kwok]

Ack. I'm not saying that these ideas are bad. But can we not make these shit-list posts? It's so hard to keep track of who agrees with what and why. The ideas here have no dependency on each other at all.

I'm trying to keep maintenance on the the ideas and this long list makes it really hard to review.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Agreed, I both agree and disagree (mostly agree) with a lot of the stuff that was brought up here but I don't want to try and discuss like 50 different unrelated issues from 3 different people in one thread. Kinda hoping this either gets split into topics or goes nowhere in terms of influencing balance decisions on its own.

I don't see why we should go through the effort of making posts focused on the discussion of single topics if these stupid zero-effort giant list posts are going to be taken seriously just because a ton of people each replied "+1" or added their own 5 extra suggestions. Lists aren't terrible if there is a specific common goal among all of said suggestions, like "lets do X, Y, and Z to make this unit or doctrine viable/counterable", but vomitting out like 50 separate points with the only common goal being "general game balance" is dumb since it discourages any sort of discussion of individual issues. That being said, individual topics are generally far better at generating a balanced discussion on whatever issues are brought up.

I'm not going to name any names, but the more Axis-biased members of the community tend to be the ones that make these big aimless lists. I think that says a lot about the points they are making, as if they are so unsuccessful with pushing individual ideas that they have to take this approach to avoid any counterarguments being made, maybe those ideas are poorly supported and shouldn't be implemented until someone can actually make good arguments to support them? Again, many of these ideas aren't even bad, but this practice of trying to push a bunch of completely unrelated stuff at once is flat out dumb and it's demoralizing to those who put effort into individual threads to see it taken seriously.

You.Are.God.Damn.Right.

[Mantis]

Some members write unnecessarily long posts. few people read them ...

[Krieger Blitzer]

Not everyone has enough time to eat snacks & sit on his a*s typing walls of text all the day for the sake of a game.. so ya, some people should be already grateful that any such topics were made at all, to begin with.

I don't see any problem with making such lists, they are short to read.. & up to the point. Also, individual ideas can be still taken from it and discussed separately at any given moment. Claiming that only Axis fanboys make these types of lists is also invalid, as similar topics were made by the opposite direction as well. Not to mention - alone - that claiming how only the Axis fanboys are the ones creating these lists (who actually aren't even Axis fanboys) is nothing but a mere try to shutdown their right of providing any valid suggestions.

Some noobs full with hatred need to step up and consider their value before speaking so confidently... Else, they could be taught a lesson.

[MarKr]

Let's stop with this "someone".
We want players to make individual topics because it is easier for us to check them out and see what the consensus is. When I get home from work and find some time to work on the mod, I want to open the forum, check the "suggestion" section and go one by one, open topics and quickly see the opinions.
In posts like these it takes much longer because I need to go through the topic, make list of individual points then read through the post, see who and where commented on which point to see how much support each point has.

Yes, it is a slightly more time-consuming for players but it is the players who want to see the changes so making the process a bit easier for us isn't that much to ask.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Let's stop with this "someone".
We want players to make individual topics because it is easier for us to check them out and see what the consensus is. When I get home from work and find some time to work on the mod, I want to open the forum, check the "suggestion" section and go one by one, open topics and quickly see the opinions.
In posts like these it takes much longer because I need to go through the topic, make list of individual points then read through the post, see who and where commented on which point to see how much support each point has.

Yes, it is a slightly more time-consuming for players but it is the players who want to see the changes so making the process a bit easier for us isn't that much to ask.

Alrighty, if that's more helpful to you.. then it's a fair point. Gotchya!

Let's say these "list" topics are just a store of ideas for now until we get enough time to break them down into individual posts later on, from which more detailed topics could be made.

[kwok]

I'll add on it's not only helpful for Markr to read but for players to provide the necessary debate/argument to making a good change. It's a matter of organization for everyone and prevents the idea that "just a few people are driving major changes for the majority". For example, the ideas on this post range from RAF to AB to RE to so many things. Some players said yes to some things, other players said yes to all things, each player didn't provide an opinion for every point so far. At the end of the day, the question will always be which changes should be taken on and to what details? As the topic stands right now, everyone just piled on more and more ideas but we haven't talked into detail for one idea. We haven't even arrived at a general consensus for one idea. The most "popular" idea right now it seems is strafe tweaks, but how much should the strafe be tweaked? No one said and suddenly we're talking about fallsj panzershrecks and other handheld AT.

Tiger is right that it's not just "one side" of people doing this, but Dicky is also right that focused posts take time and effort but are where the most constructive conversation can be held. I don't want anyone's value to feel diminished, we are just trying to agree on the direction of the mod in a fair and efficient way.

That being said, saying that long posts are unnecessary and no one reads them is something I want to discourage... Long posts are FINE. Long posts with SUBSTANCE is exactly what's necessary to talk through everything needed to make a fully thought out change. If changes that were only supported with one line of "because it should be" were all implemented then the mod would break down FAST. Even if players don't read the long posts, the devs do. Even if we think the posts is uselessly long, we still read it... Just because some people don't have time to write full posts doesn't mean we look into the long posts less... If anything, it is better to listen to the players who put the time, dedication, and thought into the mod than those who just post in one word.