Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1659
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 13 Dec 2018, 20:17

While the strategies mentioned are most played I would t say they are meta. I’ve played successful games without paratroopers (except the Luft pios for the emplacements) because there is that option. There is a counter to mencius’ mentioned sniper Sherman He counter: literally don’t make inf and build a strategy around vehicles and air support for aggression, emplacements and mines for defense. They say that armor doc is a counter to Luft but here you can make 88s that are hard to crack for armor because of lack of arty, and Henschel runs for the aggressive search, attack, secure. I agree luft paratroopers are ridiculous but even after nerfs I still feel there’s greater issues at stake. All you’re doing is adjusting unit values up and down again which will alaeays lead to balance issues (like WM grenadiers in my other post. See: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2223)

Edit: actually I think that’s EXACTLY what happened. Luft paratroopers got buffed from where they were, now we are nerfing back down

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3514
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 13 Dec 2018, 21:32

as i said, the past few times i played luft i got max 2 para units and everything else was vampire, two hetzer, mortar and spamming sd2 to secure places i cant guard with troops.

Simply changing values wont fix much.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1659
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 13 Dec 2018, 22:26

Yes I was agreeing with you hawks, just providing anecdote and hammering the point it is a doc design flaw not unit values.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 415
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 14 Dec 2018, 00:50

i dont think luftwaffe infantry are problematic or the doctrine is flawed. the infantry die easily when get ambushed by close range thompsons or sten.
snipers and 50.cal can shred them too. not to speak about crusaders and shermans with high explosive of course. or flame grenades of airborne.

i think making luftwaffe infantry weaker, will hurt the infantry balance so badly. the infantry balance seem to be very fine between axis and allies now.

and speaking of shermans, someone made a post on the previous page complaining about them again.
when he should know that shermans are now even better than panzer4 although shermans are cheaper. you can spam too many of them in late game.
and they have better health. and can be repaired faster. the armor is not too weak as well. not everything can reliably penetrate the easy eight.

back to luftwaffe, i think the only problem is the panther tank. the only problem.
it will make more sense to have cheap panther in blitzkrieg doctrine.

and royal air force need some light artillery unit. but firefly is not needed.

User avatar
Death_Kitty
Posts: 63
Joined: 15 Apr 2017, 18:20

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Death_Kitty » 14 Dec 2018, 06:42

I've had some success with one sniper into HE sherman... (sooner or later)... will have to try it with 2. Thanks Mencius!

So how much of this rework is directly nerfing actual units, and how much of it is going to be reducing the bloat this doc has? Like I get that people want to keep as much of this Luft's "identity" as possible; I find myself on the "keep girbs with falls" side of things, for example. Part of kwoks original analysis was that you can develop part of your tech tree, but luft, even starting off at a CP disadvantage, can still reach the end of their "branch" before you do... so a good part of this rework should be "extending" branches. I was thinking maybe combing infantry and defenses branch? have the 88 come as an upgrade to infantry capabilities after a fair amount of command points? I dunno. Really, I just want the hetzer to go and the fall/gerb bonuses to require so CP-ing into. And their kits to be reworked. Tired of falls slaughtering stuff when they land. I believe in kwok. (though not sure how much this means coming from US biased me.)

MenciusMoldbug
Posts: 144
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 12:57

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby MenciusMoldbug » 14 Dec 2018, 07:46

One thing I don't like about weapon drop crates that come with airborne type units is there's sometimes no incentive to put them on the squad that drops with them.

Say for example, why should I give my SAS 2 bazookas each when I can give my marine commandos who can crawl 4 bazookas? Why should I give every single one of my AB squads 1 recoiless when I can give one squad 4-5 recoiless and another squad 4 bazookas that come from the 82nd squads?

There needs to be a serious rework for airborne weapon crates because it is not working as intended. For what reason was triple bazookas removed from AT infantry when you can already stack way more than that on a single AB squad? I've seen people put 6 recoiless on an airborne squad because why not? By being pure AT and killing enough vehicles they vet very fast too; and not many lightly/medium armored vehicles can survive a barrage from 6 recoiless at once.

I've been thinking that the weapon crates should have no weapon in them; but they should speed up the time it takes to get weapon upgrades for the airborne squads that drop with them. The weapons that were originally in the weapon crate should be free upgrades that come with the airborne squads but take very long to get without them getting their weapon crate (and the time for getting the upgrade becomes normal perhaps after 5 minutes).

The other thing I don't like about removing the Hetzer is that there's only one tank left in that Panzer-Jager Command that can take on medium-armored vehicles then: The Marder III, and it's crap. Ironically this is because it's one of the TD's using allied-like camouflage ambush modifiers; Where it's very easy to find it with it's huge detection radius and it only gets 1 shot from ambush before it's screwed over.

The camouflage system even after some tweaking is still a mess. Hetzer is apparently the best camouflaged tank to ever exist (it's guns weapon ranges are not fixed yet either) and gets 3 camouflage shots from ambush. Meanwhile, a Chaffee which is of similar or even smaller size gets only 1 shot from ambush and has a +10 bigger detection radius than that TD (20 vs 10). A jagdpanther does not need 2 ambush shots, and Allied TD's along with Nashorns (also Marder III's) should get 2 ambush shots and their detection radius' simplified so they are all pretty close to one another. I honestly see no reason to build the Marder when the 75mm AT Puma in Logistik Companie gets 2 ambush shots instead of 1 (which is also my deciding factor of why I favor the hetzer over the jagdpanzer IV).

From what I read, the problem here seems to stem from SD2 -> Flak 88 is the greatest synergy unlock in Luftwaffe right now. It also seems Luftwaffe becomes mini-def doc when they can get their 88's faster than defensive doctrine actually can. I don't think increasing the CP's itself does anything to change that combo. Because SD2 -> Flak 88 would still be the #1 unlock to go for when you're stuck on the defense.

I would instead separate these two unlocks into two different branches: Buttefly bombs go into the sabotage path, and victor target for 88's is removed/they come with it normally. With 88's needing the flakvierlings and luftwaffe pioneer unlocks to get. So it would look like:

Shoemines -> Sabotage Points -> SD-2s

Luftwaffe Pioneers -> Flakvierling 38 20mm AA Guns -> 88's

I agree that luftwaffe pioneers should have some plantable mines, and the shoemine is already there so might as well give them that too. But booby traps should be something unique to SE. I would honestly nerf booby traps to be clearable by mine sweepers as well. Because some factions like Wehrmacht or US have no choice but to step on them with their infantry.

Separating SD-2s from 88's means you go after one or the other but you can't get both together for maximum impact. SD-2s belong as a late-unlock considering how powerful they really are; being free plantable mines you can put anywhere, even on top of your enemies. Sometimes I think they are outright better than getting the strafing unlock because of how multi-purpose they can be. Seeing as how they can immobilize tanks, and even kill light vehicles. I honestly don't know about the Hetzer, because it's still over-performing for its cost while units like Marder III are under-performing. Perhaps when I see their future changes I'll think about it again then.

Edit: One thing I forgot to mention is that flakvierlings and wirbelwind in general should get buffed because they have 4 20mm guns but they seem just as good if not worse than the single 20mm guns Wehrmacht use for their units/emplacements.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 415
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 14 Dec 2018, 10:50

giving bazookas from sas to marine commandos? always better yes.

but i think doing the same with american airborne and giving all recoilless rifles and bazookas to only one unit is very bad. they cant crawl and 1 good high explosive shot from any tank and you will immediately lose all your anti tank infantry.

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 675
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 14 Dec 2018, 11:12

Viper wrote:giving bazookas from sas to marine commandos? always better yes.

but i think doing the same with american airborne and giving all recoilless rifles and bazookas to only one unit is very bad. they cant crawl and 1 good high explosive shot from any tank and you will immediately lose all your anti tank infantry.


I agree, it will also take 2 valuable seconds to shoot, it's a double-edged sword..and in the doctrine of infantry the 3 bazuka were eliminated, because in doc inf you can improve the penetration of the bazuka, in addition, the anti-tanks without recoil do not have the same drilling capacity as a normal bazuka, if I am not mistaken

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3514
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Dec 2018, 18:02

Having all at weapons in one squad is risky...Just one dies and you gave lost a shot...or one HE shot and all AT is lost.

However, menicus idea about crates is nice.


About defenses I wouldn't put all inf together with 88 etc.

88 should get linked to luftwaffe pios of course. But gebis and fallis serve two purposes. One defensive role and one offensive.

Sd2 can be put pretty much everywhere. Air support, sabotage operations and defensive branch. I would remove them bc no matter if they come late game or early, they have too many roles and when the map gets bigger, they kill you....In Front of your base, in the combat zone, during your raids in the enemie territory....Just everywhere and you can't clear every square meter unless you stop fighting and spam pios.

Also in vcoh they killed a men per mine, here a squad per mine and the amount got liked tripled.

The ambush thing is a problem indeed. Didnt check the values yet but 20 range detection should be the minimum. I hate tanks that ambush in front of your own tanks gun muzzle. I would perhaps make it dependent on size of your tank. That means hetzer and Jagdpanzer iv/70 should be best in terms of detection range.


Marder should have two ambush shots bc it lacks everything else.

That brought me to another idea:

Can we remove zimmerit upgrade from th doc and instead add some sort of "ambush expert" upgrade? That would improve the time required to ambush and reduce the minimum detection range?

So instead of having a weird mix of ambush buffs and survivability buffs I would make the branch more focused towards destruction and ambush first strike style and increased td output rather than turning every td into a heavy tank due to zimmerit.

Anyway, that was offtopic.


Edit:
MenciusMoldbug wrote:

Luftwaffe Pioneers -> Flakvierling 38 20mm AA Guns -> 88's



Edit: One thing I forgot to mention is that flakvierlings and wirbelwind in general should get buffed because they have 4 20mm guns but they seem just as good if not worse than the single 20mm guns Wehrmacht use for their units/emplacements.


i provided data here.

The quad cal 50 is much closer now to the single cal 50 (or the other way arround) in terms of bullets required to kill.

The difference between quad 20 mm and single 20 mm is almost like the difference between HMG42 and Bofors gun in terms of how hard the weapon hits. The single 20 mm is too much 40 mm, the quad too much HMG.


I like the idea of having the quad 20 mm being CP unlock but in return very effective.

Sinekyre
Posts: 2
Joined: 14 Jan 2019, 16:08

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Sinekyre » 14 Jan 2019, 17:53

I think Luftwaffe is one of the weakest doctrines, defense being the weakest. I play BK mod every day but don't post here a lot.

Everything Luftwaffe can do, other doctrines can do better. It is also incredibly limited in terms of alternatives. Not as bad as defense, but if you know your shit, you'd never choose luftwaffe over some other doctrine. I really don't know what the devs are smoking if they think Luftwaffe and Defense are balanced.. like I don't know what to tell you. You can't have any experience with developing or balancing RTS games if you think they're viable options.

[EDIT]: I don't know who you are, guy who posted before me, but what you write about "one has an offensive purpose and the other an offensive", reminds me of all the discussions I've had with people who only understand game development from a theoretical perspective. Like, no, that's not how it works. In practice, they're not used for offense or defense, that's just how it looks on paper. This is the problem with armchair developers - you need to actually play PVP a lot and test the shit you say, not develop blindly and have a theory about how some units work. That's in essence why this discussion is kind of useless. The only useful info is to take mass-surveys and gather the experience of everyone who plays. Gebir can serve both offense and defense, same with luft or SS. They're not good though, not compared to the synergy with airborne or other doctrines.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1659
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 15 Jan 2019, 01:18

The post before plays pvp. I play pvp.
I have also sent out a mass survey among players who have experience and play. Survey shows luft is really strong.

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

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby The New BK Champion » 15 Jan 2019, 01:31

Luft is strong not beacuse it's good itself, it's because somewhy people don't know how to counter it

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 675
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 15 Jan 2019, 11:51

The New BK Champion wrote:Luft is strong not beacuse it's good itself, it's because somewhy people don't know how to counter it



it's totally true

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1659
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 15 Jan 2019, 20:29

Shanks wrote:
The New BK Champion wrote:Luft is strong not beacuse it's good itself, it's because somewhy people don't know how to counter it



it's totally true


My argument to this is: the reason luft is “counterable” is because players don’t know how to play luft

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 675
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 15 Jan 2019, 20:39

and who knows how to use luft? ... tell me

There is not a single pro player who has played with luft and who has not been defeated by me in BK, from 1v1 to 4v4, even you ... especially if I play with doc inf or RA

If you have crusader and rifleman with the British, you stop 70% of the Luft force, if you have sherman and infantry with inf doc and you stop 80% of the Luft force, and if you have emplacement spam , poor player of luft, not to mention the famous sniper

The costly maintenance of his troops is his heel of Achilles

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 415
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 15 Jan 2019, 21:01

luftwaffe is very normal doctrine without panther. i think the only problem is the panther.

the german paratroopers are not kch. they die by flame grenades. crusaders. shermans and snipers. kch used to survive snipers. sneaking commandos and rangers can sweep german paratroopers too.

so any nerf to luftwaffe bigger than only removing panther....could hurt the doctrine too bad and cause imbalance.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3514
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Jan 2019, 21:20

Viper wrote:luftwaffe is very normal doctrine without panther. i think the only problem is the panther.

the german paratroopers are not kch. they die by flame grenades. crusaders. shermans and snipers. kch used to survive snipers. sneaking commandos and rangers can sweep german paratroopers too.

so any nerf to luftwaffe bigger than only removing panther....could hurt the doctrine too bad and cause imbalance.



many dont use vampire... that makes ambush etc hard to use vs luft

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1659
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby kwok » 15 Jan 2019, 21:31

Shanks wrote:and who knows how to use luft? ... tell me

There is not a single pro player who has played with luft and who has not been defeated by me in BK, from 1v1 to 4v4, even you ... especially if I play with doc inf or RA

If you have crusader and rifleman with the British, you stop 70% of the Luft force, if you have sherman and infantry with inf doc and you stop 80% of the Luft force, and if you have emplacement spam , poor player of luft, not to mention the famous sniper

The costly maintenance of his troops is his heel of Achilles


Personally I haven’t lost a match as luft in a 1v1 yet, I would feel better if I did lose. Did half those games without a Hetzer too.

I’ll be back home with my personal computer this weekend, we can get a few games in. I would like to lose just so I can propose a less biased rework.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 415
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Viper » 15 Jan 2019, 21:34

Warhawks97 wrote:many dont use vampire... that makes ambush etc hard to use vs luft

royal air force doctrine has radio triangulation too.
and i think it's better than vampire because it makes your teammates see hidden units on the map too. vampire only allow you to see them.

i saw a lot of good players lose 1v1 with luftwaffe against airborne and infantry doctrines.

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 675
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 15 Jan 2019, 22:07

kwok wrote:
Personally I haven’t lost a match as luft in a 1v1 yet, I would feel better if I did lose. .


You say you did not lose a 1v1 game when you used luft?

Or that you did not lose any 2v2 or 3v3 playing with luft?

Or 4v4?

Tell me

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3514
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Jan 2019, 22:14

Viper wrote:
Warhawks97 wrote:many dont use vampire... that makes ambush etc hard to use vs luft

royal air force doctrine has radio triangulation too.
and i think it's better than vampire because it makes your teammates see hidden units on the map too. vampire only allow you to see them.

i saw a lot of good players lose 1v1 with luftwaffe against airborne and infantry doctrines.



if you expect triangulation, you can beat it... you see the glider and usually know the typcial loction of beacon... i said that bikes and krads do a good job.

vampire stays save and you can predict all incoming crawling attempts and regular attacks and put your own ambushes accordingly. It can stay anywhere and spy in a large area
thus you can push step by step and counter enemie attacks... tringulation doesnt allow this many options

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

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby The New BK Champion » 15 Jan 2019, 22:19

kwok wrote:
Shanks wrote:and who knows how to use luft? ... tell me

There is not a single pro player who has played with luft and who has not been defeated by me in BK, from 1v1 to 4v4, even you ... especially if I play with doc inf or RA

If you have crusader and rifleman with the British, you stop 70% of the Luft force, if you have sherman and infantry with inf doc and you stop 80% of the Luft force, and if you have emplacement spam , poor player of luft, not to mention the famous sniper

The costly maintenance of his troops is his heel of Achilles


Personally I haven’t lost a match as luft in a 1v1 yet, I would feel better if I did lose. Did half those games without a Hetzer too.

I’ll be back home with my personal computer this weekend, we can get a few games in. I would like to lose just so I can propose a less biased rework.


You can always call me xD

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 675
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 15 Jan 2019, 22:30

Do you remember this kwok?
Attachments
relic00050.jpg

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 675
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Shanks » 15 Jan 2019, 22:34

Warhawks97 wrote:if you expect triangulation, you can beat it... you see the glider and usually know the typcial loction of beacon... i said that bikes and krads do a good job.

vampire stays save and you can predict all incoming crawling attempts and regular attacks and put your own ambushes accordingly. It can stay anywhere and spy in a large area
thus you can push step by step and counter enemie attacks... tringulation doesnt allow this many options



first was the inf luft, then the hetzer and the panther ..... now the vampire? wow


Well, the vampire is a good weapon, but it's not the big thing either, the panther can eliminate it, anyway it's not the big deal, the hetzer must stay

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3514
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Poor Doctrine Design - Luft

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Jan 2019, 22:41

The New BK Champion wrote:
kwok wrote:
Shanks wrote:and who knows how to use luft? ... tell me

There is not a single pro player who has played with luft and who has not been defeated by me in BK, from 1v1 to 4v4, even you ... especially if I play with doc inf or RA

If you have crusader and rifleman with the British, you stop 70% of the Luft force, if you have sherman and infantry with inf doc and you stop 80% of the Luft force, and if you have emplacement spam , poor player of luft, not to mention the famous sniper

The costly maintenance of his troops is his heel of Achilles


Personally I haven’t lost a match as luft in a 1v1 yet, I would feel better if I did lose. Did half those games without a Hetzer too.

I’ll be back home with my personal computer this weekend, we can get a few games in. I would like to lose just so I can propose a less biased rework.


You can always call me xD


one match kwok luft, the second BKNC luft. Just to get objective results.



Shanks wrote:
Warhawks97 wrote:if you expect triangulation, you can beat it... you see the glider and usually know the typcial loction of beacon... i said that bikes and krads do a good job.

vampire stays save and you can predict all incoming crawling attempts and regular attacks and put your own ambushes accordingly. It can stay anywhere and spy in a large area
thus you can push step by step and counter enemie attacks... tringulation doesnt allow this many options



first was the inf luft, then the hetzer and the panther ..... now the vampire? wow


Well, the vampire is a good weapon, but it's not the big thing either, the panther can eliminate it, anyway it's not the big deal, the hetzer must stay



*facepalm* :roll:


Did i say remove`? Someone said you can sneak them... i said you can put all your units into ambush.... really all...use 1-2 vampire and mortar forward and prepare your own ambushes accordingly to income sneak attempts and attacks. Sometimes you see nothing else but their mortar HT while he sees all you got... your recons... everything.

And thus its generally better than triangulation simply bc of its "hiddeness", it doesnt need to be exposed (like beacons behind enemie lines) and require much less effots. Often enemies dont know whether there is a vampire or not... you can "camp creep" forward this way and keep your enemie blind. No need for foolish inf rushes aka kch style. And your own defense keeps prepaired and ambushes well placed. You can drop even sd2 to bolster your defense.

So luft has the best defense. Not bc of raw power but bc you cant see luft defense (hetzer, inf, sd... all hidden) while he can see all your movments.
Its not the spectecular fight like most luft players do... its a long, boring, nasty almost gurellia kind of defense.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 15 Jan 2019, 23:02, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests