Lets talk about Doctrines

Currently on the mod I am working on, there are some doctrines that are obsolete and some that have only one or two good abilities are either worth it. I would like to talk about how to improved doctrines whether about being in my mod or in live in general. I am able to alter the doctrines in my mod if you all would like a preview. Note, I would like to doctrines separated as much as possible so try keep at most TWO like abilities with other doctrines. On the other end I would like to see at least 3 doctrines with a doctrinal unit so a bulletin can affect all three doctrines. Down below is just some topic not all.

Mod:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/64205/%C3%86gion-s-experimental-balance-changes-mkiii




Soviets

1. Shock Army
This doctrine has too many over lapping abilities
-Conscript PPSHs and Shock Troops
-120mm Mortar and Ml-20 Howitzer

This Doctrine could be completely redesigned and how would you do it?

Edited: Possible Replacement
Show Spoiler

2. NKVD Rifle Disruption Tactics
To many munition sinks
This Doctrine could be completely redesigned and how would you do it?

Edited: Possible Replacement
Show Spoiler

3. KV-1
This tank could be non doctrinal T4 since it does not overlap with the T34/76 and SU 85.

4. Armored Vehicle Detection
How effective is this ability, and who on earth has actually used this ability?

5. Community Defensive Tactics Tank Traps
I would like to make this non doctrinal, but what should I replaced it with? The Forward HQ is not an option because I replaced the Booby Trap with PMD 6 mines and with M42s already the doctrine and I do not want 3 of the same abilities. I am thinking of two options, an MG bunker or PMD 6c (Light AT mines).

6. M42 Light AT gun
While effective for its cost it does not scale well with anything heavier than a Ostheer P4


7. Hit the Dirt
This seems like it would be effective but perhaps let it extend to combat engies, guards, and penals?


Abilities that would be nice to have a 3 doctrines
1. Partisans
2. Isu 152
3. Is 2


Mod Doc Changes
Show Spoiler

Ostheer
I have adjusted a lot of these doctrines in my mod but here some other things I have not changed.

1. Jaeger Infantry Doctrine
Too many munition sinks in faction who craves for munition
Ideally either light arty barrage or Stuka close air since they are both targeted abilities while the rest are upgrades.

Edit: There are audio for a Jaeger Light Infantry dispatch so why not a Jaeger Light Infantry dispatch like the OKW but with only 3 stars of veterancy?

2. Storm Doctrine
sounds like it could be good doctrine for stormtroopers to make a third doctrine with them.


3. Regal AT mines
This seems like it would an overpowered ability, so why do we not too offen. Is it because Ostheers munitions are too valuable in this time of the game?

Mod Doc Changes
Show Spoiler


USF
I have adjusted a lot of USF doctrines as well, but if you have any comments let me know.

Mod Doc Changes
Show Spoiler

OKW
I have adjusted a lot of these doctrines in my mod but here some other things I have not changed.

1. Strum Officer

Mod Doc Changes
Show Spoiler

UKF

1. Commando Regiment
This Doctrine has 4 Munition based abilities, a bit too much.

2. Tactical Support
People originally only used this doctrine for the OP Arty Cover, but with proper nerfs to arty cover this doctrine has really fallen out of usage.
-in my mod I have adjusted the Recovery Operations to make it more affordable and reasonable.
-The biggest dead ability is the forward observation post. 300 manpower 60 fuel for a garrison to gain abilities which all are expensive. And at 10 Cps, the opponent(s) probability have access to items to quickly destroy these HQs, (if there were any left to use for this ability or in good locations).

Mod Doc Changes
Show Spoiler


If you all have any opinions on how these doctrines or any doctrine could be improved lets talk about it. I am not part of any balance team or have any special channel to talk with Relic but this could draw awareness for the next patch (if one happens) that could fix these. Fixing doctrines would help make the game more enjoyable and less stale with more and different strategies.

NKVD:

0 CP Maxims are now able to teamkill cons for retreating

1 CP NKVD agents kill all soldiers parents and thus give them -50% in combat performance

5 CP Penal vodka supply; all penals gain -50% accuracy but +500% hp

7 CP Engineer PPSh package

100 CP Comrade Stalin call in; this unit oneshots everyting in its path thanks to beams of pure communism from its eyes. Also gives all nearby allied units free biscuits.

This is something I've thought about off and on and tried to implement various ideas in mod tools. I could never get things to function how I'd wanted due to the restrictions of mod tools/my own time and knowledge of modding this game.

I honestly believe that while there are obviously some broken commanders on either side of the viability spectrum, I don't think that individual designs of commanders are the root of the problem.

I think the most distilled version of what might function for CoH2, not necessarily a hypothetical CoH3, would be the return to how vCoH utilized CPs.

You didn't choose a doctrine that automatically unlocked abilities as you acquired CPs. You acquired CPs, and then you used them to progressively unlock abilities from one of the three doctrines.

For CoH2, since commanders don't have branching/multiple paths of unlocks, it would actually be feasible if ALL THREE commanders in the loadout could be unlocked in one game. You would have three pathways to spend CPs on. You could have your Soviet Shock Army where you spend 2 CPs to unlock Shocks, but then you could have the community commander with tank traps that you could spend 2 other CPs on. And then hell, you could have Guard Motor to unlock Guards.

6 CPs in you could have Shocks, Guards, and Tank traps, but at the same time you'd be a long way off from any ML-20s, T34/85s, etc. This setup would allow for players to spread their CPs out for a wide array of useful passives, like say, Riflemen mines, RE flamethrowers, and M1919 unlocks. But the endgame abilities and call-ins would be likewise delayed. That M10 might just come too late.

Do you put everything into one commander to get out that Elefant? Do you get your Panzerfusiliers out then switch gears to try and get that Sturmtiger or Command Panther unlocked? Spreading CPs too thin could be crippling.

I always thought this would've been far more dynamic and interesting for CoH2. This is how I felt in 2013.

My OTHER notion about commander loadouts would be that all commanders could be categorized in a mutually exclusive way. For example's sake, all commanders could be categorized as "Offensive", "Defensive" or "Support". All loadouts would consist of one "Offensive" commander, one "Defensive" and one "Support".

All in all, I kinda miss triple NKVD commander loadout scare tactics. Kappa.

This is something I've thought about off and on and tried to implement various ideas in mod tools. I could never get things to function how I'd wanted due to the restrictions of mod tools/my own time and knowledge of modding this game.

I honestly believe that while there are obviously some broken commanders on either side of the viability spectrum, I don't think that individual designs of commanders are the root of the problem.

I think the most distilled version of what might function for CoH2, not necessarily a hypothetical CoH3, would be the return to how vCoH utilized CPs.

You didn't choose a doctrine that automatically unlocked abilities as you acquired CPs. You acquired CPs, and then you used them to progressively unlock abilities from one of the three doctrines.

For CoH2, since commanders don't have branching/multiple paths of unlocks, it would actually be feasible if ALL THREE commanders in the loadout could be unlocked in one game. You would have three pathways to spend CPs on. You could have your Soviet Shock Army where you spend 2 CPs to unlock Shocks, but then you could have the community commander with tank traps that you could spend 2 other CPs on. And then hell, you could have Guard Motor to unlock Guards.

6 CPs in you could have Shocks, Guards, and Tank traps, but at the same time you'd be a long way off from any ML-20s, T34/85s, etc. This setup would allow for players to spread their CPs out for a wide array of useful passives, like say, Riflemen mines, RE flamethrowers, and M1919 unlocks. But the endgame abilities and call-ins would be likewise delayed. That M10 might just come too late.

Do you put everything into one commander to get out that Elefant? Do you get your Panzerfusiliers out then switch gears to try and get that Sturmtiger or Command Panther unlocked? Spreading CPs too thin could be crippling.

I always thought this would've been far more dynamic and interesting for CoH2. This is how I felt in 2013.

My OTHER notion about commander loadouts would be that all commanders could be categorized in a mutually exclusive way. For example's sake, all commanders could be categorized as "Offensive", "Defensive" or "Support". All loadouts would consist of one "Offensive" commander, one "Defensive" and one "Support".

All in all, I kinda miss triple NKVD commander loadout scare tactics. Kappa.

This would be interesting for a CoH3. I remember from a post in the Modding section where some one was or did try in import a Company of Heroes 1 style menu. I tried looking around for it but it may have been a year ago so it is like trying to fine a needle in a hay stack if you do not know what it was called for the search function.

Why remove Tommy Guns from Paras and Rangers?
That's the one change I don't like, Rangers with elite 1919s, which are better than the regular ones, might be hilarious broken, everything else is good but I would change the "Scott" Combat Group just to a Combat Group like the one in CoH1 Infantry doctrine, just you pay fuel to turn into Manpower. That would be situationally powerful.

Why remove Tommy Guns from Paras and Rangers?
That's the one change I don't like, Rangers with elite 1919s, which are better than the regular ones, might be hilarious broken, everything else is good but I would change the "Scott" Combat Group just to a Combat Group like the one in CoH1 Infantry doctrine, just you pay fuel to turn into Manpower. That would be situationally powerful.

I my mod, I replaced the M1919 Rack with a Thompson rack and made the Bar rack doctrinal while the Thompson are unlocked through normal means. This was in part of to reduce long range damage of all standard infantry. I removed the Thompson upgrade so they can be picked up from the rack up to three times for Paras and Rangers.

For the 1919 upgrade, I am trying to make it into an unique weapon for elites so they can seem and sound different than regular infantry. The 1919s are still the para variant which for them never seemed overpowered too me, so this is more or less a test for the Rangers so this could be subject to change or have stats ajusted.

For the Scott, The Scott in the live game seems like it comes out too late to be any real impact. I moved the Scott to a doctrine where it could come out earlier and replace the slot in the major building with a Sherman (105) that could be upgraded to a bulldozer for more health, armor, and for its "terraforming" abilities. A fuel to manpower ability to me screams "lets blob and attack." With the extra manpower, that would be the common way to help remove HMGs and other support weapons, while the earlier Scott with the help of the Greyhound to spot could strategically displace weapon teams.

I have been thinking, for some additional ideas and I would like to hear your all thoughts.

Soviets

1. Shock Army
Show Spoiler
Possible Replacement
Based on the name this doctrine should be geared towards offense but shock troops have been used many other doctrines and prevent overlap why not Assault Guards?

-2 CP: Hit the Dirt
-3 CP: Assault Guard Halftrack
-6 CP: For Mother Russia
-8 CP: Mark Target
-13 CP: IS 2


2. NKVD Rifle Disruption Tactics
Show Spoiler
Possible Replacement
Based on the name, this doctrine should be about harassing your opponent and perhaps with "Harassment unit: Partisans?"

0 CP: Radio Intercept
2 CP: Partisans
2 CP: PMD 6c AP mines (can be laid by partisans)
2 CP: PMD 6m AT mines (can be laid by partisans)
6 CP: Fear Propaganda

While there is still Three Munition based abilities, two are very cheap and variable so they are not really a big munition sink while Fear Propaganda is cheap enough itself used as well.
Granted, in my mod, I have replaced one the Partisan Call in from the Partisan Tactics Doctrine with PMD 6 mines as well so perhaps replacing that with something as well. I was thinking for that a Conscript PTRS upgrade in which Partisans can be upgraded to the Guards variant as well.

Shock army:
Conscripts PPsh->Hit the dirt
ML20->KV-1 or KV-2

NKVD Rifle Disruption Tactics
(I don't like the implementation of the commissar but since you have him)
Recon->NKVD officer
Commissar can now be upgrade to NKVD officer, increases the bonus aura but unit affect can not retreat for the duration.

Rapid conscription->hit the dirt

Shock army:
Conscripts PPsh->Hit the dirt
ML20->KV-1 or KV-2

NKVD Rifle Disruption Tactics
(I don't like the implementation of the commissar but since you have him)
Recon->NKVD officer
Commissar can now be upgrade to NKVD officer, increases the bonus aura but unit affect can not retreat for the duration.

Rapid conscription->hit the dirt

What do you not like from my Commissar? My intent is to have the Commissar to buff Conscripts in order for better late game scaling.

... I would like to talk about how to improved doctrines whether about being in my mod or in live in general. I am able to alter the doctrines in my mod if you all would like a preview...

Everlasting discussion about useless or not-efficcient doctrines. Good to know, that somebody still take attention to this problem.

I want to leave here some suggestions from Talore (suddenly, he leaved forum long time ago, but his ideas still here ). I find them interesting and still actuall for the live game.

Quote from the original thread:

Introduction

The UKF is pretty brilliantly designed, balance tweaks aside. The 'set-piece' mentality that went into their commander design feels great, like you get so much more out of your commander selection. The other factions are a damn shame in comparison. I really think Relic ought to revisit existing commanders and consolidate or improve abilities to reflect this new design paradigm. I have some suggestions, if you feel like reading them. Note that most of these are Eastern Front since there are more commanders and more "do-nothing/little" abilities.

Eastern Front Defensive Abilities

Looking at the Wehrmacht Defensive (Community) Doctrine and then to OKW Luftwaffe Ground Forces/Fortifications is pretty insulting. Tank traps and trenches are two separate abilities for the Wehrmacht, but OKW get both plus flak emplacements in a single ability? Surely we can similarly consolidate underused and underpowered commander abilities into each other to open up tactical diversity?

I think that increasing the availability of defensive options like tank traps could be a very good thing for the metagame, especially in large team games where tank traps in particular can help break up the ridiculous tank blobs. Perhaps these abilities could become valuable in the minds of more players, rather than just filler between the call-ins and the air support.

Listed below are some possible solutions; they don't have to be all-or-nothing if they are partially salvageable.


Fold (Wehrmacht) Riegel Mines, Tank Traps, and Trenches into one ability. Since Wehrmacht Defensive (Community) Doctrine has two of these, it'd need a new ability. I'd suggest Incendiary Bombing Run, a thematic ability which only shows up in one other doctrine and an additional munition sink.

Fold (Soviet) Anti-Tank Gun Camouflage, Tank Traps, and PMD-6 Mines into one ability. Same goes for the Soviet Defensive (Community) Tactics, which has two of these abilities. I'd suggest the KV-2 Heavy Assault Tank, a thematic ability which again only appears in one other doctrine and would give this doctrine some late-game potential.

Wehrmacht

Show Spoiler

Soviets

Show Spoiler

USF

Show Spoiler

OKW

Show Spoiler

Source: https://www.coh2.org/topic/39925/brit-like-redesign-for-outdated-commanders

I don't find something inherently wrong about MU-heavy doctrines. It's the way that most muni-heavy doctrines are implemented that give muni-heavy design a bad name.

It's fine if you have 4 MU-only abilities, as long as your non-muni ability is reliable and cost efficient, and as long as you are getting 4 decent-to-great muni-heavy abilities which you have to choose how to burn.


With some modifications, this would work amazingly for the Commando doctrine, had it not been:
- For the rip-off 500MP-per glider on a 4-minute cooldown (I'm not joking)
- Smoke raid that only works for commando squads (which are ultra expensive)
- Assault that only works for Tommies

With a decent glider, and smoke raid/assault working for all squads, that would have been an amazing doctrine that gives you a hell lot of versatility. Then, what the player needs to do is control their munitions expenditure so that it doesn't become a bottleneck.

NKVD is a doctrine that simply won't work with its munitions abilities, because every single one of them ranges from meh to below-par (Rapid conscription simply has no chance of working with non-ppsh conscripts; sorry). Each of these abilities is a medium-range ability in stronger doctrines.

If you remade NKVD with something as follows, it might, someday start feeling like an interesting doctrine:
- Commisar squad (like the OKW officer)
- Rapid conscription that gives pre-nerf Penal flamer squads
- IL-2 bombing strike
- Propaganda artillery?
- Radio Intercept

TL;DR: Muni-heavy doctrines are perfectly fine, as long as they give access to premium (ideally unique) MU abilities, and as long as their (few) non-muni abilities don't outright suck (so that you still have a doctrine).

What do you not like from my Commissar? My intent is to have the Commissar to buff Conscripts in order for better late game scaling.

A stock unit that buff all soviet infantry can prove really problematic. Especially one that can nullify one of the things Ostheer have going for them the HMG-42.

If one want to make conscripts better in late game one can simply allow universal upgrades in each of the soviet buildings.

That would prevent conscripts from blobbing since they would have to spend on teching before becoming effective.

Imo conscript are not as bad as people claim, its the ST VG that are op and make them look bad...

A stock unit that buff all soviet infantry can prove really problematic. Especially one that can nullify one of the things Ostheer have going for them the HMG-42.

If one want to make conscripts better in late game one can simply allow universal upgrades in each of the soviet buildings.

That would prevent conscripts from blobbing since they would have to spend on teching before becoming effective.

Imo conscript are not as bad as people claim, its the ST VG that are op and make them look bad...

Only with increase of reinforce cost

"the ST VG that are op"

Lol care to explain ?

Only with increase of reinforce cost

"the ST VG that are op"

Lol care to explain ?

VG with ST upgrade are simply too good at all ranges. Mainline infantry should have a range that are strong and an range that they are weak (or something else going for them).

If one compares VG with grenadiers, VG are more cost efficient and thus they are OP.

The panzerfus changes are too weird IMHO, panzerfusiliers means panzer riflemen, but they have got grenades.
I would rather balance them on stats and give this upgrade to JLI.

"Sturmtiger" unit removed for relatively unfair wipes
WHAT ?!? You want to remove what was a stock unit.
"Unfair" ? As far as I know it makes a noise, takes 5 seconds to shoot and requires a long risky reload

Churchill avre, same
Why ??

Both units have ALREADY been adjusted to not commonly wipe along with formations adjustments, only bunched squads of blobbers get so close to be wiped ij one shot.

VG with ST upgrade are simply too good at all ranges. Mainline infantry should have a range that are strong and an range that they are weak (or something else going for them).

If one compares VG with grenadiers, VG are more cost efficient and thus they are OP.

Then EVERYTHING is op but grens and cons.
Volks are "too good" (questionable, care about proving it with data ?) at all ranges but shit enough to lose at all ranges vs penals without upgrade and vs wfa mainlines equipped with 1 bar and 1 bren, so there is just a difference of 2 mp that doesn't justify a bigger gap.
All mainlines get nerfed or volks are ok like that, because they are probably the most balanced mainline in terms of cost efficiency over rifle/brits/penals blobs, with NONE of those mainlines following the rule you said.

Ps: and it's not like grens are UP in the slightest, they just need a reinforcement cost reduction. Vetted lmg grens mow down stuff like nothing with good RA and dps, unlike volks that pretty much suck for the whole match (but I like that sight in cover bonus, it helps me to see when I need to retreat my 0.81 RA models from terminator bars #vet5).

And why this ?
"All infantry should have a specific range where they are strong"
Then ALL infantry should be supported by min 0 hmg, mortar and sniper....
Okw was built with the idea if of specialized AI troops with a mediocre unit alll ranges unit filling the gap and keeping things togheter, USF was built over a quality/number mainline versatile enough to compensate the zero support it gets at min 0 thus semi auto equipped.

Units lite ST, Avre, Brumbar can simply redesigned.

Instead of wiping units, their damage could go down (240?), become more player friendly (but using this units easier, for instance faster aim/fire) and allow them to provide extra utility instead:

1) Provide suppression to stop blob
2) Do engine damage to units with 800HP and bellow
3) Do extra damage to fortification/emplacement.

Then EVERYTHING is op but grens and cons.
....

Allot of units are more cost efficient than Grenadier and since the Grenadiers are used as benchmark they are actually OP.

Penals is another fine example of how a units should NOT be. Too good at all ranges.

"All infantry should have a specific range where they are strong"
Then ALL infantry should be supported by min 0 hmg, mortar and sniper....

No they should not since support weapons has little to do with "relative positioning" for more on the subject you better check the patch notes when "weapon profiles" and "relative positioning" were introduced.

Units lite ST, Avre, Brumbar can simply redesigned.

Instead of wiping units, their damage could go down (240?), become more player friendly (but using this units easier, for instance faster aim/fire) and allow them to provide extra utility instead:

1) Provide suppression to stop blob
2) Do engine damage to units with 800HP and bellow
3) Do extra damage to fortification/emplacement.

You are missing the point, thise units DON't WIPE NOW.
Formations and aoe toning down result in 2 models at least making it out to the base.
Exception is
1) bunched models in blobs
2) right click on point capping which still concentrate the squad
3) obstacles and tight spaces

Late game surely means there are several ways to spot the enemy with flares, air recon, t70, doctrinal sight range...

You are missing the point, thise units DON't WIPE NOW.
Formations and aoe toning down result in 2 models at least making it out to the base.
Exception is
1) bunched models in blobs
2) right click on point capping which still concentrate the squad
3) obstacles and tight spaces

Late game surely means there are several ways to spot the enemy with flares, air recon, t70, doctrinal sight range...

I suggest you watch the video where helping Hans loses 3 T-34 to single ST shot...Units and abilities that evaporate things in a game of unit preservation are not good for the game.