Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
have you played old TH doc?
I'm playing since 4.6 version. And casemate tanks is what I loved in Blitzkrieg mod long time
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
There was no "critical mass"... just place a hetzer at every crater and bomb your enemie.
U miss my point again... I said that about spam-rush tactic that u like
crazzy501 wrote:For me, as example, that spam-rush is boring. U just need to wait for gain critical mass and then end the game despite the losses
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
It was boring as fuck for both sides. For allied bc they couldnt do anything bc in every corner sat a silly low profile casemate TD.
man if it was boring for PE players so they wont play it! For thous, who like that playstyle that is comfortable. And I'm one of that players. And I really doesn't mind about your problems to fights against that. It's really only my opponent problem and he must find the way to solve this coz I have problems about fights against US factions as well. And not by whining on forum for remove this unique playstyle from a single doctrine of 6 (WH + PE)
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
It might have been funny for you, but generally it was super boring and frustrating and pure camping shit.
So don't play it. Go for BK Doc and vise versa. Don't make any doc like Blitzkrieg Doc
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
It was only camp and bomb, everytime. I prefer to deal with charging panthers rather than with "sitting tanks you cant see but you know they are there but you cant make them run so you have to die a stupid arty death".
Yeah, man, then I prefer to see my clones all around the whole world. But that is nonsense. Much different peoples, much different playstyles, u know. That's what gives us challenge
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
And why should the Jagdpanther be twice as good vs 90 mm guns but more vulnerable to 17 pdr and 76 guns? I dont get this logic dude.
Coz of shorter barrel and less penetration power as example. 17pdrs possible to penetrate at longer ranges than Pershings 90mm. And that's described even in the in-game tips
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
When it comes to jagdpanther IV/48 or Hetzer, they do have worse protection vs 76 guns than Panzer IV H/J and far worse when compared to tiger.
The IV/70 is about similiar to tiger but has way less HP.
I'm talking preferable about IV/70 in any case so... Yes - that's what I like in that doctrine and why I don't want to see Tigers and Panthers here
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
The games were never about "take points strategically"... it was just a line of Hetzers sitting in every crater and more a "broad front slowly creeping forward" gameplay.
That's only a problem of opponent. If PE player wants to play in that way - why u think it's boring for him? For other playstyles we have other doctrines
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Generally, handling rushes and deep strikes and then counterattack with your own tanks perhaps elsewhere or at the same location is more fun to play bc you have a realistic chance with your allied tanks to flank them or to make pushes.
with current state of CP tree it can't be comfortable, because, as I said above
crazzy501 wrote:Rush to the base until opponent leave is not fun for me
And u have better doc for it: WH Blitzkrieg, witch also have buffs for economic like munitions trade. TH Doc haven't it for now and it can't loose tanks coz it's unable to recover if attack die out. That makes TH Doc more of "1 single risky try", witch is unfair alongside, for example, US Armor with their ultimate ability to instantly recall all of crushed shermans.
Yes, u can add some economic buffs in this doctrine but how it will differentiate from Blitzkrieg doctrine and not become OP?
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Facing a wall of casemate TD´s is super frustrating to play against bc you have tanks but you cant do anything against them and every step can be your last one.
Last updates gives much arty units for almost any faction. Even US Armor have Calliopes, Jeep Calliopes and 105mm to fights against emplacements and what's wrong to use it against emplaced cazemate tanks? If u don't use your units in right way, maybe smthng wrong with your playstyle
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Lastyl, i dont get your logic. First you want to keep the F2 and saying something like "US has shermans with cal 50".
...
The F2 was btw no mainstay. it was a stop gap of a handfull produced.
I want to give them Panzer IV H/J´s as a main stay over the F2 but then you come up with:
My point is to not give all available German tanks to single doctrine. Instead of this I just want to see some basic cheap unit just a little more powerful than Halftruck with AT gun to fill the gap in tech tree between armored car and JP 4/70, that will be used as counter for early Shermans with 75mm or vs armored cars. Just for balance case.
Sure we can have this Panzer 4 J/H, but why I need it for 60 fuel, when I already have JP 4(48) at same costs which have more accuracy, can hide in cover and/or dig in at vet2? Make it cheaper and it will become OP.
BTW that's why I suggested somewhere on the forum to remove JP 4(48)
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Ultimately, the PE when it was introduced in coh was meant to be the offensive doc. It had no defenses except for luftwaffe but just slight one.
Right now the entire faction is quite defensive with exception for luft (which is funny given that this one was the actually defensive doc in PE).
PE represents more or less the SS and the overall design original layout is about pure speed, flexibility, micromanagment and hard hitting attacks (vcoh it had the Panther battlegroup). Its just hurtfull for me when PE becomes a "sitting/bombing" faction when it was about hard hitting brute force attacks.
I see. But I think the only reason why PE has become defensive doctrine was is fact, that they has very weak infantry in past.
In current beta state we have some infantry buffs and have Assault Grenadiers and I'm already tested to play offensive in the way I talk above. And that was more funny than in early beta state just because of combination infantry with halftrucks and JP IV/70. Now we have expensive TDs with good stats, that we won't loose and have much infantry, that can be easily reinforced. And that gives us less risks to loose whole match by just one wrong move and gives us gameplay variation
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
And there is a vast difference between these two docs (BK and this one). BK is about speed with medium tanks that flank the enemie or attacking soft or bad defended areas. You could have watched countless of games where i used it with big success and comming from the flank and surprise the AT guns and using sneaky inf to swiftly clear emplacments and what will be left.
the way u talk about what u want to see in PE doctrine is the same, as u said there. U want lots of P4 and Panthers, just like BK Doc. And u said that's rushing is "the only way to play for fun"
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
Its just hurtfull for me when PE becomes a "sitting/bombing" faction when it was about hard hitting brute force attacks.
that's a good point of view for changes. I already mentioned above about remove all arty units from this doc and give them just Stuh42. With support of JagdPanthers and JT u can easily brute force any u want. But, as I said, we need downsides for this. For now, JT with support of P4 J/H will become ultra powerful combination of antitank/antiinfantry force, that can't be penetrated in front or outmaneuvered. Switch P4 J/H for something less powerful, that has lack of MGs and that become less OPed
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
This doc would be more about frontal hard hitting brute force charges with well armored tank and no sneaky arround with lots of high speed medium tanks.
witch tanks u want to see for that purpose? Same as Blitzkrieg doc? So what's the difference with it? That's why I offer you to play BK Doc instead of making PE-BK clone with advantages of Panzer Grenadiers
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
So basically, the only units BK and this doc would have in common would be Tank IV H/J and stugs. Panthers, yeah, but different versions.
Ok. Your right about making Panthers as core unit of German factions but I think we need to split tech trees of Tanks/TH ealrier in time. Let's say, we can't build P4 J/H if we decided to go for TH line. So we can't combine both powers from two sides. Just for balance purposes. And, again, I must to say that Tigers and KT are not fit this doctrine and must be removed. I think better to remove Panthers limit instead of having Tigers there in a case of representing a "Elite SS Battle group"
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
But what you say is like saying Inf and armor are the same bc both have Shermans, 76 shermans, jacksons, jumbos and M10´s. Same units do not mean same gameplay.
yes. That's why US Armor doc have a lot of buffs for Shermans, like field repairs, sandbags, cheaper production and more, that differentiate them from any other faction. For now I don't know how u want to differentiate P4 and Panthers from BK Doc and for now it's looks like u just want PE-BK clone doctrine
Warhawks97 wrote: ↑24 Aug 2020, 22:42
The facts speak for themselves. Most play BK doc coz it has a good TD, Panzer IV H/J and Panthers. TS doc? only a few prior to the change recently.
And reviving a casemate tank only doctrine wont make it more attractive and for the allied just once more super frutrating.
BK doc haven't any of good TDs u know.. It's have tanks, that only intended to use for rushing and flanking. Stug4 can only fights against early Shermans or Shermans without sandbags around, but not vs Easy Eights coz of their good accuracy and well survivability.
I'm playing mostly PE TH Doc just because of casemate tanks. I like how it looks. I like how it plays. And only thing them needed is good infantry support.
And yes, I'm played all factions allied and axis just for interest and have a view on them all