Good example of Armor doc

[Krieger Blitzer]

just had this 3vs3 game today, even though I lost the SP rather quickly.. but we still managed to win.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nWdXtMuqLQ

Video Thumbnail.

Enjoy!

[Warhawks97]

Min 33:13

That kind of unlock. A doc reduced to one unit. Thats what i am talking about.


Thats what i was talking about:

However, due to the current US faction and doctrine design playing US feels a lot more like playing a "fake fiction". Rangers as basic units to stand a chance vs standard axis grens while rifles are just support (while it should be the other way arround). Pershings and Jumbos to have a chance against the standard axis armor while shermans are just "screening" arround and killing vehicles while it should again be the other way arround. Jumbos and Pershings as special tactical tools (just as rangers) instead core combat units. Achieving this would however require a rethinking of US doctrine designs (or entire faction design), esspecially in terms of tactical support. US feels cumbersome in terms of mobility (usefull cost effective mid game vehicles), Flexibility (Unit versatility, reorganizing armor composition and adapting strategies where US is often very fixed) and tactical support (access to small quick available usefull indirect fire units/off maps) being thus often "slow" compared to axis in particular. Sudden rushes, advances, breakthroughs (at weaker defended areas) are rare and ineffective.

Cumbersome and predictable. Boring faction and doctrine design. US barrely contains something really that could surprise and shock the enemie. The only combo i know for US is inf doc off map arty+ close combat squad in house spawn.

Everything else is slow build up with very predictable units and stuff. The only "surprise" in the US design is the player kwok.... suddenly some smoke drops.

I mean look from the moment SP was down.... now at min 36.... idle.... tiger guards, Maultier is shelling you and well.... idle.... Ranger assault attempt smashed with incredible ease (unlike average grenadier assaults) from any doc.

At in 37 you sometimes "jump in" in tank engagment just to counter a few of them that are being send more or less alone. That pershing/Jacks thing is some sort of "worse copy of Panther spam tactics". But nothing that gives a "special touch" when playing an US doc. In that case, acting as anti Tank doctrine, it looks like the attempt of copying the axis TH doc.

But where is that "wow effect" when playing armor. Like "Wow, that felt so special and fun, i want to play it many more times". In your case here you got toni in your team who actually "brought life" in this game from allied perspective.


But basically that all could have been done almost in a similiar way by any CW guy. Simply hiding M10 (which i think is better for some reason than M36) and yeah. Comet is the cheaper and actually better Pershing, just that the doc with comet holds more special assets. US armor doc feels extremly passive. Like no other doc, not even any other US doc.

I mean i hope anyone gets my picture about US design in general.

[sgtToni95]

This game was quite boring i think.

It was a nice result since we beated the best PE players teamed up, but i spent most of the time doing nothing. On the right side which is barely ever seen in the video i guess there was a very intense arty battle between SE and RA players. All i did was keep sending air recons and recces, to help our arty player.

I did not unlock anything related to commandos and just countered them with plan brits units, which is, depending on map, more cost efficient than getting commandos, and allows you to invest your resources on Crusaders and Achilles.

I used 2-3 bombing runs to prevent flaks building, to try destroying 210mm nebel (I stopped using 95mm cromwell since the last patch came out, but that would have been a lot more effective), which did not even get decrewed once, and on infantry at the end of the game, two rocket strike on tigers, one missed, my bad, and i just kept losing my sappers and tommies because i always forgot them around the frontline ( i made 4-5 sappers squads this game).

I think they made several mistakes on axis side, more than us playing exceptionally good:

1) attacks were barely ever supported by arty/rocket to clean some defences;

2) BK and Luft player were collaborating, but they were attacking all grouped up (2 Gebirs squads always sent like it was a single 12 Rambo unit, attacking frontally HE sherman, snipers and later Crusaders) so countering theese attacks was so easy;

3) pretty bad (imo) target choice of almost all airstrikes (probably due to excessive map ammo income):
-strafing run used on a sapper squad which was next to the triage center (gave me free tommies in excange for sappers);
-anti emplacement stuka patrol killed only triage center and a mortar pit (was lucky there was a mortar halftrack next to it which got destroyed);
panzerknacker killed SP, a sherman and a Crusader, which wasn't bad, but at that point SP was not a threat to any important unit. You killed it and then did nothing untill Jackson and Pershing came and killed your "cats". I think leaving SP there to give "AT confidence" to the opponent, and killing it (together with other tanks) right before an attack would have been a wiser choice.

About armor doc itself i almost never played it. I had a game the other day but i want to wait and have a few more before giving an opinion. I can say tho that after SP and arty barrage i randomly made the other unlocks.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Yup, I agree the game was a little boring actually.. but maybe more boring for you than it was for me... Because as Armor doc I still had some fun managing my tanks here and there. Specifically after I lost SP, as I was yet able to destroy 1 Tiger and 1 Panther using both my Pershing and Jackson... I also often tried lead the breakthrough with my tanks! While u played a pure supportive role, that's why it might have been a little more boring for you I guess.

Nonetheless, regarding US faction design and Armor doc in general... I honestly like the current design. It might not be absolutely perfect, but definitely not bad either. WH faction has more complicated design in my humble opinion, and probably even slower.

Though, I totally approve how Achilles and Comet are actually far better versions of Pershing and Jacksons.. which I find to be rather questionable, since that Achilles and Comet are cheaper... As I always wondered how they could be cheaper and also better at the same time than Pershing or any Jacksons on the other hand. And the Firefly is exceptionally too good btw...

[Shanks]

I think the price of Achilles and comets are good .... on the other hand I think that the armor should be improved

[idliketoplaybetter]

its not "good" example of armor doc, it is amazing example.

1500mp and 600muni on 20th minute of the game with barely no fuel for anything

*there is simply nowhere to invest that muni bank in. u guys discussed much of crew arty ability, but i believe there is even worse situation with ALWM and Field repairs. No one is interested in those, its all for 1unit and banking that MP..

[sgtToni95]

Can we not start balance discussions in any topic?

Actually when i played the above mentioned game as armor i used the "replacing tanks" ability (i guess from your words that must be ALWM?) when i was about to lose my pershing, and that actually worked so nicely ^^. So maybe as a first timer i used more in armor doc than vet players Jk

I'm experimenting with US since is by far the faction i feel less comfortable playing with, so might be little boring, and my mate had to go afk quite a few times. Low res map, gave me very little fuel, that's why i was glad i managed to replace my pershing when it got destroyed.

I rarelly use tanks of any kind too, so i'm even too cautious pushing them forward sometimes. This was a complete experiment on various aspects i must say.

4p_martainville.2017-07-21.15-20-17.rec

(3.67 MiB) Downloaded 43 times

I once tried to use command tank abilities ( not in this game) they cost muni and they should provide timed buffs of various kind, tho i tried the defensive one 3-4 times and i must have been very unlucky cause my tanks still got hit 100% of times. That command tank even has a 50 cal mg and a "targetting" ability, which can give your infantry that little boost they need to stand a chance against "superbuffed" enemies they're facing.

Mine are just suggestions made considering what i've seen available for this doc. When i play US i spend most of the time looking at units abilities and trying them, then i use them the worst way possible and i lose

Edit: Of course suggestions and comments on my armor "playstyle" are welcome

[Krieger Blitzer]

Thing about the Comet, is that it costs only 100 fuel and about 600 MP, whereas Pershing costs about 800MP and 150 fuel... Nevertheless, the Comet is better at every possible aspect.. better mobility, almost same gun; also same armor and same abilities! A similar comparison could be made with Achilles and Jacksons. The only downside of Comets however, is the fact that it requires 6 CP and Pershing requires 5 the other way. But it's not a big difference anyway, the Comet is one of the most cost effective tanks in the whole game. And that's why CW tanks are actually better than US ones, because u basically get better tanks but for cheaper prices!

I consider this game here sort of a "good" example because of 2 primary reasons, Armor doc had the best kill/loss ratio... And the doc wasn't useless after the death of the SP. Not to mention that I also wanted to show how Armor doc usually doesn't lack munition at all, unlike some people might think otherwise... Blitz doc on the other hand usually lacks ammo so bad btw.

[Shanks]

Not lack of ammunition because their artillery does not work, and you will not spend on equipping infantry, obviously, because they are shit

[Krieger Blitzer]

What u said is correct, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing.. as u always have the opportunity to upgrade ur tanks with HE and AP rounds, u could also use suppression abilities as well as other Armor doc abilities such as War Machinery or Field Repair for example...

[Shanks]

I know

[Warhawks97]

I am not at home so I make it short.

1. You don't lack ammo coz you play armor doc pretty much "pershing only". Try anything else and you will lack ammo. Simply you need it to kill any paper tank. SP again makes you saving ammo.

2. I didn't say comet is too cheap or achilles. CW is all about MP already. Just when playing RE you get a more dynamic combo of various unit types all effective in their role.

3. WH isn't lame at all and if then just def doc. However they are unpredictable, flexible during any stage and decent possible combos to outplay enemies. They are flexible and can keep mobile during the most crucial parts of the game. Mainly bc of vehicles like those of 234 series.


Armor is the exact opposite of this.

[Shanks]

The doctrine of armor, is incomplete, this game proves it

[Panzerblitz1]

The doctrine of armor, is incomplete, this game proves it

what this game proves? armor doc won the game against 2 of the toughest axis faction? this game proves absolutely nothing, in fact the armor doc in this replay has been very well played and took an edge versus the opponents, good camo armor, lots of damages, and a constant push back, so what does this game proves? that armor can kick asses if well played?

[Redgaarden]

I once tried to use command tank abilities ( not in this game) they cost muni and they should provide timed buffs of various kind, tho i tried the defensive one 3-4 times and i must have been very unlucky cause my tanks still got hit 100% of times.

I gives a 0.25 recieved accuracy bonus. When tanks have over 100% accuaracy you at best still get hit over 25% of the time (Not calculating scatter)

what this game proves? armor doc won the game against 2 of the toughest axis faction? this game proves absolutely nothing, in fact the armor doc in this replay has been very well played and took an edge versus the opponents, good camo armor, lots of damages, and a constant push back, so what does this game proves? that armor can kick asses if well played?

It proves the doctrine is boring and only has 2 kinds of units: Shermans and Super Pershings. I think it's the mass production upgrade that makes the doctrine bland. It effectively makes all the tank destroyers obselete. Why build a m10 for 320mp when you can get a sherman 76 for 335? because it's cheaper and better at anti tank? lol who cares. "I get a discount on this tank so it must be better".
You're tricking players to build shermans like a store that has a sale. Try removing mass production and you'll see armour doctrine starting to build better units that is neccecary for the situation instead of building different kind of sherman to throw at the problem and fail.

And also. If that one unlock is the entire foundation of an entire doctrine. Maybe you can see why it aint so great and how predictable armour doctrine really is.

[Shanks]

The doctrine of armor, is incomplete, this game proves it

what this game proves? armor doc won the game against 2 of the toughest axis faction? this game proves absolutely nothing, in fact the armor doc in this replay has been very well played and took an edge versus the opponents, good camo armor, lots of damages, and a constant push back, so what does this game proves? that armor can kick asses if well played?

I knew that you would say that, but the one who used BK did not show the true power of this doctrine; Summarizing: Tiger 1996 had a very calm and easy game

[Warhawks97]

That game shows that the doc is a idle, passive and everything but a "forward going doc". You wait there like a police officer waiting for reason to get active. And this is when either inf comes in (shermam) or tanks (SP).

That's it. And in both scenarios all other allied docs could offer similar stuff +tools that allow to go forward.

[Shanks]

That game shows that the doc is a idle, passive and everything but a "forward going doc". You wait there like a police officer waiting for reason to get active. And this is when either inf comes in (shermam) or tanks (SP).

That's it. And in both scenarios all other allied docs could offer similar stuff +tools that allow to go forward.

I like when people understand BK, not like others ..... they show a video where they come with a panzer "H" without even observing, apparently ...thinking: ooowow, there is no AT , and I'm going to kill to everyone, great!!!

[Zman111]

You seem to forget that actual american armor doctrine saw Shermans as disposable answers to every problem the German army could throw at them. Tiger killing everything? lol send 5 ish 76s at it and wait. Infantry dug into a town? load those shermans up with HE ammunition and watch the fireworks. They were a workhorse tank and the american military industrial complex made them faster than the Germans (or technical difficulties) could disable them

[Warhawks97]

The allied used basic chassis and put various weapons on it.

brits had idk how many churchill variants. And US did it with shermans. And why not? Guns for urban fights, against fortifications, against armor. For everything the right answer. And the shermans were a good platform to carry all those weapons.

Its not that they didnt care at all with just driving towards known defesnsive strongholds like the russians did.



Also they didnt just "thorw at them" like russians. Sure they got ambushed. But that would have happen to all armies when advancing over areas that allow it (eg the normandy areas), even to the germans (eg death of wittmann).