Doctrine Unit allocation

[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

[tank130]

This is a suggested allocation for doctrine units. It is open to suggestions of course, but we are trying to keep within the themes of the doctrines.

Remember - completely ignore the current doctrines designs.  This list has units with other units that was never done before.
Obviously there are too many unlocks in some categories, so we either need to eliminate some or find another way to have them implemented.

The simple solution for some of them is to just upgrade. For example, if you unlock airborne, then you should have the ability to upgrade HMG / ATG / Jeep / Sniper etc in the launcher to Airborne version.

American

Infantry / Support
Assault Engineers
Rangers
American Officer
105 Howitzer
Medic Bunker

Mobility / Mechanized
Airborne & Airborne support weapons
Airborne Rifles
Airborne Sniper
75mm GMC M3
T17
WC54 Ambulance

Armor / Tanks
Calliope
Pershing
Sherman Jumbo

Commonwealth

Infantry / Support
Mortar Pit
95mm Cromwell
Priest
Bofors
17 Pndr

Mobility / Mechanized
Commandos & Commando Support Weapons
Tetarch
Commando Jeep
Commando Officer
Commando Sniper
Trench Busters

Armor / Tanks
Church – AVRE
Church – Croc
Church – Prince


Wehrmacht

Infantry / Support
Storm troopers
Defensive Officer
Walkng Stuka
Medic Bunker
Flak 88
4 man KCH

Mobility / Mechanized
StuH
Le:IG
Ambulance
Geshutzwagon

Armor / Tanks
Tiger
Pak 40
King Tiger

Panzer Elite

Infantry / Support
Luftwaffe
Flakvierling
Flak 36
Panzer Pioneers
MG 42 Support grenadiers
Hummel

Mobility / Mechanized
Fallschirmjäger
Wirblewind
Support Scout Car
Flammenwerfer
Stummel

Armor / Tanks
Pak 36
Hetzer
Bergetiger
Jagpanther

[Hobomancer]

Hummel is a better fit for PE armor, LE.IG doesnt at all fit into mech, PE inf maybe, Pak 36 doesnt fit in anywhere Imo.

4man kch should be canned as terror disappears, as should storms, both for units better designed to perform necesarry roles, and to fit the future doctrines.

I must thank you immensely though, as this post has given me quite a few ideas.

[Korpisolttu]

Planning to add any new units from other mods?

[AlphaTIG]

how about adding existing unused units like the pzIII?

[GrayWolf]

Pak36 and Leig -> Mechanized
Hummel -> Infantry/Armor

[TheVolskinator]

While I do like how the super-heavy ATGs were attached to the tank-based companies, I think it should differ by faction--this includes the M5 76 mm ATG.

M5 76 mm - should be attached to the U.S. Armor Battalion, in my head, as part of a towed tank destroyer company unlock (to go with the M18 as a self-propelled TD unlock--maybe buff the M18 and make it an Armor exclusive?).

17 pdr - Yep! Should be part of the infantry-based British battalion. Maybe lump it in with an artillery unlock of sorts?

Pak 40 - should remain attached to the Wehr infantry-based battalion, as it makes sense (better AT support for infantry) and is historic.

Flak 88 - should probably be a part of the mechanized companies of both Wehr and PE; tank and mechanized units (incl. Panzergrenadier units IRL) would be the ones with 88s brought up for support, to crack enemy positions or enemy tanks that the Panzers etc couldn't take out. This would also give the Axis mechanized companies some nice 'teeth' with which to either fall back to or to be used "offensively" with their long range, to turtle the front lines forward in support of their other, rapidly moving elements.

OTHER

StuH - definately an armor unlock; it's your assault tank, per se, just like the Jumbo. Yes, it's not as tanky, but it's your middle finger towards enemy infantry and crewed weapons. It's also a little more thematic as a tank support unit rather than a mechanized one, as it's just not mobile enough (imho) to truly be effective with a highly mechanized build.

[GrayWolf]

Imo every heavy ATG should be placed in infantry doctrine as infantry support. Same for M5 76mm.

Stuh should also be part of infantry as INFANTRY support tank :p Stuh isnt' that mobile, so this might be a good idea.
Like I said in the other thread, open top halftrack would be a good idea for mechanized WH.

[Hobomancer]

While I do like how the super-heavy ATGs were attached to the tank-based companies, I think it should differ by faction--this includes the M5 76 mm ATG.

M5 76 mm - should be attached to the U.S. Armor Battalion, in my head, as part of a towed tank destroyer company unlock (to go with the M18 as a self-propelled TD unlock--maybe buff the M18 and make it an Armor exclusive?).

17 pdr - Yep! Should be part of the infantry-based British battalion. Maybe lump it in with an artillery unlock of sorts?

Pak 40 - should remain attached to the Wehr infantry-based battalion, as it makes sense (better AT support for infantry) and is historic.

Flak 88 - should probably be a part of the mechanized companies of both Wehr and PE; tank and mechanized units (incl. Panzergrenadier units IRL) would be the ones with 88s brought up for support, to crack enemy positions or enemy tanks that the Panzers etc couldn't take out. This would also give the Axis mechanized companies some nice 'teeth' with which to either fall back to or to be used "offensively" with their long range, to turtle the front lines forward in support of their other, rapidly moving elements.

OTHER

StuH - definately an armor unlock; it's your assault tank, per se, just like the Jumbo. Yes, it's not as tanky, but it's your middle finger towards enemy infantry and crewed weapons. It's also a little more thematic as a tank support unit rather than a mechanized one, as it's just not mobile enough (imho) to truly be effective with a highly mechanized build.

Have to disagree with the stuh somewhat, it'd fit very snugly in PE mech, both to round out the doctrine (decent staying power, High ai killing power), themathically too, the stuh isnt something that was used too support tanks normally, im talking irl here of course, regardless in my doctrines i've got it slated for PE mech for now, the bigger issue tbh is the KT, cant have two heavies in one doctrine for the simple reason it'll just make it so terribly dull, And using it over the tiger 1 seems wrong, atm considering two options personally, using it for PE armour instead of jagd (i'd love this, it'd give PE a real all rounder), or not using it at all and suggest it be made a reward unit.

[ick312]

i am not following the forums anymore, but i can tell that you are trying to ride the horse backwards.

Instead of thinking which units you have and where to allocate them, you should ask yourself which abilities each doctrine should have and then allocate the units which enable the ability.

ach ja Lone Survivor will come, i just got 2 more contracts to fullfill.

[AlphaTIG]

i am not following the forums anymore, but i can tell that you are trying to ride the horse backwards.

Instead of thinking which units you have and where to allocate them, you should ask yourself which abilities each doctrine should have and then allocate the units which enable the ability.

+1

[tank130]

i am not following the forums anymore, but i can tell that you are trying to ride the horse backwards.

Instead of thinking which units you have and where to allocate them, you should ask yourself which abilities each doctrine should have and then allocate the units which enable the ability.

ach ja Lone Survivor will come, i just got 2 more contracts to fullfill.

That would be stupid - to be honest.

If you don't follow the forums, then don't share your uninformed opinion on a topic you know nothing about. Instead, read the Doctrine design document and get yourself informed.

The top row of buffs and the majority of the middle row of buffs are supposed to be buffing doctrine unlocks. How do you see that happening without knowing what those unlocks are?

How you making out on that mod you said was ready to launch - 3 months ago?

[GrayWolf]

i am not following the forums anymore, but i can tell that you are trying to ride the horse backwards.

Instead of thinking which units you have and where to allocate them, you should ask yourself which abilities each doctrine should have and then allocate the units which enable the ability.

ach ja Lone Survivor will come, i just got 2 more contracts to fullfill.

IT'S ICK. Jesus, just wait for smokaz to come back, I dare you lol.

What I would like to see is nikomas coming with new models (from other mods/forums). There could be much more units. Infantry is easy to do, just go for different skin (and there's plenty).
I'm asking for a lot, but I know Edrai can do it, if he wants

[Scotzmen]

What's the point of adding more units again? Just asking. As I feel that more units would be harder to balance etc.

[Tachibana]

No need to add new units, look at the giant pool of reward units that can be incorporated into doctrines.

[tank130]

You guys need to remember we are limited to what we can do because of the launcher. There is no way to recode it to handle additional items.

If we load up on unit unlocks ( new units ) you will have no spaces left for upgrades or doctrine specialization.

I also agree with Scotz. Why add a bunch more units that will just throw balance off even further?
The smart play is to implement the new doctrines with units we are familiar with and balance it.

[Hobomancer]

You guys need to remember we are limited to what we can do because of the launcher. There is no way to recode it to handle additional items.

If we load up on unit unlocks ( new units ) you will have no spaces left for upgrades or doctrine specialization.

I also agree with Scotz. Why add a bunch more units that will just throw balance off even further?
The smart play is to implement the new doctrines with units we are familiar with and balance it.

We dont need to have a ton of new units, But some of them will bring a breath of fresh air, Rather what i've done is redesign and replace some units, Namely all the wehrmarcht special infantry, Why? Well first off any infantry doctrine in my opinion needs something like rangers, Now what are rangers? They're significantly tougher than you're regular infantry and they hit harder, 4man kch or stormtroopers could take the spot of gebirgsjaegers in the infantry doctrine i designed but, 4man kch are hideously expensive and hideously specialized, Not to mention its pretty much designed for terror only, Now for stormtroopers they just arent good, You took away the moving cloak as standard from them and that frankly just made them sort of pointless, Before you could get a powerful tank hunter or ambush unit now you can get a shreck squad with more health or an ambush unit.

Now if no new units are going to be implemented for the sake of rustling up balance (Which new doctrines will do just as well,) I just dont see the point of the doctrinal rework, Certain doctrines like axis mechanized ones will not work well without some new units added, Not to mention that the new repair system you've told us to design them around would bring posibillities for special repair units, And lastly if no new units are accepted wether they are completely new or replace old ones all the doctrines we see will more or less be the same as the old ones.

[GrayWolf]

What this mod need is fresh air like Trap said. Since we're talking about doctrine units, it's gonna be easy to balance them with the current system (because they're doctrine only buffed). It would be cool to see more reward units, but let's limit ourselves to only doctrine units, okay?

[Scotzmen]

So 12 newly designed and newly handled doctrines are suddenly not enough and isn't enough of a breath of fresh air?

Sorry, I feel like your wanting more and more without actually thinking of the amount of workload there already is, with only taking into the account of coding and balancing 12 new doctrines.

Can we like calm the farm maybe and go one thing at a time?

[GrayWolf]

I said in previous post that Nikomas is able to do it, if he has courge to do it. That's optional, not a must lol. No one expects from you to make new doctrines and units. I thought someone is helping you on this. My bad.

[Scotzmen]

Volsk should be helping me on this, but we are kind of waiting for you guys to give us your doctrine ideas. They aren't going to design themselves.

At this rate, volsk will be designing all of them lel