Artillery upkeep

[Warhawks97]

After a long talk with coolstantin we both had the point that artillery should cost fuel instead of ammo upkeep.

The reason is simple. We both and probably most others experienced by themselves that the upkeep did not really hurt arty usage, esspecially when barrage costs went down like it did for SE.

But what is severly hampered is the fact that once you got arty, its barely possible to upgrade your infantry properly due to the upkeep. Often times units run arround with partial weapon upgrades reducing their effectivness, esspecially during attacks. But arty stays viable and the ammo that remains is put into artillery since this is often the savest way to spend it.


Anyway, i would propse that artillery units require fuel upkeep rather than ammo. The basic ammo income in turn is reduced from 8 down o 5 or 6.
That would have following effects:
1. Rushing lots of arty in early to mid game would hamper the tec speed.
2. Arty+ Tanks, the ultimate combo in BK, would be harder to field and to maintain since both require fuel for their logistical basis.


- Light 75 mm arty would roughly require 0.7 to 1 fuel upkeep.
- Medium 105 mm Arty and Nebelwerfer would require arrond 2.5 or 3 upkeep. SPG´s and mobile rocket launchers 4.5 and
- Heavy 150 mm Art vehicles would require arround 5-6 fuel upkeep.

Arty that hurts ammo income hurts essentially infantry gameplay as well as the usage of doctrinal abilities while fielding arty and powerfull tanks remains quite an easy Task. Arty costing fuel would have far smaller impact on infantry and doctrinal gameplay.

[MarKr]

I don't think this will solve anything. It will more likely just shift the "problem" you're describing into a different part of the game.

You say that ammo upkeep leaves too little ammo for upgrading infantry and so people just keep shelling everything because it is the safest way.

If you move arty upkeep to fuel, you will have less fuel for tanks/vehicles and so the only thing left will be infantry, but infantry is squishy (even if you upgrade it with weapons) so the safest way will be to shell everything...and because ammo would no longer lower the ammo income, you would have more ammo for even more shelling - either with on-map units or off-map abilities.

Also I disagree with this:

the upkeep did not really hurt arty usage

I've seen many replays since the change was introduced where players kept in the field just two or three arty units and still were able to use infantry upgraded with weapons. The players themselves said that if they had built more units, they wouldn't have been able to feed the arty with ammo, or upgrade anything - so exactly the "self-regulating" result we wanted.
Ofcourse, if a player builds 4, 5 or more arty units (or even less when they just don't control enough ammo points), then the player won't have ammo to upgrade infantry and probably won't even have enough ammo to feed just the arty units. This is the intended decision making behind the ammo upkeep - players know the ammo upkeep is there and so they know how much each unit will hamper their ammo income (and so their ability to upgrade units/use abilities), based on that they should be able to tell how many arty units they can afford before it starts noticeably impacting these things. From there they should consider how many of those arty units they REALLY need or if they are willing to have more arty power at the expense of little-to-no unit upgrades.

Arty that hurts ammo income hurts essentially infantry gameplay as well as the usage of doctrinal abilities while fielding arty and powerfull tanks remains quite an easy Task.

If the arty+tanks combo is a problem, then a better solution would be vehicle cost revision. It has been suggested several times and we agree it would be beneficial but postponed it for later as it is not as easy as "let's set all light vehicles to X, mediums to Y and heavies to Z".

[Warhawks97]

I don't think this will solve anything. It will more likely just shift the "problem" you're describing into a different part of the game.

You say that ammo upkeep leaves too little ammo for upgrading infantry and so people just keep shelling everything because it is the safest way.

if you would take the full picture. Sadly i am forced to divide topics that belong to each other every time.

So the suggestion in total:

1. Higher build cost to build 105 and 150 mm arty. Much higher actually.
2. 4 CP minimum (see SE suggestion and my def doc suggestion i once made. 2 CP 105 is a total no-brainer to a point where people think about whether to get mortar or 105......
3. 65 barrage cost for 105 and Nebler, 100 minimum on 150. Like i can fire two barrages for the cost of one lmg42. Or two and a half to upgrade one sherman, or 4 to upgrade one squad fully with stuff. There is huge disbalance. I mean you fire 6-8 shots in salvo that has the damage potential than all your schrecks/nades/mgs combined against any target: Inf, emplacments and vehicles alike. Have you ever seen a weapon that does that for just 50 ammo? A Grenade bundle costs 50 ammo and is faaaaar away from that damage potential. Even a single 105 shell deals a hell lot more damage than one nade bundle.


I mean, you dropped Hummel to 500 MP and 0 fuel and a barrage to 75 ammo and you telling me now that you solved arty problems while my combined suggestion did not. Stop fooling yourself. You made the biggest pro arty move ever with SE.... 2 off maps for 3 CP and 150 mm arty for 500 MP and 6 CP and VT for 0 CP that can make two 150 for 75 ammo.

If you move arty upkeep to fuel, you will have less fuel for tanks/vehicles and so the only thing left will be infantry, but infantry is squishy (even if you upgrade it with weapons) so the safest way will be to shell everything...and because ammo would no longer lower the ammo income, you would have more ammo for even more shelling - either with on-map units or off-map abilities.

Again, if you had followed carefully what i wrote, you would know that fuel is never really a concern to get tanks unless you want a Tiger or so. Ammo is a much greater issue to field tanks that can actually fight. I Personally, when i start my 76 sherman spam or Panzer IV spam i dont check the fuel but i check for what i have the ammo for. Most of the time i dont upgrade the AP rounds or skirts on the J to save the valuable ammo. Most players do so btw: Look tara in his vids. He never gets AP on tanks or only when necessary. Also he never builds a J version as he rather spends MP on H simply for the skirts.

Tanks and arty are the largest threat to infantry gameplay. Yet both cost almost nothing to field but at the same time consume all ammo that infantry needs so desperatly. Most of the time players dont lack arty or tanks. Tank III or IV and a nebler or maultier is no problem at all. They cost a lot more ammo than fuel.

I've seen many replays since the change was introduced where players kept in the field just two or three arty units and still were able to use infantry upgraded with weapons. The players themselves said that if they had built more units, they wouldn't have been able to feed the arty with ammo, or upgrade anything - so exactly the "self-regulating" result we wanted.
Ofcourse, if a player builds 4, 5 or more arty units (or even less when they just don't control enough ammo points), then the player won't have ammo to upgrade infantry and probably won't even have enough ammo to feed just the arty units. This is the intended decision making behind the ammo upkeep - players know the ammo upkeep is there and so they know how much each unit will hamper their ammo income (and so their ability to upgrade units/use abilities), based on that they should be able to tell how many arty units they can afford before it starts noticeably impacting these things. From there they should consider how many of those arty units they REALLY need or if they are willing to have more arty power at the expense of little-to-no unit upgrades.

Garbage because:

1. Those who field many in the past always lacked ammo. Intense walking stuka spam or use of double Hummel has been almost impossible when barrage cost went up long before the upkeep change. I remember how i had many arguments with players saying Walking stuka became unusable when the barrage went from 85 to like 115 ammo or when Grille went from 35 to 50 or what it was. It feels like it was yesterday when i the debates with some guys within my old clan.

Also i played SE actually always and one Hummel was enough to dominate with arty, esspecially with vet 3 or vet 4 + vet commander along with 3 second reload between the shots in stationary mode.
People crying for a drop in barrage cost for hummel lacked ammot before upkeep change and will so now as well when fielding two.
I have been using arty a lot since i play BK, mostly as inf doc and SE doc. I never really got more than 1 or max 2 howitzers and never more than one Hummel when the cost were 125 ammo per salvo. Perhaps a 210 nebler remained from the early game but fell out of use later on. In intense battles i had two batteries in order to have one left in case one is dead or to have access to a larger portion of the map but mostly fired one. Now i do use not more arty but i feel like i run super low on ammo every single match. Esspecially when i have for example a mid game arty unit and later simply have to get a 105.

So i did not feel how it changed my personal artillery behaviour or usage but what changed is my constant lack for ammo to be used for inf or doctrinal abilities or to upgrade my tanks. And i also dont feel to get "less bombarded"... it feels exactly the same as always, even worse when it comes to Grille and Hummel or hotchkiss.
As said, often times you saw more arty units, but many were left unused when for example when a player transited from 210 nebler to Hummel. Or they couldnt fire them often. Today they have to suicide the 210 to not draw more ammo, but the total volume of arty is the same.

Just as i said: Many times i only win because i go cheap rifle spam to make my enemie expand his ammo faster than i run out of rifle squads.

2. The "regulating factor" is bullshit since we had many arty units kept behind a unit cap of 2 for a long time. So we dont have real "before and after comparission". The ammount of artillery usage remains has thus remained the same.


3. There is one arty unit that i consider perfectly balanced but not because of ammo upkpeep: The US Priest. 8 CP makes sure to arrive super late and the cost of 580MP and 85 fuel makes sure that getting two of them would be almost impossible despite the fact it has a fixed limit of just 1 unit. Even if i could build 3, i would never get this many because of the immense cost i have to pay.

So, based on the "Pirest experience" i would argue that a high CP and build cost along with higher barrage cost would make an actual difference.

On top of that, if you want to hurt a certain unit, set the requirments up. Upkeep always hurts everything, not just the unit you want to hurt. Lets say a KT costs only 500 MP but drops your MP income by half, which units do you really hurt? the KT or everything else? I bet the player will likely get another KT for 500 MP even when this would cut his income to like 0 before he builds a 380 MP inf squad or a 350 MP vehicle when his income is just like 150 per min after the first one. Or he spares 1000 MP and get two at once. But the Upkeep did not prevent them from getting two. But it made all other units obsolete.

If the arty+tanks combo is a problem, then a better solution would be vehicle cost revision. It has been suggested several times and we agree it would be beneficial but postponed it for later as it is not as easy as "let's set all light vehicles to X, mediums to Y and heavies to Z".

True. Both are extremely cheap esspecially in terms of fuel. Both can put up a lot of firepower but are super cheap. I label both as "heavy equipment". Hence they should be fuel intensive to get and to maintain.

The problem is that we want to get away from "Tank Rush" and "Arty Rush". The problem is: Both take away the ressources required to play differently: Ammo mainly but also MP and also CP. The CP cost are low for both: 2-4 CP usually and there you go. But its enough to delay infantry gameplay since inf cost a lot of CP to get going from unlock to doctrinal boosts. I think that got pointed out many times over by at least me, consti, sukin and others.

Ammo is another thing: What do you do? 100 MP on a single lmg or 50 ammo on two stgs? Or use it for an arty barrage or put 50-135 ammo into your tank? I think 90% would say: Fuck inf that dies so fast, i arty the enemie and spare the other ammo to make my OP Tank as powerfull as somehow possible. The general ending of BK is: Bomb your enemie to ashes, then send in your tank forces you carefully prepared. Bomb the AT, tank kills everything else.



So, make arty and tanks fuel heavy. Both to build and maintain. MP cost would be 380 MP upwards. Medium Tanks a bit more fuel heavy while medium arty more MP/ammo heavy and SPGS also fuel heavy since they are real doomsday machines. Its just laughable that a Hummel does not cost a tiny drop of fuel.


Edit:
Another thing where cost based balance beats upkeep based balance is in the decision making what arty to use. Cost based balance means you can build and use a medium arty even though a heavy exists. You can then use the light arty for lets say 35 per barrage to achieve the goal instead of spending lets say 75 amm on your heavy arty unit. Upkeep now means that you have to decide which to keep on the field. Surely people will keep the heavy one. So they only pay upkeep for that one, but also only use that one because no other is left. Hence you get the feeling that every single unit you have becomes a 105 target. On the other side, much needed ammo is spend for heavy arty upkeep and their use because a light arty does not exist anymore.


Edit II:
Another example how your "self-regulating" upkeep system worked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfdk5bX22OQ

9 mins into the game and 3 nebler barrages and two nebler fielded.
Just ask yourself: How many 105´s, Grilles, Neblers do you see? And how many US Priests do you see? The answer to that should give you the answer you need. Priest is so rare i even forget it exists in inf doc.
Min 10: Howitzer fireing. So the game just got started, the first larger engagment and attack took place 3 arty units fired already 4 barrages... lmao. Did he even get a captain?

11:55: Still think 2 CP howitzer for 375 and 25 fuel is fine? Tara has one defensive unit: a Pak. Yet he got targted like 5 times by arty now.

27 mins into the game: Tara doesnt use airstrikes and just a few inf abilities and the cheapest arty you can get.Still he only has these roughly 150 that is just enough to have some use of infantry abilities. One airstrike and it would be all gone. Now imagine inf doc with tons of weapon upgrades, hundreds of ammo on WSC upgrades like sticky, better zooks etc. Fuel piles up while ammo is always low. Fuel is enough to throw tank after tank but ammo is a really precious ressource. So playing not really ammo intense and yet he has to take care what to use. But fuel? No probs here.

29:59: Tiger fires AP, 30:02: Tiger fires HE. Thats why i say: remove single shot HE. Make ammo swap but the swap would require 10 seconds to complete.

41:15. One doctrinal use and all ammo is gone and he does not even use arty. Fuel stockpiling. The other sides ammo situation is probably the same. But once they have 50 ammo gained, they fire a barrage.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Fuel upkeep for ammo is a NO from me.

11:55: Still think 2 CP howitzer for 375 and 25 fuel is fine? Tara has one defensive unit: a Pak. Yet he got targted like 5 times by arty now.

None of the Allied players tried to counter the howitzers with 75mm HT as far as i can see.

29:59: Tiger fires AP, 30:02: Tiger fires HE. Thats why i say: remove single shot HE. Make ammo swap but the swap would require 10 seconds to complete.

So, just to fix this little thing (which is hardly a big deal) u want to turn all tanks into inf sweeping monsters?
Nope.

Also:
Vechiles prices revision suggestions proposed before were nearly catastrophic in my opinion.

[Warhawks97]

Fuel upkeep for ammo is a NO from me.

None of the Allied players tried to counter the howitzers with 75mm HT as far as i can see.

So, just to fix this little thing (which is hardly a big deal) u want to turn all tanks into inf sweeping monsters?
Nope.

1. 75 mm with 150 range? US side had 105 if you didnt notice. The 75 can reach the 105 when the enemie retarded enough to place it too far forward.

2. Shooting AP and HE in 3 seconds is a monster. Having a 10 second swap would ease things a lot. Also, pls, take a look here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4751


Idk if it can be fixed at all because the tank does not only load a shell, it changes the entire weapon. We would have to add a 10 second aim time on the HE shot which is reseted each time a target runs out of the target zone. You will never get to fire an HE.

So, good luck on "fixing" it. Timed HE would be a solution if you add a 10 second activiation time perhaps. But then again, you can just add a swap because towards the ending of "Timed HE" it exchanges the weapon again and thus bypassing reload again.

People tell me to make seperate topics, but then again dont try to figure the full picture i have in mind. Can you pls stop answering to single picked parts and instead try to discuss the full picture before throwing out a "one word sentence"?

[Consti255]

First of all, i agree that a fuel upkeep would be WAY better than a ammo upkeep paired with higher salvo costs among all factions.
Hawks brought up my points i made in our little talk pretty good.

The overall thing in BK is that arty is just way too good to use (especially if it is that cheap) , compared to other solutions like an infantry + tank attack or anything else. The overall goal of the ammo upkeep was a reduction of the arty spam + higher choice pathing if you take the arty route.
In general it worked, since when you use arty right know, you cannot afford upgaded infantry or tanks, which is a little bot overkill.
I think a better solution is to cut down the fuel income which actually slows you down in tiering or in tank fielding, but still gives you room to use dotrinal ability, infantry abilitys, upgraded inf/tanks to get a decent unit comp.
This would also give players a actual reason to think about if they want to get the 105 or is the 75 or mortar enought for that?

I agree to a certain extend that this will shift the problem, but it would shift it to a more impactful decision by players and drives the game away from this no brainer arty spam with the arty oriented docs, early into the game.
Big Arty pieces should be in general a big investement you take, but you get a good bang for your buck.

@Tigar
You keep saying that the 75mm HT is the way to go to counter the early 105, it is possible but defnitly not the outspoken and cost effective conter.
1. the HT is only available in Inf doc
2. it coss more fuel as the 105mm
3. it costs a shit tn of ammo to upgrade the HE
4. it has less range
5. the AoE spread is INSANE so you might not even take it out with one salvo.

So not that it is even cost ineffective to get this unit, it is even more dangerous to use this unit as a counter.


@Warhawks
Please keep this thread by its topic and dont throw in the overall Tank HE topic. I know, many things are linked to each other, but it is easier to keep track on single topics and opinions by different players if we keep it simple.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I hated arty upkeep since the first day it was introduced. It indeed only limits the usage of doctrinal abilities and upgrades. I would LOVE to have it’s gone for good.

[idliketoplaybetter]

Cant stand away from this anymore.

Please, no. Terrible ideas. Terrible. Just don't.

[tarakancheg]

No from me.
You cant delay tech on Arty docs because they only need tech to get said arty.

[tarakancheg]

.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Cant stand away from this anymore.

Please, no. Terrible ideas. Terrible. Just don't.

+1

Even by acknowledging the issues they represented.. yet, most of the suggestions they provided are super over-scope and would only make things a lot worse. As usual though, Hawks always super confidently gives us the impression how these suggestions must be the best solution to the problems.. he often believes so much in what he says, but honestly i think he should take a step back with deeper look at what these kind of suggestions would end up to achieve.

Hawks, i could explain my opinion in more depth rather than just throwing "one sentence statements" as you say, but unfortunately i don't always have that much time anymore.

I just wonna say that even if the suggestions provided get implemented.. it will only lead us to running in circles & even bigger suggestions would later be there to follow.

Currently i like the overall balance of the game.. tanks are at the right price & are nearly blind without spotters helping their vision, so inf game-play is fine, and i have seen mutiple vet5 squads from all docs throughout the past couple of months, so inf game-play now is effective & is generally balanced with tank game-play as well.. suggestions given of ex "give all tanks permenant HE switch button" would only break everything up.. as it would convert inf game-play into pure hell... Arty could be a bit annoying atm ye, but believe me; it's currently better than it has ever been and counters do exist. I have seen arty players being smashed with proper team co-ordination.


@Consti
The 75mm HT is not only available in inf doc as u say, but also RA doc.
Range isn't much lower than the 105 howitzers atm, and the damage dealt to naked howitzers is very high.. not to mention it's a mobile unit that can shoot then quickly escape... Try it before you say otherwise.
it's literally a 105 Axis howitzer killer.

[Warhawks97]

No from me.
You cant delay tech on Arty docs because they only need tech to get said arty.

Well, if you put enough CP cost on them, it would work. The US Priest is the best example how CP and high build cost prevents from using it unless they really need it.

The fuel upkeep is also not only there to prevent tec, which it will considering that some get the howitzer before the third building, perhaps even before the second HQ upgrade. So again, if they have to spend 50 fuel to build it and then pay 2.5 upkeep per min it will hurt for sure. Having two would mean to pay 100 fuel to build them and like 4 to maintain them, perhaps even 5.
It would also make it harder to guard this said arty with a horde of tanks like deadly HE tanks, TD´s etc.

I would also say arty docs do have other tecs. Basically a pure arty doc doesnt exist anymore since RA was rebranded. Its just that arty is the earliest and cheapest available type of unit that increases your armies firepower tenfold.


So i think if we take it all together, higher build cost, barrage cost, fuel upkeep and higher CP requirments, things will really change without having to sacrifice infantry upgrades and doctrinal abilities due to ammo upkeep.


@Tiger: I do use the 75 mm HT as inf doc basically every game since i have to. I can try to weaken the defense of my enemie and then rush its 105 with vehicles. But trying to directly counter it is nearly impossible unless you have an axis team that doesnt try to push at all and hence make it easier to push them and getting close enough to their 105. But if that doesnt work and axis are somewhat competent and combine some pushes with their arty things get difficult and the HT will get under high risk when trying to get close enough. Also i often enough had games where the player just replaced one 105 after another. In a game at bloody gulch me, tara and erich played a 3 vs 3. Our enemie got a 105 which was countered by a tank push from erich who defeated his weaker opponent on his side. The second 105 was countered by an off map from me when i got visison for a second. However a third was up soon after. And i have to say that our enemie really placed his arty at a very awkward position without any cover.
So that arty is so damn cheap to replace that even if you manage to blow one up with a 75 mm HT, the next one will be up in no time and usually at a somewhat better protected area where you cant reach it. So dont think you are the only one using the 75 mm HT to try using it as counter. Srsly, i am so depserate that i tried everything imaginable to counter their first arty... dropping AB droppers to kill their crew and capture them, drop 101st, use off maps like planes etc, rushing hellcats in suicide missions hoping to get at least a short moment to breath, rushing with greyhound etc etc.... but from one desparte counter move to another, the ammount of protection increases.... more paks, more TD´s, Pak Pumas etc.... its super easy to build the arty + the means to protect them. So you may counter the first arty units by using suicide tactics, smart moves, sneaky house drops or whatever but it gets harder and harder to do so unless you field your arty at some point that tries to somehow get the upper hand over your enemies arty.

[Consti255]

No from me.
You cant delay tech on Arty docs because they only need tech to get said arty.

Absolutely disagree here.
Arty docs arent just build arround arty.
Def,Inf and RA can spam emplacements while SE needs fuel for its Nashorns and other TDs. We dont have any pure arty doc in the game right now. There is enough ways to spend fuel in all of this docs.

RA (Canadians) can build arty after the armored truck HQ which is followed by the command tank which gives you access to bigger tanks = senseful tiering nerf
Unless you skiped the captain, but which is again a senseful investment IF you want to rush arty you have to pay. 25pounders are even CP free.

Inf doc
4 CP for the 105, this is basicly a n one tiering nerf at all in HR games, since if you are a good macro player, you are already tierd up to the tank depot or even supply yard IF you consider rushing it. It will indeed slow down your tank deployment which is a senseful trade off.

Def doc
oh boy were d i start with it? More than deserved for players that want early 105 support to get slowed down in tiering and tank/td acess.
You can still use Paks, which is a vulnarable defensive unit, but i wont slow down tiering or anything further. So options are there not to get steamrolled. Not to mention, that pak 38 do better than 57mm guns against their targets. Have fun penning a P4 H with a 57mm, the pak38 is laughing about 76mm shermans.

SE
Needs a rework in general.


So overall beneficial of this change:
- More ammo to spend on doctrinal abilitys
- Arty becomes a more impactful unit choice instead a oh i click i kill choice.
- Arty isnt as present in this game
- Fuel becomes the main ressource to get tanks and not Ammo
- Infantry doesnt run arround naked in the later stages in the game (more upgaded infantry)
- Snowballing of Infnatry ges reduced (Early upgraded elites that have vet, wont face naked infantry so often and feed them to
oblivion)
- Infantry recover isnt as painful as now, when you loose your high vet sqaud

There are even more beneficials, but the last 2 even support your statemeant of "i seen many high vet or even vet5 units aross the field" , yes of course you do, because once they get upgraded they murder every unupgraded infantry on the field and feed their way to high vet. Not to mention the vet changes which make it even harder to comeback against those sqauds on the recieving end. We were trying to get away from uber sqauds, but here we are again. The last time ive seen a basic riflesqaud beeing impactful was ONE game from me and Kwok, where he managed to let a 7men call in rifle sqaud reach vet 4-5. Beautiful game but an absolutely rare gem these days. Elite is whipeing everything.
Worst is SE where you dont even have CP upgrades and if you lost all your upgraded infantry, you transition to full schwimm spam,because you need all your ammo for your big dick guns, what a meme is that ??

@Tigar

first, Hawks is absolutely right when it comes to cost effectiveness between those pieces you mentioned. As is said before, this things are costly compare to the 105mm.
2. do you play every game Inf doc and Canadians? What about the other 4 docs?
3.Even if you manage to decrew a 105mm WHEN you get lucky in this huge spread are of the HT, the def player will simply recrew that bitch with cheap pios. In the fewest scenarios the HT will completely destroy the arty piece.

Aswell, tank prices arent fine at all, you wanna tell me a 30 or 40fuel Sherman is fine, while a 28mm HT from de doc costs 35fuel?
Absolutely not, the current tank prices are horrible and lead to tank spam.
Atleast the vision nerf brought something up agains this retarded tank spams.
Mediums are WAY to cheap, Light tanks and vehicles are overpriced as balls, while heavys are fine as they are.

Again, its a different topic, but it is hard to stay in one since things are dependent on each other.
We all made this changes arround the medium prices with HE nerfs, Vision nerfs and huge ammo costs in tanks, instead freaking increase their fuel costs.

I want potent HE on my tanks, but damn my tanks should be limited by my fuel income and not my MP and Ammo. Period.

[Redgaarden]

we should make infantry abilities cost fuel instead. 4 fuel for a grenade. 12 fuel for mp40

[Redgaarden]

SE
Needs a rework in general.

Why does SE need a rework?
SE is a counter to armor doctrines and can supress other artillery doctrines. Has good infantry.

Does it need a rework because they are too strong? too weak? its biggest weakness is that it lacks emplacements and super infantry.

I can't think of a doctrine SE can't fight at all.

- More ammo to spend on doctrinal abilitys

With how annoying a lot of abilities are (Off-map click to kill abilities) I say good riddance so I like people not having muni because infantry and tanks get a chance to stay on the field without dying by some insane manner.

- Arty becomes a more impactful unit choice instead a oh i click i kill choice.

We should make another discussion of which arty needs to be balanced so they dont become I click I kill choice.

- Arty isnt as present in this game

Arty is important in every game.

- Fuel becomes the main ressource to get tanks and not Ammo

Better way to do that is increasing tank fuel costs.

Infantry doesnt run arround naked in the later stages in the game (more upgaded infantry)

Nothing wrong with running naked since naked guns got buffed and actually usable.

- Snowballing of Infnatry ges reduced (Early upgraded elites that have vet, wont face naked infantry so often and feed them to
oblivion)

Vet isn't important, and if you put rifles against storms you deserve to get killed. Elite inf are balanced as they are steamrolling worse infantry.

- Infantry recover isnt as painful as now, when you loose your high vet sqaud

You're going to lose a lot more infantry if this change goes through.

There are even more beneficials, but the last 2 even support your statemeant of "i seen many high vet or even vet5 units aross the field" , yes of course you do, because once they get upgraded they murder every unupgraded infantry on the field and feed their way to high vet. Not to mention the vet changes which make it even harder to comeback against those sqauds on the recieving end.

The reason why you see high vet infantry is because airplanes are easier to shoot down. Click to kills are not affordable. the nr 1 squad wipe of this game is muni based abilities and not guns.
I refuse to go back into the game where people can afford both off-maps and arty

The last time ive seen a basic riflesqaud beeing impactful was ONE game from me and Kwok, where he managed to let a 7men call in rifle sqaud reach vet 4-5. Beautiful game but an absolutely rare gem these days. Elite is whipeing everything.

vet 5 rifle squad still lose to vet 0 grenadiers. vet is not important unless it's for abilities. They have different roles. Elites are meant to be in combat while rifles do other tasks.

Worst is SE where you dont even have CP upgrades and if you lost all your upgraded infantry, you transition to full schwimm spam,because you need all your ammo for your big dick guns, what a meme is that ??

If you lose everything you lose. You want an endless game where it doesn't matter if you kill everything the enemy has and nothing changes?

As Tigar said. Game is quite balanced as it is. We shouldn't change stuff that was recently changed. If something is completely broken it's usually done with in beta version. There may be some changes I didn't agree with like the 500mp Hummel and 2cp 105. But I have enjoyed it a lot. The game is meant to be played by everyone and not a specific few.

[Krieger Blitzer]

As Tigar said. Game is quite balanced as it is. We shouldn't change stuff that was recently changed. If something is completely broken it's usually done with in beta version. There may be some changes I didn't agree with like the 500mp Hummel and 2cp 105. But I have enjoyed it a lot. The game is meant to be played by everyone and not a specific few.

+1

Although it might be worth mentioning; despite i am OK with 2CP 105 & Hummel currently.. yet, i personally don't mind if Hummels would become 800MP again or buildable.. and the Def 105 howitzers could be delayed by locking it behind more tech upgrades instead of more CPs.

[Warhawks97]

we should make infantry abilities cost fuel instead. 4 fuel for a grenade. 12 fuel for mp40

so in the end inf is going to cost more fuel than tanks and artillery? Ammo is the ressource used on the field for abilties and weapon upgrades while fuel is bringing the stuff to the front. So in future we will spend ammo to get tanks and fuel to upgrade infantry. Why dont we make submarines fly and airplanes dive?

Why does SE need a rework?
SE is a counter to armor doctrines and can supress other artillery doctrines. Has good infantry.

Does it need a rework because they are too strong? too weak? its biggest weakness is that it lacks emplacements and super infantry.

I can't think of a doctrine SE can't fight at all.

I guess you missed the debate. Its not to what it is a counter to (which btw shouldnt be the place following new doctrine intentions) and what not. Its about how the doc is played. Everyone picks SE today, even Wurf. Its just arty spam pure. Two off map for 3 CP and super cheap hotchkiss and Hummel. This doctrine gone mad and has absolutely nothing to do with SE anymore.

Ofc, with this ammount of arty you can fight everything, we already noticed this.

With how annoying a lot of abilities are (Off-map click to kill abilities) I say good riddance so I like people not having muni because infantry and tanks get a chance to stay on the field without dying by some insane manner.

Tanks dont die that often to off maps in general unless its en Elephant or an immobilized tank. The most powerfull tank killer off maps are Prop doc orbital rocket strike and Henschels. But planes can be easily countered today.

The vast majorty of units are dying to nonstop arty barrages from on map arty during games, far less to off-maps. Off-maps are often cruical for doctrinal games and to gain momentum. In this game the ammount of momentum is actually 0. Its just who can arty more and longer. Its a slow ww1 style arty massacre.


The arty madness that starts at about min 5 of the game is the only thing that keeps killing units in an "insane manner" for the rest of the game. I am really not afraid of off maps if you use AA, spreading units and have a feeling on what and when your enemie uses it. Many off maps are not really going to do all that much, best example Long-Tom which is a pure "pray for good" ability.

But my guts turn upside down each time i hear the first nebler or howitzer firing because you have no idea where it lands since players tend to even bombard single engi squads with neblers nowadays. But you can be sure no one is going to use an off-map on pios. Hence on map arty is a lot more terryfying than off-maps except for the Prop rocket barrage perhaps.

We should make another discussion of which arty needs to be balanced so they dont become I click I kill choice.

Yes, up the CP cost, build cost and barrage cost and i gurantee, player will think at least twice whether they spend this many CP and res into arty and ammo into barrages or not.

Arty is important in every game.

Its not only important, artillery is BK mod.

Better way to do that is increasing tank fuel costs.

Also, we brought this up many times already. Heavy equipment, let it be tanks or arty, should be quite fuel intense.

Nothing wrong with running naked since naked guns got buffed and actually usable.

usuable to melt basic inf, yes, but hardcore elite inf in late game will just laugh at you.

Vet isn't important, and if you put rifles against storms you deserve to get killed. Elite inf are balanced as they are steamrolling worse infantry.

In old days it was like this: Elite replaces basic. Now matter how many mistakes you made with elites or how much better you positioned your normal inf, elite always won. For a short time that changed and in exchange elites got cheaper. Now elites are cheap but yet again back in rambo like behaviour.

You're going to lose a lot more infantry if this change goes through.

Which change? Less arty spam means less inf losses. Off maps dont fall on you every 20 seconds unlike cheap on-map arty that never stops firing.

The reason why you see high vet infantry is because airplanes are easier to shoot down. Click to kills are not affordable. the nr 1 squad wipe of this game is muni based abilities and not guns.
I refuse to go back into the game where people can afford both off-maps and arty

Muni based abilities aka never ending artillery barrages you mean?

vet 5 rifle squad still lose to vet 0 grenadiers. vet is not important unless it's for abilities. They have different roles. Elites are meant to be in combat while rifles do other tasks.

which is said. RTS games with vet system have this vet in order to promote good unit handling and reward good unit preservation. But BK gives a shit about skills. Only brutalized units and artillery matters. "Congrats, you made your rifle squad reach vet 5. You dont have any advantage out of it but thank you for your passion!" Just sad to hear this.

If you lose everything you lose. You want an endless game where it doesn't matter if you kill everything the enemy has and nothing changes?

The thing is not that you lose when you lose everything. You lose if you dont get enough arty. You cant get around heavy losses when your opponent starts bombing you right from the start of the game while you try to fight a skill based match.

Like now you get inf, upgrade it and if you lose it you never build one again or doesnt add upgrades because there is no point in doing so. If you lose everything you lose unless you get enough arty, then you can make a comeback.

As Tigar said. Game is quite balanced as it is. We shouldn't change stuff that was recently changed. If something is completely broken it's usually done with in beta version. There may be some changes I didn't agree with like the 500mp Hummel and 2cp 105. But I have enjoyed it a lot. The game is meant to be played by everyone and not a specific few.

I think the entire debate isnt about balance. I dont get why every post is viewed as a balance complain. Its the ammount of annoyance you get every time you play.... to always go through the same repetetive artillery madness, same tec procedure of always the same unlocks because unlocking other things will make you lose the game unless you have far superior skills and so on.
And completely broken? 2 CP howitzer and 500 MP Hummel or Grille that fires for low cost every few seconds. Its broken for idk how long and its still here.


I think players just got used BK being an all out arty party game. This is why you see the same players hosting the same games every day. At the same time, many of those other players that like to use their brain a bit more are gone or stay away for weeks because no sane human on earth can handle this game for more than one day without getting crazy.

Like let me start:
Wurf and his mates: Bloody Gulch, la fiere, duclair. He might take luft but his mates get arty for sure and he, too, nowadays.
Sturm and Psylo? Bizory, base camp and get mortar and rocket art asap.
Hazee and budies: Lane maps with crazy ammount of arty. Usually Road or goodwood etc.
Ete and his buds? Similiar story.
And a bunch of other 2 or 3 men crews on high valley and so on.


Then i sometimes see guys online when i am lucky but they only play 1-2 matches and disappear again for a week or more.
So, when you talk about "specific few", its always the same bunch of guys with heavy camping and arty in mind that have games open 24/7. Every time i go online, i see these games open waiting for a bunch of poor dudes to join their madness and insanity. And after not seeing other games and hosting rosmalen standard res without anyone joining, i go off.

[Consti255]

Personal opinion:
Simply get rid of all arty pieces and simply make arty a off map call in with different cooldowns and calibers.

Case closed.

@Red

its not like i pushed with Hawks and Dicky for outspoken AGES to increase the fuel prices of mediums and light tanks/vehicles.