Wehr's little defence doc boost but why not others?

[stingraywinston]

I dont play as wehr much but im really happy that there not much denfencive doctrine has become viable again just because of a few little buffs like bunker HP and OP HP and others. This now making it a more popular choice as it was before.

This then brought to my attention other doctrines that are not used as much with other factions. Say for instance the amour doc for the US that every1 seems to complain about. Then i started thinking, why should defencive doc for wehr have a defensive boost(only slighty) and not amour have a amour boost(only slighty).

Just remember though wehr only had a few very small adjustments to there doc, but making quite a good change at the same time.

What changes could you make to amour but again only very small changes and making a differance or any other doctrines to that fact. Any other doctrines too

Any suggestions. Only small though.

[Falaris]

Hmm...... I'd buff the calliope a bit, seeing as that is a little underused. Probably reduce cooldown a little, make it more useful in fog of war, make'em actually effective against inf_soldier armor.

Some general changes to make armor a little more viable in general - nerf the schreck a bit might do the trick, if not, I'd consider reducing the upgrade costs of the sherman, improve the M8 and Quad a bit.

Err... yeah, that's taken from the change log. ;)

[stingraywinston]

Hmm maybe a good idea. Its only a very small change but amour maybe should have a slight reduction in upkeep costs.

[DoctorLee]

Armor company is suffering because Tanks are easily killed now with abundance of inf AT, not because the tech tree sucks.

Remember that Armor ruled CoH back in the old days. There's not many changes done to the tech tree itself, but rather tanks in general became too vulnerable.

Believe me, Armor company doesn't need a buff. Tanks do. Or nerf to inf AT. (it is already sort of done)

[DrunkenBrawler]

Armor company is suffering because Tanks are easily killed now with abundance of inf AT, not because the tech tree sucks.

Remember that Armor ruled CoH back in the old days. There's not many changes done to the tech tree itself, but rather tanks in general became too vulnerable.

Believe me, Armor company doesn't need a buff. Tanks do. Or nerf to inf AT. (it is already sort of done)

I dunno, brits infantry AT sucks royally though, no wher player ever backed up their tiger because of a sapper squad. I think the main problem is still shrecks... The difference in accuracy between before the patch and now is marginal. /puts flamesuit on

[akim]

What's so wrong with armor?

Armor was buffed. Caliope was buffed. Axis inf AT was nerfed... So emm, why not try it out?

Seems to me people just prefer the OP elements of the other trees. Like rangers, strafing runs and fire up inf. Maybe armor is actually the only balanced tree left for US?

I know I'll probably get flamed for saying that. But think about it for a second. I rarely come up against armor, does that mean it's broken? The few times I do, they seem to do pretty well, m8s+quads with capping power are just nuts, especially now with the shreck nerf. And Calliopes CAN actually tear stuff apart, believe it or not.

I don't know, maybe it doesn't work that well in 1v1. But in 2v2 it seems to hold its own pretty well.

@Drunken
Believe me the shreck nerf is very real. At least for wehr players. Against PE, it might not seem that different, for the sheer volume of shrecks they can field, with relative ease.

Not a flame, just FYI ;)

[stingraywinston]

What changes could you make to amour but again only very small changes and making a differance or any other doctrines to that fact.

Amour doc was just an example. I play amour 8/10 times. This thread was for suggestions to all doctrines of all factions. Basically how could a small change make a particular doc better that all. I like amour i have nout against it but the pershing coming out so late making it more or less useless in 1on1's.

I just thought the small buff to wehr def doctrine was a perfect example how a small change can make a differance to a particular doctrine.

[Panzer Jager]

Armour doctrine got mostly indirect buffs. (upgrade cost for upgunned Shermans, Schreck nerf, Marder nerf, buffs to M8 and M3.)
And a few direct buffs to Pershing and Calliope.

[E-Bass]

How many times does it need to be said........

Armour company's death has much less to do with its tanks or the enemys AT weapons than it has to do with the fact it gets no infantry based anti tank capabilities.

When facing the Panzer Elite, no Recoiless Rifles or Bazookas for the hordes of Scout Cars, Armoured Cars, Half Tracks, Mortar Half Tracks, Marders, AT-HTs, which can come into the game long before a tank depot (or even a motor pool in most cases) is just too big a sacrifice to make in exchange for mostly mid-endgame abilties.

[Schwarzwald]

popular to much belief, wehrmacht defense doctrine is not all the way fixed, ive said it countless times... 280m offmap rockets barely scratches paint off trucks and emplacements....Bunker HP increase helps but its not much compared to trenches etc..

[ErichTheGraham]

I think it needs a few small buffs and then it will be good again. Mostly: Pershing could come out a CP sooner and I, as a mostly wehr player, would not cry about it. Also, my friend and I were play testing some stuff with the Calliope and I was pretty unimpressed. I think I would rather have just about any other arty in the game. The good thing about it is it's on a mobile and durable platform. Other than that, I don't think it justifies it's cost. Actually, I think a small price reduction would do wonders for it.

EDIT: Yeah defensive is not 100% fixed but now it is very viable. Plus that is not the topic of this thread. This thread is trying to assess if there are any other doctrines that don't really get much use. I would say that pretty much armor is the only one left that needs serious attention. Like somebody said, it's main weakness is sacrificing early and mid game abilities. I think that some sort of cost reduction or slight global buff to Ami armor would do fine, as has been brought up before.

[Kuriente]

I think the fear for most people might lie with Tank Destroyer Tactics. A Pershing as it stands merely serves as an appetizer for more vet for the Jagd. Hetzers outrange all American tanks with their site upgrade and teller mines can ruin the day of any Armored convoy. If PE doesn't go tank destroyers than it's not a problem but tank destroyers seems to be the popular choice at the moment.

I'm not complaining or saying anything is imbalanced but merely stating why I think people have been avoiding armor. Though I have to say that armor has one extremely useful ability against PE, namely Raid. PE being a faction that relies on being able to quickly cover the field and cap points behind the front line really takes a beating when the Americans can beat them at their own game. M8's can move around the field about as fast as a ket (sometimes faster if you count the fact that they can run over fences and things), they're unaffected by booby traps, they can lay mines (traps of their own) AND they have a gun. When used properly this can really hurt PE, particularly in 1v1's from my experience.

[Goobers]

I don't think you can fix the AC doctrine so much as fix Doctrineless Americans vs PE.

Once you take Rangers and Airborne out of the picture for dealing with the abundance of PE Vehicles, it leaves very little options for an Armoured Player to compete early in the game, and content with Map control so you can even get to the tank stage.

What I wouldn't mind seeing is Doctrine perks, like PE get for the Ketten. For example, taking Armoured Company, give the Jeep the AP Rounds ability. Puts more reliance on American Vehicles early game, and would help cover the gap of early mobile AT duties, which I believe scare most people away.


Defence Doctrine has always been viable, it just lacks the end tree heavy punch that is the Tiger which puts it below Terror and Blitz.Its been my preferred doctrine since I first got the game and has a whole host of useful stuff. Its never been weak, just shunned.

[TheWickedGerman]

Some general changes to make armor a little more viable in general - nerf the schreck a bit might do the trick, if not, I'd consider reducing the upgrade costs of the sherman, improve the M8 and Quad a bit.


Are you serious? Maybe AC tree needs a buff, icant say i never play usa. But your suggestions are silly. Shreck has been nerfed and are now useless against M8 or quad, cause if they get close for a good chance too hit they die and m8 and quads kites. so if you backup your tanks with those(or a croc) shrecks should be not your main problem. i dont know if M8 an quads has been buffed in 2.3 but since then they often come in pairs, and their is no chance for axis inf.

What is the upgrade costs for the sherman?

[k0lyan]

200 mp 50 fuel.
In someway armor doctrine are pretty useless now, why>>>in original coh us got a lot of Pershings, now they can get only 1. Sign armor doesnt have arty, or early doctrine units.
About little buff>>>may be raid should cost 1cp, and jeeps should get armor piercing burst after raid, for 35-50 munition. (it will make armor pretty good vs pe), and may be Pershing should cost 4cp?.

Btw why relic nerf Inspired Assault?
I know some people complain about inspired snipers.(May be only ia for snipers should get nerf:) ).

[Falaris]

Are you serious? Maybe AC tree needs a buff, icant say i never play usa. But your suggestions are silly.

A little hint, TheWickedGerman, the changes I suggested was the ones done in the 2.3 patch. So yeah, in a WAY I was serious in that those changes might be enough to turn around the AC, but on the other hand, no, I was not seirously suggesting doing them 'again'.

[iaguz]

There are 3 problems to Armour Company:

1) No effective early/mid game powers. Infantry and Airborne are popular because they have better early and mid game powers and the metagame has shifted to having those powers more popular. Partly because there's a lot of sweet gubbinz in those trees (1 sec arty, strafing run, elite armour Rangers, buffed Howitzer etc) but also because against PE you generally require an early/mid game power like a strafe or a Ranger squad to stay competitive. I'm not saying it's a requirement, it would be stupid to generalise the USA/PE matchup that badly, but many players feel they need a quick power like that to remain competitive.

2) Armour Company's abilities suck the fat one. Armour company isn't useful until you actually have a tank on the field. Even then, it's abilities cost a hefty amount of resources. 200 munitions for your shermans to stay alive a touch longer? For 150 munitions I could just kill all the bastards anyway with a strafe! Same goes for AWM, a risky charge that might backfire or just be plain stupid, wheras with a bombing run for the same cost will kill or push back lots of Germans, guarenteed. Ok, I'm comparing a 3rd tier ability to a 2nd tier but you know what I mean.

3) It cannot compete with late game kraut trees, which is mainly what Armour company should be doing and what it was doing back in 1.71. Armour tree competed with Blitz and Terror because it got a Pershing out 1 cp before they did. It also had a calliope, but 9 times out of 10 that Pershing had priority. The USA guy had to get as massive an advantage as he could before the Tiger came, and maybe even delay combat until he gets a second one.
Nowadays, the Armour tree cannot compete, for the same reasons almost the Tiger cannot. For 8 cp's, I can get a Pershing for 900mp, a relatively shitty tank for it's cost. For 8 cp's and an unbeatable cost (free. Kinda) I get a JagdPanther, a tank that beats a Pershing at basically everything. Except you only get one. Big deal, the game will most likely be over because it's on the field and the poor USA git has to pay through the teeth for his far inferior tank. Same kinda goes for the King Tiger too.

The regular Tiger is hardly used for a similar reason, because if you're going to hoard CP's for something big and powerful you may as well get a KT for your troubles, which is cheaper and more effective. That, and the Tiger doesn't dominate like it used to, especially since there's no Pershings out there for it to chew up and spit out (USA late game armour is fairly rare, because of it's hard to get nature and relative shittiness). British fireflies and the 17pdr and 57mm AT guns smash it to pieces too when using AP rounds.

That's basically what's wrong with armour company. To me anyway.

[Question]

A lot of doctrines have abilities that feel a bit screwed up or only usable in rather few situations.

Stuh42 : 5 CP, 600 mp for something that has problems taking out emplacements and blobs, its primary function. Cant fire over hedges and stuff either.

Resource blitz : Spending munitions on the most muns hungry faction in the game to gain no manpower advantage is err.....no. Compared to airborne supply drops that does the same thing in reverse + more, this is a joke.

Inspired Assault : Making it easier to give the enemy chances to wipe out my squads and give him free shrecks...no.

Field repair : I cant even imagine what kind of armoured force is worth 200 muns to repair in the field like this.

Wireblewind : Not worth MP or CP cost.

Firestorm : It takes what, five seconds for the flares to drop alone? How could anyone possibly get hit by this?

KT : Except that it has no upfront cost, its basically a slow moving arty magnet that limits your offensive speed. It cant even kill enemy tanks effectively, due to the time it needs to fire each shot.

PE 88 : Hardly an appropriate faction for a static heavy emplacement like this...

PE flakvierling : Not very useful either, cant scratch the paint of an armored car.

Falls : Dies fast, needs upgrade to be useful, cant kill emplacements because anti-building nade can be repaired easily, has no AT ability(fausts dont count), very expensive, 3 CPs....

Scorched earth : 3 CPs for something that removes your ownership of the point is stretching it a bit much. Would be useful on a ketten that can get behind enemy lines, but you need a halftrack + PGs to make it really useful.

Tiger : AP rounds, problem solved. Isnt even particularly good against infantry...

Wehr 88 : Blocked by terrain, shells constantly smash into the ground instead...

Rocket artillery : Useless against brits

Overwatch : Keeps smashing into houses or such that are in the way.

[Ano2]

The problem as Iaguz pointed out is that Armour lacks anything useful early game. Best idea i've heard, was suggested elsewhere, is to give the Jeep AP rounds with fast deployment.

It would make the perfect early counter to AC spammers, lots of jeeps whizzing around with ap rounds. Makes up for the lack of early mobile AT that armour fails to offer.