5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

If there is something new, it will be posted here.
User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2823
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby MarKr » 16 May 2019, 22:19

Hello once again!

We're bringing you a new update for the beta branch. This one addresses some of the issues reported about the reworked Blitzkrieg doctrine and also adds reworked Armor and Infantry Companies of the USA.

First of all, we wanted to address the issue of "OP" static howitzers. There have been suggestions to return them back to what they were but we did not want to do that because that would mean to make them useless again. In the posts you all mentioned various reasons why the howitzers were OP but in the end the biggest issue seemed to be the fact that there could be huge numbers of the howitzers distributed among the team and everybody could shoot barrages everywhere - so practically speaking, the power of a howitzer was not a problem but the number of the howitzers was a problem (or at least one of the problems). So one thing we changed here is that you cannot use the barrages of the static howitzers if you hadn't chosen one of the "Artillery" doctrines (Infantry, RA, Def or SE). You can still capture the howitzers with any doctrine but if you chose, let's say, Armor Company, the barrage ability of the howitzers will be "grey" and you will not be able to shoot it. This is there simply to make it impossible to "share" static howitzers with team mates and thus lower the number of howitzers in team games. Static howitzers are doctrine-specific units and thus are quite powerful but are not meant to be available to every doctrine, just as you cannot "give" your Panther to your SE team mate or as you cannot "give" your Commandos to your RE team mate. The veterancy bonuses per every level were also changed so that on higher levels they won't become too "shipy".

Another completely new thing this update brings is ammunition upkeep for howitzer units. The upkeep values are different based on the strength of each unit so weaker arty units (Pack howitzers, LeiG18, Autocar...) have a lot lower upkeep than Hummels, 210mm Nebels and other strong arty units. This is there to limit the usage of artillery through indirect means. If you play bigger maps with more ammo points you will be able to "feed" more arty units, on smaller maps with limited ammo income you will most likely be able to field about 2 arty units because more of them will lower your ammo income too much and then you won't be able to use other abilities which require ammunition. Thus you need to make decisions about how many arty units you actually need and can afford, instead of the "build as many as possible and shoot everywhere" tactics.

Another thing added in this update are turret rotation speeds for all armored cars - these had in reality turrets rotated manually but in the mod most of them rotated faster than tank turrets rotated with an engine. In the game then Pumas and Greyhounds could circle around tanks and keep shooting at full speed while the gun was always on target this should be harder to pull of now, but it is still possible. It also makes light tanks more suitable for this because they have faster turret speeds so they now differ from the armored cars a bit more.

The change about AT guns is there to make them a bit more useful again. The long aim times were introduced as a "fix" for the glitch abuse where you could bypass the reload times. However, with up to 4 seconds of aim times the AT guns were aiming forever and sometimes armored cars were able to drive all to way to them on a direct line and get pass them and the AT gun did not fire. Kwok came up with this other solution where the AT guns will have aim times of maximum of 2 seconds but the tear-down times are a lot longer. This prevents the abuse too and keeps the guns a bit more useful. This means that when a unit gets outside of the cone of fire and the gun wants to readjust the aim, it starts the tear down time so it limits the AT guns in a different way but with proper support they are a lot more useful with this change than they used to be and even more so for defending chokepoints.

The removal of over-repair is experimental. It just makes units a lot more durable than they should be for absolutely no drawback and this makes then the units harder to balance. Instead of the over-repair the units could rapair stuff faster, we'll see how that goes.

Blitzkrieg Doctrine
BK doc 1.1.jpg

There have been complaints about the Combat group call in (mainly that it does not fit the "tank" unlock line and that it is too cheap for the units you can get) the call in has been swaped with the Blitzkrieg ability in unlock tree and it now always provides PIII N (upgraded with both ammo upgrades) and a Grenadier squad upgraded with StG44. This way the ability should stay useful even later in the game because an HE tank with upgraded infantry can have their use at any stage of the game (while StuGs and PIV H/J start getting obsolete when Allies bring their stronger tanks, you also know what you're getting with this ability so the danger of getting a vehicle which you don't need is eliminated.

Command bonuses of command tank no longer work on StuPa/StuH because having extra range for these units (they already had more than 60 by default) was getting insane.

StuH/StuPa were changed too. It was mentioned that their huge range makes it possible to kite enemy units at ranges where they can never shoot back and this kiting in combination with Panthers that the doctrine has now was deemed to be too strong. However, the main intended purpose of StuPa/StuH is to breake through defensive lines and they need the range for it (or they get counter-shot by any AT emplacement and die), so these units have normal range of 60 now but have an ability which allows them to shoot a projectile over range of 80 - this ability is payed per shot, cannot shoot into FoW and can only shoot at buildings/emplacements (so no, you cannot use it to attack tanks or infantry). So if you know there is a 17 pounder emplacement somewhere, you need to get vision at it from some spotter and then you can keep shooting at it from safe distance. Any other units can only be attacked at range with standard attack at range of 60.

There are also changes to the 37mm Halftrack of Blitz doctrine - people complained about it in the past and still complain about it now. It is an incredible infantry killing machine. It was a result of quite good accuracy, low scatter and high damage. We tried to bring it down a bit without making it useless. Now it has less range (all vehicles with HE mode have less range, only this one had full), bigger scatter (so when it rolls a miss, the shot can land farther away and miss the squad completely and also it has tweaked AoE penetration values so it is possible now that soldiers in the AoE get lucky and take no damage. It is still a killer against infantry without cover but the change should be notable against infantry in cover.

US Armor Company
Armor Doc Rework.png

The main change in Armor doctrine is reorganisation of the unlock tree. Now the tank tree is divided into a Tank Destroyer branch and Tank Branch. This requires players to choose based on situation rather than "always go down the same path because it always leads to SP". If you now rush the Pershing you might get overrun by PIV spam against which TDs could be useful, but they are now in a different branch so careful unlock selection can be crucial.

As far as units go, new addition is 105 Sherman, this Sherman, however, no longer has the barrage ability and works the same way as StuPa/StuH described above (direct fire, range 60 + ability that allows shooting at emplacements over longer range). So for artillery you still have TC offmap arty, then 105 Sherman for punching through defenses and then Calliope Sherman (still indirect unit). With this addition of 105 Sherman there was no reason for Scott to be there because the roles are the same but Sherman is more efficient while not so much more expensive, thus Scott is gone from Armor doctrine. There is also no longer a reward choice between M36 and M36B1. It is not like anyone ever used the B1 in Armor doctrine, simply because the ambush is superior element and for unambush combat you have Peshings with same gun and better chance to survive, so Armor doctrine alwas has only the M36.

The doctrine changes are aimed for more well-rounded doctrines and Armor doctrine lacked some special-purpose infantry. They got the Combat Engineers and also a new unlock which makes them a bit better at surviving. They are still purely close-range units and can lose to MP40 squads and will lose to StG44 squads but it provides some room for clearing obstacles and combat repairs.

76mm Sherman Jumbo was removed from Armor doctrine and replaced by 75mm Jumbo. With the improved strength of Jumbo armor it would be too strong to have the 76mm version in same doctrine as Pershings because it would allow for the Jumbo soak damage while the Pershings behind would take out any tanks and the enemy would not be able to charge at this combo because the 76mm gun at closer ranges can actually be dangerous even to Tigers and Panthers. This way if you use the Jumbo+Pershing combo, enemy can sort of ignore the Jumbo and try to go after the Pershing because the 75mm gun on Jumbo is not a threat.

Tank repair ability has been changed to require only tank Vet level 1 (this is for all doctrines). Field repairs are no longer an unlock, they are an upgrade now - this upgrade in WSC changes the tank repairs to "Advanced tank repairs" which allows to repair the tank faster but even this advanced ability still requires Vet level 1.

Infantry Company
Inf doc.jpg

Infantry doctrine did not get any extensive changes because it did not needed too many. For the unlock tree the biggest change is probably that the first three unlocks in the top line are now independent. This is because they all feel like very early-to-mid game unlocks and if you don't unlock them in those phases of the game, you probably don't need them later. This change should allow to the player to pick whatever he wants first, based on what the situation requires and thus Infantry players should get a strong presence in the early-to-mid game. The weapon upgrade cost drop unlock has been turned into an upgrade and is now available in WSC.

Since the 105 Sherman (which was the mobile arty of this doctrine) has been moved to Armor doctrine, the artillery path now has a Priest in it at the end. This priest can only use the standard barrage and can also be upgraded with the Flame shots but has no other abilities which the CW Priest has. It is also built in the Tank Depot so you need to pay fuel for it. Still apply the ammunition upkeep values mentioned above so for infantry doctrine it will not be very easy to "feed" several static howitzers and Priests at the same time because the upkeep will lower the ammo income so much that the player won't be able to shoot them all.

Infantry doctrine always had to rely on their arty or team mates to destroy enemy heavy tanks, now they got a reward option to choose between either the 76mm Jumbo or the M36B1. So you can either get a unit with strong armor and relatively weak gun or a unit with weak armor but a strong main gun. For now the Limits are set to 1 for Jumbo and 2 for M36B1 - the Jackson is still pretty expensive and if you build 2 to go against heavy tanks, you are very likely to lose of them in the fight, so it is sort of 1 for 1 situation.

Infantry doctrine now also got the Scott - it again has the same changes as the StuH/StuPa/105 Sherman so it can be used to take out emplacements (with the long range shot) or to support infantry pushes with its direct fire.

So now for the complete changelog:
General:
- Barrage abilities of static howitzers are only useable by artillery doctrines now
- Added ammunition upkeep to artillery units:
-- Pack howitzer, LeiG18, Autocar, Scott: 5 munition
-- Calli Jeep/Sherman, Maultier, 150mm Nebels, 95mm Cromwell/Churchill, 25 pounders: 8 munition
-- 105mm arty (US/WM howitzers), Priests, Wespe, Stuka HT, Hotchkiss, 105 Sherman, StuH42: 12 munition
-- 210mm Nebels, Hummels, Sturmtiger, Grille, StuPa: 15 munition

- Removed unit limit on static howitzers
- Added forgotten fuel upkeep to Sturmtiger (4.56)
- Greyhound, Staghound, 50mm Puma, Damiler Scout Car and most Axis Armored Cars and Halftracks with 20mm cannon turret have their turret rotation speed lowered to "18" (from various values)
- Mine laying time reduced to 5 seconds
- Democharge planting time reduced to 14-16 seconds
- Removed Over-repair from all factions that had it
- Static howitzers now gain 5% faster reload per Vet level (was 10% per level) and 5% scatter reduction at level 3 and 4 (was -10% at every Vet level)
- Increased basic damage of Stuart HE rounds to 50 (from 40)
- Changed accuracy against infantry for Stuart HE rounds - now basic accuracy is unchanged and gets lowered by 25% when the infantry is moving (from "-25% no matter if they are moving or not)
- Significantly shortened aim time of AT guns but added a long tear-down time

US - Armor Company:
- M24 Chaffee has now same ambush bonuses as any other vehicle
- Reorganised command tree unlocks
- Field Repairs removed from the unlock tree
- Tank Repair ability cost drop to 35 ammo (from 50)
- Added Sherman 105 (has no barrage ability, can fire directly at normal range + long range with ability; requires unlock)
- Combat Engineers moved into Armor doctrine (from Infantry doctrine)
- Added an unlock into command tree which improves performance of Combat Engineers (adds satchel charges, CE take less damage)
- Added Field Repairs upgrade to the Weapon Support Center (unlocks Advanced Tank Repair ability; still requires Vet1)
- "Allied Warmachine" and "Rapid production" unlocks merged together (when you unlock the Warmachine ability, your Motorpool and Tank depot produce units faster)
- Increased range of "Commander Off-map Barrage" to 90 (from 70)
- Lowered the cost of Smoke Cloud abilities on Shermans to 15 ammo (from 50)
- 76mm Jumbo removed
- Added the 75mm Jumbo
- Recon buff from Command car no longer affects tank destroyers
- Removed reward choice between M36 and M36B1 (Armor doc now only has access to M36)
- Removed M8 Scott

US - Infantry Company:
- Fast Deployment, Defensive Operations and Mass Deployment unlocks are now separate unlocks
- Weapon Upgrade Cost Reduction changed from an unlock to an upgrade in WSC (100MP 80Ammo)
- 75mm Jumbo removed
- Added a reward choice between 76mm Jumbo (limited to 1 at time) or M36B1 (limited to 2 at time)
- Changed the armor strength of M36B1 to about the same as 76mm Shermans
- Removed 105mm Sherman
- Added Priest as a mobile arty unit
- M8 Scott is now available in Infantry Company
- Lowered basic range of Scott to 60, increased scatter and lowered accuracy against moving targets
- Added a long range shot ability for Scott (can be used only against buildings

Wehrmacht:
- Camouflage ability of StuG IV no longer requires Veterancy level 1
- Cost of Battlegroup call in set to 700MP (from 850MP)
- Battle group now always provides upgraded PIII N and Grenadier squad
- Command tank bonuses no longer affect StuPa and StuH
- StuH and StuPa no longer gain scatter reduction with Veterancy levels
- Lowered range of StuPa to 60
- Increased the scatter of StuPa
- Significantly lowered accuracy of StuPa against movig targets
- Added "Long Shot" ability to StuPa (fires one shot at range 80, 45 ammo per shot; only targetable at emplacements and buildings)
- Lowered range of StuH to 60
- Increased the scatter of StuH
- Significantly lowered accuracy of StuH against movig targets
- Added "Long Shot" ability to StuH (fires one shot at range 85, 25 ammo per shot; only targetable at emplacements and buildings)
- Panzer IV D removed from Blitzkrieg doctrine
- Panzer III N added to Blitzkrieg doctrine
- Ammunition reserves unlock now also lowers the activation cost of Wolfram ammunition ability to 35 ammo (from 50)
- Ostwind removed from Blitzkrieg doctrine
- Flakpanzer 38(t) "Gepard" moved to Blitzkrieg doctrine (from Defense doctrine)
- Changed the Recon bonus of Command tank, now it provides +10 vision range and detection of enemy tanks in FoW at range of 70
- Lowered maximum range of HE rounds of 37mm Halftrack to 50 (from 60)
- Tweaked the AoE of 37mm Halftrack HE rounds so that now there is some chance that infantry in the AoE gets lucky and won't take any damage (just as with any other HE rounds)

That is the content of this update. We hope you'll enjoy the new changes and if you run into any bugs, please report them here so we can work on fixing them.

Next update will bring fixes to reported issues and reworked Defensive doctrine of Wehrmacht.
Image

MenciusMoldbug
Posts: 149
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 12:57

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby MenciusMoldbug » 17 May 2019, 00:19

So it looks like the Jackson now got its own tree instead of being a branch towards the Pershing which is a good thing because it needs to be recognized in it's own 'platform' as this tank doesn't have a strong connection to the Pershing other than having the same gun. I still think the Jackson is overpriced though, especially when you compare it to all the other TD's.

It's more expensive than a Nashorn and a JP4 L/70; which I consider way better 'pure TD's.' I mean this tank still has to buy it's engine to get the flank speed. Maybe off-load some manpower cost for the tank towards munitions for buying the engine and stuff? So it goes down 50-100 MP and the engine costs like 25-45 Munitions extra (or more)?

I still would have liked if Infantry Company got some extra infantry AT power. I kind of miss the double bazooka Rangers from VCoH; Maybe an Ranger AT Squad in the Ranger Truck (4 Men, 2 Bazookas, limit of 2; same thing as normal barracks AT Squad except Infantry Company can have a max of 4 AT Squads on the field)? Idk just a thought.

Oh yeah, about the howitzer upkeep thing; is it abuse-proof in the way that you can't just 'un-man' the howitzers if you don't feel like paying upkeep and re-man it when you feel like firing it? I think Howitzers upon re-crewing should have their cooldown reset again so they can't fire immediately; So they would have to wait however much time a normal barrage would take to fire again to actually use the thing.

MarKr wrote:US - Armor Company:
- Recon buff from Command car no longer affects tank destroyers


:(

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1700
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby kwok » 17 May 2019, 00:42

I thought if the same thing about decrew recrew on useBut normally decrew costs micro, munitions, and accumulated veterancy which is crucial for counter bombard tactics. hopefully discourages enough to NOT do it.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3900
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Tiger1996 » 17 May 2019, 04:24

I have so much notes, but my time is super limited these current days... So, i will try to keep it as short as possible, even though it might be still a long post to read after all... Although i won't be able to address all the points right now, but only the most important ones:

- in the past, there was a suggestion to give +5 ammo income by default for all factions, just like the basic +5 fuel income.. but this idea was countered as there wasn't any units that require ammo upkeep... Now however, after the addition of ammo upkeep for arty units, I suppose this suggestion has to be finally considered.. otherwise, i'm afraid "camping tactics" would become the ultimate choice once again.

- i'm unhappy about the removal of over-repair, it didn't make sense for emplacements, however... US tanks needed them. just as I also believe that Axis tanks at max vet level (vet4) should never lose the 25% damage reduction bonus. Over-repair should have been tweaked for some particular vehicles (example the E8 Sherman had so much HP with sand-bags and over-repair which could have been simply adjusted or tuned down) instead of completely getting rid of the feature...

Not to mention that one of the best things about Bk Mod is how it offers both very intolerant game-play mechanism (where most units die fast like in reality) while at the same time.. still offers tolerant game-play at some certain aspects on the other hand (where some high vet units or over-repaired units can survive longer than others) which is something i hope to never disappear from the MOD, as there is nothing wrong to reward players with some better surviving units on the field when they are lucky to keep a specific unit alive for long enough over the course of the battle by gaining veterancy levels, or by allowing some of their units higher survivability chances through some certain features or tools such as over-repair for example... I don't want Bk Mod to become another version of Spearhead Mod for CoH2 where literally everything always die so quickly.

- Blitz doc tech tree looks much better now, despite that I would still suggest replacing ammo unlock with Maultier for 2CP (1CP can be borrowed from Stuka plane unlock) while making it independent from the mass production line.. and then finally allowing LeiG.18 as a special unit in this doctrine. As it doesn't make sense being a reward of Pak38 AT gun...

- Regarding the change to Stupa, etc.
Doesn't sound too bad, though... I wonder what kind of effect would a paid single shot ability do.. specifically knowing that emplacements are often repaired so fast... THAT and also keeping in mind the ammo upkeeps, i really hope camping tactics wouldn't be the final result.

- About US Armor doc,
At the first look, it's impossible for that to go un-noticed... Pershing is now delayed to 9CP (from 5CP) and SP or PAce is delayed to 11CP (from 9CP) and 75mm Jumbo is delayed to 6CP (from just 2CP in infantry doc) while i believe there is absolutely nothing wrong about this historically, because all those are late war US tanks. Yet, as much as I am fine with it.. as much as i believe it would be most necessary to significantly buff the armor of regular Pershings in order to compensate their late appearance on the battlefield.. and don't forget that Tiger tanks are also planned to be unlocked so early in Terror doctrine.. including the Tiger Ace which is probably going to require only 7CP (at least 2CP earlier) being as early as Panther.G now... Accordingly, the armor resistance of Pershing tanks should be on a much higher level... And the SP unlock should have ACE Pershing available when the SP is gone.

I mean, don't get me wrong... i like how Pershings are delayed and how Panthers and Tigers will be earlier available as it was in reality, but then... Pershings should be really tough to destroy.

And now, to some points in the change-log:
- Increased range of "Commander Off-map Barrage" to 90 (from 70)

Can't say anything except that it's such a terrible change right there and has to be reverted back immediately. This way, you can sooo easily kill ANY Flak88s with this ability.. given the fact that Flak88s have 85 range. This ability isn't supposed to be a counter to Flak88s unless you get the chance to get close enough by the help of some terrain obstacles, like taking cover behind houses with your vehicle.

- Camouflage ability of StuG IV no longer requires Veterancy level 1

Great news, so now WH has a TD like M10 but what about the HE rounds from ambush? Would it be possible to disable the HE ability as long as ambush mode is activated? And just a reminder.. there was a special unit available within the off-map support call-in called Stug4 "Late Version" which had a 360 degree rotating MG like Hetzer.. by changing the off-map support, this special Stug4 is now removed from the game, as it's not available anywhere else... So, you will need to insert it somewhere else.

- Changed the Recon bonus of Command tank, now it provides +10 vision range and detection of enemy tanks in FoW at range of 70

Hold on, so... Does it no longer provide +10 firing range like the US command car?? If yes, then it's another terrible change, i'm afraid to say...
If US tanks can get the firing range bonus, then why shouldn't German tanks get it too? Specifically knowing that command tank is more expensive than command car and has many drawbacks already.

That said, i have to say that apparently great efforts and time were spent on these doctrinal re-works, which is definitely appreciated.

Also, there are still a lot of other things i want to address.. but my time is running out, so.. will be coming back later.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1700
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby kwok » 17 May 2019, 05:06

Guys look, comments and opinions are appreciated and listened to but...
Did anyone actually TRY a pvp game on the patch yet? Or even the last one? It was literally posted THIS DAY. And before you say “no one else is on playing it so why bother”, the time it takes to write a response is as long as it takes to set up a game with another player from your steam list and play.

If you HAVE played the patch, then this doesn’t apply to you. I know some of the people who have. As far as I know who, their opinion will likely get more preferential treatment when it comes to considering.

Bonus points if you post replays. The more replays you post, the more we can analyze a real game in action and the more we will appreciate your opinion.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1709
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 17 May 2019, 05:43

Nobody care or dare trying the patch, Please try the god damn thing and after some pvps come back with realistic and accurate pvp problems, not just what « might » sounds weird on paper.
Thx
Image

User avatar
Black Panther
Posts: 81
Joined: 04 May 2019, 14:54

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Black Panther » 17 May 2019, 05:58

Just saying, armored cars with lowered turret speed rotation, driving near yellow cover - just fucks up whole unit into dying or starting making circles.
I'm surprised no one mentioned it before

The New BK Champion
Posts: 288
Joined: 11 Feb 2018, 22:09

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby The New BK Champion » 17 May 2019, 08:10

Imho you make the mod bland less-unique and boring by imposing more and more regulations and limitations over everything and removing literally any interesting and fun things from it, because "people abuse". It might be more balanced, "polished" whatever you think that means, but your ideas are just boring. I have lost interest a few patches ago, but this one only adds to my disappointment.

NOHOMO
Posts: 4
Joined: 17 May 2019, 07:34

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby NOHOMO » 17 May 2019, 08:15

The new Blitzkrieg-Doc could be great but two things are destroing it for me..the new STUPA-changes are just imprudent. Why it can shot with the far-range-abbility at PAK-emplacements but not at normal PAKs? That makes no sense. Addet to this...nobody built PAK-emplacements, just normal PAKs. I think this abbility is useless, maybe its just good to kill MG-emplacements. When the far-range-abbility is payed per shot, why the STUPA cant shot at all units then? That would be more then fair.
The second point is the Flakpanzer 38...this is the most useless tank in the game. The Ostwind was perfect for the Blitzkrieg-Doc why you change it with the Flakpanzer 38? This thing is too slow for the Blitz-Doc and its useless vs infrantry. The Tiger was kicked out of the Doc because it was too slow and now you add this old slow mangy Flakpanzer 38? Why someone would do that? Please dont kill the Blitz-Doc.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2823
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby MarKr » 17 May 2019, 08:49

Blacktigerace's post has been moved to appropriate forum section (here).
The part of his post that actually was about this update was:
blacktigerace wrote:For This Patch, i already try some games with US and WM, and i have some question
1. no limit arty means, 105mm mortar is spamable?
2. if M4 105mm is same mechanic like stupa and StuH, i think there no need 2x M4E2 jumbo, 1x 105mm anti infantry tank + 2x 75mm strong M4 anti infantry tank is already OP? but considered US armor doctrine is only have 1 limit of M4 calliope, how is other player opinion?
Beside that i not found another problems for now U.U

1) The changelog says that the limit has been removed from static howitzers - these are the 105mm howitzers of Infantry and Defensive doctrine + 25 pounders in Artillery doctrine. Mortars are unchanged.
2) Armor doctrine has the 105 Sherman (but it is not "arty" tank as it was) and Calliope (still arty tank). Jumbo with 75mm isn't the same as the 105mm Sherman. 105mm Sherman is against defenses so it has problems hitting targets which are moving also reloads slower than Jumbo. So Jumbo is "anti-infantry" tank, 105mm is "anti-emplacement" tank. 105 Sherman has weaker armor and can be destroyed by any L48 gun or stronger, Jumbo is more durable but also has shorter range with HE...there are several differences that make the two units different.

The New BK Champion wrote:Imho you make the mod bland less-unique and boring by imposing more and more regulations and limitations over everything and removing literally any interesting and fun things from it, because "people abuse". It might be more balanced, "polished" whatever you think that means, but your ideas are just boring. I have lost interest a few patches ago, but this one only adds to my disappointment.
Well, if you enjoy playing a game where there are things blatantly abused to gain unintented advantange, and perceive such tactics as fun, then I can understand your loss of interest.

NOHOMO wrote:Why it can shot with the far-range-abbility at PAK-emplacements but not at normal PAKs? That makes no sense. Addet to this...nobody built PAK-emplacements, just normal PAKs. I think this abbility is useless, maybe its just good to kill MG-emplacements. When the far-range-abbility is payed per shot, why the STUPA cant shot at all units then? That would be more then fair.
Nobody ever built 17 pounder emplacements? Well, even if not, the unemplaced AT guns are almost exclusively used from camo. If it is camoed, you cannot target it unless you "shoot ground" where you expect the gun to be placed. If we enable this then it will be used to attack any unit over long distance. StuPa is there to help bring down defenses, not to attack every infantry squad or tank from such a range where they don't even see it nor can they return fire (read the first beta post where people explain why StuPa with long range in combination with Panthers is problematic). The costs per shot might be changed or completely removed based on the feedback, also we might try to make it targetable at revealed AT guns too, again, based on feedback.

NOHOMO wrote:Flakpanzer 38...this is the most useless tank in the game. The Ostwind was perfect for the Blitzkrieg-Doc why you change it with the Flakpanzer 38?
Ostwind is very powerful in hands of BK doctrine - it is very deadly against infantry (with both normal bullets and HE mode too), with HE mode it can wipe/decrew emplacements in seconds and it also provides quite reliable AA capacity, on top of that with the bonuses from Blitz ability it is turned into a higher-calibre MG42 with possible HE mode. Yet, is it really needed? When you have a unit like this which can wipe infantry so easily, what are there the Stormtroopers for? If you have a unit like this which can easily deal with emplacements, why would you need StuPa/StuH when it should be their job? With all the capacity that BK doc now has in dealing with infantry, tanks and defenses alike, having also one of the strongest AAs in the game is sort of an overkil even for the reworked concept. We also want to give some more usefulness to the Flakpanzer 38, not sure what will be changed about it yet, though.
Image

NOHOMO
Posts: 4
Joined: 17 May 2019, 07:34

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby NOHOMO » 17 May 2019, 10:08

We also want to give some more usefulness to the Flakpanzer 38, not sure what will be changed about it yet, though.


The Flakpanzer 38 is too slow, has no armor, has no rotatable tower and has just one tiny 20mm-flak, the Wirbelwind has four of them. This tank is generally to bad for this game. With no rotatable weapon its useless against infrantry and planes. I never saw someone playing Def-Doc and using it. Even the Möbelwagen is much better.

Nobody ever built 17 pounder emplacements? Well, even if not, the unemplaced AT guns are almost exclusively used from camo. If it is camoed, you cannot target it unless you "shoot ground" where you expect the gun to be placed. If we enable this then it will be used to attack any unit over long distance. StuPa is there to help bring down defenses, not to attack every infantry squad or tank from such a range where they don't even see it nor can they return fire (read the first beta post where people explain why StuPa with long range in combination with Panthers is problematic). The costs per shot might be changed or completely removed based on the feedback, also we might try to make it targetable at revealed AT guns too, again, based on feedback.


But the Stupa has an howitzer and a howitzer has more range then a tank-canon. Thats the way it is. I thougt the Blitzkrieg Mod should be more realistic?
Other howitzers like the grille can fire on every unit but the Stupa cant shot at tanks and infrantry? This is just an artificial deterioration. If there is a little hill in the way the Stupa hits nothing. And now the scatter is even more higher?
And the combination Panther-Stupa is no excuse - US would have the same advantages with Phersing-Sherman 105. So wheres the problem?

NOHOMO
Posts: 4
Joined: 17 May 2019, 07:34

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby NOHOMO » 17 May 2019, 10:46

And for the M8 Scott the changes are even more worse. This tanks role is to kill infrantry. When he loses the advantage of the long range why someone should play with it? The M4 sherman with HE is cheaper and has better armor. The M8 Scott is needless now. And the far-range-ability only vs buildings is a joke for the M8...he deals so less damage to emplacements, you would need 20 shots ore more to kill it. This ability makes no sense for the M8.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3900
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Tiger1996 » 17 May 2019, 11:00

Bonus points if you post replays. The more replays you post, the more we can analyze a real game in action and the more we will appreciate your opinion.

Despite being under severe time pressure, in fact... I already have a couple of PvP games recorded for the beta, but i will not upload or post them for some of my very own reasons.

And since when does it work this way? The more replays posted.. the higher the chance for the opinion to be considered and appreciated by the devs? Really??? I don't think that this has ever been the case! If we take a live example, my opinion never really got more weight by the devs, no matter how many games i upload... Actually, it might be even the opposite, as i feel like it does only make the opinion less important and sometimes even ignored by the devs.

Next time, when a feedback is given that you think is lacking game-play experience insights.. then you could just point exactly at which part of the feedback where you think the player is missing the track of the changes.. but if some important points keep getting ignored (despite being mentioned a hundred times) then I'm afraid some people would eventually lose interest of course.. or might just feel no obligation of providing anymore feedback in the first place.

Anyway, most of the points i personally mentioned are fundamental.. just that i want to add, the WH AT squad was nerfed so bad on the previous beta, and few other problems seem to have been either over-looked or kept for later.. can't really tell what you did exactly with those issues... But i still don't have time to go over anything in deeper details, so that's it for now.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3560
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Warhawks97 » 17 May 2019, 12:33

MarKr wrote:Hello once again!


Another completely new thing this update brings is ammunition upkeep for howitzer units. The upkeep values are different based on the strength of each unit so weaker arty units (Pack howitzers, LeiG18, Autocar...) have a lot lower upkeep than Hummels, 210mm Nebels and other strong arty units. This is there to limit the usage of artillery through indirect means. If you play bigger maps with more ammo points you will be able to "feed" more arty units, on smaller maps with limited ammo income you will most likely be able to field about 2 arty units because more of them will lower your ammo income too much and then you won't be able to use other abilities which require ammunition. Thus you need to make decisions about how many arty units you actually need and can afford, instead of the "build as many as possible and shoot everywhere" tactics.


The barrage costs remained, or?
Another thing added in this update are turret rotation speeds for all armored cars - these had in reality turrets rotated manually but in the mod most of them rotated faster than tank turrets rotated with an engine. In the game then Pumas and Greyhounds could circle around tanks and keep shooting at full speed while the gun was always on target this should be harder to pull of now, but it is still possible. It also makes light tanks more suitable for this because they have faster turret speeds so they now differ from the armored cars a bit more.


finally. Staghound and 20 mm cars were pure trolling.


The change about AT guns is there to make them a bit more useful again. The long aim times were introduced as a "fix" for the glitch abuse where you could bypass the reload times. However, with up to 4 seconds of aim times the AT guns were aiming forever and sometimes armored cars were able to drive all to way to them on a direct line and get pass them and the AT gun did not fire. Kwok came up with this other solution where the AT guns will have aim times of maximum of 2 seconds but the tear-down times are a lot longer. This prevents the abuse too and keeps the guns a bit more useful. This means that when a unit gets outside of the cone of fire and the gun wants to readjust the aim, it starts the tear down time so it limits the AT guns in a different way but with proper support they are a lot more useful with this change than they used to be and even more so for defending chokepoints.


I had a talk about it with kwok about it. One thing AT guns could be good in is rate of fire as the crew has not to work in a cramped space. So Mobility and fast reaction wouldnt be their strenght, esspecially with the tear-down times (The tear up times for heavy AT should perhaps also be higher), but once you got aim at something you can shell it in quick succession with like 4-5 sec reload times, even for the bigger once.

The removal of over-repair is experimental. It just makes units a lot more durable than they should be for absolutely no drawback and this makes then the units harder to balance. Instead of the over-repair the units could rapair stuff faster, we'll see how that goes.


good move.

Blitzkrieg Doctrine

There have been complaints about the Combat group call in (mainly that it does not fit the "tank" unlock line and that it is too cheap for the units you can get) the call in has been swaped with the Blitzkrieg ability in unlock tree and it now always provides PIII N (upgraded with both ammo upgrades) and a Grenadier squad upgraded with StG44. This way the ability should stay useful even later in the game because an HE tank with upgraded infantry can have their use at any stage of the game (while StuGs and PIV H/J start getting obsolete when Allies bring their stronger tanks, you also know what you're getting with this ability so the danger of getting a vehicle which you don't need is eliminated.


Can we get a storm squad with stg instead?
For the future i would perhaps rethink the idea of stgs for grens in general. They were just quickly added to somehow compensate for the loss of kch units in terror doctrine. But if changes probably comming for this doc as well, its fighting style might change and stgs for grens may become obsolete or wouldnt fit anymore. The reason is simply that STG is afterall just everywhere and more or less a nobrainer upgrade. Like in late games you go always for stgs in chaotic battles when close and ranged fights occure randomly.



StuH/StuPa were changed too. It was mentioned that their huge range makes it possible to kite enemy units at ranges where they can never shoot back and this kiting in combination with Panthers that the doctrine has now was deemed to be too strong. However, the main intended purpose of StuPa/StuH is to breake through defensive lines and they need the range for it (or they get counter-shot by any AT emplacement and die), so these units have normal range of 60 now but have an ability which allows them to shoot a projectile over range of 80 - this ability is payed per shot, cannot shoot into FoW and can only shoot at buildings/emplacements (so no, you cannot use it to attack tanks or infantry). So if you know there is a 17 pounder emplacement somewhere, you need to get vision at it from some spotter and then you can keep shooting at it from safe distance. Any other units can only be attacked at range with standard attack at range of 60.


finally, after more 6 years waiting for it.
Will the stuh get cheaper now? I still have in mind a stug III with 105 mm gun but with similiar support abilties for nearby inf.

And would we still have a unit limit?

Question: Will a stuh be able to crush a 17pdr emplacment in a shot? Or do they fire at the emplacment/building as long as its visible and untill its destroyed?

There are also changes to the 37mm Halftrack of Blitz doctrine - people complained about it in the past and still complain about it now. It is an incredible infantry killing machine. It was a result of quite good accuracy, low scatter and high damage. We tried to bring it down a bit without making it useless. Now it has less range (all vehicles with HE mode have less range, only this one had full), bigger scatter (so when it rolls a miss, the shot can land farther away and miss the squad completely and also it has tweaked AoE penetration values so it is possible now that soldiers in the AoE get lucky and take no damage. It is still a killer against infantry without cover but the change should be notable against infantry in cover.


thx.

US Armor Company
The main change in Armor doctrine is reorganisation of the unlock tree. Now the tank tree is divided into a Tank Destroyer branch and Tank Branch. This requires players to choose based on situation rather than "always go down the same path because it always leads to SP". If you now rush the Pershing you might get overrun by PIV spam against which TDs could be useful, but they are now in a different branch so careful unlock selection can be crucial.


so far most or all TD branches are not linked to a tank. But this one is linked with Sherman afterall. Nothing important just asking if it could become independent just as well? Buts i am fine either way.

As far as units go, new addition is 105 Sherman, this Sherman, however, no longer has the barrage ability and works the same way as StuPa/StuH described above (direct fire, range 60 + ability that allows shooting at emplacements over longer range). So for artillery you still have TC offmap arty, then 105 Sherman for punching through defenses and then Calliope Sherman (still indirect unit). With this addition of 105 Sherman there was no reason for Scott to be there because the roles are the same but Sherman is more efficient while not so much more expensive, thus Scott is gone from Armor doctrine. There is also no longer a reward choice between M36 and M36B1. It is not like anyone ever used the B1 in Armor doctrine, simply because the ambush is superior element and for unambush combat you have Peshings with same gun and better chance to survive, so Armor doctrine alwas has only the M36.


interesting move. Didnt expect it. But its good.
Does it still keeps that strict unit limit of 1 which was exaggerated before already.

The doctrine changes are aimed for more well-rounded doctrines and Armor doctrine lacked some special-purpose infantry. They got the Combat Engineers and also a new unlock which makes them a bit better at surviving. They are still purely close-range units and can lose to MP40 squads and will lose to StG44 squads but it provides some room for clearing obstacles and combat repairs.


That was necessary.

76mm Sherman Jumbo was removed from Armor doctrine and replaced by 75mm Jumbo. With the improved strength of Jumbo armor it would be too strong to have the 76mm version in same doctrine as Pershings because it would allow for the Jumbo soak damage while the Pershings behind would take out any tanks and the enemy would not be able to charge at this combo because the 76mm gun at closer ranges can actually be dangerous even to Tigers and Panthers. This way if you use the Jumbo+Pershing combo, enemy can sort of ignore the Jumbo and try to go after the Pershing because the 75mm gun on Jumbo is not a threat.


A different approach could have been to add a WSC upgrade that turns all jumbos into 76 shermans, but thus losing usefull emplacmant clearing capabilties.

A look at the ww2 reality gave me that idea. From 254 deployed jumbos, the last remaining 100 got converted into 76 shermans via field conversion in europe in 1945.
For the player it would mean to make a decision, stay with the 75 mm or lose it forever.
That could become a tricky decision when you have to fight tanks as well as heavy fortifications.

Tank repair ability has been changed to require only tank Vet level 1 (this is for all doctrines). Field repairs are no longer an unlock, they are an upgrade now - this upgrade in WSC changes the tank repairs to "Advanced tank repairs" which allows to repair the tank faster but even this advanced ability still requires Vet level 1.


thx.

Infantry Company
Since the 105 Sherman (which was the mobile arty of this doctrine) has been moved to Armor doctrine, the artillery path now has a Priest in it at the end. This priest can only use the standard barrage and can also be upgraded with the Flame shots but has no other abilities which the CW Priest has. It is also built in the Tank Depot so you need to pay fuel for it. Still apply the ammunition upkeep values mentioned above so for infantry doctrine it will not be very easy to "feed" several static howitzers and Priests at the same time because the upkeep will lower the ammo income so much that the player won't be able to shoot them all.


I would add air bursts rather than flames. The US used invented them and used air bursts at the battle of bulge. They were the only one with proxy fuzes. But its just a thought.


Infantry doctrine always had to rely on their arty or team mates to destroy enemy heavy tanks, now they got a reward option to choose between either the 76mm Jumbo or the M36B1. So you can either get a unit with strong armor and relatively weak gun or a unit with weak armor but a strong main gun. For now the Limits are set to 1 for Jumbo and 2 for M36B1 - the Jackson is still pretty expensive and if you build 2 to go against heavy tanks, you are very likely to lose of them in the fight, so it is sort of 1 for 1 situation.


Jumbo doesnt really "fits" so well here i would say.
As suggested i would prefer jumbos in armor doc only with the 76 being an upgrade in the wsc or tank depot which turns all 75 jumbos into 76 shermans.


Infantry doctrine now also got the Scott - it again has the same changes as the StuH/StuPa/105 Sherman so it can be used to take out emplacements (with the long range shot) or to support infantry pushes with its direct fire.


How exactly will a 75 mm take out an emplacment with a single shot? Its the same question as for the stuh (and 105 sherman).
So now for the complete changelog:

- Removed unit limit on static howitzers
- Added forgotten fuel upkeep to Sturmtiger (4.56)
- Greyhound, Staghound, 50mm Puma, Damiler Scout Car and most Axis Armored Cars and Halftracks with 20mm cannon turret have their turret rotation speed lowered to "18" (from various values)
- Mine laying time reduced to 5 seconds
- Democharge planting time reduced to 14-16 seconds
- Removed Over-repair from all factions that had it
- Static howitzers now gain 5% faster reload per Vet level (was 10% per level) and 5% scatter reduction at level 3 and 4 (was -10% at every Vet level)
- Increased basic damage of Stuart HE rounds to 50 (from 40)
- Changed accuracy against infantry for Stuart HE rounds - now basic accuracy is unchanged and gets lowered by 25% when the infantry is moving (from "-25% no matter if they are moving or not)
- Significantly shortened aim time of AT guns but added a long tear-down time


good.
About the upkeep, there are afterall units that are extremely low in fuel upkeep. Most notebaly panthers but also some of the tank IV´s.
And the Jagdpanther as an MP upkeep of a Tank IV.

US - Armor Company:
- M24 Chaffee has now same ambush bonuses as any other vehicle
- Reorganised command tree unlocks
- Field Repairs removed from the unlock tree
- Tank Repair ability cost drop to 35 ammo (from 50)
- Added Sherman 105 (has no barrage ability, can fire directly at normal range + long range with ability; requires unlock)
- Combat Engineers moved into Armor doctrine (from Infantry doctrine)
- Added an unlock into command tree which improves performance of Combat Engineers (adds satchel charges, CE take less damage)
- Added Field Repairs upgrade to the Weapon Support Center (unlocks Advanced Tank Repair ability; still requires Vet1)
- "Allied Warmachine" and "Rapid production" unlocks merged together (when you unlock the Warmachine ability, your Motorpool and Tank depot produce units faster)
- Increased range of "Commander Off-map Barrage" to 90 (from 70)
- Lowered the cost of Smoke Cloud abilities on Shermans to 15 ammo (from 50)
- 76mm Jumbo removed
- Added the 75mm Jumbo
- Recon buff from Command car no longer affects tank destroyers
- Removed reward choice between M36 and M36B1 (Armor doc now only has access to M36)
- Removed M8 Scott


looks promising and good.
US - Infantry Company:
- Fast Deployment, Defensive Operations and Mass Deployment unlocks are now separate unlocks
- Weapon Upgrade Cost Reduction changed from an unlock to an upgrade in WSC (100MP 80Ammo)
- 75mm Jumbo removed
- Added a reward choice between 76mm Jumbo (limited to 1 at time) or M36B1 (limited to 2 at time)
- Changed the armor strength of M36B1 to about the same as 76mm Shermans
- Removed 105mm Sherman
- Added Priest as a mobile arty unit
- M8 Scott is now available in Infantry Company
- Lowered basic range of Scott to 60, increased scatter and lowered accuracy against moving targets
- Added a long range shot ability for Scott (can be used only against buildings


Looks generally good.

Wehrmacht:
- Camouflage ability of StuG IV no longer requires Veterancy level 1
- Cost of Battlegroup call in set to 700MP (from 850MP)
- Battle group now always provides upgraded PIII N and Grenadier squad
- Command tank bonuses no longer affect StuPa and StuH
- StuH and StuPa no longer gain scatter reduction with Veterancy levels
- Lowered range of StuPa to 60
- Increased the scatter of StuPa
- Significantly lowered accuracy of StuPa against movig targets
- Added "Long Shot" ability to StuPa (fires one shot at range 80, 45 ammo per shot; only targetable at emplacements and buildings)
- Lowered range of StuH to 60
- Increased the scatter of StuH
- Significantly lowered accuracy of StuH against movig targets
- Added "Long Shot" ability to StuH (fires one shot at range 85, 25 ammo per shot; only targetable at emplacements and buildings)
- Panzer IV D removed from Blitzkrieg doctrine
- Panzer III N added to Blitzkrieg doctrine
- Ammunition reserves unlock now also lowers the activation cost of Wolfram ammunition ability to 35 ammo (from 50)
- Ostwind removed from Blitzkrieg doctrine
- Flakpanzer 38(t) "Gepard" moved to Blitzkrieg doctrine (from Defense doctrine)
- Changed the Recon bonus of Command tank, now it provides +10 vision range and detection of enemy tanks in FoW at range of 70
- Lowered maximum range of HE rounds of 37mm Halftrack to 50 (from 60)
- Tweaked the AoE of 37mm Halftrack HE rounds so that now there is some chance that infantry in the AoE gets lucky and won't take any damage (just as with any other HE rounds)


So much thx for the stupa/stuh change... no more silly kiting.

But why do you keep going with that AP upgrade for BK doc? I know you did that for your well rounded approach and so on but still.


That is the content of this update. We hope you'll enjoy the new changes and if you run into any bugs, please report them here so we can work on fixing them.


One of the best patches and changelogs. Really like it.

In summary my questions and thoughts:
1. Jumbos should all be armor doc, just that a global WSC upgrade turns all 75 jumbos into 76 with no option to turn it back in the game.
2. The stuh costs?
3. Stuh/105/scott limits sill in place?
4. Will scott/stuh/105 sherman fire just one shot at an emplacment which will likely survive a single hit?
5. When all WH docs got reworked, is it still necessary to keep stgs on grens? (which was more an emergency solution to compensate for lost kch)
6. Tank III N call in should come with a storm squad that has stgs.

Edit:
Oh, and any changes to jumbo armor? It still doesnt feel like "jumbo". Often killed by hetzers and stugs who still go through with every fourth hit. It should be a pretty hard match even for normal 88 guns.


Next update will bring fixes to reported issues and reworked Defensive doctrine of Wehrmacht.


cant await it.


MenciusMoldbug wrote:So it looks like the Jackson now got its own tree instead of being a branch towards the Pershing which is a good thing because it needs to be recognized in it's own 'platform' as this tank doesn't have a strong connection to the Pershing other than having the same gun. I still think the Jackson is overpriced though, especially when you compare it to all the other TD's.

It's more expensive than a Nashorn and a JP4 L/70; which I consider way better 'pure TD's.' I mean this tank still has to buy it's engine to get the flank speed. Maybe off-load some manpower cost for the tank towards munitions for buying the engine and stuff? So it goes down 50-100 MP and the engine costs like 25-45 Munitions extra (or more)?


fully agree here.


MenciusMoldbug wrote:I still would have liked if Infantry Company got some extra infantry AT power. I kind of miss the double bazooka Rangers from VCoH; Maybe an Ranger AT Squad in the Ranger Truck (4 Men, 2 Bazookas, limit of 2; same thing as normal barracks AT Squad except Infantry Company can have a max of 4 AT Squads on the field)? Idk just a thought.


and here. Captain and Ranger AT perhaps added to the truck? The captain had been there along with a sniper iirc.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2823
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby MarKr » 17 May 2019, 12:44

NOHOMO wrote:But the Stupa has an howitzer and a howitzer has more range then a tank-canon. Thats the way it is. I thougt the Blitzkrieg Mod should be more realistic?
I am not balistic expert but isn't this misleading? Howitzers could shoot over larger distance but that was because they fired indirectly. If you could take KT gun and elevate it to same angle as a howitzer (so you would use it for indirect fire), it would drastically increase its range too. It is not like the Stupa has some option to realistically elevate the howitzer in a same way as, for example, Priest or Grille. Wasn't it also the case that these "howitzer tanks" were used for direct fire? If so, then this:
NOHOMO wrote:If there is a little hill in the way the Stupa hits nothing.
is simply realistic behavior (not that "realism" is any main argument but you brought it up).

NOHOMO wrote:Other howitzers like the grille can fire on every unit but the Stupa cant shot at tanks and infrantry?
It can, but not at range of 80. Get it to range of 60 and it will shoot at anything you want.

NOHOMO wrote:This is just an artificial deterioration.
Yes it is, just as is artificially deteorated the realistic range of every cannon in the game and some other elements of the game too.

NOHOMO wrote:And now the scatter is even more higher?
Yes it is. And if we consider that it had almost no scatter at all, which resulted in the gun hitting things even when the game "rolled" a miss (realism for the win!!!), it is a good thing

NOHOMO wrote:And the combination Panther-Stupa is no excuse - US would have the same advantages with Phersing-Sherman 105.
Are you really comparing performance of StuPa to 105 Sherman and think they are equal? Try to compare all their factors, not just their purpose.

About Scott - same applies, you can still shoot with it at normal range without any cost. If you want to exceed the normal rangem it costs ammo.

Tiger1996 wrote:Despite being under severe time pressure, in fact... I already have a couple of PvP games recorded for the beta, but i will not upload or post them for some of my very own reasons.
Saying this is the same as saying "I don't have any replays". Anyone can claim anything, without proof there is no reason to believe it.

Tiger1996 wrote:And since when does it work this way? The more replays posted.. the higher the chance for the opinion to be considered and appreciated by the devs?
Since recently. We're done with people immediately bitching about how everything will be completely fucked up without playing a single game with the new changes.

Tiger1996 wrote:If we take a live example, my opinion never really got more weight by the devs, no matter how many games i upload... Actually, it might be even the opposite, as i feel like it does only make the opinion less important and sometimes even ignored by the devs.
I don't want to hit any nerves here but you got yourself into that position with videos which showed some pre-set situation where some unit got quickly wrecked and then you tried to present it as a proof of the unit being generally useless. I don't remember what exactly it was about but as an example I know you had some video on Angloville map where there was a Tiger parked in the middle of a road it got blown up by something else...no support, no attempt to move the unit etc. - no resemblence of real game situation but still it was used as a "proof" that something was OP (or that Tigers were weak? don't really remember). Or you've presented videos with situations which were quite rare (some lucky shots killing this or that), or possibly some very luckly bounce-offs and again presented them as a general problem. Are we really to blame for taking such videos with scepticism?
Also, wasn't the video where RL Jeep kills a Tiger also yours? There were changes made based on that report. I think there were more chages to units based on your reports, if the reports showed a genuenly problematic issue.

Tiger1996 wrote:Next time, when a feedback is given that you think is lacking game-play experience insights.. then you could just point exactly at which part of the feedback where you think the player is missing the track of the changes...
Sorry but no. This has been the practice for as long as I can remember and where does it ever lead? Does this conversation remind you something?
Person1: This change is a problem because (unit A) will be absolutely helpless if it happens that (situation X).
Person2: No, (unit A) will be fine if you use (ability F).
Person1: What? How can you use that ability? There is never time for that, and also if your oponent has half brain he will use (unit B) to prevent it.
Person2: If he brings (unit B) you can counter it with your (unit C), what is the problem?
Person1: lol? Everyone knows that (unit C) is useless because it gets wiped by (unit D). I have never seen anyone use (unit C).
P2: I've never had this problem. I always did (move K) and I was fine.
P1: Then you play against noobs because (move K) can anyone beat with a simple (move M).
P2: I play with various people, some are really good BK players, e.g. (names), and as I say - never had the problem with (unit A). Sometimes can happen that (situation Y) but that is quite rare and even that can be countered by (move/unit R). Not to mention that you original post compares performance of (unit A) against (situation X) but you completely forget about costs!
P1: Yeah, (unit A) costs (prize) and the other unit costs (10 less) so it is actually even worse!
P2: Not true, you're forgetting tiering costs, with the tiering costs (unit A) is at (price +10) while the other unit is at (price).
P1: So?
P2: So I am right.
P1: You're not.
P2: Care to explain why?
P1: Upkeeps.
P3: Yes +1!
P2: Yeah but in the late game (faction L) has lower upkeeps than (faction U) so that is not really relevant.
P4: I think you're wrong.
P1: How can that be not relevant? Because of the upkeeps you won't even get to late game with (faction L)!
P2: You will, if you unlock (whatever V) first, then your entire (faction U) is fucked.
P1: No it is not because in (doctrine O) of (faction L) you can unlock (whatever Z) sooner and (faction C) cannot do jackshit then, especially if you chose (doctrine T).
(goes on for several pages until there are no more letters to use and then the letters start to repeat)
So...is that familiar? It should be, it is in a nutshell every major discussion that has taken place here in past years. So yeah...no more. People should back their theories with facts, if they don't it is just a theory and will be considered as such.
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3560
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Warhawks97 » 17 May 2019, 12:47

Tiger1996 wrote:
- Blitz doc tech tree looks much better now, despite that I would still suggest replacing ammo unlock with Maultier for 2CP (1CP can be borrowed from Stuka plane unlock) while making it independent from the mass production line.. and then finally allowing LeiG.18 as a special unit in this doctrine. As it doesn't make sense being a reward of Pak38 AT gun...


agreed.


- About US Armor doc,
At the first look, it's impossible for that to go un-noticed... Pershing is now delayed to 9CP (from 5CP) and SP or PAce is delayed to 11CP (from 9CP) and 75mm Jumbo is delayed to 6CP (from just 2CP in infantry doc) while i believe there is absolutely nothing wrong about this historically, because all those are late war US tanks. Yet, as much as I am fine with it.. as much as i believe it would be most necessary to significantly buff the armor of regular Pershings in order to compensate their late appearance on the battlefield.. and don't forget that Tiger tanks are also planned to be unlocked so early in Terror doctrine.. including the Tiger Ace which is probably going to require only 7CP (at least 2CP earlier) being as early as Panther.G now... Accordingly, the armor resistance of Pershing tanks should be on a much higher level... And the SP unlock should have ACE Pershing available when the SP is gone.



Can agree to 70%... but same for jumbo when it comes so late.


- Increased range of "Commander Off-map Barrage" to 90 (from 70)

Can't say anything except that it's such a terrible change right there and has to be reverted back immediately. This way, you can sooo easily kill ANY Flak88s with this ability.. given the fact that Flak88s have 85 range. This ability isn't supposed to be a counter to Flak88s unless you get the chance to get close enough by the help of some terrain obstacles, like taking cover behind houses with your vehicle.


It is the purpose of it. What else is the purpose of calling arty when its not to destroy defenses before you ride into them.


NOHOMO wrote:

But the Stupa has an howitzer and a howitzer has more range then a tank-canon. Thats the way it is. I thougt the Blitzkrieg Mod should be more realistic?
Other howitzers like the grille can fire on every unit but the Stupa cant shot at tanks and infrantry? This is just an artificial deterioration. If there is a little hill in the way the Stupa hits nothing. And now the scatter is even more higher?
And the combination Panther-Stupa is no excuse - US would have the same advantages with Phersing-Sherman 105. So wheres the problem?


Wrong.

Howitzer does not mean more, range, in fact its less. The calibre to barrel lenght ratio for howitzer is shorter than that of Canons, thus if you have a canon and howitzer of same calibre, the gun has more range but weights also much more.

Not sure how much you know about it the barrel lenght is set in relation fo shell dimameter. Like when you have lets say 105 mm (diameter) L/28 gun it means that you have 105x28 mm=2940 mm long barrel.
The longer the barrel in relation to the shell size, the more power and speed the shell gets and the longer the range.
That also means that if you would want a 105, 122 or 150 mm gun to have the same barrel lenght ratio as a 75 mm gun has, the gun would be massive.

Look for example at the russian 152 mm ML-20 howitzers (some of them fitted in famous ISU 152). They were howitzers with a calibre lenght L/29. These barrels were 4412 mm long and could fire over 17 km. And they weight over 7 tons.
The germans manufactured canons in this calibre like the 150 mm Kanone 18 or 39 (in very limited numbers, less than 100) and these weight over 12 tons in order achive a range of 24 to over 25 km. So they had to almost double the weight of the gun which was un-practical in the field.

The main purpose of howitzer is to loop shells with as much HE load as possible over defenses while being as light as possible, not to straight outrange other weapons. The range is gained by elevation and amount of gunpowder, not necessarily due to shells flight speed etc.


As other comparision: The german 105 mm L/28 Leichte Feldhaubitze 18M (light field howitzer 18M) was already an upgraded version with muzzle break and 3308 mm long barrel to increase the range. Its max shooting range was 12.325 meters and had a weight of slightly over 3 tons when moving and 2 tons when shooting.
The Sherman 76 L/55 mm gun had a max shooting range of 14,7 km.
The stuh42 that mounted a 105 mm L/28 had a max shooting range of 5000 meters and less. It didnt reach 12 km bc it couldnt elevate so high.
The German 100 mm L/52 Kanone 42 had 6300 mm long barrel and had a weight of over 5,5 tons in order to achieve a range over 21 km.
The german standard heavy howitzer was the 150 mm L/29,5 Heavy field howitzer 36. It had a range of 12,5 km and and barrel length of 4125 mm and weight 3450 kg.


As you can see, howitzers are different from guns and are more similiar to mortars.
1. Their barrel lenght relation to shell size is small. Usually between L20 and max L30. In this case, russians and germans, had about L/27 to 29.
2. They have much shorter point blank range. Thats the range where you dont have to adjust trajectory and where you can aim straight at the target. Thus its incredible difficlut to aim in direct fire with howitzers.
3. They deliver as much HE as possible while being as light as possible. A canon of same claibre usually weights twice as much.
4. They rely on usually indirect fire to loop shells over defenses.



Thus saying howitzer=more range than canons is the greatest miss-believe and miss-conception among the regular population with little understanding of military equipment.


The Grille is for instance incorrect in game from a realistic perspective. It as an Infantry gun like the 75 mm leig. They had to be very light and being used right at front or close behind it to provide quick fire support for inf. Thus their range was never more than 5 km. Sadly the Grille is treated like being a normal howitzer like that of the Hummel.
The grille used the SiG 33 150 mm gunL/11. As you can see its shell to barrel lenght ratio was very small with just L/11. But it was with 1800 kg even lighter than the german 105 mm Field Howitzer 18.
That exact same gun was used by stupa. The guns max range was less than 5 km due to the short barrel. Technically, a sherman 76 could fire three times as far with 14 km but its questionable or impossible to hit something via direct fire or to penetrate anything.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 17 May 2019, 13:49, edited 3 times in total.

NOHOMO
Posts: 4
Joined: 17 May 2019, 07:34

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby NOHOMO » 17 May 2019, 14:05

MarKr wrote:
About Scott - same applies, you can still shoot with it at normal range without any cost. If you want to exceed the normal rangem it costs ammo.


Maybe for the Stupa and the Sherman 105 this makes sense because they can destroy emplacements with few hits...but why I should spend ammo on one 75mm-shot from the M8 Scott that doesn't do damage to buildings? So I must spend ammo for 10 shots to destroy one MG-nest? That doesn't sound effective to me.

You can't give the M8 Scott an ability to help him destroing emplacements when he's not able to destroy emplacements in an reasonable time. Or do I understand this false?

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3900
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Tiger1996 » 17 May 2019, 14:17

Warhawks97 wrote:It is the purpose of it. What else is the purpose of calling arty when its not to destroy defenses before you ride into them.

The problem is.. this ability is very cheap (only 85 ammo i think) but still one of the most lethal arty barrages in the game, and at least 3x times more lethal than the infantry doctrine off-map 105mm arty barrage.. because it has much higher precision and many more shells to deliver at the designated area.. it would kill any Flak88 emplacement immediately, even if it's full health.. and probably even bunkers won't last a chance against it... I understand that it's an arty barrage that is supposed to be countering defense, but at the same time.. it shouldn't be a brainless ability.. else, what is the purpose of Flak88s at all if they get countered so easily in various ways? Thus, i think this ability should have nothing more than 70 range, or much higher cost...

MarKr wrote:Sorry but no. This has been the practice for as long as I can remember and where does it ever lead?

You see.. this is my 3rd post on this topic, my first post was feedback about the beta... While my 2nd post was nothing more than a reaction to a particular (nearly off-topic) statement... And guess what? You choose to WASTE time typing a long ass post full of nonsense trying to illustrate how it's so much unworthy and a "WASTE of time" to respond back at the actual feedback as you believe that it leads nowhere and endless discussions... While i truly wonder; Wouldn't it be more worthy and less of a time waste if you could have just better reacted to the goddamn suggestions??

Like really... What do you prefer? Wasting your time trying to explain to me how it's useless to respond.. or wasting time actually responding to the actual bloody hell ideas and feedback? I'm not going to argue about if the replays i upload or my videos are convenient enough to you or not.. nor am i going to waste time to help you investigating my intentions whether if I am a liar when i say that I already have replays for beta or whatnot...

I provided clear ideas and insights... if you have something to say regarding those ideas, then go ahead.. but please don't keep circling around with me in meaningless arguments. Else, i swear that this would be my ever last feedback to give.. even if serious bugs were discovered, and i wouldn't give a damn.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2823
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby MarKr » 17 May 2019, 16:41

Tiger1996 wrote:You see.. this is my 3rd post on this topic, my first post was feedback about the beta... While my 2nd post was nothing more than a reaction to a particular (nearly off-topic) statement... And guess what? You choose to WASTE time typing a long ass post full of nonsense trying to illustrate how it's so much unworthy and a "WASTE of time" to respond back at the actual feedback as you believe that it leads nowhere and endless discussions...
Your perception of the situation is different than mine. I chose to INVEST my time into explaining why I believe that arguing about balance is pointless if people acutally DON'T have experience with the balance of the mod version they speak about (a.k.a "they have not played it (enough or at all)"). I invested my time this way, hoping that it will lead to discussion which is based on FACTS (proof from the replays) rather than WASTING my time pages on pages of discussion based on THEORIES (argumenting what might potentially happen IF this or that situation occurs).

Therefore
Tiger1996 wrote:Wouldn't it be more worthy and less of a time waste if you could have just better reacted to the goddamn suggestions?
From my experience, no it would not - if I take another look at your post there are many "I think..." and "I believe..." sentences (so theories backed up by no hard evidence showing that the situation with the mod will evolve this way), then some stuff you're OK with (so no need to react there), and then some suggestions that have been said and repeaded several times in various topics (we've read them before, know about them).

I didn't want to call you a liar or whatever, I just wanted to point at the fact that if we ask people for replays to back what they're saying, then saying "I have the replays but I won't show you, just trust me" is simply no reason for us to change anything. By the way, I have a dozen of replays of intense PvP games from the Alpha testing period and there is no single time where anyone would say that they need basic +5 ammo income to compensate for the ammo upkeep, nor a single time where it would show that removal of over-repair hinders allies in any significant way, nor a single time where it would prove that payed shot of StuPa would have a problem dealing with emplacements, nor any Axis player complaining that Armor player has been killing his 88 emplacements with TC arty (and there were several games of Armor doc vs the Def doc (the updated one, which comes next). See? I have a proof against your points.

Tiger1996 wrote:i swear that this would be my ever last feedback to give.. even if serious bugs were discovered, and i wouldn't give a damn.
Nobody forces you to report bugs. It is nice when people do it but we cannot force them so if they won't, they won't (even though they are against them selves by doing so). However, I would like to point out that there is a difference between a bug report (which is for us easy to evaluate as a true bug just from description of it and then replicate it in the game (to see if it really happens) and then fix it) and demanding a change based on reading a changelog and immediately coming up with theories on what problems the changes may bring in certain situations (even though you have not experienced the situation even once).
Image

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1700
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby kwok » 17 May 2019, 17:12

First, the post about playing before complaining is directed a general audience, not specifically you Tiger. But that doesn't mean I personally don't suspect you haven't played it. It's the idea that large posts came in within 2 hours of posting of the beta, in that time at max a person could've played 2 games? Can ideas really be clear and credible after playing a heavily restructured new rework after two games? Did you explore all the possibilities of the rework outside of what you knew about the doctrine before the rework? 3 doctrines got changed, is 2 games enough to understand how the new doctrines works? I'd imagine you'd want at least 3 games, 1 with each doctrine, to form an opinion of all the doctrines. Hopefully, it's more than just 3 games though because you want AT LEAST 3x3 (for every doctrine, play against every other doctrine), and that's just a MINIMUM to get an understanding of how the new doctrine works.

This isn't just the work of the devs btw, these reworks are accumulations of many ideas pieced together to try to get a big picture with some players testing this over 15-30 games prior to this beta. If you think these are ideas that just come out of my own ass, then that's absolutely wrong and insulting to others who have had opinions and more importantly had the open-mindedness to TRY new things before putting their own wants ahead of what a community might want.

Anyways, your ideas have been read Tiger, how we go about addressing them will have to wait while others get a chance to try.

User avatar
blacktigerace
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 May 2019, 01:27
Location: Wehrmacht

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby blacktigerace » 17 May 2019, 17:55

MarKr wrote:me = no limit arty means, 105mm mortar is spamable?

Mar = The changelog says that the limit has been removed from static howitzers - these are the 105mm howitzers of Infantry and Defensive doctrine + 25 pounders in Artillery doctrine. Mortars are unchanged.


relic00024.jpg


i feel so confident with this line of defenses :'V
so stronk

NOHOMO wrote:Maybe for the Stupa and the Sherman 105 this makes sense because they can destroy emplacements with few hits...but why I should spend ammo on one 75mm-shot from the M8 Scott that doesn't do damage to buildings? So I must spend ammo for 10 shots to destroy one MG-nest? That doesn't sound effective to me.


i think he right, i already try 3 games but 2 games is againts AI, and M8 scott is bad at take down emplacement, you cant blame devs for this, M8 scott max upgrade using 75mm hotwizer U.u , my suggest, maybe just add more unit limit to M8 scott? since this LT is good againts infantry, but yeah... its 75mm and have stuart armor, its little bit bad at taking down emplacement maybe just buff the unit limit to 4x M8 scott in battle?

=====================================================================================


others think i found, and my suggestions =

1. for US, can you exchange M15A1 to M16 halftrack in armor doctrine? while in infantry doctrine use M15A1 instead of M16 halftrack, for mobile AA unit for armor doct.

2. can you bring back ostwind to blitzkrieg doctrine? just make the unit limit to 2x ostwind, since blitz ground unit, will always need AA support, even a column of tanks and infantry so easily get killed by P47 patrols spam, and that 2x ostwind at least can kill 1x plane, even with 1x plane shotdown, if the P47 patrol still active, the game still spawn 1x more plane to keep it 2x planes every attack, and also... ostwind is everyone favorite tanks :v included wilberwind, they are Destroyer of World units


=====================================================================================

kwok wrote:Guys look, comments and opinions are appreciated and listened to but...
Did anyone actually TRY a pvp game on the patch yet? Or even the last one? It was literally posted THIS DAY. And before you say “no one else is on playing it so why bother”, the time it takes to write a response is as long as it takes to set up a game with another player from your steam list and play.

If you HAVE played the patch, then this doesn’t apply to you. I know some of the people who have. As far as I know who, their opinion will likely get more preferential treatment when it comes to considering.

Bonus points if you post replays. The more replays you post, the more we can analyze a real game in action and the more we will appreciate your opinion.


and i have some question..., devs always try their mod in their PCs right? O.o
im sorry for say something bad like this.... but its that true?
because me and other players so hard to find PVP partner, because we need wait our BFF or waiting our COH squad to test the beta, just waiting in room for random people come and shouting in discord will not help to much, because.... you know.... COH is ded game in PVP mode, with team killer still exist in the game
while "maybe" the devs, admins, forum admins is always contacting each others every hour?

but still, we need random PVP room to test the games, to found more problems in every battle situation
Last edited by blacktigerace on 17 May 2019, 19:12, edited 2 times in total.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1700
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby kwok » 17 May 2019, 17:59

blacktigerace wrote:
and i have some question..., devs always try their mod in their PCs right? O.o
im sorry for say something bad like this.... but its that true?
because me and other players so hard to find PVP partner, because we need wait our BFF or waiting our COH squad to test the beta, just waiting in room for random people come and shouting in discord will not help to much, because.... you know.... COH is ded game in PVP mode, with team killer still exist in the game
while "maybe" the devs, admins, forum admins is always contacting each others every hour?

but still, we need random PVP room to test the games, to found more problems in every battle situation


I have a game up right now you can come.
For the most part in the BK community, it is very steam-friend based. What timezone are you in? Most players are either in europe or america. Sometimes it's hard to find games at other times. There use to be more russian players but they all disappeared. Maybe sukin will come back with the doctrine reworks someday and he will bring his russian friends back

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3560
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby Warhawks97 » 17 May 2019, 18:03

For the scott/stuh issue of 1 shot at an emplacment doesnt help, what about having like 2 or 3 types of barrage available.

Like for example, if you think you have to hit an emplacment twice with a stupa, you can use the ability that makes two shots at it for higher cost and the risk of being shot by something during the reload process for the second shot.

The stuh would have the abilities to shoot one, two or three times at an emplacment, but the process would require like a half min to make three shots, increasing the risk of getting hit during process.

For the scott there would be an ability to fire two shots (one really wont help), three or four at an emplacment and having fastest reload of course.
Also if you selected lets say three shots and the target emplacment is destroyed by the second already, the last shot would not get fired. The ammo will be wasted whatsoever. So you have to be aware of the risks (eg counter arty, fast tds etc) and the ammount of shots required in order to prevent losing your unit or wasting ammo.

The shooting process can be manually disrupted when dangers emerge ofc.


Just a thought.

User avatar
blacktigerace
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 May 2019, 01:27
Location: Wehrmacht

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby blacktigerace » 17 May 2019, 18:06

kwok wrote:I have a game up right now you can come.
For the most part in the BK community, it is very steam-friend based. What timezone are you in? Most players are either in europe or america. Sometimes it's hard to find games at other times. There use to be more russian players but they all disappeared. Maybe sukin will come back with the doctrine reworks someday and he will bring his russian friends back


oh no T.T
i really want to come, but its already midnight in my city, i must go to bed soon even i dont want
im in south east asia timezone :\

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1700
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 5.1.8. beta (Doctrine rework, update 1)

Postby kwok » 17 May 2019, 18:11

Okay, next time. You can add me on steam.


Return to “Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yuri Boyka and 56 guests