[DBP] Tank Hunter feedback thread

B4 was our first choice.

However, the commander needs something reliable to crutch onto, since every other ability is situational.

There is no way to make B4 work reliably, without either making it look weird (e.g., B4 shells dealing same AoE as ML-20), or letting it perform like a complete RNG cannon, which would ruin the doctrine.

There was also always the danger of overbuffing B-4 and forcing players to fight vs waves upon waves of Counterattack/Tank-Hunter tryhards.

Cannot B-4 be something opposite to STD or demo? I mean, SDB and demo have inta-death circle as big as AoE, so B-4 could be made very accurate, with huge AoE but at the same time small death circle so it wipes only clumped squad, but direct hit on HMG crew for eample would kill only 1-2 models while inflicting heavy damage to the rest of the squad.

____
I like the idea of ISU call-in with only AT rounds.

I'd prefer keeping the ML20 because what it needs to be competitive against a lot of other very potent doctrines is not another big gun or more antitank- where it lacks in live (1v1 and 2v2) is use against teamweapon play, cloaked raks, paks, multiple MGs. ML20 rounds out the composition much better than a command SU85 or B4 (which is unreliable and conceptually impossible to balance without compromising the aesthetic of it being a giant cannon).

ML20 does not fit at all in the theme.

But it fits the gameplay well since it gives you a way to pressure Axis and force them to enter your territory where your ambush should be waiting.

It seems there are too many commander abilities now. Perhaps merging the light AT mine and AT gun cloak will help AT gun cloak become more attractive to other commanders.

Tank hunter conscript at nades and 1 shot from their PTRS guns will take a medium tank down below half health in a couple seconds, seems to strong. I can understand the desire to make the AT nades consistent but the damage seems far too much for 25 munitions. Even priced higher 2 squads should probably not be able to run up a medium tank and instantly destroy it, especially when they can cloak and they are simultaneously destroying the engine.

I think making fewer units throw a slightly stronger grenade would reduce the afore mentioned high end performance with full squads but allow it to still be useful most of the time.

played a couple games with tank hunter yesterday, i think the ambush cons are a bit too strong considering the base cost of the squad and the synergy with maxims (a lot like AT partisans and guards in the previous meta)

getting a good ambush is satisfying but its too easy to oorah up and punish any slight mismicro for very little difficulty, and lategame a couple squads can stall out armor from the front very easily just by threatening the 300dmg nuke

suggest looking into spreading some of the ability out to ptrs cons to
ptrs penals- if ptrs penals got the cloak + nuke nades there would have to be a significantly greater upfront investment in cost and tech and subsequently reinforcement, so its less likely you get more than one squad (right now two squads of cons can cover half the map, esp with oorah)

It also requires preemptive teching instead of instantly popping the doc and upgrading ptrs on cons the moment you see the enemy light vehicle, which is half the reason why AT partisans are so potent.

Cons could get a slightly weaker version of the ability with less nades (or something like what honeynuts suggested). alternatively if the nades were thrown with delay between them so that a vehicle that sees them and instantly reverses will get hit by the first few and maybe snared, but wont be practically instakilled.

i think the conscripts get too much stuff: ptrs, vehicle detection ability, RPG-40 grenades, Orah ability ...
They will become the new super-units.
Why give some stuff to other units like penals, engineers or snipers?
If only one unit can detection, immobilize and finish every tanks is too much.
Blob is near.

The new volley nade is too much for what it does, much better it revert to the old one .

This commander feels more like "tank ambush tactics" rather than "tank hunter tactics"...
How can't anyone see how the conscript ptrs package is over the top? With this upgrade cons get ptrs's that make going penals redundant, they get vehicle detection that some commanders have occuping one of the five commander slots and they get grenade assault that makes upgrading AT grenade package redundant. Doens't that feel overkill just for the first commander slot?

This commander should look something like this:
-AT grenade assault (buffing this and making this replace the normal AT grenade once upgraded would be the best course of action)
-Armored vehicle detection
-Vehicle crew repair training (or salvage kits, or conscript repair kit)
-IL-2 AT bombing run
-T-34-85 (I wouldnt put anything heavier than this tank)

I'd like to see ISU152 call-in with only AT rounds. That would be neat and would suit theme of this doctrine much more than AT Gun camo for example. Instead we have very tricky commander which definetly won't become meta or any near it. Just fun to use but nothing special.

I'd like to see ISU152 call-in with only AT rounds. That would be neat and would suit theme of this doctrine much more than AT Gun camo for example. Instead we have very tricky commander which definetly won't become meta or any near it. Just fun to use but nothing special.

We have to be consistent here, if this doctrine was to have the ISU-152 it would have to be exacly the same ISU-152 as other doctrines or all other ISU's would have to change to this one with only AT rounds. Imo the best tank for this doctrine is the t-34-85 because it's very mobile and has a better gun to hunt down heavier tanks and still make this commander viable for 1v1's.

We have to be consistent here, if this doctrine was to have the ISU-152 it would have to be exacly the same ISU-152 as other doctrines or all other ISU's would have to change to this one with only AT rounds. Imo the best tank for this doctrine is the t-34-85 because it's very mobile and has a better gun to hunt down heavier tanks and still make this commander viable for 1v1's.

Becasue...?

Otherwise there would have to be a new instance of the ISU specifically for this commander.

Although the ability to switch shells could just be tied to a requirement of specific commanders as an alternative.

Still, that kind of stuff is a major opportunity for something to go screwy between balance patch version and implementation.

I have no idea how modding tools work but if team could bring new abilities like raid tactics or cluster bombs, making a "new" ability with AT ISU for Tank Hunter isn't a big deal.

Making the ability is easy.

Making the ISU entity that populates the ISU squad have the ability only under the circumstances of the tank hunter commander is a little more convoluted.

Essentially the ISU unit and squad would have to be cloned, given, or stripped of, the unique abilities. And then tied to a callin ability for that commander, entirely separate from other ISU instances.

Totally feasible, but the exact kind if bloating process that is at the root of so many imbalances and inconsistencies that these patches are ostensibly trying to fix. The grens that come with an lmg42 in a 250 HT as a callin are an example of this.

It'd be easier to just give the tank hunters commander the existing ISU callin, but modify the shell switching ability so it's not available for tank hunter doc.

Making the ability is easy.

Making the ISU entity that populates the ISU squad have the ability only under the circumstances of the tank hunter commander is a little more convoluted.

Essentially the ISU unit and squad would have to be cloned, given, or stripped of, the unique abilities. And then tied to a callin ability for that commander, entirely separate from other ISU instances.

Totally feasible, but the exact kind if bloating process that is at the root of so many imbalances and inconsistencies that these patches are ostensibly trying to fix. The grens that come with an lmg42 in a 250 HT as a callin are an example of this.

It'd be easier to just give the tank hunters commander the existing ISU callin, but modify the shell switching ability so it's not available for tank hunter doc.

Well, that's also the option to modify switching ability. I just feel like this Tank Hunter doctrine has nothing to do with hunting tanks. It feels rather like tricky AT ambush doctrine. I mean, am I supposed to hunt Axis' heavies with PTRS and camo T34/76? Seems rather tricky. Fun to use, sure, but nothing about hunting and destroying armor.

Well, that's also the option to modify switching ability. I just feel like this Tank Hunter doctrine has nothing to do with hunting tanks. It feels rather like tricky AT ambush doctrine. I mean, am I supposed to hunt Axis' heavies with PTRS and camo T34/76? Seems rather tricky. Fun to use, sure, but nothing about hunting and destroying armor.

Plenty of real life hunting basically boils down to finding a hiding spot and waiting for game to walk into your sights.

Well, that's also the option to modify switching ability. I just feel like this Tank Hunter doctrine has nothing to do with hunting tanks. It feels rather like tricky AT ambush doctrine. I mean, am I supposed to hunt Axis' heavies with PTRS and camo T34/76? Seems rather tricky. Fun to use, sure, but nothing about hunting and destroying armor.

Well it's also hard to hunt tanks with an ISU and that's why I think the t-34-85 is perfect for this commander, it's a mobile tank with a very capable gun and having the repairs and armored vehicle detection makes for the perfect hunting armor commander Imo.

Plenty of real life hunting basically boils down to finding a hiding spot and waiting for game to walk into your sights.

Oh yes, that's why I can afford to leave my T34/76 hiding for X mins waiting for this one opportunity while my cons will bleed my whole MP vs vetted axis infantry and tanks

Well it's also hard to hunt tanks with an ISU and that's why I think the t-34-85 is perfect for this commander, it's a mobile tank with a very capable gun and having the repairs and armored vehicle detection makes for the perfect hunting armor commander Imo.

T34/85 is a general unit while this doctrine would need something AT dedicated.

This commander feels more like "tank ambush tactics" rather than "tank hunter tactics"...
How can't anyone see how the conscript ptrs package is over the top? With this upgrade cons get ptrs's that make going penals redundant, they get vehicle detection that some commanders have occuping one of the five commander slots and they get grenade assault that makes upgrading AT grenade package redundant. Doens't that feel overkill just for the first commander slot?

This commander should look something like this:
-AT grenade assault (buffing this and making this replace the normal AT grenade once upgraded would be the best course of action)
-Armored vehicle detection
-Vehicle crew repair training (or salvage kits, or conscript repair kit)
-IL-2 AT bombing run
-T-34-85 (I wouldnt put anything heavier than this tank)

Na the Conscript AT package is perfect for... Conscripts hunting Armor. Its staying.

Na the Conscript AT package is perfect for... Conscripts hunting Armor. Its staying.

I agree, but the fact that you get those without needing to upgrade your infantry with AT grenades makes that same upgrade redundant.