88 Change

[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

[Vermillion_Hawk]

Prevent officers from buffing it then. The idea of an 88 getting all those bonuses from officers is ridiculous anyways.

[Smokaz]

You can't even unlock 88 arty without getting the same ability that allows you to supervise 88s.

[Hicks58]

Defensive Officer needs to NOT buff damage.

Having damage buffs on demand really screws over balance. For example, the combination of damage and accuracy provided by Defensive Officers can turn Volks into 5 man Grenadiers offensively speaking.

[I2ay]

Well hold on, the Bottom T3 for blitz gives ALL tanks a 15% accuracy boost, and then the middle T3 gives all tanks a 15% damage/penetration boosts. Thats not being called OP here. The Officer gives a 20% accuracy and damage boost to all units around it with the top and middle T3 for defensive, so long as hes NEARBY. If you want to nerf the 88 don't drag the officer into it. I would say his buffs are comparable to the buffs of blitz, with the added need to have an officer nearby for them to work at all. Hell, for all I care just make it so the 88 can't be affected by the officer, but don't change the officer because you want to change the 88.

[Vermillion_Hawk]

You can't even unlock 88 arty without getting the same ability that allows you to supervise 88s.

The doctrine ability isn't written in stone or anything. Unlocking 88 artillery is pretty damn good in itself, but combined with Officer supervision it just escalates an already-powerful unit to unnecessary levels.

[Smokaz]

Well hold on, the Bottom T3 for blitz gives ALL tanks a 15% accuracy boost, and then the middle T3 gives all tanks a 15% damage/penetration boosts. Thats not being called OP here. The Officer gives a 20% accuracy and damage boost to all units around it with the top and middle T3 for defensive, so long as hes NEARBY. If you want to nerf the 88 don't drag the officer into it. I would say his buffs are comparable to the buffs of blitz, with the added need to have an officer nearby for them to work at all. Hell, for all I care just make it so the 88 can't be affected by the officer, but don't change the officer because you want to change the 88.

How is the comparison ending on the officer being equal to blitz buffs if he buffs all unit types around him?
His buff is actually stronger for tanks than the blitz buffs. Would you pick 20% damage or 15% penetration on a flak 88, panther, ostwind, puma.. The def accuracy buff is already higher.

[I2ay]

I'm trying to say in an overall sense I personally believe the officer with the top two trees is fine. While the buffs are stronger than the blitz comparison I made, it does require an officer to be nearby to take affect. If your officer dies, you lose the buff. If your officer is forced to move away from your units, you lose the buff. With blitz the buffs are always there, its less of a hassle, and there's nothing your opponent can do to get rid of the buffs, so in that sense that its possible to remove fairly better buff the officer gives I find it balanced. This is just an example to help justify my belief that the officer shouldn't be modified on a grand scale to fix the balance issues with the 88. Change the way the officer affects the 88 directly, or change the 88. I don't think anyone will complain if walking stukas can still be buffed by the officer...

[Vermillion_Hawk]

I'm trying to say in an overall sense I personally believe the officer with the top two trees is fine. While the buffs are stronger than the blitz comparison I made, it does require an officer to be nearby to take affect. If your officer dies, you lose the buff. If your officer is forced to move away from your units, you lose the buff. With blitz the buffs are always there, its less of a hassle, and there's nothing your opponent can do to get rid of the buffs, so in that sense that its possible to remove fairly better buff the officer gives I find it balanced. This is just an example to help justify my belief that the officer shouldn't be modified on a grand scale to fix the balance issues with the 88. Change the way the officer affects the 88 directly, or change the 88. I don't think anyone will complain if walking stukas can still be buffed by the officer...

That's the thing though: you must kill the Officer, a feat not easily achieved versus someone who can effectively use him. Not to mention the fact that the Officer has heroic armor (I believe) and nearly double the HP of any other officer. If he picks up a weapon, he can even hold off a squad of rifles by himself, sometimes even better than that if he gets an LMG42.

Long story short, I propose he no longer gets the ability to buff 88's.

[UndeathWrath]

- Revert flak vs atg change
Then,

A) leave flak as is
Or
B) remove arty ability and give defensive a lefh

defensive companies need arty...
otherwise you have to go on the offensive if you want to neutralize enemy arty.

I prefer option B

Side note: stuka should be available in all wehr doctrines imo...especially for its current mediocre performance.

Not sure why its always been decided to be defensive only, I think its the only exception to the vcoh doctrine setups. All brit companies can get howitzers no?

[Vermillion_Hawk]

- Revert flak vs atg change
Then,

A) leave flak as is
Or
B) remove arty ability and give defensive a lefh

defensive companies need arty...
otherwise you have to go on the offensive if you want to neutralize enemy arty.

I prefer option B

Side note: stuka should be available in all wehr doctrines imo...especially for its current mediocre performance.

Not sure why its always been decided to be defensive only, I think its the only exception to the vcoh doctrine setups. All brit companies can get howitzers no?

The 25 pounders for all doctrines have been questioned heavily in the past before, and from what I understand it might again. Perhaps the issue should not be whether defensive needs a new dedicated artillery unit but instead how the Stuka, the current dedicated artillery unit, can be improved. Giving the defensive doctrine a new artillery gun will only serve to further compound the doctrine's issues.

[Smokaz]

Almost perfect, here's my dream change:

- ATG vs 88mm modifiers reverted OR luftwaffe "shieldless" 88 considered for defensive 88 which basically makes infantry and artillery much more powerful vs the crew
- Officer aura considered for a 5% nerf
- 88 arty considered removed and in exchange make stuka a lot more worth it (faster rocket drop time, lower recharge, full accuracy vs american infantry armor types)

[UndeathWrath]

A stuka for all intents and purposes is not a dedicated artillery piece in the way that 105s, priests, 25 pounders, and hummels are.

The stuka is not an effective counterbattery weapon. It's more of a mobile heavy indirect fire support weapon on cooldown, great for defending against blobs of infantry at medium to short range. At long range, you're taking a shot in the dark, even if they sit still in a nice blob.

The point is, defensive deserves to be able to fight back against artillery on equal footing.

You shouldn't have to hunt down a british defense-oriented company with plentiful artillery options because you with defensive wehrmacht have no artillery whatsoever.

With 5 out of 6 allied companies having legitamite artillery pieces (I count the calliope here because it is devastating when used correctly), most of the time you're forced to play super-aggro, kind of defeating the purpose.

Another side note: rca t4 fire support needs to be looked at....way too short of artillery cooldowns.


EDIT: If not a lefh, then a wespe but tweaked (more range and cost possibly). We already have the unit model and everything

[NightRain]

Officer vanilla buffs are as follows as people have claimed it wrong again.

1.25 Accuracy. 1.2 Damage.

Artillery experts. 1.35 Accuracy. 1.3 Damage with Ability to supervise 88s and anti tank guns.


Stuka is a rather terrible artillery piece and only achieves something in large numbers (i.e 2) but that means 16 pop which has a cooldown and is pretty much a halftrack. All in all Stuka is terrible artillery piece and terribly expensive at it too for what it is worth and can not be recrewed.

Stuka's main issue is in the range and barrage. Its barrage is quite ineffective as it is so random and usually this randomness can be fixed with more numbers. However if you catch a blob offguard and hit it, with 1 stuka. You will see minor casualities but nothing serious. 2 stukas, more serious damage so to speak. Though if you want to get rid of stukas all you need is just 1 light vehicle and send it from flank. Unlike immobile arty piece, you lose it, can not be save recrewed.

[pqumsieh]

we will be addressing these issues shortly; but not in time for next patch. Next patch will see a stop gap solution until we finish up what we are working on right now.

PQ

[Tymathee]

I'd love to see the Wespe as a Defensive doc unit, take away the 88 aritllery, it makes more sense than the Stuka.

Then move the Stuka to Terror the rockets going off are quite terrifying and you move a lot and then you can give it specific doc buffs along with the nebel.

[NightRain]

I'd love to see the Wespe as a Defensive doc unit, take away the 88 aritllery, it makes more sense than the Stuka.

Then move the Stuka to Terror the rockets going off are quite terrifying and you move a lot and then you can give it specific doc buffs along with the nebel.

I'm quivering in fear when a canister of vodka lands next to my troops and does little damage...

[Vermillion_Hawk]

A stuka for all intents and purposes is not a dedicated artillery piece in the way that 105s, priests, 25 pounders, and hummels are.

The stuka is not an effective counterbattery weapon. It's more of a mobile heavy indirect fire support weapon on cooldown, great for defending against blobs of infantry at medium to short range. At long range, you're taking a shot in the dark, even if they sit still in a nice blob.

The point is, defensive deserves to be able to fight back against artillery on equal footing.

You shouldn't have to hunt down a british defense-oriented company with plentiful artillery options because you with defensive wehrmacht have no artillery whatsoever.

With 5 out of 6 allied companies having legitamite artillery pieces (I count the calliope here because it is devastating when used correctly), most of the time you're forced to play super-aggro, kind of defeating the purpose.

Another side note: rca t4 fire support needs to be looked at....way too short of artillery cooldowns.


EDIT: If not a lefh, then a wespe but tweaked (more range and cost possibly). We already have the unit model and everything

Quel surprise, a doctrine that focuses on artillery gets buffs to their artillery...

As I said, introducing a new artillery piece to the defensive doctrine will only compound the issues. The defensive doctrine already gets a plethora of great stuff available to them, the whole point of the doctrine is to be able to provide a solid defensive flank for your allies, who will likely be spearheading the charge. Giving them the ability to hold down a sector AND be able to aggressively demolish the enemy's support with little effort is wrong.

As I said, the core principles of the defensive doctrine lie in the titular trait. You must defend, and  it must be a proper elastic defense combined well with static emplacements. No amount of artillery will be able to shake that. By locking yourself into a sector as defensive, you are taking that risk knowing that you can and will be shelled. The idea is to build a defense that, as stated earlier, overcomes these flaws.

Correct me if I'm wrong as well, but I recall the 88 being both infinitely more survivable than a 25 pounder, both health wise and in terms of recrewability, and it costs less population.

[Demon767]

Giving them the ability to hold down a sector AND be able to aggressively demolish the enemy's support with little effort is wrong.

I hate when people do this, you say its WRONG to do that, where the fuck is your evidence to say that defensive cant be used in attack? your word is meaningless.

Every doctrine has the ability to do that! to hold a sector and aggressively demolish enemy support weapons. So who gave you the right to say that defensive can't do the same?

FYI, i am not choosing sides, i just want YOU to explain your argument more clearly and not think you can haphazardly say shit and expect it to be accepted without you providing little evidence apart from theory crafting on what YOU think should be doing what.

Edit: sorry vermillion. *calms down* Could you please provide evidence of your opinion

[TheVolskinator]

Hate to say that I agree with Demon.

I don't think Defensive needs arty on top of its rediculous Offmap AND the officer mortar barrage. With the balance team looking at the Stuka, it looks like everything will be much better off (if and when 88 arty is removed).

[Vermillion_Hawk]

I hate when people do this, you say its WRONG to do that, where the fuck is your evidence to say that defensive cant be used in attack? your word is meaningless.

Every doctrine has the ability to do that! to hold a sector and aggressively demolish enemy support weapons. So who gave you the right to say that defensive can't do the same?

FYI, i am not choosing sides, i just want YOU to explain your argument more clearly and not think you can haphazardly say shit and expect it to be accepted without you providing little evidence apart from theory crafting on what YOU think should be doing what.

Edit: sorry vermillion. *calms down* Could you please provide evidence of your opinion

Well the reasoning behind my opinion is that the defensive doctrine possesses abilities, units and doctrine buffs that exemplify the defense of secured territory. Units get bonuses in friendly territory with aforementioned abilities and buffs, so therefore they are naturally more adept at the defense.

That being said, there needs to be some sort of balance mechanism. A doctrine with the abilities of the defensive doctrine will, naturally, sacrifice some offensive power for the bonuses. I'm not saying that the defensive doctrine has to be useless on the offensive - far from it, the defensive should be able to attack to a reasonable degree - but with the ability to hold a sector down totally, something other doctrines CAN'T do, they inherently have to sacrifice some offensive power, in this case, a high-powered artillery weapon.

I'm not saying the defensive artillery ability has to be completely nerfed, I'm saying it needs to shift paradigms. The Stuka needs to become a viable option for defensive artillery, not the already-multipurpose 88.