Infantry doctrine

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Dnicee]

just checked out the infantry doctrine and




Nothing buff riflemen or stickies...why?

[PonySlaystation]

dual t3s.

[skaffa]

Ever since I started EIR Ive pretty much only played US faction as allied and 99% Infantry doctrine. In my opinion its a pretty good doctrine with a lot of options. Even with the current T4 locked and loaded, which I never liked, the doctrine allows for plenty of builds and interesting armies through the rest of the unlocks.

TR with Jumbo is great. Jumbos for AI and ATGs + zooks for AT. This leaves a lot of muni open for snipers and mines, easily could get 2 snipers and 10+ engies with mines. I played with this build a long time and its really effective.

Another TR build I used was Ranger spam with zooks. Once you can get a side/rear shot off they deal great damage. GMC's worked pretty nice as support. There was a replay of a stackbattle where I win 1v3 in the end with this.

Top T4 is what I played with most recently. Combined with smoke nades on infantry and US officer, you can have a really nice cheap rifleman heavy army with lots of smoke allowing you to always attack and get close. Once close, throw pineapple nades to win. Hellcats work really nice with this, as well as 2 or so shermans for the aura. Fun strat for inf battles and flanking.

Besides that you can use a variation of 2x T3s. Allowing you to go BAR heavy (top T3), with bottom T3 for moving accuracy.

Bottom unlocks are also all useful, the offmap is great, triage is excellent which also received buffs in T3s.  

These are some builds I used and had a lot of fun with and which proved very effective as well. Not sure if you would like these too since you mostly play tank heavy iirc. In that case the Jumbo can still be excellent. Not that hard to keep it alive and if you do you can get lots of inf kills with it.

[Dnicee]

still a infantry doctrine that doesnt buff the main infantry?

[TheIcelandicManiac]

I say we bring back the old Inf doc with Carbiner and the non-nerfd TR and assult riflemen.
That shit was so cash

[skaffa]

When I was still part of the staff we did discuss/updated/improved the current inf doc. When or if its coming I don't know. But it definately has some nice things.

[Hicks58]

still a infantry doctrine that doesnt buff the main infantry?

It's as ridiculous as a Commando doctrine which doesn't buff the Commandos. >.<

[skaffa]

If you want a different doctrine, the only way is to make a draft yourself and post it. Its just the way it is.

Imo, as I tried to point out with my first post, the inf doc does have some nice things and possibilities. If they dont sound appealing to you then you can either try them out anyway to give them a chance, make up something yourself or take a different doctrine. The questions is if the doc allows builds you'd like. It did for me, unlike AB or Armour doc which I never found appealing or interesting enough to use a lot.

[Ahnungsloser]

If you want a different doctrine, the only way is to make a draft yourself and post it. Its just the way it is.

Imo, as I tried to point out with my first post, the inf doc does have some nice things and possibilities. If they dont sound appealing to you then you can either try them out anyway to give them a chance, make up something yourself or take a different doctrine. The questions is if the doc allows builds you'd like. It did for me, unlike AB or Armour doc which I never found appealing or interesting enough to use a lot.

You think after posting a rebuild there will be a serious change?
I have seen a AB rework in a thread which was posted a year ago (*or two?*) and i could not find any serious changes with the today's doctrin.

[3rdCondor]

Infantry doc is probably the best Allied one. Any doctrine that buffs really inexpensive units is going to be amazing in the long run. Dual t3s ftw

[skaffa]

You think after posting a rebuild there will be a serious change?
I have seen a AB rework in a thread which was posted a year ago (*or two?*) and i could not find any serious changes with the today's doctrin.

That nothing has changed about certain doctrines shows the lack of activity on the staff. This means, as we have seen, it can take a very long time before things as complicated as doctrines change. If you have a good idea and make a solid doctrine draft, preferbly discussed with many other people, post it on the forum Im sure it will be looked at by the devs. They have mentioned this multiple times. Making proper doctrines is, imo, not that easy. If you give the devs something to work with I think the entire process will go faster. Having said that it still boils down to the activity of the staff to actually check it out, review and discuss it and implementing it.  

[Dnicee]

really, what does dev stand for? I just gave them something to work with, BUFF THE MAIN INFANTRY!

[DarkSoldierX]

Theres like 10 buffs that improve riflemans. To say it doesn't buff riflemans is a understatement. But would be nice if that ?planned? Top T4 rework was done to give riflemen a big buff.

[Ahnungsloser]

How would it be to make ventrillo convention where the community (Mod -Team included) to discuss severval main issues. For taking a small step (It would be hilirous to discuss complete doctrin rebuilds) a topic could be the lacking field presence of medium tank. (Just a example what i mention right now)

The players who have good thoughts about balancing and game changing details could sum up some collected main ideas and could discuss
it with the dev team. The dev team is able to make stand to the ideas and could include their own ideas to create a final soloution. (And the most important: That they are able to say directly whats impossible to implement and what's impossible.)

Pro's:

+ More efficient as a shitload  of derailed Threads
(*Choo-Choo!* another great thread got an accident with offtopic trash talk - Gets frustrating after severak times)

+ The playerbase gets a better knowledge about the POV of the dev team and a better feeling what balancing means
(Several guys have a lot of cool ideas which are unrealistic and lacking at the implement aspect because there haven't finished there thoughts about it)

+ More interchange between Devteam and the main Community
(It seems that one of a main issue is that the playerbase reckoning the dev team as a black box which operates in the background and have no idea what there actually doing or if they do anything)

+ Increased belief in the dev team
(Because the players get the feeling that they are a part of the mod because they can bring up there own thoughts which will be discussed in a constructive way)

+ Playerbase feels comfortable with the Situation
(Because they get small changes and keep them in the mod. I think the warmap will be fucking awesome but a lot of players get bored when they see that nothing happen and the warmap isn't released. Small changes could delay the warmap release time without problems because the players are distracted with smaler changes)

Con's:

- Organization
(It needs some players and at least someone one who represent the dev team)
- Frustating conversations without agreeing on something
(*Choo-Choo!* - Greets from the "Train Of Useless Thoughts")



We have several things going on here in the forum.
At first a dev team which look at a QQ-ing community ( Axis OP, Allied Op, "When will the warmap released?", "Airborne is a fail doctrin", "Dev Team is useless...), the seond one is the Allied vs. Axis Fanboys Flamewar, and third are the people who try to bring up some good points and feeling bad for not taken serious.

And whats the coherency between each other? - There are all result in a form of dismotivation and frustation.

[8thRifleRegiment]

My first question is. Who is this guy, and what is his eirr launcher name.

[smurfORnot]

dunno how can you say that they dont buff rifleman,you can get extra bar,moving acc,and acc in cover,also,tanks can give you buffs. DOesnt sound like no buffs for inf.

[8thRifleRegiment]

triple Bars... doesnt get any better

[hans]

How would it be to make ventrillo convention where the community (Mod -Team included) to discuss severval main issues. For taking a small step (It would be hilirous to discuss complete doctrin rebuilds) a topic could be the lacking field presence of medium tank. (Just a example what i mention right now)

The players who have good thoughts about balancing and game changing details could sum up some collected main ideas and could discuss
it with the dev team. The dev team is able to make stand to the ideas and could include their own ideas to create a final soloution. (And the most important: That they are able to say directly whats impossible to implement and what's impossible.)

Pro's:

+ More efficient as a shitload  of derailed Threads
(*Choo-Choo!* another great thread got an accident with offtopic trash talk - Gets frustrating after severak times)

+ The playerbase gets a better knowledge about the POV of the dev team and a better feeling what balancing means
(Several guys have a lot of cool ideas which are unrealistic and lacking at the implement aspect because there haven't finished there thoughts about it)

+ More interchange between Devteam and the main Community
(It seems that one of a main issue is that the playerbase reckoning the dev team as a black box which operates in the background and have no idea what there actually doing or if they do anything)

+ Increased belief in the dev team
(Because the players get the feeling that they are a part of the mod because they can bring up there own thoughts which will be discussed in a constructive way)

+ Playerbase feels comfortable with the Situation
(Because they get small changes and keep them in the mod. I think the warmap will be fucking awesome but a lot of players get bored when they see that nothing happen and the warmap isn't released. Small changes could delay the warmap release time without problems because the players are distracted with smaler changes)

Con's:

- Organization
(It needs some players and at least someone one who represent the dev team)
- Frustating conversations without agreeing on something
(*Choo-Choo!* - Greets from the "Train Of Useless Thoughts")



We have several things going on here in the forum.
At first a dev team which look at a QQ-ing community ( Axis OP, Allied Op, "When will the warmap released?", "Airborne is a fail doctrin", "Dev Team is useless...), the seond one is the Allied vs. Axis Fanboys Flamewar, and third are the people who try to bring up some good points and feeling bad for not taken serious.

And whats the coherency between each other? - There are all result in a form of dismotivation and frustation.

good thoughts, but one dev is the only guy who can answer most questions. and tbh u cant discuss with most of the community because then u would spend hours of time just to notice that u wont get anything from it but ten thousand ideas!

the best is just to be patienced and let the mod leader do his great job. if there is anyone disagreeing with his decisions u can only try to get into a conversation with this guy.

[Zamochit]

dnicee seriously dude, you come back and all you've done is complain. be constructive, no ones going to listen to a thing you say if you're going to start threads like these.

[Ahnungsloser]

good thoughts, but one dev is the only guy who can answer most questions. and tbh u cant discuss with most of the community because then u would spend hours of time just to notice that u wont get anything from it but ten thousand ideas!

the best is just to be patienced and let the mod leader do his great job. if there is anyone disagreeing with his decisions u can only try to get into a conversation with this guy.

It depens what you ask someone about something, but in the most cases your definetly right. (For example Hicks would be a good person for such a kind of convervations). At least i just want to throw my thoughts in this thread to check what other dudes thinking about the points i mention.