Terror doctrine

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Cyberzombie
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 01:45
Location: Germany

Terror doctrine

Postby Cyberzombie » 25 Jan 2016, 22:07

What happened to terror doctrine?
I was hardly playing the last weeks and when I do I see at least one terror player in every axis team.
It happens also very often that there are more terror players in one single team. I even had a 3vs3 against 3 terror players.
I would not have such a big problem with that fact but I see the following happening waaaay to often.
Average terror player "tactic":

Code: Select all

function TerrorTactic {
   play extremely defensively at the beginning - double sniper and mortar are excellent for XP farming without loosing troops
   unlock Panzergrens
   while(gameHasNotEnded) {
      if(notEnoughMP) {
         get some more XP while waiting for MP to build Panzergrens (snipers are well suited for that)   
      }
      else {
         build at least one Panzergren unit
      }
      send panzergrens towards enemy
      hold
      shoot
      retreat
      if(stukaIsAvailable) {
         shoot on troops that stopped the Panzergrens
      } else {
         build stuka
      }
      if(pantherGIsUnlocked) {
         build at least one Panther G
      }
      if(pantherGIsAvailable) {
         play defensively with Panther (use it only to see half of the map and shoot with stukas if you see something moving)
         never attack with Panther, stay only at range until you have at least two panthers
         steamrole enemy
         break
      }
   }
}

Why is this brainless tactic so successfull?
Why isn't the player punished for not combining his units.
He should support his Panzergrens with Stugs for example but instead the player is rewarded for not soing so and just waiting for his Pantehr Gs to arrive.
It's like and armor player only relying on Rangers and one Calliope until his SP arrives. Have you ever seen that? Neither have I...

I have no idea how to change some things in this doc without screwing the whole balance up.
But I have at least one suggestion that shouldn't do so and that is limiting stukas to 1.
Armor doc has only one Calliope too and Stukas can fire way more often and are way more devastating than Calliope.

I mean this doc is already an allrounder why not limit at least a bit of it's possibilities.
Second, change how the optics of Panther G works.
Currently they provide huge sight. This results in two ways:
1. No need for scouts since your Panther is a mobile heavily armored and armed scout
2. this heavily armored scout is very mobile and if your smart enough you will always drive near the frontline to reveal enemies attempts to set ambushes.
Since you also have very mobile and devastating artillery in that doc you can easily kill those ambushes and move forward without ever engaging directly teh enemy.

And that's another issue:
Most of the players use their Panthers only for defense and not for offence at least until they got more Panthers so steamrolling the enemy will be more likely wo work.
In every game I had in the last weeks no player at all tried to engage enemy tanks with his panther. All what happens is masses of schrecks hunting down that poor tank.
That's no fun at all at least not from the allied perspective.

And this is the next suggestion:
I know Panzergrens are not that cheap but I think their cost/performance ratio is still very good.
That's why this brainless rush-to-enemy-hold-and-shoot tactic works. You should be punished if you send your troops into a fight they will not likely win and loosing almost all your troops.
So maybe consider increasing their reinforcement costs in order to dorce the player to be using his troops not like rambos.

Any suggestions are welcome or convince me that I'm totally wrong with my point of view.

User avatar
Terence's Mouth
Posts: 133
Joined: 07 Aug 2015, 18:10

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Terence's Mouth » 25 Jan 2016, 22:38

I made the experience that Terror doc is better than most other docs.
On some maps this noob tactics cyber talked about works realy well on other not...

I dont like the way we all went last years and only reduced and nerfed things mostly.
Only thing that should reduced is the sniper Limit to 1.
The Stuka can stay at 2 in my opinion because only few maps give the player the Munition to use them after "cool down time"
plus Axis realy need artillery for the tons of emplacements.

On BK doc we can see how axis have no chance vs emplacements spam because of to less arty, If Terror doc will look like this someday we only have some frustrating doc more.
Of course they got the neblers but theyre realy bullshit at the moment when using them vs emplacements.

I like the Panther realy much and i think there never should never be changed something because M10s or Hellcat can oneshot it.
Health Damage is realy ok, the only thing that could be changed is maybe the Turret MG42 but then to all german Tanks or a Limit of 2.

To the Panzergrenadeers: Please dont nerf something again for axis or increase the Costs only by looking on one thing without keeping the overview.
I saw many Panzergrenadeers dieing faster than Riflemen and the Price/reinforcesPrice are realy good in the moment.



At the end i want to say it looks realy like not all docs can fight each other(in "old times" :oops: there wasnt this problem) Now it looks like British arty doc has no chances vs Terror doc, or Axis def doc has no chances vs all other docs without a good teammate...

when you give points of strenght from 1-10 it looks nearly like this:

USA:
Infantry 10
Armored 7
Airborne 7

British:
Raf 7
Royal Artillery 6 (if handle it like some rare people can then 8 maybe^^)
Royal Engeneers 6

Wehrmacht:
Terror 9
Blitzkrieg 8
Defensive 5

Panzerelite:
Luft 7
Tankhunter 6
SE 7

Of course People can give another points and i dont want to complain about the points, i just want to say that some doctrines have no chances vs other doctrines.
Its a realy big Problem for the game.
All docs could fight each other with nearly 50-50 chances or the game is just frustrating and destroyed.

Another big issue is when one team take multiple doctrines(2-3 Infantry doctrines destroy all fun and can win a game easily or 3-4 Terror doctrines too)
This shouldnt be an problem when all doctrines fit to each other.
Everybody can see how some doctrines are better than others...

Please fix this before change little and single things or we never get a well balanced game.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2796
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby MarKr » 25 Jan 2016, 23:19

I am interested in the replies of other players but so far:
At the end i want to say it looks realy like not all docs can fight each other(in "old times" :oops: there wasnt this problem) Now it looks like British arty doc has no chances vs Terror doc, or Axis def doc has no chances vs all other docs without a good teammate...
For as long as I have been part of the community (I admit it is not that long but still almost two years I think) I have always heard that BK is simply not balanced for 1vs1 but for team games. Therefore whenever somebody said "Doc X is simply weak against doc Y. Do something about it." The response usually was something like "Play in a team and let the team mates help you where your doctrine lacks."
Image

User avatar
Cyberzombie
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 01:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Cyberzombie » 25 Jan 2016, 23:35

I dont like the way we all went last years and only reduced and nerfed things mostly.

Agreed, but sometimes it is necessary.

Only thing that should reduced is the sniper Limit to 1.

I always was against that but maybe we should try that out. Or another idea without removing the second sniper, simply delay it (if this is possible) by making it available only after building X (in case of wehrmacht you could make it available at the last stage for example).
With this you would prevent sniper spam in the early game where they are extremely efficient and delay that to a later stage of the game where other units like tanks dominate.

The Stuka can stay at 2 in my opinion because only few maps give the player the Munition to use them after "cool down time"
plus Axis realy need artillery for the tons of emplacements.

So why got Calliope then reduced to 1 while having an extremely long cooldown? And when you don't even have enough ammo to use both at a time why not reduce them to 1? Having 2 at a time only eables you to "bypass" the cooldown of stukas since you can fire with one and while it cools down fire with the other.
Regarding the emplacements, you still would have one stuka, 2 neblers, VT, V1, firestorm and inf that can run trough MG fire once they are vetted.
Currently stukas are used to take out concentration of units or simply paks. When none of both is in range players tend to shoot brainless the first thing they see.
And if you only have one at a time you need to use that one effectively. Take down emplacement/pak/whatsoever and immediately attack. This is the purpose of this unit and not trying to compete with SE/Arty doc...

I like the Panther realy much and i think there never should never be changed something because M10s or Hellcat can oneshot it.
Health Damage is realy ok, the only thing that could be changed is maybe the Turret MG42 but then to all german Tanks or a Limit of 2.

I love that unit too. It was the first unit I fall in love with when I started plying BK.
But imo it is a bit too deadly against inf. I mean why the hell is this Panther so different from the others? Same gun, same MGs, a bit different armor but still way more deadly. That's nonsense.
And combining this huge power with huge sight makes this unit a bit too powerfull.
So pls tell me why this tank is so different to other panthers and why it has this huge sight upgrade.

I just had a game in which I wanted to test terror. It was me with 2 noobs against one noob and 2 older BK players. We were pushed back heavily and my mates managed to hold the line until I got a Panther G. After that the game was over since they failed to kill my vet3 Panther and my mates started to spam havies too. This victory was not earned since we were almost beaten before and one single tank turned it all. I didn't even need scouts. I saw every new 17pdr they built and killed it with my stuka...

To the Panzergrenadeers: Please dont nerf something again for axis or increase the Costs only by looking on one thing without keeping the overview.
I saw many Panzergrenadeers dieing faster than Riflemen and the Price/reinforcesPrice are realy good in the moment.

I don't want to nerf them either but it can't be that this stupid tactic works. Something has to be adjusted.

Of course People can give another points and i dont want to complain about the points, i just want to say that some doctrines have no chances vs other doctrines.
Its a realy big Problem for the game.
All docs could fight each other with nearly 50-50 chances or the game is just frustrating and destroyed.

Actually I think the other way round. Imo it's good that some docs are weak against others and strong against others. That forces you to play with your team. Allrounder docs on the other hand destroy that "balance". And that's why those have to be limited in thier possibilities.

Another big issue is when one team take multiple doctrines(2-3 Infantry doctrines destroy all fun and can win a game easily or 3-4 Terror doctrines too)
This shouldnt be an problem when all doctrines fit to each other.
Everybody can see how some doctrines are better than others

I partially agree. If every doc had at least one weakness (inf doc weak against heavies in late game) then it would be easier to counter them.

For as long as I have been part of the community (I admit it is not that long but still almost two years I think) I have always heard that BK is simply not balanced for 1vs1 but for team games. Therefore whenever somebody said "Doc X is simply weak against doc Y. Do something about it." The response usually was something like "Play in a team and let the team mates help you where your doctrine lacks."

And that's the right way. But allrounder docs don't need the support of others so they play their own 1vs1 game in bigger games. And if there were no allorunder docs you would get punished for not playing in a team.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2796
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby MarKr » 25 Jan 2016, 23:50

And that's the right way. But allrounder docs don't need the support of others so they play their own 1vs1 game in bigger games. And if there were no allorunder docs you would get punished for not playing in a team.
Well yeah but in a sense Axis docs in general are more all-rounders (all have relatively good infantry, vehicles and some late-game unit to take out tanks) while Allied docs are more centred around one tactic. But that is also an aspect of BK that was intended by original devs and we would like to keep it in the game.
Image

User avatar
Terence's Mouth
Posts: 133
Joined: 07 Aug 2015, 18:10

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Terence's Mouth » 26 Jan 2016, 00:11

I said when one team Uses 3 Inf doc or 3-4Terror doc the other team cant stop them when they combinate their docs together.
It must be changed.
All docs must fit to eachother or the game end depends on picking docs.

Its nonsense to tell me that i have to pick the right doc or combinate it with my team, i play for fun and i should take all docs i want.

Plus you cant Buff doctrines like infantry and then forget the Def doc on axis side.
Its a realy a blind change that just increase the frustation.

@Markr you like frustrating games or not? If not then make all docs fit to each other or its just a matter of how polite the enemy is in picking doctrines or on the other way how unpolite and unfair it is in picking the doctrines with your team. (As example again 3-4 Terror docs on Goodwood or 3Infantry doc with tons of arty and emplacements destroy the game)

User avatar
Cyberzombie
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 01:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Cyberzombie » 26 Jan 2016, 00:32

I said when one team Uses 3 Inf doc or 3-4Terror doc the other team cant stop them when they combinate their docs together.

Well it is not impossible it is just a lot harder. There a re currently two guys playing only lyon with double inf. I lost two times against them but one the third one with ease. You just change your tactic and then you can win. To stay at inf doc as an example, double or tripple inf doc can be so powerfull because the strength of this doc is the early game. But if you survived this you can push them back pretty fast. What about tripple armor doc? Only strong in mid/late game will get slaughtered in early game.

Its nonsense to tell me that i have to pick the right doc or combinate it with my team, i play for fun and i should take all docs i want.

And exactly this results in tripple inf or terror :P

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3519
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Jan 2016, 01:08

@Terence:

What kind of evaluation of doc is it? What are the criterias??
Feeling? come on.

If i make would make a list then i would use these criterias: 1. Unit cost efficency 2. Versatility 3. How easy it is to play.

And in these regard all WH doc would win followed by SE and inf doc and RAF.
I also played Terror doc a few times against several players, docs and on dif maps and even when i had a horrible start (like wasting all pumas) i got a comeback by just getting out 3 gren squads, recon and AT squad. After that double nebler for VT and then wait for panther G.

Inf is all in all the best doc allieds have. But alone it badly sufferes vs combos of late heavy tanks, rocket arty and inf. Especially rocket arty and panthers is just a pain. Emplacment gets erased (maybe not all, but at one part of the map through which enemie forces fall into your lines and erasing the remaining emplacments or heading straight to your forward retreat point) and stuff arround shredded. Its arty is just momentum arty (off map) which loses in efficency in the mobile late game combat. Arty competetivness is actually horrible, actually worse than terror arty.

AB can deal with most situations but is also extremly difficult to play. You have to know all "secret tricks" like slightly lower reinforcment cost, smoke cover and using calli rocket jeeps momentum.

The RAF isnt bad but it has very hard times in mid early game due to bad cost efficency of commandos at that stage. First late game RAF is becoming some kind of a threat but if the axis didnt play too static having some vet inf by their own they afterall beat the shit out of commandos. Especially Panther/inf combo. You then just play defensively untill you can steamrole the enemies with panthers.
RAF (just like all CW) are pretty hard to play in order to be really successfull. There is really just a rare handfull RAF players that are really successfull with it.


And Terror is pretty easy.

Thing is that their inf is simply elite being put in a "standard inf jacket". Equipment and weapon stats are 100% elite, even better. The only "weakness" is their inf_type which is slightly worse as those of commandos/AB/Rangers. But in a ranged combat they beat enfield commandos when both use rifle and lmg. The commando TP offers only advantage while moving. VS rangers they win at any distance actually due to way better weapon stats.

But the HP pool (same as elites have) makes up for the "bad" standard inf type. Besides that they get stronger in Terror doc the more men they lose. The smaller the squad the more deadly the remaining become. Also they get stgs for free and flame nades.

In def doc they get the huge def bonus after upgrade and when being in cover. That def boost makes them better than any elite inf actually.


So the "prob with grens is" that they have as standard elite inf HP and rifle stats which are being boosted further in Terror and def doc by quite a lot. PE inf is atm far away from that cost efficency.
And this is combined with the most versatile doctrines you can get.


About Panther G: The gunsight is not that much OP, just others are plain stupid bad. As it seems all tanks use so far same periscope upgrade that provides only + 15 sight range. The Panther G has special upgrade that boosts sight range by +35 and accuracy with 1.5 modifier.

about arty: I actually agree that armor doc could have two callis like it has been. I dont really get why its limited while it comes much later with lots of CP, with less range and longer cooldown.


Coming back to gunsights: As they cost atm 75 ammo (except hetzer that cost 25) they should provide better boosts. Gunsights are quite bad atm except panther G which has an insane gunsight.

I think these upgrades should boost the spotting range by + 20 or 25 instead of 35 and accuracy boost of 1.15 or 1.2 instead of 1.5.
That should be gunsight upgrade standard.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2796
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby MarKr » 26 Jan 2016, 01:37

I said when one team Uses 3 Inf doc or 3-4Terror doc the other team cant stop them when they combinate their docs together.
It must be changed.
Im interested in how you would change it...if changes are made that 3x infantry doc won't be as trong as now then in games where you have 1 infantry + others, infantry will be weak.

Its nonsense to tell me that i have to pick the right doc or combinate it with my team, i play for fun and i should take all docs i want.
In such case every doc would need to be the same. Or how exactely do you want to make a doctrine that has clear advantage in defense (WH Def doc) but at the same time is capable of forming crushing offense? Or a doctrine that is focused on artillery (CW arty doc) but at the same time has access to strong infatry and tanks? It is logical that if one doctrine has an edge in certain field they must lack in another. Yes, playing Allies is harder because they have specialized doctrines and when things get nasty you cannot simply change strategy from fielding strong tanks to fielding strong infantry but on the other hand the doc you chose is stonger than Axis in their tactis - meaning that if you play US Infantry, you lack tanks but you can spam infantry easily and cheap so even if Axis have better infantry if they go 1vs1 (squad vs squad) you beat them because you can field more than they ever can, if you play CW arty, you simply have most available arty and in most cases shooting your arty is cheaper than other docs, not to mention Priest with its "sniper" abilites.
So as much as you might not like it, that is the way BK mod was made.
Image

User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 293
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:51

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Devilfish » 26 Jan 2016, 12:39

Ultimate axis guide here.
Steps:
1. Secure early positions with mgs/at guns/mortars/snipers.
2. Get nebels.
3. Bomb forward allied positions until they are forced to pull back.
4. Move nebels forward.
5. Repeat the process from the point 3 until the opponent types gg.

Note: Feel free to stack up some rambos infantry equipped with mgs/stgs/schrecks to better defend your forward positions and to clear out the survivors of nebel bombing.
"Only by admitting what we are can we get what we want"

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 857
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 26 Jan 2016, 14:08

Devilfish wrote:Ultimate axis guide here.
Steps:
1. Secure early positions with mgs/at guns/mortars/snipers.
2. Get nebels.
3. Bomb forward allied positions until they are forced to pull back.
4. Move nebels forward.
5. Repeat the process from the point 3 until the opponent types gg.

Note: Feel free to stack up some rambos infantry equipped with mgs/stgs/schrecks to better defend your forward positions and to clear out the survivors of nebel bombing.


On Wolfheze it have always been like this, map is just one big field in fact = no obstacles = snipers, paks, AA and rocket arty is super effective. Playing on this map without pro CW arty player who clears all defenses and nebels is suicide.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3519
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Jan 2016, 20:34

Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:
Devilfish wrote:Ultimate axis guide here.
Steps:
1. Secure early positions with mgs/at guns/mortars/snipers.
2. Get nebels.
3. Bomb forward allied positions until they are forced to pull back.
4. Move nebels forward.
5. Repeat the process from the point 3 until the opponent types gg.

Note: Feel free to stack up some rambos infantry equipped with mgs/stgs/schrecks to better defend your forward positions and to clear out the survivors of nebel bombing.


On Wolfheze it have always been like this, map is just one big field in fact = no obstacles = snipers, paks, AA and rocket arty is super effective. Playing on this map without pro CW arty player who clears all defenses and nebels is suicide.


its on many maps. Except maybe this small map with lots of hedgrows.
But look arround.... hill 112, graves, la fiere, road, fields.....

which map isnt working that way. I admit i play axis similiar like that (except BK doc which i play 100% aggressive even when i have just one unit left). Terror and TH doc are the best samples for that strategy. Early good defense instantly followed by nebler/hotch. I have to admit that TH doc doesnt provide (or PE in general) any real alternative up to late game if you took care for your early game units.

So when i see that we as allied team are unable to get more than 50% of the map in early (or when losing early game too badly) and my opponents not total dumps that just all run for Panthers and other costly super units the game ends pretty often as described. Tons of nonstop arty shooting everywhere. Most of the time its to our advantage that all axis players fail to spend res in mid game units to maintain the dominance they took in the early which gives time for allied to have a comeback in mid game.

Another ending is that allied team sieges two ours long the axis base and the area arround without being able to make finally the finishing push. Thats happens quite frequently when playing without RA doc.

Thats why i also prefer the "playing on larger map" solution. That makes it easier for the flexible player to get arround stronger defenses while the "camper" cant camp everywhere at the same time. Also the brainless nonstop rocket launcher barraging randomly into fog of war isnt so successfull anymore as he clearly has to figure out where exactly the enemie forces are.

Edit:

Wolfheze HR. This is why i dont like HR in generally and especially not on such maps. Axis instantly get the stuff to cover at least 40% of the map and getting arty at almost the same time. You will never get me into a game as alli with HR on maps like road, wolf, fields, goodwood etc.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 857
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 26 Jan 2016, 21:44

Oh, just don't start with this "axis are better" bullshit again, that is not objective at all and I can't say exactly the same but vice versa: " If axis team is unable to get more than 50% of the map in early game than the game is lost, because allies will build up thousand emplacements and you won't have ammo for destroying them, also such things like RAF frag run sometimes can kill the entire army of the single player in early game. Btw, RAF and inf docs are my favorite ones for making a breakthrough in early stage: frag run/arty strike + glider/cqb + go ahead with other units is absolutely deadly combination, there is no any German docs which are able to provide such powerful punch in early game. And pls, do not start arguing about this crap, this allies/axis advantages are very situational and highly dependent on map,res, game opening. You may say that axis won with dumb arty spam in particular game, and this will be true, but in next one they will sink in emplacements and overwhelming amount of allied units.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3519
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Jan 2016, 21:59

Well. Yeah. Inf and RAF have good early to mid punch which was the reason we relatively quickly managed to take map controle. But then they stack arround their base defense and the most important res points. Planes and gliders got killed by 20 mm vehicles and base def and our arty was just momentum arty, not competetive to enemie arty.

The emplacment spam (especially inf doc) is part of that kind of siege strategy and the only really effective one not to lose ground to quickly again by also keep up some pressure. But on the long hand, when axis more or less starting assaults from right out of their base and backed by stupa/stuh they will slowly by steadly gain on strenght untill first panther arives which you basically just really kill with a lucky inf doc off map. Other arty options arent sufficient when playing without RA.

Having arround 50% of the map as allied when the game gets into late stage (means when axis have so far access to max tier units) and relatively flexible defense (which makes momentum abilties like RAF raid or inf off map way less effective) you basically cant spam enough emplacment to stand the nonstop arty fire combined with powerfull inf charges backed by a tank or tanks (stupa and Panther in particular).

It does rely on map, sure and maps with high MP income and low ammo income favours emplacment spam but also powerfull multipurpose units like Panthers which then can be thrown out in decent numbers.

Wake
Posts: 304
Joined: 07 Dec 2014, 17:22
Location: USA

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Wake » 27 Jan 2016, 03:03

Well, here's the prices of the units involved:

Grenadiers - 400 MP + 50 muni for 2 StGs (get 2 for free after 4 CP upgrade)
Panther G - 850/150 fuel (requires 75 fuel upgraded production) + 75 muni for gunsight periscope
Walking Stuka - 400 MP/50 fuel + 115 (!) munition to fire (125 muni for incendiary rockets)

To me, it seems that the Panther and Stuka have justified costs. It takes an incredible amount of fuel (455 minimum) to build the first Panther, and the stuka is extremely expensive to shoot, and just building one delays the production of the Panther as well.

Grenadiers, however, I believe are underpriced in this scenario. Maybe bring their cost back to 430 or 450 MP like they were in previous patches (pre-StG upgrade)?

There really is no way to stop the grenadiers once they get a panzershreck and 4 StGs, and vet. Machine guns are just a hilarious waste of resources, as without vet, they can crawl up, even while suppressed, and throw a grenade, or with vet, they can literally just walk up right in front of the MG and use their StGs to kill the enemy. Using infantry against them is just trolling for free veterancy, and if they get panzershrecks, you can't do much with a single tank.

Fireflies and camouflaged 17 pounders usually do pretty well against the Panther, though.
Image

User avatar
Butterkeks
Posts: 492
Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 17:42
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Butterkeks » 27 Jan 2016, 14:08

MarKr wrote:Well yeah but in a sense Axis docs in general are more all-rounders (all have relatively good infantry, vehicles and some late-game unit to take out tanks) while Allied docs are more centred around one tactic. But that is also an aspect of BK that was intended by original devs and we would like to keep it in the game.


Well partly afaik. Terror was actually prepared to get a total overmake, making it to Axis "inf doc", but the idea died when Ruhpottpatriot left.

Imo the problem is the following:

Insanely strong inf + excellent arty + most powerfull Axis tanks in one single doc.

Get rid of one and the problem may solve itself. Atm it is simply way to effective to play double or triple terror doc as it is actually not possible to counter.
Even with the costs per stuka barrage it's no problem as there are in theory 6 stukas available in a 3v3. So even if every player would only get one Stuka there would be still 3 ones that can easily be used as every player only has to care about one.

So my suggestion would simply be to reduce this allrounder doc by one strong point, I'd favor infantry.
Example:
Panzergrens become "normal" PGrens without free STG upgrade and no flame nades. VT only available for, let's say WH officer (or whatever unit, as long as it is not PGrens).

You can see it at Blitz doc, WHs other Allrounder doc:
Imo best infantry in game, strong tanks (Tiger, Pz IV H), medium arty. Maultier is good arty and capable of killing defensiv positions to gain a point for the breach. But it definitely is not the best arty in game.
So Blitz has good inf and good tanks but hasn't that good arty so it's still counterable.

Getting rid of stuka in Terror doc would simply make it to BLitz doc 2.0.
Getting rid of tanks would resolve in the problem where to put them. Maybe back to TH doc, I really liked how Cyber played it back then when Panther G and KT were still in TH doc.
Getting rid of Elite PGrens would make it a strong artillery and tanks doc that lacks a bit infantry. PGrens would still be capable of fighting US and CW inf, but is still defeatable by Allied elite inf. It would simply force Axis to use their inf more wisely and not just in stupid rush and hold tactics.

Regarding Panther G:
I'm ok with Panther G's armor, main gun and MG42. I simply hate it's view as it makes it impossible to ambush it. SO please reduce the gun sight to standard or maybe a bit more than standard and you'll never hear a complaint from me any more.

Regarding Sniper spam:
I don't think a Sniper limit is the solution. CW and PE for example have way less snipers. The problem is that it's at the moment simply the "best" to go for triple Terror/inf.
If player would choose CW or PE more often it would also reduce the amount if snipers int he game.

Regarding double/triple inf:
Imo it simply got necessary because of the double/triple Terror spam. Inf doc lacks late game power as they have a hard time countering Axis heavies. So at the moment you either win at early/mid game vs axis or you have no chance at all because you lack late game powers.
So get rid of the need to kill axis players in early/mid game and people will also choose to play late game docs (like armor doc) again.


So to conclude my suggestions:

Either get rid of Nazi Super Mutant PGrens in Terror Doc and transform them to "Normal PGrens"

OR

get rid of Panther G and KT in Terror Doc and transfer them to TH doc. -> More people playing PE TH, less Sniper spam, no Stuka and Panther Rush from single players anymore + no OP inf in the same doc.

Looking forward to read you comments on this suggestion, from my point of view that could fix a lot of issues.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3519
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jan 2016, 15:39

Wake wrote:Well, here's the prices of the units involved:

Grenadiers - 400 MP + 50 muni for 2 StGs (get 2 for free after 4 CP upgrade)
Panther G - 850/150 fuel (requires 75 fuel upgraded production) + 75 muni for gunsight periscope
Walking Stuka - 400 MP/50 fuel + 115 (!) munition to fire (125 muni for incendiary rockets)

To me, it seems that the Panther and Stuka have justified costs. It takes an incredible amount of fuel (455 minimum) to build the first Panther, and the stuka is extremely expensive to shoot, and just building one delays the production of the Panther as well.

Grenadiers, however, I believe are underpriced in this scenario. Maybe bring their cost back to 430 or 450 MP like they were in previous patches (pre-StG upgrade)?

There really is no way to stop the grenadiers once they get a panzershreck and 4 StGs, and vet. Machine guns are just a hilarious waste of resources, as without vet, they can crawl up, even while suppressed, and throw a grenade, or with vet, they can literally just walk up right in front of the MG and use their StGs to kill the enemy. Using infantry against them is just trolling for free veterancy, and if they get panzershrecks, you can't do much with a single tank.

Fireflies and camouflaged 17 pounders usually do pretty well against the Panther, though.



Increase the gren squad isnt that cool. Their performence and stats would "easily" justify that (450/38) but then storms would be what? Too cheap as they also cost not more.

Also the more expensive you make a (inf) unit to build the more rambo behaviour shows up and "must" happen coz the possible support becomes less.
It would really be a huge thing already if the squad would not have (almost) stormtrooper stats and even a better lmg as those. In case of def doc defensive upgrade the grens might be even superior in terms of survivability and suppression reistance (which is almost reduced to 0).

The main mistakes of WH grens atm:
1. They get stgs in all docs. I think it should be more a terror special.
2. They use "K98_elite" which is the same as Stormtrooper have. Since there are three k98 types (VG, normal and elite) i do belive that they got mistakenly the elite k98 stats but not sure though. Thing is they once had high cost (450/38) and had to fight only with K98 and single lmg42 which was probably the reason for these rifle stats. But they got cheaper and new abilties and weapons.
3. They are afterall cheaper as other inferior units.


So firstly we have to look what their actual role is in each doctrine. But i wanna point out that their purpose is not to be elites or superior to elites and rather a real standard unit that belongs to the "upper league" of standard soldiers.

Gren Suggestion General:
1. Down their K98 stats from Stormtrooper performence to normal Gren performence. That means their K98 would be as good as those of PEgrens which actually all consider as powerfull ranged unit.
2. Certain weapon upgrades doctrinal
3. Reduce build cost to 380 MP, keep reinforce cost at 35 or up it to 36.
(4. Reduce HP from 80 to 75 per men. CW inf has 70, rangers 75. Rangers has slightly better infantry type therefore lower damageoutput atm. But 80 HP is simply elite so far).


Grens roles in each doctrine:
Def doc:


1. They should hold the line at first. And thats something that is already possible with volksgrens with lmgs and that defensive upgrade (which greatly reduces taken damage, received accuracy and suppression when unit has light or heavy cover).

Possible Upgrades:
1. Schreck
2. LMG42 (maybe we could allow them to have two of them to underline its rather defensive role in that doc but not sure if it wouldnt be too op though).

Terror:
1. Assault force and core inf for all roles.

Possible Upgrades:
1. Schreck
2. LMG42
3. STG (only after upgrade?)
(maybe also MP 40 instead stg as upgrades but still receiving two stgs after that terror upgrade for free)


BK doc:

1. Supporting roles (backign storms, cover tanks)

Possible Upgrades:
1. Schreck
2. LMG42
3. MP40



That way they would, at least in damageouput of rifles, become more normal standard infantry. In Terror they would remain strong actually.

User avatar
Butterkeks
Posts: 492
Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 17:42
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Butterkeks » 27 Jan 2016, 16:16

Warhawks97 wrote:That way they would, at least in damageouput of rifles, become more normal standard infantry. In Terror they would remain strong actually.


Well I wouldn't mind different roles for PGrens in different docs. But your last sentence is where I see the problem.

They would remain strong in Terror doc. So the problem of triple/double terror doc is not solved.

Don't get me wrong! I like your idea, but this topic is about undefeatable Terror doc, so please let's focus on this point.
Although I'd suggest your ideas of changing their inf type, Kar98 type and HP and also maybe some weapon changes so terror doc would get rid of this Elite unit (refers to my suggestion to eliminate one strong point of Terror doc).

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1662
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby kwok » 27 Jan 2016, 16:24

Hehehe

I chuckled at cyber's code. It's even funnier because his name is cyber. NEEEERRRD.
Just kidding I love it.

User avatar
Cyberzombie
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 01:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Cyberzombie » 27 Jan 2016, 17:40

To me, it seems that the Panther and Stuka have justified costs. It takes an incredible amount of fuel (455 minimum) to build the first Panther, and the stuka is extremely expensive to shoot, and just building one delays the production of the Panther as well.

You are right, it's expensive to get the first Panther but after you have reached that stage you can most of the time build one after another while keeping with the existing Panther(s) the enemy on distance until you got enough of them.
Regarding stuka, you need to invest your ressources once because this unit hardly ever gets killed since it shoot and simply drives away (unless facing high vet priest or just by beeing careless).

Grenadiers, however, I believe are underpriced in this scenario. Maybe bring their cost back to 430 or 450 MP like they were in previous patches (pre-StG upgrade)?

Sturmgrenadiers from PE cost 435 and are worse - don't get me wrong they are a very deadly unit. So I think a little price increase either bei build costs or by reinforment costs (I favor this one) is justified.

There really is no way to stop the grenadiers once they get a panzershreck and 4 StGs, and vet. Machine guns are just a hilarious waste of resources, as without vet, they can crawl up, even while suppressed, and throw a grenade, or with vet, they can literally just walk up right in front of the MG and use their StGs to kill the enemy. Using infantry against them is just trolling for free veterancy, and if they get panzershrecks, you can't do much with a single tank.

Exactly. At the beginning you can stop them but with each brainless attack they will get some XP and vet up and then it get's harder everytime unless you are lucky and kill a whole squad. With US you can stop them by spamming HE-Shermans but then you just have to face 2 additional AT-Teams. As brit, well, not so easy. MGs are useless at one point, crusaders get wrecked, inf gets shred.

Fireflies and camouflaged 17 pounders usually do pretty well against the Panther, though.

If you manage to camouflage one since the enemy sees half of the map with his panthers and will send either some rockets or some grens + schreck-teams.
But otherwise you are right.

Either get rid of Nazi Super Mutant PGrens in Terror Doc and transform them to "Normal PGrens"

OR

get rid of Panther G and KT in Terror Doc and transfer them to TH doc. -> More people playing PE TH, less Sniper spam, no Stuka and Panther Rush from single players anymore + no OP inf in the same doc.

I totally support the first suggestion since those Grens are supposed to be standard unit and no elites. They still can be strong once vetted but you have to be carefull to keep them alive.
But I disagree with the second. Firstly I like the Panther G and KT in terror doc. Secondly it was said multiple times that there will be no such changes beeing made to TH doc.
Better nerf the Panther G. And before you guys start raging about that suggestion, continue reading.

About Panthers:
They all have the exact same gun, only difference are dound in the armor.
Ausführung A
Armor: Turret front 110 mm (@78°)
Lower hull: 60 mm (@35°)
Side: 40 mm

Ausführung D
Armor: Turret front 80mm (@78°)
Lower hull: 60 mm (@35°)
Side: 40 mm

Ausführung G
Armor: Turret front 100 mm (@80°)
Lower hull: 50 mm (@35°)
Side: 50 mm

The rest of the armor is one eacht version the same.
So you can see that the Panther G has a bit better turret armor and side armor and that's it. In game it feels like Panther D < Panther D < Panther G.
But why? Add to that the optics upgrade which increases the sight enornomous. So you got an tank/inf raping extremely mobile and well armored scout.... Pls consider removing or changing that upgrade! There is no need for scouts once you have Pantehr Gs and that shouldn't be the case.

The main mistakes of WH grens atm:
1. They get stgs in all docs. I think it should be more a terror special.
2. They use "K98_elite" which is the same as Stormtrooper have. Since there are three k98 types (VG, normal and elite) i do belive that they got mistakenly the elite k98 stats but not sure though. Thing is they once had high cost (450/38) and had to fight only with K98 and single lmg42 which was probably the reason for these rifle stats. But they got cheaper and new abilties and weapons.
3. They are afterall cheaper as other inferior units.


So firstly we have to look what their actual role is in each doctrine. But i wanna point out that their purpose is not to be elites or superior to elites and rather a real standard unit that belongs to the "upper league" of standard soldiers.

Gren Suggestion General:
1. Down their K98 stats from Stormtrooper performence to normal Gren performence. That means their K98 would be as good as those of PEgrens which actually all consider as powerfull ranged unit.
2. Certain weapon upgrades doctrinal
3. Reduce build cost to 380 MP, keep reinforce cost at 35 or up it to 36.
(4. Reduce HP from 80 to 75 per men. CW inf has 70, rangers 75. Rangers has slightly better infantry type therefore lower damageoutput atm. But 80 HP is simply elite so far).


Grens roles in each doctrine:
Def doc:

1. They should hold the line at first. And thats something that is already possible with volksgrens with lmgs and that defensive upgrade (which greatly reduces taken damage, received accuracy and suppression when unit has light or heavy cover).

Possible Upgrades:
1. Schreck
2. LMG42 (maybe we could allow them to have two of them to underline its rather defensive role in that doc but not sure if it wouldnt be too op though).

Terror:
1. Assault force and core inf for all roles.

Possible Upgrades:
1. Schreck
2. LMG42
3. STG (only after upgrade?)
(maybe also MP 40 instead stg as upgrades but still receiving two stgs after that terror upgrade for free)


BK doc:

1. Supporting roles (backign storms, cover tanks)

Possible Upgrades:
1. Schreck
2. LMG42
3. MP40



That way they would, at least in damageouput of rifles, become more normal standard infantry. In Terror they would remain strong actually.

I like those suggestions but I'm not sure if they are enough.

he problem imo is that the Panther G performs too good. And that's why each and every Terror player simply waits for this unit since he knows how powerfull it is. Of course you can argument that it can be oneshoted and you know what, the Terror player knows that too and that's why those Panthers are only used to keep the enemy at distance and have a mobile scout in order to bomb everything until he has an army of Panther Gs. If those Panthers wouldn't be the game decider this tatcic wouldn't work at all. So pls nerf the sight range of this unit.
With this huge sight it's almost impossible to ambush one Panther and without ambushing it's slmost impossible to destroy it (bombers can be dogded or shot down and and arty can be dodged too unless it's an high vetted priest shooting).

Hehehe

I chuckled at cyber's code. It's even funnier because his name is cyber. NEEEERRRD.
Just kidding I love it.

Glad you like it ;)

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 857
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 27 Jan 2016, 18:41

Big sight is the only thing which makes Panther G special, nerf it and we will get 2 similar units in different docs, first removing kch, now this, deindividualization of docs sucks.

Regarding Grens I agree, and actually I was the very first one who mentioned their "aka elite" perfomance but for the basic price right after patch have been released.

I liked keks idea about panther and it would be awesome to see Panther G in TH doc. But than the whole concept of axis docs shall be shifted what is not welcomed by devs at all.

Finally, generally, I wouldn't implement any nerfs for axis right now, especially for BK and Terror, since they are absolutely must have and core docs in every game, simply because PE sucks and def doc is narrow specialized. At least they shall not be touched untill PE wont be pulled out of a butthole. The whole axis power is too concentrated on this docs, Alies currently have more "smooth" strength distribution among the docs, Inf, Raf, Tanks, CW arty are played equaly often, even Sappers apears from time to time, only AB is offski and rare, because doc have always required decent skills and concentration in order to be played effectivly, but was nerfed only because of come crying jerks on forum and now almost never appears in pvp. For axis TH and Luft docs are outsiders because they have very limited options of taking out emplacements and very expensive units with low cost\efficiency ratio, why should someone play luft when grens and storms are better and cheaper? Why should someone play TH with bunch of boring and useless tankbusters (useless not because they suck, but because other axis docs are able to stop alied armor by themselfs, there is simply no need in so highly spezialized doc) where pz4 costs 80 fuel when in BK it costs 45. Def doc is also outsider but thats so more likely because its style is too passive and not appreciated by players.

So, let's wait for the upcoming patch and see how things will go.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3519
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jan 2016, 20:45

So far BK and Terror is the core of Axis gameplay as sukin already pointed out. So idk how these nerfs would end. And PE needs some adjustments. Th doc doesnt lack options, generally PE has many but the insane cost of all (or most units, eg Luftpios) greatly reduces the possibility to get them all. As TH doc you have decent stuff that works if combined. Double hotch kills all emplacments very well (Th doc is one of my fav mid game axis arty docs), Tank IV take on vehicles, tanks etc and having commander/vet/Zimmerit and AT squads with double schreck take on units that can beat Tank IV (Jumbo, persh, jacks). This inf can also clean any tank ambush as TH inf can see alll hidden vehicles on minimap that prevents you from rushing into them with. And as inf you have the decent grens.

But the cost do limit the versatility in realistic time. When you just got stuff to do one thing you lost another unit for which you have to wait again several mins and finally you never come to an attack.

So a PE buff would already be if we would really test the 5 men starting squad size combined with greatly dropped inf build cost for affected units. Also Luft pio cost drops (and producable for cheap cost) would also help a lot.


But thing is that we removed elite inf from terror doc (KCH) in order to replace them by Standard Infantry. But it feels more that we removed two expensive elites and replaced them by many, much cheaper but not much less powerfull new elites (Grens) which also seem to be more versatile. And this is the mistake actually. And as we all belived the Grens are standard inf that was never used it finally turned out that they had been elites actually, just not "elite enough for axis WH".

So pls, Terror has elite armor, elite assault arty and nice infantry abilties+ off map support. So the grens should really become more standard. Means HP to 75 per men and K98 to PE Pgren level.

The STGs only for terror doc and coming with unlock first so that it is a kind of "standard inf buff".

Also an option would be to remove the schrecks from them except from def doc grens. But then we would also have to remove zooks from standard rangers except from those of inf doc. And here we end again: One possible option to solve the "plain gren spam" doing hit and runs with stgs and schrecks by removing schrecks from all but def doc grens would reopen the discussion about rangers as it is unfair to nerf grens that hard while keeping ranger with zooks non-doctrinal.
But that would be one of the best solutions which at least would force the player to combine infantry rushes with dedicated AT stuff (which isnt a prob as soon as Panthers hit the field).


The Panther G issue:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=966

But i would like to see Gunsight upgrade on Panther A as well. Maybe it could have skirts at default or remove one of the round types (HE, AP).




So finally to get it on a point:

1. Grens rifle stats being not anymore stormtrooper stats and instead comparable to PE Pgrens.
2. Lower HP from 80 to 75 MP
3. Reduce build cost from 400 to 385 MP. Reinforce cost 35/36
4. Available after HQ upgrade. Second building not necessary.
5. Weapon upgrades doctrinal:
- Def doc: Schreck, LMG and maybe even MP40. Schrecks becoming available after def doc inf defensive boost.
- BK doc: Lmg 42 and MP40. Anti tank is available enough with storms, Tank IV´s (and buffed stug III due to standardisation of L/48 guns), Panthers etc.
- Terror doc: LMG42 and STG´s after unlock. Also MP40´s
6. Panther G: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=966 (same link as above).


Along with these changes to keep it fair: Zooks on rangers only after choosing inf doc. Or available when infantry defensive upgrade is up (the second of first unlock line that enables Rifle squads to build defenses) or after ranger vet upgrade.


So at the end we might have also solved the "endless schrecks (and zooks)" that schred all tanks. Especially stuff like "The 1% HP panther escaped into a wall of schrecks which then have shred all the purchasing shermans and TD´s which in my opinion is often one of the most frustrating shit when elite tanks quickly escape into schreck formations that then turn entire tank armies into dust withing few seconds.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jan 2016, 20:56, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Butterkeks
Posts: 492
Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 17:42
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Butterkeks » 27 Jan 2016, 20:54

And how do these changes make players choose other docs than Terror?

In your suggestiom Terror still has the best PGrens, which makes it still an elite inf, armor and tank doc.

Removing zooka from Rangers? No thanks. Zooka is still crap and needed to counter Puma.

Gunsight for Panther A too? Great, now it is impossible to kill that one too.


Idk man. Your suggestions just seem to make it worse :D
Would be cool if devs could comment on this topic ;)

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3519
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jan 2016, 21:08

Butterkeks wrote:And how do these changes make players choose other docs than Terror?

In your suggestiom Terror still has the best PGrens, which makes it still an elite inf, armor and tank doc.

Removing zooka from Rangers? No thanks. Zooka is still crap and needed to counter Puma.

Gunsight for Panther A too? Great, now it is impossible to kill that one too.


Idk man. Your suggestions just seem to make it worse :D
Would be cool if devs could comment on this topic ;)



Well, the gunisghts would be adjusted. So Panther G would greatly lose sight while others would get more but gunsight would keep worth the cost for sure. Also that crazy accuracy buff wouldnt exist anymore and instead a more "balanced" one.

@Sukin: If you get scared now all Panthers would simply be "same" when doing such gunsight adjustments i just can say: The reality offers enough differences between these three versions ;) (Panther D is fastest, A as it seems best armor, G cheapest but not worse than A actually)

Also keep in mind that Grens would have less HP, nerfed rifle stats and STG´s first after 4 CP´s. Also the Panther G wouldnt be able to retreat back behind a wall of grens that shred all tanks with schrecks. Means you can steamrole them then easier with tanks. So even a standard inf doc sherman would force the player to get more different units that just grens.

Why would players would then choose dif docs?

If Pure gren spam with STG/schreck wouldnt be so easy when choosing tripple doc due to less AT power more would go for BK doc to have Tank IV as anti tank power. MP would be necessarily invested into Stugs as offensive (and defensive AT).

People would go Def doc to have grens with schrecks and so on.


Also where do you use rangers with one zook vs Puma. I mean go inf and you would have zooks afterall. But generally i barely see 1 ranger squad as ultimate and only way to counter puma. I am getting additional AT guns, greyhound etc. I am usually going for motorpool first anyway so that i get 57 mm HT, greyhound, AT squad etc.
So i doubt that impact would be too large.

@Markr: This! :D Thats what i meant and thats what i "expected to happen" if....:P
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jan 2016, 21:10, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cyberzombie
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 01:45
Location: Germany

Re: Terror doctrine

Postby Cyberzombie » 27 Jan 2016, 21:08

And how do these changes make players choose other docs than Terror?

In your suggestiom Terror still has the best PGrens, which makes it still an elite inf, armor and tank doc.

Removing zooka from Rangers? No thanks. Zooka is still crap and needed to counter Puma.

Gunsight for Panther A too? Great, now it is impossible to kill that one too.

Well regarding Warhawks suggested changes they would become a bit more exoensive on reinforcing and as far as I understood it they become a bit weaker. That could be enough to stop them.
About rangers I'm not sure too since you are right and they are only good for killing light vehicles and medium tanks (except in inf doc with bazooka upgrade).
Regarding gunsight, Pnther A and G had the same gunsight so it would even make sense. But I only agree if it is implemented like it is suggested in this topic ([url]viewtopic.php?f=15&t=966[/url]).

Edit: Warhawks was faster^^


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests