Quick example of why i think not every doctrine should have arty

[sgtToni95]

Just had a game which i played quite decently, tho got fucked by rockets (nebel had i think more than 40 inf kills) while all other units were pretty much doing nothing. I picked my doc quite late, only when my mate was locked in his base and i locked my direct opponent in his own, while maybe unlocking airstrikes little earlier could have saved his side. I thought many times of building 95 mm cromwell, even just to counter that nebel and maultier, but i'm just trying to get used to what RAF will (hopefully together with other docs) be.

What i found most annoying is i watched the replay from classic's prospective, thinking he had some spotter next to my bases since he constantly used rockets, but funny fact he didn't. He was just using arty where my units might have been, or every time i attacked, just because it was easy (i guess). I don't think this can be really considered "strategy", unless the strategy is "random rockets where i feel like doing it", this i just brainless bombing (I really mean no offense to Classic). I'm not pointing at nebel in particular, but at all kind of artys in non arty doctrines.

Allies: Me - RAF, Bad Rain - RE
Axis: Nugi - BK, Classic - Luft

temp.rec

(2.07 MiB) Downloaded 71 times

[Warhawks97]

I didnt watch the replay. But i know what you mean.

I don't think this can be really considered "strategy", unless the strategy is "random rockets where i feel like doing it", this i just brainless bombing (I really mean no offense to Classic). I'm not pointing at nebel in particular, but at all kind of artys in non arty doctrines.

After like 20-30 mins of playing without one side winning there have always been a tremendous ammount of rockets coming over to say hello. It was largely frustrating in so far that everything got interrupted. A huge ammount often hit nothing but the pure masses made it not necessary to check out where to shoot at. And when every unit just gets constantly damaged you will never get into a (planned) assault or not in full strenght.

Can you just say which map you played? Maps like Autry, road to cherbough or la fiere and esspecially Wolfheze ended up that way very often.
During the last games i choosed to play on larger maps (kwoks idea) and that worked out better. But still, in a 3 vs 3 on maps like goodwood the ammount of arty could become large as well.

Maybe look for maps with less easy ammunition access.

[Kr0noZ]

The funny thing to me was that the 1st Nebel hit the field at around 13 minutes, which isn't as fast as possible but still relatively early; I thought the Wehr player had gone Terror to play around the upgraded grenadiers and the nebelwerfer victor target - only later did i realize that the Wehr player actually went BK and got a Maultier, and the nebel was the Luftwaffe player's unit... wtf^^
That guy played "not-Wehrmacht-but-still-Wehrmacht" with Panzergrens instead of Fallschirmjäger, Nebel instead of airstrikes and Panthers... that's not what the doctrine is about -.-
Also, ammo income was pretty equal and aristrikes would have been more expensive and therefore less frequent (also, cooldowns are longer), so if you can get a nebel to do whatever you want then why should you ever use your doctrine abilities. Something definitely isn't right here.
I think the nebel in Luftwaffe is at least odd, if not outright misplaced, and that seems to be a common theme in most doctrines; almost all docs have some unit that doesn't fit the bill but is better than something doctrine specific (95mm cromwell is more versatile than airstrikes most of the time, nebel beats airstrikes as well and i think we could expand that list quite a bit...).

[kwok]

Also. Play bigger maps.

[idliketoplaybetter]

To me its less about "map size".

Most of players would do the same thing on preety much any map.They pick most narrow map for their "playstyles" cause they know what it's all about, and if u coudlnt finish game in first 30minutes, then game gets to phase, when all looks like Tower defence.

Its not only arty, or only maps when u can sit back and do same shit.Its as (i believe Redgaarden said here on forum somewhere), BKmod offers a lot benefits for player IN DEFENCE, and everyone can experience that easily so for abuse it.., which is a lot easier, when u 1strat-fastarty-moreammo, and most important - time and patience.

*and i believe u cant escape and fix this anyhow.Vcoh, for instance, used to cure this with some hardcore price/concept changes, every time after revealing the abuse source.And that was hard to do, even with that amount of units and Doc Tree choices.

Here bkmod simply has no chance to shake off parasites like this in a "onesimplesolutionway".
Change of something like ATboys caused THATMANYWORDS already, and that is just a rain drop, out of huge cloud of upcoming change(nope)

**and that is ofcourse "my humble opinion and im cool with any changes or no changes at all" (c)

[DolphinsAreGaySharks]

Well, this noob duo of classic nugiman can only play specific few maps abusing things the game lets them.
I recently had a game against them on high Valley (which became a too famous map and I can't seem to understand why..new duclair confirmed?) where one of them chose the RE doc just to spam the 10 secs build emplacements..
I mean yeah we all want to win but this way is frustrating,almost uncounterable and needs no skill at all.
Finally, a disclaimer to the moders and some other players :
Don't try to give a proper explanation to every complain we re pointing out, like you could have made a mortar Dolphins and destroy the emplacements ( you said this on another topic where I think Lehr has mentioned it about RE abusers.) cause it s ridiculous the least. Have you actually ever been into such situations in games cause I have a very long time seeing any of you in game and you re giving solutions the safe way..
When we re making a complain about something believe me we know what we re talking about and have high experience on game. We re not mentioning them just to cry..
To the point of the topic, I agree with Toni. Not every doc has to have arty! Isn't it obvious??

[JimQwilleran]

Don't you think that taking away that small arty unit from all docs beside arty docs would make game incredibly campy? For now no matter who you are facing you know that if you started to camp shamelessly, you would be countered by at least nebel/95mm. If you take them away game will become much more campy and every side would be forced to pick at least one arty doc. That's opposite of what everybody wants, right?

[idliketoplaybetter]

What is with REdoc though???

That exact time, it was obvious wrong doctrine pick on Axis side.Both BKdoc and TankHunter are useless against it, and fact they couldnt break through, doesnt necessary mean, that REdoc is OP (!!!!!!!!!!)

[DolphinsAreGaySharks]

What is with REdoc though???

That exact time, it was obvious wrong doctrine pick on Axis side.Both BKdoc and TankHunter are useless against it, and fact they couldnt break through, doesnt necessary mean, that REdoc is OP (!!!!!!!!!!)

I dont think we re talking about the same game.. The game i mentioned for example was yesterday and i had Nessi as a teamate.

[idliketoplaybetter]

The game i mentioned for example was yesterday and i had Nessi as a teamate.

Well, u mentioned Lehr and his complain on something related to RE, which was posted some time ago on forum.And there was the exact same claim u made.And i still see no problem with REdoc in any way..

If u have that game with Nessi saved, better post it, and try to put out the problem, instead of saying, that someone cant see something obvious u could notice about balance, cause normally its exactly opposite.(although i dont exclude there might be a problem of any kind dude

[Devilfish]

It is simply given by the realistic nature of BK mod. Realistic damage, big ranges. Heavy cover is super effective and so many units can build sandbags/trenches out of thin air. Invisible AT guns with even bigger range and great agility (no setup and preparation time). So obviously defense will always be an huge advantage and without any sort of indirect fire, almost impossible to break if someone goes really defensive.

In my opinion if you just leave all arty to only arty docs, then it will become mandatory in every game, because players will def even more than now otherwise. Yes, arty abuse against non-defensive opponents is really nasty and cheesy, but I don't think there is any reasonable solution. Heck, players even go for arty docs and bomb the shit out of you even if you don't show any defensive signs at all. So whatever.

Ye I know, the solution is 1v1 on 4v4 map, but seriously, who wants that.....

[Warhawks97]

Don't you think that taking away that small arty unit from all docs beside arty docs would make game incredibly campy? For now no matter who you are facing you know that if you started to camp shamelessly, you would be countered by at least nebel/95mm. If you take them away game will become much more campy and every side would be forced to pick at least one arty doc. That's opposite of what everybody wants, right?

I dont know if you can remember that times. But that was one of the many reasons that pissed me off forever. Back then i was a voter against restrictions on Arty like the limit of units as it was often easy to outspam the enemies with defenses faster as his two arty units could destroy them (esspecially when it came to bunkers and 88 when they got also repaired much faster as they took damage, thus making literally every doc except arty doc useless). Stepping forward with defenses and arty step by step. I called it offensive camping. Others here recently found similiar words.

There we had discussions like giving armor doc a single 105 sherman (and or second calli back) to give at least a little options (as there is no really usefull inf or anything else).

But the result was that we had to go for a arty teammate when expecting such games (of which like 90% of the games had been like, thus arty doc was a must have).

But it was decided not to give more (or at least more smaller arty types) to any doc. RAF was a huge exception.


But besides removing arty from certain other docs (which would have been a good way to achive the ultimate goal of reducing total artillery usage) we just left a few with a lot of arty, others with average and others with no real arty (absolutely depending on arty mates when arty is necessary).


Increasing the ammount of light and medium army in all docs would have reduced the usage of heavy artillery doctrines. That was an option. But not liked. So it was decided to reduce it. Just we reduced it only selectively.

What is with REdoc though???

That exact time, it was obvious wrong doctrine pick on Axis side.Both BKdoc and TankHunter are useless against it, and fact they couldnt break through, doesnt necessary mean, that REdoc is OP (!!!!!!!!!!)

So at the end we have to face this question (again). Should every doctrine be able to deal with any other doctrine, just with different efficiency?And should camping be always be punished? Which would mean that ammount of arty in most docs is equal to each other. Thus players who just sit there and camp will ultimately lose. Or is shall it be acceptable that camping is allowed to be an easy win if the enemie fails to pick the right doc? e.g Amor vs def doc is probably the best example currently.

(btw, BK but also terror can go through RE easily.... sturmtiger, walking stuka, stuh, stormtroopers.....)

So this is a fundamental question here. What gameplay is "allowed" to win.

Remove arty on both sides equally and both would have to make risky attacks. But it might end up in a ww1 scenario and a game that nobody can win at the end.

Or at least a minimum arty to all docs which then would have been able to make the one or the other strike to break a whole in the defenses of the opponent. But cooldowns etc large enough to prevent nonstop abuses.



The doctrine question is also back. Kronoz pointed it out quite well.

It is simply given by the realistic nature of BK mod. Realistic damage, big ranges. Heavy cover is super effective and so many units can build sandbags/trenches out of thin air. Invisible AT guns with even bigger range and great agility (no setup and preparation time). So obviously defense will always be an huge advantage and without any sort of indirect fire, almost impossible to break if someone goes really defensive.

True. But defenses can be adjusted.

1.AT gun ranges for example dont have to be so far superior to tank gun ranges. Like giving them a slight advantage only. They also dont have to be able to take several hits from tanks and hendheld AT weapons.
2. Emplacments can be more expansive as mobile units. Why for example is it cheaper to build an emplacment with MG inside and three men as to build a normal MG? Shouldnt it be the other way arround? And You need pios/engis first but you get them from start.
3. Sandbag can cost MP, like Tank traps
4. MG42 doesnt need to have accuracy bonus against suppressed infantry.... its a 25% accuracy boost vs suppressed units thus making it a "place and relax" weapon
5. Arty damage against tanks can be reduced. In this case allied tanks taking considerable more damage from arty as axis opponents (a tank Iv takes way less damage from arty as a sherman).
6. Bunkers are really not a necessary building in the BK mod.... Basic emplacments are powerfull enough after upgrades.

7. Super range direct fire units (stuh, stupa) can be reworked....Instead of pure gun range they can have supportive abilties like smoke, suppressive fire etc etc.

and so on

In my opinion if you just leave all arty to only arty docs, then it will become mandatory in every game, because players will def even more than now otherwise. Yes, arty abuse against non-defensive opponents is really nasty and cheesy, but I don't think there is any reasonable solution. Heck, players even go for arty docs and bomb the shit out of you even if you don't show any defensive signs at all. So whatever.

Ye I know, the solution is 1v1 on 4v4 map, but seriously, who wants that.....

1. We can increase cooldown for arty.... Rocket arty can for example take long to reload. It fires a "magazin" but it would take a while to reload them again. That could reduce the "rocket arty nonstop everywhere" issue. Damage against emplacment might get raised. Why shooting emplacments that wont die when i can kill all the soft targets (including tanks) easily.

2. Less buildable arty and more "precious arty on target". Those would have some cost and cooldown but breaking the targeted defensive fortifications for sure. I like it for example how the US armor doc has it for its tank commander. Sadly its often a suicide mission to do that due to activation range. Many spotters will also lose their lifes first.

3. Howitzer arty will only fire by VT abilties. Those can be used by certain commanding units (Inf commanders but also tank commanders). Inf captain uses howitzer, Tank doc tank commander in a sherman activates the 105 shermans and so on.

4. Rocket arty can be shorter ranged (would also be more realistic, they were fired from closer ranges before an assault taking place... shooting with a range of howitzers with more or less same accuracy and scatter is just silly. That way users would be forced to risk them as they have to get them closer to the front.

5. Point 3 and 4 combined.... howitzers fire with VT, rocket is a more short ranged cluster weapon that is used right in front of an attack (or at the same time). They would then also need quite a while to reload.

And more options are possible. I have created a private Bk mod for private usage and testing. There i divided the arty. One for taking out defenses and stuff from afar. Those are placed in more arty focused doctrines (def, SE, RA, inf). The other type is supportive. Those are close ranged and sticking behind the assault forces (or supposed to). To that all types of rocket arty belongs to it. But also the 105 sherman. The range is approx 100. Tank gun range as comparision are usually 60, AT guns 75.


So its not that we are all out of options.

[sgtToni95]

Apart from 88s, i honestly don't think other emplacements, on both sides, are so impossible to take out without the use of arty, and maybe smoke will be considered a little more, since i almost never seen it used, expecially from axis side.

I believe a 2v2 or bigger scenario is enough for both factions to have something to deal with everything the enemy will throw at them, and not only arty doctrines are so effective to take out emplacements (BK doc has so so many other tools imo, RAF, AB and inf have demos/satchels, stuka patrol and nade volley in Luft too).

I even hope that, if this ever happens, a player would consider using the ammo he won't spend for arty on all those abilities from tech tree and command units nobody ever uses. Quick example: I was amazed to see Kwok ( yeah it's always him ) taking out HE shermans with no effort using infantry buffed with timed ability from the tech tree instead of spamming panthers or using stuka non-stop, and I'm quite confident to guess that ability could work on emplacements too.

About that RE game they keep talking, i think JT was doing even too good against all those emplacements: let's be honest, without airstrikes (which BK player had the counter for), that would have not been stopped, and all RE doc emplacements and tanks would have been totally useless. This is to show how even a non arty doctrine had a great counter for everything.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

Don't you think that taking away that small arty unit from all docs beside arty docs would make game incredibly campy? For now no matter who you are facing you know that if you started to camp shamelessly, you would be countered by at least nebel/95mm. If you take them away game will become much more campy and every side would be forced to pick at least one arty doc. That's opposite of what everybody wants, right?

Exactly, that's what I always have been talking about, small arty piece in each doc = less heavy arty docs which are the reason of the real arty parties.

[kwok]

But isn't that what mortars are? Small arty in each doc?

[Redgaarden]

Apart from 88s, i honestly don't think other emplacements, on both sides, are so impossible to take out without the use of arty, and maybe smoke will be considered a little more, since i almost never seen it used, expecially from axis side.

There is a great reason why you dont see smoke that often. It's just not that effective, HE rounds dont get affected by smoke, mg42 and other fast fast firing guns get affected by the smoke but will still kill the infantry reliably.
I did test where I used smoke launcher on sherman + Defensive aura from command car but Tiger still managed to hit 3/3 times (1hit kill every time) And I also have had a situation where I used only defensive aura and Tiger missed every shot it made.

So in conclusion, smoke will only be effective against small arms fire and pretty random and unreliable vs bigger stuff. I do not reccomend smoke for gameplay use.

I believe a 2v2 or bigger scenario is enough for both factions to have something to deal with everything the enemy will throw at them, and not only arty doctrines are so effective to take out emplacements (BK doc has so so many other tools imo, RAF, AB and inf have demos/satchels, stuka patrol and nade volley in Luft too).

Well you could rush 2 stormtroopers in and use 2 bundle nades, only costing 100 muni and all the mp you lost. OR you could use 95mm cromwell and 35 muni to kill the same target. Yes they do have the tools, but you're just putting your squads in extreme danger and killing the emplacements in very cost inefficent ways that have a high chance of failure becasue the guy throwing the nades gets killed or the entire squad for that sake gets killed.

I'm dont think it's wrong neither. There are most defenelty situations where having 2 squads of stromtroopers are more preferable than having an arty piece. I'm just saying the nades cost way too much compared to arty.

I even hope that, if this ever happens, a player would consider using the ammo he won't spend for arty on all those abilities from tech tree and command units nobody ever uses.

If you get bars to your riflemen squad you can't destory panthers. Since nothing inf doc gets that cost fuel and mp can kill a panther, only munitions can kill panthers. Same with airborne.

Sorry for comparing 95mm cromwell with stromtroopers despite being different factions. And sorry only including US for the muni problem

[sgtToni95]

I think the exact points you mention already answer to what you said:

There is a great reason why you dont see smoke that often. It's just not that effective, HE rounds dont get affected by smoke, mg42 and other fast fast firing guns get affected by the smoke but will still kill the infantry reliably.
I did test where I used smoke launcher on sherman + Defensive aura from command car but Tiger still managed to hit 3/3 times (1hit kill every time) And I also have had a situation where I used only defensive aura and Tiger missed every shot it made.

So in conclusion, smoke will only be effective against small arms fire and pretty random and unreliable vs bigger stuff. I do not reccomend smoke for gameplay use.

I don't know about the tanks, but i found smoke to be quite effective many times. Ok HE shots don't get affected, but maybe that could be tuned a little, and mg42 can be sniped and mortared, it's not necessary to rush those.

Well you could rush 2 stormtroopers in and use 2 bundle nades, only costing 100 muni and all the mp you lost. OR you could use 95mm cromwell and 35 muni to kill the same target. Yes they do have the tools, but you're just putting your squads in extreme danger and killing the emplacements in very cost inefficent ways that have a high chance of failure becasue the guy throwing the nades gets killed or the entire squad for that sake gets killed.

I'm dont think it's wrong neither. There are most defenelty situations where having 2 squads of stromtroopers are more preferable than having an arty piece. I'm just saying the nades cost way too much compared to arty.

I even hope that, if this ever happens, a player would consider using the ammo he won't spend for arty on all those abilities from tech tree and command units nobody ever uses.

If you don't spend 100 ammo each time for a maultier salvo i think it would be easier to invest them on nades, and probably one would be enough, then you steal the emplacement and just remove it (can be done even with pios for low mp cost).

If you get bars to your riflemen squad you can't destory panthers. Since nothing inf doc gets that cost fuel and mp can kill a panther, only munitions can kill panthers. Same with airborne.

As i said:

I believe a 2v2 or bigger scenario is enough for both factions to have something to deal with everything the enemy will throw at them, and not only arty doctrines are so effective to take out emplacements (BK doc has so so many other tools imo, RAF, AB and inf have demos/satchels, stuka patrol and nade volley in Luft too).

Here I mean if you expect a panther, you can probably pick Inf combined to armor or any brits with 17p and have a non ammo counter to panthers.

[Redgaarden]

If you don't spend 100 ammo each time for a maultier salvo i think it would be easier to invest them on nades, and probably one would be enough, then you steal the emplacement and just remove it (can be done even with pios for low mp cost).

It sounds good in theory intil you notice in practice that 20mm flak emplacements are untargatable by nades. And or the 17pounder just shoots HE shell and kills 4 of your guys. The safest bet is to decrew them with maultier and then nading it to death afterwards.
And if you're going to recap it with pioneers you might as well use the flamethrower instead of nades.

Sure there are cases where you can do what you said. But not when charging straight at emplacements (Which you're most often forced to do)

I don't know about the tanks, but i found smoke to be quite effective many times. Ok HE shots don't get affected, but maybe that could be tuned a little, and mg42 can be sniped and mortared, it's not necessary to rush those.

There are cases where smoke is useful. But you still often get killed in 1 hit through smoke making smoke a not 100% guarantee for you to do what you planned to do. Caution is adviced when using smoke.

Here I mean if you expect a panther, you can probably pick Inf combined to armor or any brits with 17p and have a non ammo counter to panthers.

And rely more on chance for you to deal with it? My suggestion for you is to throw as much as you can at the panther to ensure its death. No room for shitty anti infantry equipment or expensive nades or whatnot. You need all the firepower you can get.
Do note I only speak on behalf of US inf and am not taking in account other factions. As that I think this is all situational and even if you have satchel charge, artillery is just so much better option.

What are we even disscussing? aren't we getting out of topic atm?