View Full Version : US armor Doctrine (AWM, Pershing, Calliope, & FR)
18th Mar 08, 3:40 PM
So basically, with this doctrine only to be used in cases of extreme intoxication or for shits and giggles. You can use this if you want to loose in 1v1s. Americans need rangers and airborne to combat the PE, and special abilities to aid in the killing the blob. Armor is all about late game domination, while americans nowadays need help in the early-mid game.
So here are my solutions to make the doctrine very playable in 1v1's and balanced in team games.
Allied War Machine- Possibly make it a single tank ability. One tank can have the ability active for cost of 100 munis. The timer would be the same. Therefore you wouldn't be able to tank zerg and expect AWM to replace your tanks. This wouldn't be necessarily a problem, b/c its basically 125 munis a sherman now, all this is, is a slight cost reduction and a per-tank base. Would help against the PE blob or when your sherman gets caught by a KT or something in a team game. Shermans blow nowadays, so this would be balanced.
Field Repairs- Same idea, have it as a per tank repair. Would repair the same amount of HP as the current field repairs. Cost at 75 (working number) per tank.
Pershing- Reduction in CP's. Keep it at 1 per time and buff the effectiveness and armor against King Tigers and Jagdpanthers. It's complete bullshit when a nascar JP hunts down your 1/4 health pershing and basically WTFBBQPWNS it, then speeds off to the datona 500. Also, decrease the VET requirements, for all levels. It's hard to get any vet versus the PE when they basically have nothing but inf and HT's.
Calliope- Keep all damage and cool down the same. Decrease cost to 600 and CP's back down to 2.
I feel that this would make armor playable in 1v1's and keep team games from degenerating into Armor versus Blitz.
Something creative would be to maybe give some sort of buff to .57mm guns or Sherman damage/armor. Maybe to contrast the readiness of AT of PE and Wehrmacht.
God save anyone who uses armor. It has its uses in fast deployment, but raid comes too late and pershing is a POS when its compared to any other heavy call in tanks.
I've seen players using armours with the new patch (till it went down) and it is quite effective now. The shrek nerf means that you can kite grens quite effectively, callope barrages are pretty good considering they are free, and the Pershing's buffs have helped a bit. It just needs some kind of buff for lgiht vehicles other than raid (Maybe health buff?).
18th Mar 08, 3:55 PM
Yah... It's better, as there have been some buffs, however I really think something should be done for the pershing. All of these suggestions I made were based on having the pershing as my main tank, with .57's in support and rifles. The vast number of AT units for panzer elite (and less so wehrmacht) have made armor useless. In a doctrine that is called armor, and relies on armor, it's gotten boned... hard. These suggestions wouldn't make the individual units better, just make the general availability and number of tanks higher. If i make a 420MP 90 fuel investment, it's really not fun at all when it meets the blobs, support has to retreat and it gets alpha struck by 4 schrecks and a marderIII.
18th Mar 08, 3:57 PM
I don't find the Pershing that bad if you get some veternacy on it it performs quite well as a unit with support. Let's give the patch more time before we count our eggs before they hatch?
edit: im afraid if you reduce the CPs for pershing etc other idea it would be imbalanced vs the tiger I, what im for though is bringing back two tigers/two pershings. Possibly get rid of the marder III huge bonus vs US tanks.
18th Mar 08, 4:13 PM
Pershing's vet isn't very good against PE. Extra speed isn't that helpful since the tank is very slow to accelerate and PE has hard-hitters, penetration is useless against PE units, and vet3 for extra damage is soooo far away that the poor thing is unlikely to survive that long - 21 dead PGs or 14 halftracks, for example.
Also, since the Pershing loses even against vanilla Tigers in slugfests, getting it a CP earlier would be really nice - at least it would stand a chance of getting the first level of veterancy and managing to run away.
Allied War Machine- Possibly make it a single tank ability. One tank can have the ability active for cost of 100 munis. The timer would be the same. Therefore you wouldn't be able to tank zerg and expect AWM to replace your tanks.
hmmmm thaught it only replaces 2 Shermans now the way it is.
Definately do not bring back 2 Tigers/Pershings that was ruining the game as it made the doctrine a no brainer. Sinc ethe problem is with PE, it would be more logical to change them than buff armour too much, otherwise wehr will suffer.
18th Mar 08, 5:01 PM
No one really should give a crap about wehrmacht AT capabilities. They have the best tanks in a game, and easily bought vet on a cheaper panther can beat the pants off a pershing. Wehrmacht is FINE. Cloaked PAk 38's, panzerschrecks.... They can beat brits and americans equally. I don't understand why all of a sudden americans aren't allowed to have tanks. Werhmacht's defensive doctrine was BUFFED so its usefull. Arguably, no other army has a doctrine as useless as American Armor.
What when did I say US couldn't have tanks? All I said was its better to adress the PE AT imbalances rather than buff the US armour, which could negatively affect wehr.
And wehr at is fine but not amazing like you claim it to be. Shreks have been nerfed so you can reliably use armour against them so long as you kite, and paks are the only decent long range AT till p4/panther. Stug does not count since it is 1 step away from completely useless with the 2 more nerfs it recieved this patch. Tank vet may be op in team games but in 1v1 it it is pretty useless after vet 1, since panthers only get a nerfed to shite mg mount and skirts which are only good versus handheld at. Not exactly worth the 400mp/130 fuel investment in a 1v1.
18th Mar 08, 5:15 PM
despite hearing a no no, i would like to be able to have 2 pershings on the field again at the same time.
And why not?
PE have Panther x2 callin that makes a single pershing look stupid for more or less the same price in manpower. Plus they have the jagpanther. 2 marders can even destroy a pershing.
Wehr have panthers and tiger callins, basic tiger, plus king tiger.
I cant honestly see how this would make alot of differance. Axis are still able to deploy superior amour.
Well first off the PE Panther call in is bs imo, thats one of the things i'd change.
If you give US two pershings, you have to give blitz two tigers, which means every game would be heavy tank spam with support.
The more logical thing to do would be to remove the 2 Panther call in (Such bs), nerf the Jagd to sane levels, and give the jagd and KT upfront call in costs.
If we do what you suggest, then it will just mean that wehr will produce more at to coutner, leading to another tank spam game. I'd compare this to the Panther/ff issue. The FF was op and has now been nerfed, however its main problem, range, was not nerfed. Instead they buffed the panthers range, making the panther op versus the pershing.
The sensible thing to do would have been to nerf the ffs range instead, and this is what i'm getting at. Don't buff armour, nerf PE op jagd and 2 panther call in, and reduce the range of panthers and ffs so all tanks have almost the same range.
18th Mar 08, 5:47 PM
Fair do's. but you can see where im coming from especially in 2vs2 battles when axis pull out the x2 panther and jag or tiger. And all US have to other is either shermans or the (1) pershing.
Now i know people keep saying the game is mainly balanced balanced around the 1vs1 automatch. But to be honest with the new patch and all including team 2v2 they must cater for that also.
Most 2vs2 last alot longer than 1vs1 so many of these matches will be decided with late amour.
As things are at the moment axis do have the better late amour. Most long games will result in several panthers and maybe a kt or jag rolling in at some point all together. It would be nice in this case if going amour with US to have a cap of 2 pershings.
Oh yeah I can see exactly where your coming from mate, Its just I think its better to nerf the op thing rather than risk bringing back tank spams. :) Also you shouldn't be using shermans to counter armour, they can take out croms/p4s and below fine with upgun but are not suited to taking on heavy tanks particuarly well. Better to use lots of m10s, capitalising on their speed and high penetration to constantly flank. They have weak armour, but are good anti-tank if used in 2-3 groups.
As for 2v2, it really is impossible to balance it given the wehr vet system, and as you said, the end game domiance of axis heavy tanks. However with the nerfs I suggested PE would be limited to jagd and marauders, with maybe a 1 panther call in for 600mp. You could hardcap panthers for wehr, to say 2, which would be acceptable imo but not the best way to do it. Just think of it in terms of for every panther you need 2 m10s. 2 M10s will beat panther if you flank effectively.
19th Mar 08, 2:20 AM
Nice, this is covering the same ground as my thread from the Strategy Forum: :smurf:
Take a look at it as there's som,e decent suggestions in it, with out buffing Allied Armour to a point of spamability, to increases this doctorines usability in 1V1's.
At the moment, IMHO, it's completely unviable in any 1v1 matches and will result in GG for ya. :disgust:
19th Mar 08, 2:25 AM
Armour doctrine is supposed to be powerful in 2v2's, and it is.
A small nerf to Pak38 vs. Pershing and Armour doc will be fine.
Keep it at 1 per time and buff the effectiveness and armor against King Tigers and Jagdpanthers
It got a buff in that field. Also, you can't (I mean physically) nerf the King Tiger's armour without nerfing the Tiger's armour.
19th Mar 08, 2:29 AM
Armour doctrine is supposed to be powerful in 2v2's, and it is.
I can well beleive that, if and when i start playing 2v2s i'll definately give it a go. :salute:
But it should still be a viable options at 1V1, which it just isn't i think. :wtf:
19th Mar 08, 4:05 AM
Ive always felt the placement of the CP tree makes no sense. I mean, when you have the CPs for field repair, its not like you have an army of vehicles in the field or the munitions to use it(for at least 5 minuets to boot), so wouldnt it make more sense to replace it with a more immediately available ability?
19th Mar 08, 7:53 AM
I'd like to see armor doctrine get an additional mid-level CP call-in tank along the lines of the Axis Hetzer and Stuh.
I'm not sure what tank it should be... maybe a gass-less sherman? Or two? Or some tank destroyers?
All the Axis free-gas call-ins allow them to field armor even when lacking gas, something the USA cannot do other then the over-expensive Pershing.
19th Mar 08, 8:08 AM
I'd rather replace Field Repairs or AWM with a new power called "Tanker Inguenuity". For 200-250 Mun, it adds a vet level to all shermans on the field (Maybe M10s too). It also reduces the cost of .50s and minesweepers by 50% passively.
This would make Shermans able to handle Panthers/Marders better, and would make AWM and field repairs have different uses. Right now, they do basically the same thing. Personally, I'd keep field repairs and make AWM vet tanks.
The second buff Armor needs is to allow capping light vehicles to shoot. This would allow a quad or M8 to actually take enemy ground without being a giant target. Right now they cant move, so are easy to hit, and cant shoot, so they pose little threat.
19th Mar 08, 9:56 AM
I'd rather replace Field Repairs or AWM with a new power called "Tanker Inguenuity". For 200-250 Mun, it adds a vet level to all shermans on the field (Maybe M10s too). It also reduces the cost of .50s and minesweepers by 50% passively
You sir have made the best suggestion ever in my opinion.
It makes a lot of sense.
I'm exclusively an Armored Company user, and to say the least I have struggled alot. Pershings are better now, but the range buff to the Panther negates the Pershing buff. The Pershing still needs a slight armor buff.
19th Mar 08, 10:36 AM
What if Shermans and M10s got +5 range under this doctrine?
19th Mar 08, 11:39 AM
Croat: That could be a good passive ability instead of cheaper .50s. Adding 5 range to all Shermans. Another idea would be to give +5 range at vet 2 to shermans. With the adding vet for munitions, it would be a lot easier for Armor company to get Shermans that could tackle Panthers. Other docs generally have enough other options, but Armor does need a small AT buff.
19th Mar 08, 12:52 PM
In that case, also add the +5 range to the Pershing as well. :p
19th Mar 08, 1:40 PM
Why not a +5-10 range increase with the 76mm upgraded?
Most Armour players will get it, especially since it's cheaper now.
19th Mar 08, 1:51 PM
Panzer: Biggest reason I dont like it with the 76mm, is EVERYONE gets a 76mm upgrade. Also, the cost doesnt justify it. Maybe if the cost went up, it would. With Vet, atleast your sherman earned it. Its damn hard to kill tanks without the 76mm, and thats where you get most of your vet. With Armor players, the bought vet idea I had would make vetting shermans a lot easier. Shermans also dont need help killing infantry, only tanks.
Nintento: I'd be all for that @ vet2. If Vanilla Pershings get +5 range, so should Tigers (And probably KT/JP, atleast JP. KT is already 45). I'd also be for that, but then you might as well reduce Panther/FF back down to 42.5 or so.
19th Mar 08, 2:52 PM
Perhaps we could add a somewhat expensive upgrade that you unlock with "field repairs". It would allow you to add 4 inches of steel armor to your sherman for a munitions cost. This will decrease frontal penetration so much that it will be able to win a slugfest vs a panther (assuming you have the 76mm gun upgrade)
Note, the panther will still outrange the sherman, and therefor, still has an advantage if used skillfully.
19th Mar 08, 10:12 PM
How is the 76mm upgrade bad? Its a one time global upgrade, it makes a sherman beat a panzer IV easily(not even a close match even!), and the sherman can still snipe half a shreck squad from long range instantly forcing it to retreat or drop shrecks in a few seconds. A sherman is also more mobile than a panzer IV to start with and can easily get in non-frontal arc shots against the axis heavy armor.
20th Mar 08, 7:16 AM
Question: I mean the 76mm is too good for its cost. Making it give +5 range too would be too much, especially when combined with other docs. If it was a Armor doc buff only, it might be ok, but even then I think its too much of a buff.
20th Mar 08, 7:49 AM
Why not make one path for callins and the second for the support.
So Left side:
-1CP Faster Deployment
-2CP Field Repairs
20th Mar 08, 8:05 AM
That would make far too much sense :) Actually, I've got a feeling that way back in the old days, the Calliope was in the same side of the tree as the Pershing, but I could be talking nonsense. If it is true, then I assume they changed it for a good reason (whatever that may be).
I can't even figure out what to do with Raid. Everytime I get it, it feels like too little too late. On the other hand, if it came at 1 CP then it seems like it would be too good.
No, you're not crazy. The call-ins used to be on the same path. The problem was the same as Blitz has though; nobody took the 'other' abilities first.
Field Repairs being a cheaper single target ability makes a lot of sense. It's too rare you have 250 munitions and 4+ damaged vehicles on the field to make it worthwhile right now.
Raid needs to be 1 CP, and the Pershing either needs to come down 1 CP or down ~150 MP.
The rest of the abilities are okay, though I wouldn't mind Fast Deployment giving a modest passive bonus of some kind as well.
As it is, I only take Armour when I'm winning. Giving more incentive to take it early on is desperately needed. Even if nothing else is done, Raid needs to be 1 CP before anyone will take it seriously.
20th Mar 08, 10:20 AM
Well, actually I think the range increase for the Panther was a mistake to begin with. The FF's range should have been nerfed.
Anyway, what Armored company really needs is another mid-game AT option. That is what bothers me the most.
20th Mar 08, 12:25 PM
M4A3E2 Assault Gun?
20th Mar 08, 12:48 PM
As things stand:
Raid 2CP............................ Fast Deployment 1CP
Allied WM 2CP 250 MUN........ Field Repairs 2CP 200 MUN
Calliope RL 3CP 650MAN........ M26 Pershing 5CP 900 MAN
Raid 1CP............................. Fast Deployment 2CP
M10 CALLIN 3CP 450MAN....... Field Repairs 2CP 175 MUN
Calliope RL 3CP 650MAN........ M26 Pershing 4CP 850 MAN
Just a suggestion.
20th Mar 08, 12:59 PM
Stingray- that won't suffice. You cannot take away AWM.
20th Mar 08, 1:03 PM
early armor is all about jeeps and rifles, followed by armored cars and quad 50s. It is very viable.
20th Mar 08, 1:13 PM
Two Pershings is a big NO...the fact that one could field 2 pershings/tigers in vCoH meant that the TD and PK were never used because you can just substitute the call-ins.
Armor is actually quite decent vs. wehr but needs some help vs. PE. This is mainly because of Marder III/Jagdpanther damage bonuses vs. US tanks. But Armor received quite a buff overall in OF 2.3 due to
-Cheaper Sherman Upgun
I've been using it in 1v1s to some decent effect. Get fast deployment first, then go down the RHS for calliope. Go for fast MP to get a m8 against PE, which builds lightning quick with fast deployment. Then get a quad .50 so your troops can reinforce on the field. Against Wehr, get quad .50 first then M8. Back tech to WSC if necessary (usually not). Make AT guns if you think you're going to face some armor. Get first supply yard upgrade, then TD and turn out M10s for the heavy stuff or a croc if you're facing infantry blobs. Use AWM anytime you need to replace vehicles since your munitions is really going to be stacking up on this tree due to lack of off-map arty and call-ins that need upgrades.
This is what the tree still needs, in order of importance:
1. Adjust PE modifiers against US medium and heavy tanks.
2. Pershing 1 CP earlier
3. Cheapen AWM/Field repairs by 50 munitions (they would be 200/150, respectively)
3. -50 MP cost on Calliope.
With 3 and 4 being far, far below the importance of 1 and 2.
Switching Raid/Rapid Deployment doesn't make much sense because the latter affects the M8 and Quad. You can get 2 CPs to get raid by the time you have the MP up. The only time it's a big deal is regards to jeeps, but jeeps aren't built all that often.
Switching the calliope with field repairs is a bit iffy as well -- 4 CP arty burning everything up? Bring out the eeemmmbaaa.
I really think people say Armor is bad because the other doctrines have eeemba that Armor doesn't -- namely strafing run and Rangers.
20th Mar 08, 1:17 PM
Lets just say you have 2 shermans on the field just about to be killed and you use the current AWM ability which brings you 2 more back on for 250 munitions. These sherman havent got M2HB .50 cal upgrades have they, the 1's before probably had. So not only do you have to pay 250mun for the tanks but an extra 150 for the guns to be any use against infantry at all never mind tanks. Personally its just too much munitions. Thers should be a ability callin where you should have 1/2 tanks for manpower alone.
Nearly every other faction has 1 and they are'nt called amour this one is and aint got none.
Switching Raid/Rapid Deployment doesn't make much sense because the latter affects the M8. You can get 2 CPs to get raid by the time you have the MP up.
You can still cap with a jeep. Its just at 2cps it never really gets used that much cause most the early capping has been done. The only useful time ive seen an m8 or any other vechicle cap later points at 2cp's is when they are booby trapped other than that its useless cause you have troops to do that.
20th Mar 08, 1:39 PM
You can still cap with a jeep. Its just at 2cps it never really gets used that much cause most the early capping has been done. The only useful time ive seen an m8 or any other vechicle cap later points at 2cp's is when they are booby trapped other than that its useless cause you have troops to do that. Not useless at all. Firstly, like I said, Jeeps aren't fielded that often. Secondly, it's definitely an advantage to turn all your units on the field into capping units. If your opponent retreats and you have 2 rifles + m8 up front, that's 3 decaps instead of 2.
I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying that if US Armor can field two Pershings than Wehr Blitz has to field two Tigers. If you're going to keep the Pershing at 5 CP (at the end of the tree) then you have to throw a bone to the Armor player. The Pershing isn't close to a KT, or JP or even a vanilla Tiger. Cap it at two of them but you don't get much for the investment currently. Otherwise, drop the Pershing 1 CP because at 5 CP, it isn't worth it.
Also, as stated before, Field Repairs should be at the unit level. I was thinking 30 munitions for Light Armor, 50 for a Tank with a 90 second cooldown.
Finally, as the discussion of AWM keeps going, I just think it needs re-designed. I've stated in another thread that it could reduce the cost of Allied Armor while active and give an Allied player a small window to field a bunch of cheap armor. Right now I believe AWM to be too expensive for what you get and you're always waiting for that "perfect time" to use it...and it never comes.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.