- This topic has 6 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by
.
.I am against these ideas, I know, shocker.
I don’t think it could work as well as you envision it, due to Luftwaffe having units that really don’t have much impact when called in. You can make due with two field divisions, or a MG and 1 field division, and still be alright. You never depend on the field divisions to save the day, but they are helpful when you need to plug the leaks in your line. Only parts of the call in that are really impacting when you get them, are the Tier 2 ZiS gun, and the Tier 3 StuG III.
The ZiS gun outdoes the Raketenwerfer for damage, and range, and is outdone in penetration. The StuG III outdoes the Pak 40 you can get from the same call in with speed and immunity from small arms, but is far more vulnerable to enemy armor, while being able to destroy it at the same time; basically a faster and weaker-to-armor Pak 40.
The differences in the KV-1, and KV-2 are far too great for the tiering idea of Luftwaffe. The KV-1 has a far less powerful gun, less penetration, and less explosive damage. It does have faster fire rate, and faster turret traverse, alongside movement speed. The KV-2 is a god awful beast of death and mayhem that is a rare treat, and should NOT be relied on to win the game. If you were guaranteed a KV-2 at tier 4, you would rush it quickly, and soon come to rely on it, furthering the dependence on making a meta for the doctrine. I prefer not having the tier based call in for high profile units, due to their devastating effects on the enemy. If it were a random/tiered T-34/76 or a captured sherman call in, for example, I wouldn’t really care too much, due to the two being quite similar. Both can kill one another, and their usual counterparts.
The difference in performance of the KV-1 and KV-2 is vast and great, and thus, to tier it means you are creating a solid guaranteed strategy that players will play on and require to win, thus a meta.
For the Ragtag Circus, refer to the differences argument above, and the “Solid line Meta” as the Panther, StuG III/Panzer IV are far too different in performance to be done this way. It would essentially guarantee you 3 heavily armored tanks, one with a far superior gun, and mobility, and would require less focus on its core; infantry.
As for the Wolverines and SU-85’s, its all dependent really on your muni income. The M10’s have far more penetration for free, but lack the APCR. The SU-85’s have APCR, at lower default penetration. Both excel at killing enemies, but in the way of damaging power, the SU-85 has more post-penetration damage, but the least penetration in mm by default. The M10 has less post-penetration damage, but most default penetration in mm.
My argument between the Churchhill and Valentine call in is that the Churchhill has lower armor values in comparison for what I can find for Churchhill MK IV’s, and an ineffective gun for tier IV. The Valentine has less armor than the Churchhill, but still has an ineffective gun for Tier IV. It would be understood better if the call in did far better against infantry, and was more clearly designed for anti-infantry measures, but this is not the current case for this tier IV call in. The Guards may have the IS-1, and perhaps may not need another super heavily armored tank, but it should at least be a step up from the KV-1, as it comes FAR later on, but preforms less admirably than the KV-1 in penetration, and armor.
No doctrine should have a hard lined meta, this kills the possibility of using whatever doctrine you want, and having an even playing field. If a meta exists, then players begin to find what docs hard counter other doctrines (I.e. Jagdpanzer hard counters most heavy armor docs, and Infantry counter most arty docs/armor docs, depending on abilities). This hard counter doctrine scheme will then decide how players act, and compete, thus destroying the overall level ground each doctrine has. It will also predetermine who loses, and who wins, due to doctrine counters.
I don’t mean to say that Jagdpanzer must be able to counter both Infantry and Heavy armor, but that it should not be limited to just one role. It should be able to counter infantry, but should not do so at the level an infantry doctrine should counter other infantry. It should excel at killing tanks, and is able to hold its own against regular infantry attacks, but should lack in quality fighting infantry.
Not saying that it is lacking in quality infantry, Jägers are best at range, and the WW1 Volksturm veterans are good when equipped properly. The numbers are what are lacking, these are 4 squads of good infantry (only one can excel in close quarters, Jägers melt up close), in comparison to US infantry. US infantry fields Veteran Rangers, a Demo squad, and a command squad, which all excel at close to medium ranged combat in a infantry fight (Which is far easier to achieve than long distance, especially with “rangers lead the way!”). To counter this and put the Jagdpanzer player in a more favorable condition, he would employ MG’s to slow the infantry. The US infantry player could counter with snipers or artillery (Mortars, actually arty, etc.) to kill the MG, or all of the enemy squads. To counter the arty, the Jagdpanzer should be able to call in counter arty (StuG III E barrage on targets) on targets. If its an artillery vehicle thats doing the artillery work, its up to the opposing player to maintain recon on the enemy lines to spot these targets (Via Recon planes, snipers, recon units, etc.) and to counter them before they an strike. If you don’t counter them, then expect artillery, and prepare a second line, or reactionary unit to help seal the breach in your line, and maintain till its fixed and you can employ recon to figure out where the enemy is.
No doctrine should have clear hard counters, each counter should be countered by yet another unit, or by itself. A Mortar counters Static and massed infantry, but can be countered by other mortars, infantry, snipers, arty, tanks, and things it can kill, or cannot kill. Nothing should not have a counter, even if the counters are few, due to extreme armor and deadliness (Jagdtiger, for example, can be countered with mines and ambush tactics, even if they deal little damage, your main goal should be to slow it down, till you can destroy it through the various means of more mines, Airstrikes, AT infantry, or tanks).
If you have an “Unkillable” unit, then that doctrine becomes overpowered, and is unfair to everyone, as it has no counter. All German heavies have counters, its up to you to counter the reverse counters to your counter. If you try to rush an elefant from behind with a M26 pershing, you are not guaranteed to kill it, as you may run into enemy forces capable of reverse countering your counter, or killing your Pershing in this case. So to counter that you must be able to either strike fast enough to avoid the reverse counter, or prepare a detachment to counter the reverse counter. So add infantry to defend the Pershing from AT infantry, and motorize them. If they can get ahead of the pershing, you can tie up the AT infantry, or kill them, and rush your Pershing to the flank of the Elefant and attempt to kill it. If the Elefant turns to fight your Pershing, punish it by slamming it from the side it just turned away from, or from the opposite side.
If there is a Pak 43 to counter your pershing, engage with infantry. If there is an Mg to counter your infantry, use arty to kill either both, or to disable the MG. If they send arty, destroy it, or move out of its way. If they send tanks, use the pershing to kill their tanks, or bring more tanks. If they send planes, keep a nearby retreat ( medic or ambulance, best bet as a solo armored player) , or use infantry that excel in breaking suppression (Rangers with an ally, etc) to rekindle your push on the enemy position.
The long story short, you have a VARIETY of tools at your disposal for all situations, if you fail to reverse counter, you were caught off guard, and your enemy can exploit your failure to prepare, or the inability to prepare.
