5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

If there is something new, it will be posted here.
User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 671
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Shanks » 04 May 2019, 18:21

Warhawks97 wrote: I didnt even talk about the game here. I talk about tank warfare in reality.


The right use of tanks is more important than the pure armor/gun stats.


1-If we are talking about reality, a pershing could be captured just like a tiger and the firing range of these tanks would be huge .. you are deviating from the subject, I come to talk about the game sir

2-"The right use of tanks is more important than the pure armor/gun stats"....I totally agree, you're right

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3436
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Warhawks97 » 04 May 2019, 18:47

Shanks wrote:
Warhawks97 wrote: I didnt even talk about the game here. I talk about tank warfare in reality.


The right use of tanks is more important than the pure armor/gun stats.


1-If we are talking about reality, a pershing could be captured just like a tiger and the firing range of these tanks would be huge .. you are deviating from the subject, I come to talk about the game sir


And Tanks would be slow as fuck when driving backwards. :roll: *More trolling jeeps in sight*
I feel like talking with a kid not older than 12.


To put it as short as possible:

Reality:
No infantry/arty/airplane support= Dead Tank. No matter how cheap the defense or how expensive the tank was.
Wrong tactics and usage= Dead Tank.


In Game:
No infantry/arty/airplane support= Dead Tank. No matter how cheap the defense or how expensive the tank was.
Wrong tactics and usage= Dead Tank.


And thats the heart of any strategy and tactic. We wouldnt call coh a strategy game if all what matters to win a game is the ammount of ressources put into a unit.

do you see the similarities?
What happens in most games where these super expensive units fail? Wrong usage... Often lack of inf support, lack of reconassaince, single unit use, wrong tactics (eg when your enemie has only arty, the worst you can do is to go single heavy tanks, but thats what most do), attacking the strongest defended area and so on.....



And thats the heart of any strategy and tactic. We wouldnt call coh a strategy game if all what matters to win a game is the ammount of ressources put into a unit.

And the jeep was such a case, even though by purpose and for joking arround.

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 671
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Shanks » 04 May 2019, 20:15

Warhawks97 wrote:
To put it as short as possible:

Reality:
No infantry/arty/airplane support= Dead Tank. No matter how cheap the defense or how expensive the tank was.
Wrong tactics and usage= Dead Tank.


In Game:
No infantry/arty/airplane support= Dead Tank. No matter how cheap the defense or how expensive the tank was.
Wrong tactics and usage= Dead Tank.

.


ok, I'll make it easy for you, so you can understand what you do not understand aparently (or just evading it), for example 20 millennia ago I understood what you say, you talk about strategy and that bk mod is not a single unit, combinations etc ... now, what you do not understand for 20 millennia is my point (apparently), and my point here is that you are distorting in an amazingly sick way my words and the reality taking ,not into account the scenario that I'm raising


I see that you like to talk about reality, so we'll talk about reality and of the game:

scenario: Tank Tiger vs. Jeep 1v1 in the open field (we are talking about the jeep of the US armored doctrine that has an AT)

Reality
With luck the jeep would have a 2% chance to destroy the tiger (which has a small machine gun), being optimistic ..... Result of the encounter: Destroyed Jeep, usually

In the game
The jeep will depend on its ability to evade the tiger cannon shot, if it succeeds, the tiger will be destroyed, because the jeep would look for the blind spot of the tiger to shoot the projectiles, and in addition the turret of the tiger turns very slow to have it in sight, if I'm not wrong the jeep in motion has a minimum of 60% chance to avoid the tiger cannon shot ... result of the encounter: the tiger tank is destroyed

Like any good 12 year old boy, I see that the reality of which you speak so much, is very well applied in bk mod

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 408
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Viper » 04 May 2019, 21:10

Warhawks97 wrote:And thats the heart of any strategy and tactic. We wouldnt call coh a strategy game if all what matters to win a game is the ammount of ressources put into a unit.

true......but also this does not mean that cheap units should easily dominate expensive stuff.........
bk mod suffers in many ways from this issue since many years (in addition to problematic artillery)....and more expensive units are usually on the axis side, thats why i think playing axis is harder. and this does not have anything to do with doctrine design or core game balance. but it is more an issue of the gameplay mechanism in the mod.

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 257
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 04 May 2019, 21:17

Easy domination. Lol

Even on the very loud example u all refer to (video of jeep killing tiger), it is obvious that Tiger was rushing into the base without enough support. It is exactly the issue Warhawks is talking about..

Fact that u finally seen someone microing unit enough to make it possible doesnt even prove it anyhow, rather it should be the thing you, shanks, should kinda implement and learn.

Although it is very obvious, that u'r gamestyle is no better from trolling u make on here, thats the answer to all this endless posting. (u cant win)

Omg. Its like u were born yesterday and it never happened before and u all made it such a case. jzs

Axis "expensive" units have their trade off's regarding it/bigger firing range/chances to kill with one shot mostly, lots of stuff to kill offrange.
Even more to say, like Axis side doesnt have "cheap" somewhat OP units? Hetzers maybe? Armor cars with HE of any kind, that are in common use now?
Like arty for Axis is anyhow "delayed" unlike it is for allies side, if we are talking of it.

CP upkeep gain capabilites arent any good measure for Tanks/Tank hunters measurment as well. Kwok explained it well too.

Wtf all of u are even talking about?

From the scale from 1 to 10, by scale of Tigahstyle posting, i give this thread 8 already.

1. - almost no humble opinions.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. - here where we are now
9.
10. - I agree, but in my humble opinion all is humble but not like i want.

(just to measure it for ya guys) - ^
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 408
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Viper » 04 May 2019, 21:44

idliketoplaybetter wrote:Even on the very loud example u all refer to (video of jeep killing tiger), it is obvious that Tiger was rushing into the base without enough support. It is exactly the issue Warhawks is talking about..

first, it was not tiger who rushed the base with his tiger tank in the video, it was kwok's tiger tank iirc.

second, there was enough support.....the leig18 just missed the jeep hilariously.

Omg. Its like u were born yesterday and it never happened before and u all made it such a case. jzs

Axis "expensive" units have their trade off's regarding it/bigger firing range/chances to kill with one shot mostly, lots of stuff to kill offrange.
Even more to say, like Axis side doesnt have "cheap" somewhat OP units? Hetzers maybe? Armor cars with HE of any kind, that are in common use now?
Like arty for Axis is anyhow "delayed" unlike it is for allies side, if we are talking of it.

thirdly, no one said axis dont have cheap units too. i only said axis have more expensive units than allies do. for example there is no tank with the price of 11 command points, 200 fuel and 1200 man power for allies. so i mean axis and allies both have cheap units, but axis rely more on expensive units. and this makes it harder to play when the expensive units are lost due to bad luck, random immobilization or any other unfortunate reasons.

From the scale from 1 to 10, by scale of Tigahstyle posting, i give this thread 8 already.

lastly, i think you misspelled "tigahstyle" because this is not his style. it was a question in the survey kwok published some months ago......and it was written this way. you should already know this if you participated in the survey.


Tiger1996 wrote:And just to clarify... Here is what I mean:

- 1 (OP AXIS)
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6 <<< This is what i think, so that's in my humble opinion where the balance currently stands.. version 5.1.7 of Bk Mod.
- 7
- 8
- 9
-10 (OP ALLIES)

Not sure how it's going to be after the doctrinal re-works though, but I just feel optimistic overall.. not very optimistic, but still.

maybe one of the least radical opinions about the balance. im sure many others answered this question in the survey with numbers like 3 or 8 in opposite sides.

but i would select 9 in 4vs4 games because i never saw axis win a balanced 4v4 team fight since last year.

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 257
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 04 May 2019, 21:56

(sorry im lazy to manually quote thing to thing)

(first and second)

Tiger literally took how many shots? 3-4+? when i saw storms and other units were just standing there doing nothing. Its not like Jeep is unkillable machine of death..
Again, everyone but u guys are referring to it sarcastically, but somehow it is a thing : D

Not like it was not obvious Kwok was not giving much attention to it intentionally. It even feels so.

You can outmicro lots of stuff in the game. Fact that AT jeep does its job against Tiger, is nothing, really.

(third)

Again, most of the players who know how and what to expose, are using cheapest units. As it is more likable choice in a real balanced games.

Fact that u want something, doesnt mean u should get it/it fits the game.

Who gets KT against airborne? hmm
Armor doc against hetzer spam? hmm x2
i dunno how better to chew it for ya.

Like again, there was and no issue about Panther still being 1army unit in a proper hands *and its not that costy* (hint to Nami game i had recently)

(fourth)

I misspelled nothing. And my referrence there was not about the core topic, but what u (mostly shanks) made it about.

only hope Tiger will like this joke more this time :P

(and last)

His "least radical opinion" is a cozy place he picked. Very common way he expressed his thoughts on here (i have nothing against, he has good thoughts, i really agree on many, just incredibly "cozy" way of expressing it..which is humbleness ofcourse).
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 671
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Shanks » 04 May 2019, 22:28

[quote="idliketoplaybetter"]


Are you in love with me? ... let me tell you that it was Warhawks who started talking about realism, regardless of the game (read the hawks post), he deviated from the topic, and here people should come to talk about the game.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3436
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.8 beta (Blitzkrieg doctrine rework)

Postby Warhawks97 » 04 May 2019, 23:29

Shanks wrote:

Are you in love with me? ... let me tell you that it was Warhawks who started talking about realism, regardless of the game (read the hawks post), he deviated from the topic, and here people should come to talk about the game.


the only link i made between game and realism was that in both cases strategy and tactics are more important than the pure cost of a unit or weapon.
And that applies so far to all strategy games i play so far.


Shanks wrote:


Reality
With luck the jeep would have a 2% chance to destroy the tiger (which has a small machine gun), being optimistic ..... Result of the encounter: Destroyed Jeep, usually

In the game
The jeep will depend on its ability to evade the tiger cannon shot, if it succeeds, the tiger will be destroyed, because the jeep would look for the blind spot of the tiger to shoot the projectiles, and in addition the turret of the tiger turns very slow to have it in sight, if I'm not wrong the jeep in motion has a minimum of 60% chance to avoid the tiger cannon shot ... result of the encounter: the tiger tank is destroyed

Like any good 12 year old boy, I see that the reality of which you speak so much, is very well applied in bk mod



Too bad, in game guns (tanks and AT guns) do not suffer accuracy penalties against moving tanks as well. Schrecks/zooks suffer further 50% accuracy penalty. That way moving tanks arround all the time would become a more potent tactic (eg flanking). After the war the russians gave up with their very heavy tanks. They continued shortly after but during cold war they considered speed and mobility and low profile as "armor". Speed itself was a considered active armor. Thats why the t80 could reach astonishing 80 kph and more. That only changed when automated targeting systems got implemented.

But generally i would love to see that guns having it harder to hit moving targets, even against moving tanks.


Viper wrote:true......but also this does not mean that cheap units should easily dominate expensive stuff.........


In 1944 it happend to be that a greyhound from a recon unit ambushed a kt, followed up and closed in to 25 meters and destroyed the kt or rather its engine. Just saying.
Or IS 2 tanks getting killed by panzerfausts and cheap hetzer tanks.


And i dont see how cheap units "easily" dominate expensive stuff unless this cheap unit is a type specifically designed to take out the expensive type (eg anti tank weapons vs tanks). But if you put the same type of unit against another one that costs more, the winner is usually the expensive one. Every other outcome is usually regarded to superior player skill from the guy using the cheap unit.



bk mod suffers in many ways from this issue since many years (in addition to problematic artillery)....and more expensive units are usually on the axis side, thats why i think playing axis is harder. and this does not have anything to do with doctrine design or core game balance. but it is more an issue of the gameplay mechanism in the mod.
[/quote]



There were many more occassions where super expensive shit gets killed by cheap stuff when using the right tactics. Even today million dollar tanks get killed by cheap rpgs and moltov cocktails.


Brits have no cheap stuff at all which they can use as meatshields. They are the real fucked guys when it comes to arty parties and suffer most from heavy losses to arty. You cant avoid to invest over 400 MP if you want to get any kind of unit, Axis dont need to spend much if artillery becomes too dense and dangerous for expensive units.

Axis also have lots of cheap expendable and easily deployable stuff. They do have expensive stuff everywhere, but they also have some of the cheapest and most cost effective units in the entire game. And that is what makes them actually good. Having a choice to go either cheap or expensive. You can start with volks (clearly cheaper than rifles), over Hetzers and nice HT´s with brutal HE guns and 20 mm armed vehicles for low cost. Cheap Tank IV J´s and cheap arty. So there are expensive units available, yes, but tons of cheap stuff that you can use to support them.


Return to “Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests