Terence's Mouth wrote:Okay i understand your point, but a big problem now where the units are well balanced are the emplacements.
Aliet can fight vs Axis in a balanced way but still can build map full of emplacements.
There is realy a need to change this.
Again, unless you have like 60-80% of the map its pretty usless to start spamming emplacments as allied. Axis would have enough res to bomb them to durst. So allied have some use of emplacments in early game and then when using single one. But only emplacment spam while axis have still 50% of the map? Thats suicide coz axis would have enough res for elites and arty.
1.Older times aliet was weaker but had more and cheaper emplacements that was a good way to stop axis.
"had"? the US had vcoh MG "tent" with voch weapon stats and HP. Three bursts of a fucking lmg killed the emplacment already... you think that was good and more "funny"? At the same time the emplacment did cost quite a lot! US simply got the cal 30 MG nest for the heavy cal 30 cost like every other faction has it. So you tink it was nice that US had an MG nest with vcoh stats? you must be kidding i guess
2.Now aliet are stronger but still have that cheap emplacements.
They have just got their normal MG stats and cost. So what? the cal 50 emplacment is the most expensive one, yet not as good against inf as others. High damage but almost no suppression which sucks. No other emplacment got changed in cost or anything. The 107 got reduced HP (reduced by quite a lot which is fine i think). RE emplacment cant or shouldnt bounce schrecks anymore. So again what are you talking about?
Pls dont tell me now axis have stronger emplacements.
They have. if you go def doc with defensive upgrade then an 88 emplacment can survive long tom strike with arround 40% HP left. They cost more than allied, but are not worse. But allied simply have more res for a mix of emplacment and normal units. And to be honest, they have to. In teamfights if the game turns into late game and when allied want to make the last push to base then they should have some emplacment defense back up. Otherwise they would risk getting steamroled by a single axis tank. Also US is all about preventation, esspecially inf doc. If you have too many res in reserve as inf doc then its kinda bad. It wont help you to "react better" on new situations. Its better to always invest res into back up units like paks and emplacments to make sure not getting killed in an axis counterattack. So the best way playing inf doc in teamfight late game is to simply increase your army size and to upgrade the supply yard and providing support for teammates.
Axis spend more res into single strong (defensive or normal combat) units and keep more in reserve (over invetment just hurts to adjust on new situations and hurts the income). They do not rely that much on a mix of and offensvive and defense units as their normal units are capable offensive and defensive units (Take a panther as sample. have Panther and most enemie tanks or inf wont bother you anymore, just keep 50 mm pak behind to kill fast and fragile allied TD´s). Allied distinguish more between offense and defensive units and usually have an reserve simply because axis counterattacks are much harder to stop than allied counterattacks. Have an easy eight in your lines, still you need help of special anti inf and heavy anti tank weapons when a panther or inf attacks (usually).
The Axis defense is much better suited for a comeback, esspecially the durable def doc defense. And thats their purpose.
Most of games especiacily 2vs2 games arnent played by Def or SE doc but with INF or Britains Docs.
And this games are just to boring or to much struggling for axis that there isnt any fun.
I played against inf, RE and a third doc. I loved that game as it was really a challange for me as axis. But as wolf said, in old times playing allied was a challange. A mate of me (Luftjäger) actually agrees with you. But he freely says that he likes games where one side is easy win, the other hard and challanging. That way, he said, he can play the challanging faction to have a challange. And when he wins with the harder playable side he can be proud of himself. But he openly that allied was the harder playable faction. But again, as wolf said, it was not only challanging as allied, it was very often pure frustration. Like when you won a game and then stupa wins a 1 vs 2 against to jacksons. Only when we made rules and agreements before game starts it could be fun to play and yes, we often did that.
Maybe i remind you on the games against you. First you complained about my 88 spam. Its noobish and no fun you said. Then i beat you ONLY with krad spam and sector arty soam (i had only 2 combat units, max three) and you complained again, telling me i use "noob tactics" (your words). Then i used a mortar Bunker against you in 2 vs 2. It was trolling and again you complained. So in the last games i didnt use all the stuff you hated so much (88, sector arty, Mortar Bunker and what else). That already was an agreement between me and you so that you could have fun without being frustrated by that "noob tactics" and "no fun unit use" and "no fun gameplay". For me it was a bit trolling, for you it was apparently frustrating. I also had to make agreements not to use certain units. Nobody wanted to play with me unless i promissed not to use 88 guns. I did expand this agreement by forbiding the use of sd2 and sector arty on enemie ground for myself. Sector arty got fixed (another very good sample for something that got hated many players and which caused again frustration for many allied players), sd2 weakend, still i forbid myself using them and i will never use them again probably.
You said "in old times aliet never had fun" but now axis have most time struggling games if they dont use tons of artillery.
Generally games look realy much more static than ever before because all this changes make axis players playing more defensive and aliet ever played defensive.
All that comes from that balancing infantry and tanks while not rebalancing emplacements, pls think about that.
It would be funny making some voch experiences. I would say that axis players in vcoh are 1000x more skilled than most of the axis players in BK. I did play axis quite a lot in vcoh in past year and got many losses there. But this is what i call a challange. Ok, once you got all units vet 2 or 3 its easier and when panther spam comes. But the time up to that is pretty hard. No defense will live long there as off map arty etc has no cooldown. And as PE you have 0 defense at all in vcoh. At the same time you have just 3 men squads with reinforce cost of 45 per men. And then lots of upgrades. Still its very fun to play in their specific way. In vcoh all sides are challanging in their own ways. Axis have trouble because US spams so much inf with BAR´s at default after upgrade, even when spawning out of 150 MP triage centers.
So if you really think that axis are now very hard to play and very challanging, then you havent played vcoh with good players. There you cant just hide for a long time behind paks and mgs or behind a single scout car. Just saying.
Tanks are well balanced for me, Infantry is okay balanced for me too, Arty vs Arty is balanced okay but the last thing you have to adjust are the emplacements
And this is a big problem i think, the balance with strong axis infantry vs weak aliet infantry in combination with emplacements worked fine but what now?
Playing boring camp/bombing games? Limit the emplacments or put all of them out of the game?
For reasons above, removal is a bad move. Esspecially in late game teamfights its hard to fight allied without emplacments as little back up support. But i gave also reasons: Allis normal HMG crew arent worth to build. A Allied HMG crew will simply lose the ranged fight against axis inf with lmg and k98. Put your grens with K98 and lmg in yellow cover, fighting against an allied HMG that is not behind green cover. Or Volks in green cover vs Allied HMG in green cover. The axis squad will win. Put gebirgs on a field and vickers HMG in yellow cover. The Gebirgs can manage to kill the HMG crew with just one or two losses. Add vet to them and allied HMGs will die quickly. Thats simply because the axis damageoutput at range is higher with rifles and LMG as the damage from the allied weapon crew. And this is why i dont really use Allied HMG crews and instead Emplacments.
Make a test. Get Luft inf or Grens. Use sprint and run towards and Allied HMG crew. I am sure that you get into grenade range (30 range nade range for axis) before the allied HMG can effectively suppress. And then add yellow cover (craters) and use a vet 2 basic gren squad rushing towards a Allied HMG.
And finally: Use vet 2 ranger, let them run over a field full with craters against an HMG42. I am sure the axis overrun the Allied HMG, even without nades and just stgs. The HMg42 will suppress and shred the Rangers vet 2 (or even three) before they can do anything and MG42 wont use a single men. So again, axis are not really in a great need of emplacments.
As long as all that works that way, the emplacments will keep playing a major role simply as they cant get killed by Axis small arms fire in a ranged fight. Also Emplacments are better suited to segregate Axis tank from inf. A normal HMG crew would get killed by the Panther and inf could follow the Panther. The emplacment cant stop the Panther, but at least stopping/weakening the inf while panther passes, or Panther must stop to kill emplacment which gives you some time.
When there is an axis force of panther (maybe even 2) and some brutal Schreck/stg squads i would say that the only possible allied counter chance would be an SP+ lots of shermans+ sniper. Using only normal HMG crews wouldnt work as they would die instantly. And ambushed units would maybe damage a panther, but would then get "schrecked". Esspecially now, as axis heavies armor got buffed, those would steamrole just everything which is not an emplacment in an blink of an eye. So emplacment for allied have some important fuctions:
1. Slowing down axis advanca a bit
2. Soaking damage: schrecks are fired against emplacments, so tanks have better chance to fight the axis tanks.
3. Weaken axis assault (or they would right drive till allied base. Just like illa does it with panthers atm.
4. Early warning.
5. Pak emplacments can fire more shots against an axis tanks as an ambushed pak, thus increasing the chance to make at least one pen shot.
In contrary to that, imagine allied attack: 3 ranger squads, 3 easy eights and a pershing. Axis need a jagdpanzer IV/70 in ambush that cant be "zooked" easily unlike allis TD can get "schrecked" and which is also able to keep fighting when being not in ambush anymore (allied must retreat usually when ambush didnt kill the axis tank usually). A inf squad (maybe Pgrens or a single luft squad) next to it and the rangers would be also dead in seconds.
You know, thats called diversity.
I only see one good idea that could solve that problem and this are that little/middle artillery guns for all doctrines.
(They definatly have to make enough damage to destroy vickers and mortar emplacements)
Plus another idea i realy like is to give all artillery 2 types of shooting(like the caliope with short and long shooting time)
I like this one. I often asked to add more light arty. As light arty i consider: all 75 mm Arty (CW Truck, pack howitzer, leig 18), calli jeep 25 pounder (87,6 mm) and maybe even 88, though its damage is quite capable in killing even tanks. Also maybe the 150 nebler.
Does anyone btw knows if there is a model for the Sexton SPG (CW spg that looks similiar to priest and which has 25 pounder).
So when we would got through doctrines i would say it would almost look ideal like that. Bad thing is that it again includes some doctrinal suggestions. I thought i could do it without:(
The leig 18 could be in all axis docs. The problem is, that the Terror and Def doc has already a quite large ammount of arty tools and off map stuff combined with biggest tanks. US 75 mm arty moved from FHQ to Motorpool for inf doc, and added in AB motorpool.
PURE theory thinking now! Dont take this tooo serious pls!
BK doc (breakthrough doctrine or Heavy Tank Division):
As it would contain all Tigers and KT´s (rewards):
Maultier+ leig 18. I am even thinking about having Hummel in this doc as Hummel was attached mainly to germans armor divisions. The Limit would be one Hummel. But the doc would maybe lose even the elite inf, but not sure to be honest. (Limit: 1 Hummel)
Terror/Propaganda doc. Maybe even named to Infantry assault doc:
Leig 18, 150 nebler and Hotchkiss. Also 170 mm off map "Kanone 18" strike. no more V1, firestorm or VT for nebler.
Includes as units stormtooper and special gren upgrades. Also stuh/stupa (not as super range units) against emplacments and inf support guns.
leig 18+88 guns, 105 mm lefH 18/40 M.
CW arty doc:
would have Sexton with 25 pdr as spg. And an off map 114 mm artillery strike. Also the normal 25 pdrs. (Limit: 3x Sexton)
Has 95 mm arty churchs (and and expensive heavy spearfire 114 mm strike)
95 mm cromwell. (limit: 1)
Inf Division (renamed into mechanized Infantry doctrine):
75 mm HT and Priest (just not that current sniper priest with mega range, simply a priest with 105 gun and same performence of the field howitzer. And the off maps. (limit: 2 priest, 3 75 mm HT)
Counterbalance: Rangers not cheaper anymore and more elite units. The inf mass production wouldnt decrease the cost by so much anymore. It might help to reduce the ammount of emplacments, but not sure. But spam of inf+emplacments would be harder.
Calli jeep and 75 mm pack howitzer. (Limt: 2 calli jeep)
Calli sherman and 105 sherman. I once suggested as light army to have scott with small arty barrage. Ive seen the ability in corsix already or parts of it. Also the TC off map. Maybe even Priest as reward to 105 sherman? Not sure to be honest. (limit: 1 calli, 2 105 SPG, scott?)
SP removed, obviously.
PE TH doc:
Very hard to say here. The hotchkiss might stay but it doesnt fit so nicely. Since German Tank destroyers got attached to armored divisions its really hard to say here. Atm i would say: Panther G instead of Nashorn. Doc name: Panzer Doctrine (with increased Anti tank capabilties).
Arty: Walking Stuka+ Wespe. (Limit: 1 Wespe, 2 walking stuka.).
The SE doc would be not an arty doc anymore or not so much. It is focusing more on ambushes, traps and stuff. So i consider the Grille as better suited here with short range. Also access to the 120 mortar and leifH 18/40 M.
Now at first this looks: "OMG, KT and Hummel in one doc? OP!"
But it has a simple explantation. The main big arty producer atm are SE doc and RA. Why? They often do nothing else than investing their res into expensive big arty. So big arty comes so fast, that light arty is becoming very fast obsolet. Now the big arty units which cause massive arty are now moved to docs which also have to field other heavy stuff. So instead having one doc that does nothing else then save res for wespe, we now have players being forced to either get expensive big arty and/or Big expensive tanks. So the total ammount of big arty units would be reduced+ they would come by far later (if they come). And if someone manages to get a Tiger and Hummel, then he will most likely lack everything else.
So the typicall "rush" straight for wespe/Hummel, Priest and Grille wouldnt be there anymore. RA would have only Sexton and not a single gun larger than 87,6 mm. Only one 114 mm off map.
RE only 95 mm so far (and again little 114 off map). Cracking major defense would be AVRE job.
Inf would have a quite large arty arsenal, but downside again: the player cant get lots of inf+ lots of arty+ lots of emplacments. Hardly all arty at once. So never would every piece be fielded. So it can provide very strong arty support, but then would lack in other things which are also important for the Team.
Ok, sorry for such a mega thread again. And yeah, its pure theory speaking but i get like all night new ideas for docs etc. In these i am also attempting to solve current issues brought in steam or forum.