Soviet Defensive Tactics Redesign
Posts: 521
previous suggestion
EDIT: I updated it a little bit, and to show it uses only abilities that are already in the game, or easily achievable.
CP 0: Soviet Field Defenses - Combat Engineers can build bunkers (upgradable with MG), TM-44 AT mine, and Tank Traps.
- The bunkers are the same ones that defend the Soviet base.
- TM-44 can just be a copy and paste of the Wehrmacht Tellermine.
- The tank traps are the ones already in the commander
CP 1: Forward HQ is now build able in friendly territory
- Same one that's in the Soviet Urban Defense Tactics
CP 5: Conscripts can upgrade to 2 DP-28s for 75 muni.
- Same upgrade that Guards get
CP 9: KV-1 Heavy Tank can be called into the field.
- Same one that's in Soviet Counterattack Tactics
CP 12: IL-2 Sturmovik Attacks - the strafing run one. 180 muni
- Already in many Soviet commanders
ALSO: I think the Sturmovik strafing run should have more penetration and a bit more damage, similar to Wehrmacht's JU-87 Close Air Support ability.
Posts: 1891
Frontoviki Tactics?
Posts: 521
This sounds like a Soviet Infantry Company.
Frontoviki Tactics?
Maybe replace IL-2 strafe with 2 CP tank traps
Posts: 14
CP 1: Combat Engineers can build bunkers, which can be upgraded with a DShK for 60 muni. Bunker is the same one that is in the base territories.
CP 1: Forward HQ is now build able in friendly territory Would be more defensive oriented
CP 2: TM-44 Anti-tank mine. 60 muni, a mine that only explodes by vehicles. Does heavy damage to vehicles and can cause destroyed engines; Tank Traps are build able.
Think like the Soviet version of Riflemen field defenses.
CP 5: Conscripts can upgrade to 2 DP-28s for 75 munitions.
CP 9: KV-1 Can Now be called in. Buff KV1 to Churchill cost and stat wise and allow it to hold the line for the Soviets against Axis assaults, and spearhead counterattacks.
CP 12: Not One Step Back; all enemy units in friendly territory are bombarded with ML20 saturation barrage. Infantry fight with increased tenacity. Friendly units may not retreat while this ability active. 300 munitions. Interesting ability with cool twist; could be balanced by Artillery effectiveness and cost
Posts: 521
I bolded the changed options for you. But Soviets really need a revamp, as do Ostheer and Americans.
CP 1: Combat Engineers can build bunkers, which can be upgraded with a DShK for 60 muni. Bunker is the same one that is in the base territories.
CP 1: Forward HQ is now build able in friendly territory Would be more defensive oriented
CP 2: TM-44 Anti-tank mine. 60 muni, a mine that only explodes by vehicles. Does heavy damage to vehicles and can cause destroyed engines; Tank Traps are build able.
Think like the Soviet version of Riflemen field defenses.
CP 5: Conscripts can upgrade to 2 DP-28s for 75 munitions.
CP 9: KV-1 Can Now be called in. Buff KV1 to Churchill cost and stat wise and allow it to hold the line for the Soviets against Axis assaults, and spearhead counterattacks.
CP 12: Not One Step Back; all enemy units in friendly territory are bombarded with ML20 saturation barrage. Infantry fight with increased tenacity. Friendly units may not retreat while this ability active. 300 munitions. Interesting ability with cool twist; could be balanced by Artillery effectiveness and cost
This one is definitely better.
Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3
Posts: 1740
honestly mines, tank traps, bunkers should be all unlocked with a single commander ability. A lot of commanders are just outdated when compared with WFA factions and brits.
Many commanders were outdated even at the Alpha of the game itself
Posts: 473
Permanently BannedPosts: 692
The ethos of a good defensive oriented commander should not only be about producing a superior defensive position, but also adding something that would force the enemy to attack that defensive position, like artillery of some kind.
For Soviets. Repeal the god awful community commander and replace it with something...anything. Here is my take:
Reinforced Defenses: Lets infantry construct a reinforced sandbag wall with much more hp, with a built-in wall of razor wire on one side to prevent the enemy from using the cover. Takes longer to build than regular sandbags. Also let's CE's build tank traps and bunkers.
Guards Rifle Infantry: No explanation needed
Heavy Anti-Tank Mines: Allows CE's to build anti-tank mines triggered by vehicles only, with a high probability of immobilize (Just copy/paste the riegel 43 mine from ostheer)
100mm field gun M1944 (BS-3): Allows for the call-in of a powerful 100mm field gun to the field, a major threat to even the heaviest of armor.
Katyusha BM-31-12 rocket launcher: An up-gunned variant of our beloved/hated BM-13-16 Katyusha, this truck carries 12 300mm rockets instead of the 16 132mm the baseline katy carries.
Posts: 2070
Posts: 647
really like arclyte's idea, but regular soviet mines are awesome enough, no need for overkill, let conscripts gain ability to place regular mines instead of heavy AT mines.
give them su 100 instead of another emplacement, replace that advanced katty with ml-20 and its good.
still, something needs to be done with stuka dive bomb vs fixed artillery pieces.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
What we have now:
All 2 CP 45mm AT gun, 120mm, Tank traps, Mines, Dhska
What it should be:
0CP: Defensive package tools - Allows CE to build bunkers, tanks traps and those S-mines. S-mines are now built in blocks of 4 (less micro).
2CP: Combined arms defensive group - 600mp - Calls 1 45mm AT gun, 1 Dhska and 1 120mm mortar
8CP: ML20
9CP: KV1
For a "special" ability i'll rather you choose it from:
-Scorch earth tactics: basically sector artillery
-Hold the line: copycat of Brits ability. Like the idea of disabling momentarily retreat
-Katyusha saturation barrage: can't we use the victory strike as offmaps ?
Posts: 521
Reminder that we won't see NEW things added to OLD commanders. You can actually play around with things we already have although.
What we have now:
All 2 CP 45mm AT gun, 120mm, Tank traps, Mines, Dhska
What it should be:
0CP: Defensive package tools - Allows CE to build bunkers, tanks traps and those S-mines. S-mines are now built in blocks of 4 (less micro).
2CP: Combined arms defensive group - 600mp - Calls 1 45mm AT gun, 1 Dhska and 1 120mm mortar
8CP: ML20
9CP: KV1
For a "special" ability i'll rather you choose it from:
-Scorch earth tactics: basically sector artillery
-Hold the line: copycat of Brits ability. Like the idea of disabling momentarily retreat
-Katyusha saturation barrage: can't we use the victory strike as offmaps ?
Well for the TM-44 mine you can just copy and paste the model of the British mines, same way they copied the TM-35 model for the USF M5 mines.
Posts: 73
Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2
Filthy money grabbing dlc bullshit. Should end this very day! I do not support any more Doctrines. Improve the current ones! I support your efforts however!
You remember that this one is free right?
Personally as this was "Community Designed" I would leave it and Ostheer one as they are.
Then when anyone comes along and claims that "Relic should listen more to the Community" we can point to this as what happened when they did and that maybe the professional game designers might be able to do a better job than the amateurs
* By "Community" they usually mean "Me" or if they are feeling expansive "Me and my friends and anyone else who agrees with me"
However if only as an intellectual exercise, here's my thoughts on this issue.
The Defensive Commander suffers from a number of problems:
Everything comes at once, relatively late and is expensive. At 0CP there was a point to getting this stuff out, but at 2CP you either have already had T2 up or you have gone T0-T1 and will have trouble buying all this stuff anyway.
Lack of scaling into late game, there's nothing to keep this relevant
Lack of munitions sink other than mines and demos
Therefore, with as few changes as possible:
CP0 Dishka, M42, Tank Traps
CP2 120mm
CP8 Mark Target
Dishka would get buffed so it has decent anti-vehicle performance, and the M-42 would get camo like Raketen do and maybe better AI capability.
That won't make it a powerhouse, but it would at least give some opening choices and later game viability
I wouldn't put doctrinal armour in a defensive commander because that's not how Soviets used their armour
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
Permanently BannedPosts: 521
Personally as this was "Community Designed" I would leave it and Ostheer one as they are.
If they are designed by the community, why can't it be changed by the community?
CP0 Dishka, M42, Tank Traps
CP2 120mm
CP8 Mark Target
Honestly, it's still very bad compared to other doctrines. Even with your proposed changes, it's still 60% team weapon call ins, a big manpower drain. M-42 still is garbage, 120mm is nowhere as good as it used to be.
I wouldn't put doctrinal armour in a defensive commander because that's not how Soviets used their armour
Well, this game isn't exactly cut out to be realistic? Gameplay > Realism, and KV-1 would serve as a meatshield.
Posts: 473
Permanently Banned
You remember that this one is free right?
Personally as this was "Community Designed" I would leave it and Ostheer one as they are.
Then when anyone comes along and claims that "Relic should listen more to the Community" we can point to this as what happened when they did and that maybe the professional game designers might be able to do a better job than the amateurs
* By "Community" they usually mean "Me" or if they are feeling expansive "Me and my friends and anyone else who agrees with me"
However if only as an intellectual exercise, here's my thoughts on this issue.
The Defensive Commander suffers from a number of problems:
Everything comes at once, relatively late and is expensive. At 0CP there was a point to getting this stuff out, but at 2CP you either have already had T2 up or you have gone T0-T1 and will have trouble buying all this stuff anyway.
Lack of scaling into late game, there's nothing to keep this relevant
Lack of munitions sink other than mines and demos
Therefore, with as few changes as possible:
CP0 Dishka, M42, Tank Traps
CP2 120mm
CP8 Mark Target
Dishka would get buffed so it has decent anti-vehicle performance, and the M-42 would get camo like Raketen do and maybe better AI capability.
That won't make it a powerhouse, but it would at least give some opening choices and later game viability
I wouldn't put doctrinal armour in a defensive commander because that's not how Soviets used their armour
I just made a statement
Posts: 587
Posts: 1484
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34857.859+13
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, zowinfans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM