Suggestions for AB doc

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

In the recent update AB got some buffs which made it more or less playable. However, there are still a couple of issues that need to be addressed in my opinion.

1) Bomb and rocket strikes.

Currently, it takes way to many CP to unlock rockets, which are quite essential for keeping Tigers and Panthers at bay. On the top of that, the bomb run itself became quite useless after the nerf in my opinion. It’s just too weak against vehicles and infantry, in all of my games I had to unlock it just to get through to the rocket strike. I get that it is intended for emplacements destruction, but it’s not worth 3 CP for doing just that. Moreover, the entire AB air support seems quite underwhelming, especially after the buff of AA, excluding strafe run.

My suggestion is to swap the bomb run with the rocket strike and buff bombs a bit. It shouldn’t blow Kingtigers like it used to, but It should definitely kill Panthers when the bomb lands close, as they have relatively thin side armor. Tigers on the other hand should be only killed with the direct hit.

Reasons:
- AB just gets raped by panthers, having 2 AT strikes instead of 1 will help a lot.
- It’s plainly stupid when 125kg (or 250kg?) bomb lands on the roof of the tank and doesn’t blow it up.

2) AB squad, I still extremely dislike the way you changed it. Ok, sniper can be forgotten, but please make it 6 men squad with decent weapons and flame nades. Current unit is super boring in terms of gameplay. It was a frontline versatile unit and it used to have a unique feeling being the only combat + command squad. For now it’s just another boring officer squad that always have to be kept behind the real fight, it’s damage output and durability is just too low to be used differently.

Balance reason - this change caused huge indirect nerf to 101s (that already had triple nerf - lower HP, worse weapon load out and flame nades). Due to lower combat capabilities it became much more difficult to vet the HQ team up for getting full aura boost, that is essential for 101s in order to be competitive with axis infantry.

3) 82s weapon load out is weird. Hawks have already made a post about it and I completely agree. They should start with Thompsons and be able upgrade 2 bars. At the moment this unit is way too similar to 101s.

[MarKr]

1) I am against making the bombs more effective against tanks. As you said, the bomb strike is there to clear emplacements or infantry. Making it a tank killer would make it too multirole. I wouldn't build arguments on "it is stupid that a big bomb hitting a tank doesn't destroy it". If we follow the real life logic, then people will start asking for mortars and grenades to one-shot open-top tank destroyers becasue "it is stupid that a mortar round hits directly inside and doesn't kill the crew".
Kwok had an idea to keep the AT rocket strike as a separate unlock outside of the other plane unlocks so that when a heavy tanks shows up, you can unlock the AT strike without unlocking everything else first. The idea didn't get muh traction so we dropped it. I think there were also people in the same topic who said that airstrikes were fine and that was before the latest AA changes. The community seems to be divided on this topic...

2) The command squads are there to be a support for soldiers around, not main combat squads. I understand that you liked the unique performance of the squad in the past but we don't want to take that approach with command squads.
I am also pretty sure that if the AB gets a combat-effective command squad, same way as you complain that it is now not unique, other people will start complaining that "AB has a combat effective commands squad but (Luft/Storms/Commandos/Rangers) don't" and will ask to make those more similar to the AB command squad. Then the AB won't have the unique feeling again.

3) Given that 82nd can camo now, the Garands can benefit a LOT more from the camo buffs than Thompsons. Thompsons are the most effective at close range, when you can camo the squad and wait for the enemy to come close, you'll wipe them even without the camo bonuses, and if you open fire at long range, you won't do much damage even with the bonuses. The stock Garands become more deadly when opening fire from camo at any range, that's why they are dropped with the weapons. 101st Carbines also work pretty much the best at close range so this allows you to drop squads with different combat effective range rather than always close-range.

What is up with BARs? And what sort of sense does it make to have SMGs paired with BARs? We had a similar setup long time ago with Commandos where they had Stens + Brens and people asked to change it because the mishmash of close range and mid-long range weapons was impractical. How would this be any different? Yes, Brens cannot shoot on the move, BARs can but they have such accuracy penalties on the move that you won't hit anything anyway - really, if your dude with BAR is moving toward a soldier in green cover, the maximum chance to hit he can get is about 9% (this is at closest range; 18% if the target is in yellow cover), it also reloads after two bursts so the most likely scenario is that the BAR soldier will empty the magazine (with extremely low accuracy) on the move and when you finally get close to stop and shoot, they'll start reloading and when enemy is this close, the BAR reloads for 4-5 seconds. The shooting on the move is more a burden for the squad rather than a positive thing.

[F31.58]

Bombs are already dealing enough damage to destroy medium tanks or significant amount of HP to force heavy tanks to retreat.
But regarding air support, buff to the AP strafe and 200mp ammunition drop, pretty much became ultimate universal weapon to anything enemy can field against you. And if game won't be over in 20 minutes, any air support ability combined with ammunition crate will slowly dry enemy on MP.
Making bombs capable of doing even more damage would be just too much.

[CGarr]

2) The command squads are there to be a support for soldiers around, not main combat squads. I understand that you liked the unique performance of the squad in the past but we don't want to take that approach with command squads.
I am also pretty sure that if the AB gets a combat-effective command squad, same way as you complain that it is now not unique, other people will start complaining that "AB has a combat effective commands squad but (Luft/Storms/Commandos/Rangers) don't" and will ask to make those more similar to the AB command squad. Then the AB won't have the unique feeling again.

Both the stormtrooper officer squad and the luft officer squad are actually pretty serviceable combat squads (albeit expensive to reinforce). I don't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to changing the AB one specifically, the only thing I'd probably change is giving them a longer range loadout since they're meant to be supporting other units from the back, not running in to go squadwipe stuff with thompsons. All garands, or garands with some sort of MG would probably make more sense. The same could probably be said for the stormtrooper officer squad, although STG's are serviceable at any range so it's not that big of a deal.

All that being said, having a combat capable command squad wouldn't really be unique to AB if they were changed. And honestly, most of the officer squads should be combat capable (3+ squad members with a mid-long range loadout, not just one guy with a Robocop pistol) if they are meant to be running around in the thick of combat with the other inf. Non-combat officers can still exist, although arguably they should at least all have body guards just so they aren't single men. Their loadout would just be more limited and their abilities would be more helpful in the backline rather than on the front (slow heavy arty to deter attacks and kill high value targets that get caught immobilized within your territory, supervision to reduce build times, maybe construction speed buffs). Hell, most of the offmaps should only be called in by officers, as it would at least let people know that something might be coming if they see an officer nearby. Take AB doc for example: we have plenty of posts where people complain about all these bombing/strafing runs coming out of nowhere and wiping all their stuff, so why not make said offmaps more difficult to use by forcing them to be called in by the barracks officer instead of messing with their cost (and either making them OP or too cost inefficient). Same could be said for the rocket strike on prop doc, or all the different offmap howitzer bombardments available to different docs.

Their health could also be lowered so that snipers can actually one-shot the officer himself, so that the squad could no longer use abilities. Sure, the squad wouldn't get wiped as easily, but officers shouldn't exactly be a niche unit that people only occasionally get due to the wipe risk. They should be a regular part of any build order for any doctrine.

[MarKr]

if they are meant to be running around in the thick of combat with the other inf.

But that's the thing - their value should be in the command aura that buffs infantry around + possibly some utility (some offmap arty, possibly some options to call in some other units, healing etc.). Their value should not be in additional firepower that they can dish out them selves.
From these things, the HQ squad provides the aura in a bigger radius than other officers (if the commander is alive), can heal with an ability (if medic is alive), can call in support infantry (sniper, engineers, medics) and have an offmap mortar barrage that changes to offmap 105mm barrage when the squad gets to Vet3 (or 4? not sure now). I think they fulfill their intended role well. If there is enough support, some changes can be made, I guess. But I would really like to avoid turning them into something that is self-sufficient combat-wise and the command auras are "just a bonus".

[MenciusMoldbug]

Only thing about airborne that makes me sad is their CP tree is too linear. Luftwaffe now has an amazingly flexible tree and RAF doesn't really need a flexible tree but has it in some forms (e.x. - Achilles and Firefly not being connected to unlock one or the other). I want to be able to decide whether I want to get the 82nd squad or the HQ squad first. But I can't do that because the airborne unlock tree only goes one way and that is from 101st to the airborne veterancy/damage reduction unlock.

I made a thread long time back of how I wanted the CP tree to change. If nothing else, at least being able to decide after getting the 101st whether to get the 82nd or the HQ squad would be nice: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3574

[CGarr]

if they are meant to be running around in the thick of combat with the other inf.

But that's the thing - their value should be in the command aura that buffs infantry around + possibly some utility (some offmap arty, possibly some options to call in some other units, healing etc.). Their value should not be in additional firepower that they can dish out them selves.
From these things, the HQ squad provides the aura in a bigger radius than other officers (if the commander is alive), can heal with an ability (if medic is alive), can call in support infantry (sniper, engineers, medics) and have an offmap mortar barrage that changes to offmap 105mm barrage when the squad gets to Vet3 (or 4? not sure now). I think they fulfill their intended role well. If there is enough support, some changes can be made, I guess. But I would really like to avoid turning them into something that is self-sufficient combat-wise and the command auras are "just a bonus".

I should preface this by again saying that I don't expect this change to come soon (if at all), and I don't think the game is necessarily broken without it, but I really don't see how it'd hurt to have these officer squads provide both direct fire power and support with their aura+abilities. You can't spam them, so it's not like they'd replace mainline units, and I was saying that every doctrine could have them, so nobody would be left out. Even doctrines that aren't meant to have strong inf wouldn't just magically become unstoppable because one single (expensive to reinforce) inf squad gets a couple more models and/or better weapons. The officer sqaud is still limited in how much of the map it can influence (directly through firepower/abilities and indirectly through the aura), it'd just be a more attractive tool.

Even now, with a doctrine that is built entirely around having the officer there to buff your shitty conscripts, a lot of people still insist on spending that MP on some other unit and then complain that said doctrine's inf is too weak. Raise the unit cap on the current prop doc officer squad to 3 and give them a second officer squad with 5 men and 2 MG's, better defensive stats, and less potent abilities/aura, and boom, you have a strong support unit to help you survive late game without just giving the doctrine strong spammable basic infantry. That heavy officer squad being available later would allow you to maintain the ramping power curve you intended the doctrine to have while addressing player complaints about the doctrine having a lot of trouble against rangers and other heavy inf late game. Mencius had a picture somewhere that better depicts what I'm suggesting we include, and I know he'd be on board because he keeps bringing up how he wants to write a post about officer reworks every time we talk on discord.

It also opens up some room to get creative. Take armor doc for example, a doc that people have been complaining about being weak at all stages. Give their officer unit 3 more models (so that it can follow the armor into dangerous places with less risk of instantly losing it. Keep their armament light, as the doctrine is still centered around armored firepower rather than strong infantry. Instead, have their buff aura apply buffs to friendly armor, and make it stackable with the command car. Remove/limit the buffs they give to infantry to keep them distinct from the other doctrines' officers. You then have a slightly stronger force throughout the game, and the officer unit becomes a much more sensible option to spend your MP on as armor doc than it is currently. The doctrine's central theme is maintained, and their power curve doesn't really change, but players now have an alternative to the command M20, which is much more likely to die instantly than an inf squad, and thus is often extremely difficult to use in that support role, instead being relegated to a direct fire support (in which case you might as well just get the cheaper M20).

I'll try and make a separate post and do this for all the docs to help get the ball rolling, but I'd like to hope that you see my point about how officer reworks could help fill in holes, address issues regarding OP global abilities/call-in strikes, and make officers a central part of any doctrine's unit composition rather than just some niche bonus that people occasionally build.

@Sukin, sorry I tookover your post. I'll try to get a separate thread going tonight so this one can stay on-topic.

[Consti255]

I highly disagree on the airstrike changes. I thinke they are fine as they are.
The bombs (as said before) are capable enough to kill medium tanks and stop heavy tanks.

The HQ AB unit in my opinion is really way to boring and has 0 impact imo because it dies so quickly. Even said if they get a 105mm barrage, i cant think about a last time i saw a HQ unit reaching veterancy 3+ so this thing is almost not crucial + the 60mm Motar barrage has such a short range you always loose ur HQ squad if you despreatly need the off map strike at a certain location. A increase in members and better weapons to bring back this unique command/fighting unit would be a welcome change (Sniper excluded).

The 82 are really good in my Opinion and i wiped as mentioned many sqauds with the Camo bonuses. Fine as they are.

[Warhawks97]

Idk how many topics have been made about AB doc or parts of it. Ddesign reworks, general changes, ability changes.


The things i would change in the design:

1. As Mencius already pointed out, it would be great to have a bit better flexibility.
That would be true for the inf choices (To have a decision which way to go).
The unlock would always begin with the 101st and from there in three directions direction:
- 60 mm off map (Can be called by 101st, spotter and HQ squad)
- 101st HQ and Vet training
- 82nd and Combat training (i know 101st also benefits from this unlock but still)

2. Then airstrikes which would always start with recon flight.
From there you have two or perhaps three directions:
- Strafe and Rocket strafe (Thats battlefield support). Ultimately there would be an unlock called Air Supremacy. That would either passively reduce the cooldown of airstrikes or an ability you activate and as long as its active you can call in other airstrikes as long as you have the ressource for it. It would last almost as long as the old "Raid ability" lasted. Its cooldown would be quite long At least 5 mins. It would reflect some sort of "Emergency" air support. In Vietnam war such things were called "Broken arrow". That ability would cost arround 150 fuel.

The Idea is that AB does not have the raw weapon stats or defensive means or the masses on the ground to hold against a strong force that relies on brute force and weapon stats. So this would compensate for the the lack of masses and gun power.

- The second direction would be the Bomb run as means to handle heavy camping with emplacments. (Anti defense air support like that of BK doc).

Ability and unit changes
1. HQ squad is not that bad. But the 60 mm mortar support would be replaced by 101st arty strike as soon as Advanced combat training is unlocked rather than vet 3 or 4 and also able to hide. I am not sure about officer squads being more combat capable. Some like it, some do not. I think its a doctrinal thing.

2. Make airstrikes in all docs always cost fuel and ammo. For all air docs.


3. The loadout of the 82nd changed back to thompson as default and able to upgrade Ranger Garands and lmg 1919. Being able to whipe entire squads with a unit that costs several CP to unlock, even more to have ambush capabilties and being the second most expensive infantry unit in the game justifies to have a loadout that can unleash hell when used from close range ambushes.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

1) I am against making the bombs more effective against tanks. As you said, the bomb strike is there to clear emplacements or infantry. Making it a tank killer would make it too multirole. I wouldn't build arguments on "it is stupid that a big bomb hitting a tank doesn't destroy it". If we follow the real life logic, then people will start asking for mortars and grenades to one-shot open-top tank destroyers becasue "it is stupid that a mortar round hits directly inside and doesn't kill the crew".
Kwok had an idea to keep the AT rocket strike as a separate unlock outside of the other plane unlocks so that when a heavy tanks shows up, you can unlock the AT strike without unlocking everything else first. The idea didn't get muh traction so we dropped it. I think there were also people in the same topic who said that airstrikes were fine and that was before the latest AA changes. The community seems to be divided on this topic...

2) The command squads are there to be a support for soldiers around, not main combat squads. I understand that you liked the unique performance of the squad in the past but we don't want to take that approach with command squads.
I am also pretty sure that if the AB gets a combat-effective command squad, same way as you complain that it is now not unique, other people will start complaining that "AB has a combat effective commands squad but (Luft/Storms/Commandos/Rangers) don't" and will ask to make those more similar to the AB command squad. Then the AB won't have the unique feeling again.

3) Given that 82nd can camo now, the Garands can benefit a LOT more from the camo buffs than Thompsons. Thompsons are the most effective at close range, when you can camo the squad and wait for the enemy to come close, you'll wipe them even without the camo bonuses, and if you open fire at long range, you won't do much damage even with the bonuses. The stock Garands become more deadly when opening fire from camo at any range, that's why they are dropped with the weapons. 101st Carbines also work pretty much the best at close range so this allows you to drop squads with different combat effective range rather than always close-range.

What is up with BARs? And what sort of sense does it make to have SMGs paired with BARs? We had a similar setup long time ago with Commandos where they had Stens + Brens and people asked to change it because the mishmash of close range and mid-long range weapons was impractical. How would this be any different? Yes, Brens cannot shoot on the move, BARs can but they have such accuracy penalties on the move that you won't hit anything anyway - really, if your dude with BAR is moving toward a soldier in green cover, the maximum chance to hit he can get is about 9% (this is at closest range; 18% if the target is in yellow cover), it also reloads after two bursts so the most likely scenario is that the BAR soldier will empty the magazine (with extremely low accuracy) on the move and when you finally get close to stop and shoot, they'll start reloading and when enemy is this close, the BAR reloads for 4-5 seconds. The shooting on the move is more a burden for the squad rather than a positive thing.

1) Okay, makes sense. But if bombs stay the same, Rockets must be available after the strafe run. Currently if Axis player rolls out early Panther or Tiger he catches AB player with no pants, as rocket strike is simply way too far, attacking tanks with inf is a suicide, regardless of how many zooks and recoiless you have. Similarly, Hellcat is a pure defensive measure. Clearly, the rocket strike is the ONLY reliable offensive option against anything bigger than PZ4, hence it must be avaialble earlier.

2) The thing is that is very difficult to vet up a squad with weak combat capabilities.

"I am also pretty sure that if the AB gets a combat-effective command squad, same way as you complain that it is now not unique, other people will start complaining that "AB has a combat effective commands squad but (Luft/Storms/Commandos/Rangers) don't" and will ask to make those more similar to the AB command squad."

That is not true, AB squad was 6 men for ages and no one ever complained about it being such a unit (besides the sniper). As I said earlier, this attitude of making everything the same is very harmful to the mod. AB doesn't have powerful vehicles and defences like Luft and Raf, thus they rely on this HQ aura boost much more, thats why the squad deserves better damage output and sturdiness. Please make it 6 men with a Zook + weapon upgrades for long range support (bars, 30 cal., Johnson or whatever). Actually, even sniper rifle can be an upgrade for lets say 80 munitions, it would be cool unique feature.

3) Garands do not benefit a LOT from the ambush, as enemy always can choose not to engage in the fight after 82s make their first shots. Whereas ambush with Thomposns is very deadly, also Garand loadout for a unit that cost 475 MP is meh. I agree with Hawks, Thompsons should be a default with Garands being and upgrade.

As for Bars, historically Airborne used them a lot, it is strange that they are not in the doc anymore. Why wouldn't you give 2 of them to 82s? They have a spare upgrade slot anyway, more variety = better for the gameplay.