RE Doc?

[Panzer-Lehr-Division]

Hi Shanks,

in my humble opinion I think that 95mm Churchill is actually one of the best arty units in the game, not expensive at all.. very precise, and does a lot of damage! Also the barrage is very cheap... Just it doesn't have much range, but in return; it does have much armor!
Actually, the 95mm Churchill can 1 shot 150mm rocket launcher trucks such as "Opel Maultier" and can also destroy bunkers quite reliably.

I prefer the Comet much more than in the past now, it's faster.. cheaper and still quite powerful (can still bounce off 50mm and Pak40 sometimes).
Just it does no longer bounce off 88mm or 75mm L/70 cannons or PanzerShrecks somehow!

RE doctrine is still capable of beating Blitz doctrine in a head to head battle, and possibly Terror doctrine too.. that's if you manage to produce your Churchills early enough... Churchills already are way too cheap for what they can do early game!
And by the way, realistically... They would be much more expensive than that.. just saying.

Also, as always RE doc can do both defensive and offensive tasks very quickly almost in every stage of the game... You can be offensive early game with Churchills and later Fireflys as well as Comets combined with Achilles, or you can be defensive with 17pdr emplacements which you can still construct in no time.. in addition; you gain A LOT more resources than anyone else in the game after the improved HQ trucks unlock.
Other doctrines can only be aggressive and constantly attack but can't really defend at the same time, such as Blitz doc...

Shortly that's my opinion, thanks for reading!

Ofc you do, comets are dying pretty fast against tigers now.. jk

[Krieger Blitzer]

Honestly yes
Though, 1 Tiger tank would often have to face at least 2 or 3 Comets now.. not just one Comet anymore!
So it's still fine ^^

[Warhawks97]

Keep the comet as it is now. I agree with markr and others.

In regards to AVRE. When i failed to destroy a bunker i thought that i missed. Nice to hear things will get improved.

@Tiger: The 95 mm is accurate but the drawbacks are that they are slow and have very short range. If you lose a maultier to it you did something wrong. Maultier has what? 185 range or 175 (which i think was stuka).

Also dont keep comparing all docs with BK. True, RE is unique in their capabilties to support offensives, defensives and anti tank. But that doesnt mean that there is no other doctrine that can provide powerfull defense while also having decent assault capabilties. Just RE is very unique and thus helpfull in teamfights.

If anything is unfair it is this. And thats where many allied docs struggle. Their arty cant compete and get outranged by so many stuff. The 210 nebler, stuka and maultier -or whatever you take- can bring deadly packages in a short time over such huge distances and are afterall mobile and relatively cheap (many cost no CP).
Meanwhile any allied arty has to get damn close or is simply immobile when it has range and the only exception is the priest. Their howitzers are useless to an extend as that they get countered right after the first barrage. exceptions are when you are largely dominating the game alreay. The mobile arty is short ranged between 120-150 and is slow or either takes long to end the barrage so that it gets countered as well everytime.

So again the question. Why axis arty- nebler (200 range), maultier (185), walking stuka/Hotckiss (175) just to give examples- need this range? I am not asking to get as short as 120 which would make them being killed anytime they fire. If the so called dismantle time of neblers is the reason, well remove it. Neblers would be quickly relocated at the cost of being short ranged assault arty.
But that way i think we would have much better fairness when it comes to "how to deploy arty". At least certain types.
If you blame me that i pursue "my agenda", go ahead. Still there need to be a reasonable answer to the current state. As soon as your advance is halted with RE and opponents have got their 210 nebler, hotchkiss (the biggest threat as it comes earlier than churchill in many occassions) or whatever you can actually go home with your 95 mm churchills. When hotchkiss fires its barrage from shorter ranges, like 130-150, they still stay out of range of 95 mm arty while also having a very low scatter that gets lower with every veterancy. Hotchkiss can thus snipe out tanks nicely. Hetzer/Hotchkiss is one of the most deadly anti tank combination you can get actually.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Well Hawks, there are 3 primary things that we both often disagree on:

1st - Reload times.

>>> Despite that recently we have in fact reached an agreement regarding this matter! Though, that one got backfired.. thanks to MarKr

2nd - When you speak how Axis tanks take less damage from Allied arty or how u think JagdPanther should have less HP and so on...

>>> As I actually believe that the current arty balance is fine, at least to some extent. Also, most Axis tanks are more expensive anyway so this would justify a lot... However, it's also because I can't see (in the game) how Axis tanks are more resistant anyhow.. they die to arty the whole time.

3rd - Range of arty units.

>>> This one I don't exactly disagree with you. Nonetheless, I would say it's a stretched subject that is widely open for discussion.. though, I think that if Axis docs would ever get arty re-work. Then I would say that RA doc would eventually have to be re-balanced as well...

So far, usually we both agree on everything else though! Which is nice.

[|7th|Nighthawk]

On the topic of arty (OT but it was mentioned before):

I am just reading stuff and since I don't have that much experience, I usually keep quiet here, but: How about making the simple M1, 25pdr, leFH 18 movable? Make it very slow like the 17pdr but maybe they would be less useless? I don't know what would fix the static arty positions as they indeed get bombed away very quickly. In fact they suffer from the same issues as unmovable AT and AA guns in FPS that always get preemptively shot even before being rendered (BF2 hint hint).

[Warhawks97]

Its not possible. Years ago we had such ideas. But for 25 pdr we have no movable model. Emplacments cant move anyway and for others we would have to use men of war models iirc. There was an idea of making them truck pulled and so on.

There is an easier solution. Howitzers -stat at least- and excluding 25 pdr are the only units that have got a range decrease compared to vcoh. Yes, bk has boosted combat ranges. Just for howitzers it was the other way arround. Meanwhile lots of this cheap rocket arty which was short ranged in vcoh has got a range increase. Walking stuka from approx 125 in vcoh to i 175 in BK. Nebler from 150 to 200. Calli kept the same i think.

So the easiest solution would be to adjsut howitzers to BK style just as pretty much every other unit has. And some rocket arty range boosts have been to massive in my opinion. A range increase of 25-30 in relation to vcoh would have been sufficient. We would find howitzers at approx 275-280 range standard, boosted range at approx 300 (only RA and SE). Neblers would be at approx 170-175 range and walking stuka and callis at 140.

The close range fire support howitzers like the british 95 and axis leig 18 would be keep their 120 range. Perhaps 100 for lig 18 since it can ambush and fire directly. 75 mm Pack howitzer arround 180 range, the 105 sherman, a kind of short-mid range howitzer at 170 range (currently 180).

Costs would be accordingly. Better a howitzer with a usefull life in exchange for higher cost as a cheap one that with luck makes a salvo.

[Krieger Blitzer]

@Hawks
Ok, got your private message.

@Hawks (oops, 2 Hawks... ) Well, this time I mean @Nighthawk
Regardless if that's possible or not (which I also think is not) yet, I would still not be welcoming the idea to make those howitzers more reliable.
I mean.. they are quite cheap to build, and only costs 50 ammo to fire (25pdr costs even less I think) also almost has no charge time at all...
You can literally keep barraging the whole day without running out of ammo, except maybe at the very long term!


Though, ya... I would say let's not divert this topic into an arty talk any further.

[Warhawks97]

same thing as with shermans. Use the argument "cheap" and all things solved. So its as it is with shermans. Would be much more usefull to cost a bit more for being more usefull for actual combat.

An no, you cant fire all day long bc it gets countered even be nebelwerfers. Anyway, we can discuss this private.

[Redgaarden]

(25pdr costs even less I think) also almost has no charge time at all...
You can literally keep barraging the whole day without running out of ammo, except maybe at the very long term!

DO note that the 25 pounder does 115 damage with its shell with no bonus for direct hit. You will literally need to bomb everything a whole day to harm it. What it does have though, is a great immobilization crit and is by far the best arty to immobilze your targets.

2nd - When you speak how Axis tanks take less damage from Allied arty or how u think JagdPanther should have less HP and so on...

Do mind that the tank ha 1000Hp, Damage resitance agasint everything, and arty resitance. It's quite unkillable. I think I remember having 4 Jacksons costing 2800 manpower and losing 3 of them to kill a single jagdpanther. It was a close range battle where each Jackson could shot at the Jagdpanther at the same time.

[Krieger Blitzer]

What it does have though, is a great immobilization crit and is by far the best arty to immobilze your targets.

True.

Do mind that the tank ha 1000Hp, Damage resitance agasint everything, and arty resitance. It's quite unkillable. I think I remember having 4 Jacksons costing 2800 manpower and losing 3 of them to kill a single jagdpanther. It was a close range battle where each Jackson could shot at the Jagdpanther at the same time.

DO note that Jacksons are limited to only 3 at a time my best friend So you can't have 4 of them!
You must have had just 3 ones
Also you should note that the JagdPanther costs 6 CP and 1000 MP/180 F as basic cost... I know that later it can be cheaper (900 MP/160 F) but still very expensive though, just saying ^^

[Shanks]

The accuracy is set to 85% even at max range, when it misses it can go as far as "15" units off the target point...on the other hand the AoE of the shot is also "15" so it should always (at least with its edge) reach the point where you click.

The "downhill" thing is possible though I am not sure...I recall that there is a parameter ...something like "apply elevation bonus" which has true/false values. I've never tested what it does but it could be some range boost when the unit shoots from elevated position.

at all times I said that the comet is useless ..... where I do not try to deny it ??? .... as I said repetitively, now the comet fulfills the function of tank-hunter, not a tank !!! ... that weak armor, does not justify the CP rating needed to unlock it (9 CP .... would be direct 6CP, but the churchill of 95mm is generally not omitted, which means +3 CP), so, what is the usefulness of a "tank" that can be easily destroyed in the last stage of the game ???????, in my opinion is ridiculous and useless .... I think now you understand my point better, it is a necessity to change this ..the comet should be more armored

I meant that you did not deny that you want to change it back only because Comet is now harder to use but not useless.
What is a "tank-hunter" - it is a vehicle specifically designed to destroy tanks. "Tank" is a vehicle that is armored but it has multi-role purpose - supporting infantry, destroying strong-points/MG nests, fighting enemy armored forces if necessary etc.
There were more approaches to tank designs. Axis chose the path of "bigger and stronger is better" - thus tanks such as Tiger, KT, Panther etc. Allies chose the path of "more but weaker is better than one stronger" - it is simply a philosophy - if your opponent builds 1 heavy tank and you know that for the same price you can build 4 medium tanks and at the same time these 4 medium tanks (with losses) will destroy the one enemy tank, then in terms of resources you are doing better than your opponent. Even if 2 out of those 4 tanks are destroyed in the skirmish, if you destroy the enemy tank, and the final "score" is "we lost 2 tanks, they lost 1 tank" - in terms of resources you are winning. This way you will "bleed your opponent out of resources" and he will have nothing to with with in the end.

Look:

The cruiser tank (also called cavalry tank or fast tank) was a British tank concept of the interwar period for tanks designed to function as modernised armoured and mechanised cavalry. Cruiser tanks were developed after the Royal Armoured Corps were not satisfied with many of the medium tank designs of the 1930s. The cruiser tank concept was conceived by Giffard Le Quesne Martel, who preferred many small light tanks to swarm the enemy, instead of a few expensive medium tanks.
(...)
The British cruiser tank series started in 1938 with the A9 and A10 cruiser tanks, followed by the A13, A13 Mark II, the A13 Mark III "Covenanter" in 1940 and the A15 Crusader which entered service in 1941. The Crusader was superseded by the A27 Cromwell in 1944. The A34 Comet - a better-armed development of Cromwell - began to enter service in late 1944.

It is simply very diiferent approach to tank designs in Axis and Allies. So no, Comet is a tank, not tank-hunter.

I can understand tha you see Comet as useless but not all people share this oppinion - I've seen Tiger many times saying that Comets are good in current state. You just cannot use them the same way as you did before.

I'm going to be a bit more specific, you do not need to use a tiger or a panther, to beat RE in most cases ... because ??? .. Hetzer and Stug 4 can destroy everything that has RE right now, except churchill crocodile, not counting all the support that these units can receive, such as hotchkiss, so, you speak to me of auority of numbers ???? .... Stug 4 is available with 0CP and can destroy a comet (6CP) of 1 single shot, is ridiculous, and in most cases the AT 50 mm, destroys the engine or the cannon of your "deadly weapon, comet" .... what kind of balance is this ??? ???, you talk about tiger 1996 agrees with this, but strangely I do not see him playing with "RE doc", and not only that, until the same tiger 1996 admitted that 6 CP for the comet is much !. .... what do you think now? your numerical superiority serves you if you can face only with Stug 4, Hetzer or AT 50 MM ???? .... by the way, they are basic units of the axis

[Krieger Blitzer]

you talk about tiger 1996 agrees with this, but strangely I do not see him playing with "RE doc", and not only that, until the same tiger 1996 admitted that 6 CP for the comet is much !

Hmm, this is not exactly true! ^^
Ever since the Churchills got armor buff, and I think RE is my most played CW doc so far.. before the armor buff of Churchills, my post played CW doc was RAF for sure. RA doc on the other hand is my least played doc, together with Def, inf and SE docs.. because I don't like arty oriented doctrines.

As for the Comet tank, I said that 6 CP might be much for the Comet.. yes.
However, also said that this fast tank is hard to hit with AT guns most of the time as they would keep just missing against it. Moreover; don't forget that the Comet tank was a late war tank after all.. so it can't be lower than 5 CP really! And obviously 5 CP is not much different from 6 CP now anyway...

[MarKr]

I'm going to be a bit more specific, you do not need to use a tiger or a panther, to beat RE in most cases ... because ??? .. Hetzer and Stug 4 can destroy everything that has RE right now, except churchill crocodile, not counting all the support that these units can receive, such as hotchkiss, so, you speak to me of auority of numbers ???? .... Stug 4 is available with 0CP and can destroy a comet (6CP) of 1 single shot, is ridiculous, and in most cases the AT 50 mm, destroys the engine or the cannon of your "deadly weapon, comet" .... what kind of balance is this ??? ???, you talk about tiger 1996 agrees with this, but strangely I do not see him playing with "RE doc", and not only that, until the same tiger 1996 admitted that 6 CP for the comet is much !. .... what do you think now? your numerical superiority serves you if you can face only with Stug 4, Hetzer or AT 50 MM ???? .... by the way, they are basic units of the axis

You keep jumping from one point to another...first you say that RE is crap because Churchills "are not equal" to StuGs (I guess that is what you said there) and because of this Comets need to return to what they were only with delaying flank speed.
Then you say that Comet needs to be returned to what it was because Axis doctrines can work independently. Then you say that problem is "too slow development of RE", then you say that Comet can die to basic Axis units...

You now say that StuG/Hetzer can destroy everything that RE has. Both have 75mm L48 guns, these have chance of penetration vs Churchills at max range cca 20% (more with AP, Hetzer more from camo). They don't normally one-shot Churchills. So you drive with Churchill, suddenly it takes hit from StuG or Hetzer - 20% chance to penetrate, so most likely it will bounce off. If it doesn't bounce off, your Churchill is still alive and now you know where the enemy is. At this point you take your Achilles/Firefly/Comet and while the StuG/Hetzer reloads, you take a shot - a shot from these guns is usually enough to kill them.
That is the faction design. You don't have to like it but that is how it is and it will stay that way.

[Shanks]

maybe 5 or 4 Command Points would be enough for the Comet, that's what I think

[/quote]

@tiger...

@markr.......Someone told me that talking here is a waste of time ... and you think that people with experience do not know about your "strategy" ... where do I go from one point to another ???. ... I am explaining in detail, why, the RE doctrine is a shit ..... did you read what devilfish wrote ??? ... I suppose not, because for you, all the churchil does is unleash ... . ¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿???? ..... If I'm just going to use it to know where the enemy is, I better use an observer !!!!, or I just make an attack, that forces him to move his camouflaged unit ( obus 95 mm), now, what you just told me, clearly demonstrates, that you do not know about pvp, and it is for that same reason that you do not understand me, in what time I said that the churchill dies of a shot or something similar. .¿¿??.. besides ... what does it do to you to hold on if you can not kill anything with the churchill ???? .... the hetzer or the stug 4, if they can kill the churchill, there is no turning back for the churchill, however the hetzer or estug 4 can follow you and back freely, while you lose your units, what you write, are obvious plays, and without performance in pvp, then, you did not answer what I said ....... that a tank like the comet serves you ???? if it dies of 1 single shot of stug 4 or hetzer in most cases .... 6 CP to wait for disappointment ???? ..... conclusion, RE is useless, for now, I would prefer 100000 million times RAF or RA,, the comet need more armor!

[MarKr]

OK, the whole RE is useless shit because ONE unit got changed and the entire RE stands on one tank with ridiculously strong armor combined with ridiculous speed and also powerful gun, everything else is there just for looks and plays no role what so ever in the overall strength of the doctrine. Cool.
And here we go again "devs don't play, they don't understand" ok, cool and I will once again say "people are stuck with their playing "formulas" and cannot adapt". The difference between what you say and what I say is, that if you were right, then all people would say that RE is shit and needs the old Comet back. But if I am right then there are some people who can adapt to the change and can win even with Comet after the change...I mean, I don't understand anything because I don't play so let's see what other players say...

from my experience, and i played this doc before churchills or comets had any kind of armor, it is a nice support in a team but you are not self relying.

That thing can stand for example 50 mm and also 75 mm shots. Its supposed to draw fire. The best is to use the one with 75 mm HE and supported by 17 pdr tanks. Also you can reinforce infantry neabry. I used to combine these tanks with inf doc. Thats the best you can do.
(...)
Keep the comet as it is now. I agree with markr and others.

And also here:

I prefer the Comet much more than in the past now, it's faster.. cheaper and still quite powerful (can still bounce off 50mm and Pak40 sometimes).
Just it does no longer bounce off 88mm or 75mm L/70 cannons or PanzerShrecks somehow!

RE doctrine is still capable of beating Blitz doctrine in a head to head battle, and possibly Terror doctrine too.. that's if you manage to produce your Churchills early enough... Churchills already are way too cheap for what they can do early game!
And by the way, realistically... They would be much more expensive than that.. just saying.

Also, as always RE doc can do both defensive and offensive tasks very quickly almost in every stage of the game... You can be offensive early game with Churchills and later Fireflys as well as Comets combined with Achilles, or you can be defensive with 17pdr emplacements which you can still construct in no time.. in addition; you gain A LOT more resources than anyone else in the game after the improved HQ trucks unlock.
Other doctrines can only be aggressive and constantly attack but can't really defend at the same time, such as Blitz doc...

So, tell me...how come that you think RE is complete and utter shit while these players (and they are PvP players so I think you will agree that they know what they are talking about) say that RE is OK and capable?
But sorry, I don't know jack about the game, guys can you explain (maybe in more detail than you already have) why you believe Comets and RE is OK? Or if you think it is not OK, then at least why you think it is not complete and utter shit?

And yeah, people who are stubborn and don't except ideas and points of view of others will probably tell you that writing here is waste of time. Open minded people will tell you that posting here can have results.

[Krieger Blitzer]

guys can you explain (maybe in more detail than you already have) why you believe Comets and RE is OK?

Alright, here is what I think in details then:

RE is better than RAF vs emplacements/trenches and Bunkers thanks to 95mm Churchills, RAF will have harder time against Def doctrine than RE doc. That's because the airplanes can't do anything against Bunkers and RAF doesn't have 95mm Cromwell anymore... Though, I think this situation for RAF doc perfectly fits into the "specialized" doctrines agenda that MarKr is planning to implement for Axis too. Regardless though, RE doc still obviously has better tanks too, early Churchills can be game winners; combined with Crusaders, Tulip Shermans or fast Cromwells. One of the weak points for RE doc was lack of view, but this is no longer the case.. ever since the Dingo was tweaked/improved.

I don't understand either how RE doc is bad just because Comet has less armor! When the Comet was more expensive and had more armor, it was still dying against ambushed Hetzers and airplanes from Luft doc anyway... It was only more difficult to replace. So, I think the situation now is better as you can replace the Comet much easier, yet having the same firepower at the end of the day!!! I mean that the overall balance result of the Comet change.. can only be the same as before (but just in a different way) or even better.. tho, I really can't see how the result could be worse somehow.

The old Comet armor still couldn't save you from hidden Hetzers or Luft airplanes after all.. old Comet armor only saved you against Tigers and PanzerShrecks. The new armor does not save you against these anymore.. however, Comets now much cheaper too! So, I can't see any balance problems there. It would only be a big problem if the Comet price stayed the same after the armor change.. which is not the case of course.

Also, I already clarified this 2 times before.. but well, looks like I should do it again but this time Shanks should read my whole statement, and not just the part that he likes to see ^^ It's true that I said 5 or 4 CP for Comets could be still fine maybe. HOWEVER, I also said that we should not forget how Comets are late war tanks after all, so they can't really cost anything less than 5 Command Points.. and even if they would cost 5 CP, it would still make no difference from 6 Command Points anyway. Also we should keep in mind that fast Comets are difficult to hit by most AT guns.
So, when Shanks take this as quotation next time, I think he should quote it altogether

And by the way, isn't the situation for the 76 Jumbo Sherman in Armor doc fine now and no one complains about it?
Despite it's very similar with the Comet tank actually! Let's quickly compare 76 Jumbo with Comet for example:
>>> 76 Jumbo requires 7 direct Command Points, 750 MP and limit to only one.
>>> Comet requires 6 direct Command Points, 470 MP/60 F and limit to three.

Comet is 1 less command point earlier available, surely costs some fuel therefore.. but less MP and with the possibility to deploy more than one!
You get less armor than Jumbo, but in return u get more speed and better gun as well as better HE rounds... I can still rush for 76 Jumbo and win the game too! Rushing for Comets might be even easier because CW has better standard units than US does.


If anything MarKr, then I would say Comets should be just unlimited...
just in case u would fight against a JagdTiger, this might require 4 Comets.. but that's it really

[Shanks]

I only ask you to use the logic ..... I said a long time ago that the jumbo (armor doc) was a shit vs. stug 3 and 4 ... I was right ... so they finally modified it a time later, maybe they did the tests, I do not know ... what I do know is that they modified it (I was right, although in my post, they told me I was wrong)

[Shanks]

Hey guys,
I keep it straight and plain, without walls of text.

Churchills are more or less useless in pvp (except croc and 95mm - slow arty is still an arty).
Pros - can bounce 75mm L/48 kinda, anything below reliably
Cons - it's slow, panzerfaust, schreck, L/48 APCR, anything above L/48, slow, easy to engage with handheld weapons because it's slow, easy to hit with rocket arty because it's slow and did I mention it is slow af?

It's basically Jumbo which is super slow and with worse HE rounds.
The 6pdr is useless, PE needs just hetzer, BK pz4H/J, Def JgPz l/70 Terror kinda nothing till tiger/panther but well still schrecks,fausts,50mm at gun heat thing, rocket arty.

So yea.

by the way, he also plays pvp ..... so there is a draw here, apparently ... in other hand,recently I have been told that they plan to change some things in axis ... for what? ... the axis is very well now, in my opinion, what they are going to do, it will be difficult to balance

[MarKr]

by the way, he also plays pvp ..... so there is a draw here, apparently ...

I already said:

And here we go again "devs don't play, they don't understand" ok, cool and I will once again say "people are stuck with their playing "formulas" and cannot adapt". The difference between what you say and what I say is, that if you were right, then all people would say that RE is shit and needs the old Comet back(1). But if I am right then there are some people who can adapt to the change and can win even with Comet after the change(2)...I mean, I don't understand anything because I don't play so let's see what other players say...

So you, Red and all people who would agree with you are the group number (1); Hawks, Tiger and other people who think RE is OK are the group number (2). Even if there was just 1 person in group (2) and 50 in group (1) I would still ask how it is possible that someone can play and win with RE without problems and others cannot? Because it implies that with the doctrine can be won and people simply play it wrong.

in other hand,recently I have been told that they plan to change some things in axis ... for what? ... the axis is very well now, in my opinion, what they are going to do, it will be difficult to balance

I mean...

if we are going to talk about balance, you need to first compare doctrines, Bk, Terror, TH, Def, Luft, SE, they do not need to be complemented, in most cases, because they have everything basic, good tank or basic tank-hunter, like hetzer or stug, good artillery, like stuka, maultier or mortar bombing (inf bk), and obviously good infantry, everything necessary to advance, all this, many times very fast ..... then, if the 6 doctrines of the axis, has this power of attack ... why RE should depend on other doctrines ?? ... I honestly do not understand it

So...Axis is fine except for this case?

[Shanks]

yes, markr, to which I refer, is that they should only give more "strength to RE" and not make it "too dependent 0f other doc", as are most of the doctrines of the axis that do not depend on other doctrines (in general) . ...for what to modify the other doctrines of the axis? ... also, I win many games with RE, but I think RE needs a bit more attack strength


historically, the comet did not have good armor (102 mm-76mm-14mm), ok, 10 points in your favor ... but at least, it should be able to unlock with 4 CP ... what do you think?

Note:if you do not think I win with RE, check out my latest pvp publication

[Redgaarden]

So you, Red and all people who would agree with you are the group number (1); Hawks, Tiger and other people who think RE is OK are the group number (2).

Wait, I dont remember saying anything too bad about the doc. I even complimented the infantry in it. It has artillery, good emplacements, tanks. Though they did just lose their only "heavy tank" wich had an anti tank gun. I dont understand why people say it's bad. And the enemy is forced to use atleast two doctrines to beat RE. It has durable cheap infantry that can destroy anti tank guns.

[Devilfish]

Seems that unless one posts several walls of text, his feedback will be completely ignored out. Great job.
This forum lost its former purpose and became a place where 3 persons dump their entire unpolished thought process into the forum topics.

Churchills are useless, comet adds very little value compared to achilless/firefly. So RE basically offers only cheap durable emps which is boring and works only against arty lacking docs and more resources from trucks CP. But going doc because of resource upgrade CP is just lame.

[MarKr]

yes, markr, to which I refer, is that they should only give more "strength to RE" and not make it "too dependent 0f other doc", as are most of the doctrines of the axis that do not depend on other doctrines (in general) . ...for what to modify the other doctrines of the axis? ... also, I win many games with RE, but I think RE needs a bit more attack strength

OK, I got that the first time you said it. We do not share this point of view. BK is meant to be played in teams and if everyone can work independently on team mates, then the "play in teams" thing makes little sense. That is why we decided for the reworks towards a system that requires a little bit more cooperation on Axis side too.
I know you would have chosen the opposite way but we decided for this approach.

historically, the comet did not have good armor (102 mm-76mm-14mm), ok, 10 points in your favor ... but at least, it should be able to unlock with 4 CP ... what do you think?

I am not really against this...where would the point that you take away from Comet be moved?

Wait, I dont remember saying anything too bad about the doc. I even complimented the infantry in it. It has artillery, good emplacements, tanks. Though they did just lose their only "heavy tank" wich had an anti tank gun. I dont understand why people say it's bad. And the enemy is forced to use atleast two doctrines to beat RE. It has durable cheap infantry that can destroy anti tank guns.

Sorry, Red, my bad. Shanks mentioned you as supporter of his side and I included you in my reply. It was reckless of me.

Seems that unless one posts several walls of text, his feedback will be completely ignored out. Great job.
This forum lost its former purpose and became a place where 3 persons dump their entire unpolished thought process into the forum topics.

Sorry that you feel ignored. I read your post of course but honestly:

Hey guys,
I keep it straight and plain, without walls of text.

Churchills are more or less useless in pvp (except croc and 95mm - slow arty is still an arty).
Pros - can bounce 75mm L/48 kinda, anything below reliably
Cons - it's slow, panzerfaust, schreck, L/48 APCR, anything above L/48, slow, easy to engage with handheld weapons because it's slow, easy to hit with rocket arty because it's slow and did I mention it is slow af?

It's basically Jumbo which is super slow and with worse HE rounds.
The 6pdr is useless, PE needs just hetzer, BK pz4H/J, Def JgPz l/70 Terror kinda nothing till tiger/panther but well still schrecks,fausts,50mm at gun heat thing, rocket arty.

So yea.

...what do you want me to react to? You state your oppinion. You are not asking any questions, you are not demanding any change in there and you are not tackling any of the points I present. I understand your point of view. What else should I write to that?

Churchills are useless, comet adds very little value compared to achilless/firefly. So RE basically offers only cheap durable emps which is boring and works only against arty lacking docs and more resources from trucks CP. But going doc because of resource upgrade CP is just lame.

Useless depends on situation and (I guess) individual expectations for a unit so that is debatable. "Boring" again highly depends on individual point of view. Someone mentioned here that RE is the most played CW doc...I have no official stats so it is hard to say if it is true, but if yes, then why so many people play a doctrine that is "boring" and its iconic unit (Churchills) is "useless"?

[Redgaarden]

Churchills are useless, comet adds very little value compared to achilless/firefly. So RE basically offers only cheap durable emps which is boring and works only against arty lacking docs and more resources from trucks CP. But going doc because of resource upgrade CP is just lame.

How would you make Churchills better? I dont really care about the comet since you have Achillies/Firefly. Emplacements are boring yes, but neccesary to deal with alot of things. The resources is a niche upgrade.

Seems that unless one posts several walls of text, his feedback will be completely ignored out. Great job.
This forum lost its former purpose and became a place where 3 persons dump their entire unpolished thought process into the forum topics.

There was just not much to add to your previous post.
No need to create walls of text. Just keep posting. And I think it's more what these "Walltexters" do in the background is what is affecting the balancing.

Redgaarden wrote:
Wait, I dont remember saying anything too bad about the doc. I even complimented the infantry in it. It has artillery, good emplacements, tanks. Though they did just lose their only "heavy tank" wich had an anti tank gun. I dont understand why people say it's bad. And the enemy is forced to use atleast two doctrines to beat RE. It has durable cheap infantry that can destroy anti tank guns.

Sorry, Red, my bad. Shanks mentioned you as supporter of his side and I included you in my reply. It was reckless of me.

My bad for not noticing Shanks writing that and verifying which side I was on. As it was partially my fault too, I have to forgive you.

[Krieger Blitzer]

yes, markr, to which I refer, is that they should only give more "strength to RE" and not make it "too dependent 0f other doc", as are most of the doctrines of the axis that do not depend on other doctrines (in general)

Hmm, you think RE needs support from team-mates but Blitz doc for example does not?!

What does Blitz doc have to kill your 17pdr emplacements? Let's say... Maultier? 95mm Churchill kills Maultier in a single hit, Maultier has more range but you know that the 17pdr emplacement doesn't really take any serious damage from the Maultier anyway. So what else? Maybe the Stuh? 95mm Churchill can also kill that with only 2 hits actually... And anything can penetrate the Stuh after all, not to mention that you can keep repairing the 17pdr emplacements faster than the Stuh can reload the next round.

Rifle Sections are probably even better than Storms... IVH dies by Achilles or Firefly. Now, tell me.. does the Blitz doc player have anything reliable against early Churchills?? Nothing until Tigers or Panthers which are expensive and therefore not possible to obtain except later. The only counter would be PanzerShrecks but they have 2 seconds aim time and Churchills can still bounce off Shrecks. Not to mention that HE Churchills combined with Crusaders are almost impossible to be frontally rushed by infantry, unless the soldiers want to suicide.
Stug4, Pak40 won't help you against Churchills unless you are VERY lucky!

Also now, tell me.. does Blitz doc have such a tank that is too early available and can bounce off 17pdr shells??? Not even Tigers can do that.
Churchills on the other hand can just walk safely in front of Pak40 AT guns... It's more like if the Pak40 was just throwing stones, and not shells

The only true counter against RE doc is to get out-numbered by Blitz doc off-map call-in support together with trades... That's why I think Terror doc is perhaps even weaker against RE doc since that Terror can't out-number anyone because it doesn't have any trades, or good off-map support or even IVH tanks. However, the advantage for Terror doc would be the superior arty.. such as Stuka and SturmTiger, but I think the Terror player would normally die to Churchills before he is able to reach this stage.

historically, the comet did not have good armor (102 mm-76mm-14mm), ok, 10 points in your favor ... but at least, it should be able to unlock with 4 CP ... what do you think?

4 CP would be way too early, because historically.. this tank was available only late war. That's why I said:

we should not forget how Comets are late war tanks after all, so they can't really cost anything less than 5 Command Points

So, I think 4 CP does not seem right, 5 CP would be OK though.. but then it doesn't make much difference anyway.

Let's do a quick comparison in command points here...
- Comet requires 6 CP but very cheap to produce (470 MP/60 F)

- IVH requires 2 CP but costs (550 MP/80 F) later you can have IVH cheaper (450 MP/55 F) but that's after 3 more CP which is total 5 CP.
- IVJ requires 3 CP in Blitz doc for a price of (410 MP/45 F) and later even more cheap for (380 MP/35 F) after 2 more CP (again 5 CP total).
>>> I already said this in the past, as I think IVJ is too cheap now.. for 3 CP it should cost 500 MP/60 F and after 2 more CP it should cost 410 MP/45 F on the other hand. Either ways though; it's probably worth to notify that PanzerIVs don't have any speed advantage! But ya, they get MG on the top.

- Panther.A costs 6 CP same as Comet, but much more expensive! 800 MP and 140 F.
- Jumbo costs 7 CP but I already compared the 76 Jumbo with Comet before.
- Panther.G costs 7 CP and 890 MP/155 F so far...

- Pershing costs 5 CP which is 1 CP earlier than Comet, but again much more expensive than Comets, the Pershing cost 150 F and 830 MP.
Note: Pershing will cost 7 CP if you unlock Jackson first.
- Jacksons costs 4 CP but both variants are again more expensive than Comets and they don't have HE rounds.
- Panther.D costs 5 CP but again more expensive to produce and has VERY slow turret.

- Tiger1 costs 4 CP in Blitz doctrine but MUCH more expensive than Comets... 170 F and 975 MP.
in Terror doc, it costs 5 CP with similar price of 950 MP and 165 fuel.

So, here you have a list with the command points required for all the tanks that compete with Comets.
I can't see why it should cost only 4 CP when Panther.G costs 7 CP for example, don't tell me Jacksons cost 4 CP so it's fine! Because Jacksons don't have any HE rounds in return... And the Comet is still faster and harder to hit, and if you go for Jacksons then u delay Pershings to 7 CP as I said.
Pershing and Tigers together with Panther.D are 1 CP earlier available but then they are MUCH more expensive, so it's impossible to have them earlier than Comets anyway. And even the IVH needs 5 Command Points to be as much cheap as Comets...

The only thing which is available too early and without command points at all which can also break your Comet, is the Stug.
However, you can't really complain about the Stug here.. because the same way the 17pdr is available too early and without CP but can still break Tiger1 and Panthers, so what?!

Conclusion: with the current set of command points for other tanks in the game, then I think the Comet can't have 4 CPs.
I think the IVJ in Blitz doc just need to be more expensive as I pointed out, but that's it!