Login

russian armor

How to nerf Mobile Defense without it becoming CAS

4 Jul 2018, 22:58 PM
#1
avatar of Clarity

Posts: 479

Hey everybody, I would assume most people are pretty tired of Mobile Defense being such a crutch for Ostheer but are afraid of it being overnerfed and it's repercussions on the game. Puma is probably too strong right now but I feel tying the unit to Battlephase 3 would make it come out too late. My solution is to tie the Command Tank to Tier 3 so players are unable to rely on Puma's with the Command Tank Aura to deal with allied mediums so cost effectively. My other change is a bit experimental, I would move the Osttruppen Reserves ability to either 1 or 2 CP (probably 2) but only allow it to deploy a single squad of Osttruppen that would come with an LMG42 automatically upgraded (this could also be changed along with the squads cost). The squad would cost more manpower than the regular Osttruppen squad but I am not really sure what would be an appropriate cost. Maybe about 250 manpower or so, but that is a broad guesstimate. I feel like this would make it tougher for Ostheer players to replace losses so easily with this commander. The Puma would still be a way to deal with light vehicles that can absolute dominate Ostheer in numbers.
5 Jul 2018, 00:11 AM
#2
avatar of Phoenix101

Posts: 63

I think most of the pain being felt from this doc is by Soviet players who are upset they can no longer easily wreck face with the t70, while the Ostheer player desperately runs his pak around, spending munis on fausts and desperately trying to get enough fuel for t3 and a Piv. Uck. How dare the Ostheer have a counter to the small sniper tank!?


What about tying the Puma to T2 BUT you have to tech battlephase 2? It'd leave Ost with a hope against the manpower draining t70 and stuart.

5 Jul 2018, 01:02 AM
#3
avatar of Clarity

Posts: 479

Hey everybody, I would assume most people are pretty tired of Mobile Defense being such a crutch for Ostheer but are afraid of it being overnerfed and it's repercussions on the game. Puma is probably too strong right now but I feel tying the unit to Battlephase 3 would make it come out too late. My solution is to tie the Command Tank to Tier 3 so players are unable to rely on Puma's with the Command Tank Aura to deal with allied mediums so cost effectively. My other change is a bit experimental, I would move the Osttruppen Reserves ability to either 1 or 2 CP (probably 2) but only allow it to deploy a single squad of Osttruppen that would come with an LMG42 automatically upgraded (this could also be changed along with the squads cost). The squad would cost more manpower than the regular Osttruppen squad but I am not really sure what would be an appropriate cost. Maybe about 250 manpower or so, but that is a broad guesstimate. I feel like this would make it tougher for Ostheer players to replace losses so easily with this commander. The Puma would still be a way to deal with light vehicles that can absolute dominate Ostheer in numbers.
Apologies I meant Battlephase 2 not Battlephase 3. Battlephase 3 would be pretty stupid. :D
5 Jul 2018, 03:08 AM
#4
avatar of tightrope
Senior Caster Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 29

Locking the puma behind battle phase 2 is too late, these days battle phase 2 tech is quite expensive.

I think overall it would be better to make it buildable from T2, that extra 40 seconds or so delay from the build time should make an impact. Similar for the command tank it should be buildable from T3, probably accompanied by a 10 fuel discount.
5 Jul 2018, 05:38 AM
#5
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1

Locking the puma behind battle phase 2 is too late, these days battle phase 2 tech is quite expensive.

I think overall it would be better to make it buildable from T2, that extra 40 seconds or so delay from the build time should make an impact. Similar for the command tank it should be buildable from T3, probably accompanied by a 10 fuel discount.


and what if i want to go t4? Command p4 shouldn't be tied to tech becouse it blocks diversity.

Puma idea on the other hand... Is it even possible to add delay to unit in tier sturcture with 0CP requirement?
5 Jul 2018, 06:23 AM
#6
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Locking the puma behind battle phase 2 is too late, these days battle phase 2 tech is quite expensive.

I think overall it would be better to make it buildable from T2, that extra 40 seconds or so delay from the build time should make an impact. Similar for the command tank it should be buildable from T3, probably accompanied by a 10 fuel discount.


If the Puma is tied to T2 it lost his CP requirement, thus it will potentially hit the field much sooner!

BP2 is a good option because it force the player to tech early and not only stall with a heavy T1 play + a 222.

Otherwise it could also see its CP requirement increased by 1.

About the Command Panzer, tied to T3 or make the aura on timer or has to be trigger but deactivate some tank functions, it could have a speed reduction while the aura is activated and/or cannot use the main gun.
5 Jul 2018, 06:53 AM
#7
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269

Mobile Defense is common but is it overpowered? I've not seen any upsets by someone considered inferior beating someone better in GCS2 or in any casts with it.

Mechanized Assault use to be really common a long time ago because squad wipes were so common in the early game, Osteer would often be behind and be cut off and have to resort to calling in a stug to fight t70's and infantry. The puma seems to be taking on this role right now and isn't even great at killing infantry.

Pumas also scale horribly and are mediocre in the late game.

Command Tank does seem too good as a call-in without any teching. Move that to tier 3 at most IMO.

People's complaints are about how common it is, but Relic is the only one with the data about win rates and win rates don't seem great.
5 Jul 2018, 07:08 AM
#8
avatar of tightrope
Senior Caster Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 29

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Jul 2018, 05:38 AMStark


and what if i want to go t4? Command p4 shouldn't be tied to tech becouse it blocks diversity.

Puma idea on the other hand... Is it even possible to add delay to unit in tier sturcture with 0CP requirement?


Make it buildable from t4 also. Do they have to change the puma to a 0 CP requirement to put it in tech?
5 Jul 2018, 07:16 AM
#9
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

I guess so, I can't find an example showing otherwise.

Mobile Defense PUMA is ok vs Soviet only because KV1 have been implemented in a specific doctrine (pure chance here since it was not intented) but simply overperform vs USF.
5 Jul 2018, 07:27 AM
#10
avatar of Siphon X.
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1138 | Subs: 2

I'd suggest to replace "Panzer Tactician" with something like Riegel mines. This would make the Puma more risky to use and reduce the value of the doctrine overall.

If that is not sufficient, up the fuel cost of the Puma by 5 or 10 FU.

5 Jul 2018, 08:00 AM
#11
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Simply remove the command Panzer from the commander. Having access to both AT and AI vehicles is what is causing the problem.

Then C. PzIV should be buffed since it more expensive PzIV with a lesser gun both in AI and AT.

Change to PzIV could include giving 2 fire modes. Indirect where the gun work like Stug's -E (it is the same gun after all), direct where the gun has little AOE, medium penetration but get's some deflection damage (40-80).

It aura could should also be changed to improve with veterancy (the veterancy bonuses should be changed to better suit the unit's role).
5 Jul 2018, 09:38 AM
#12
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

I honestly don't think mobile defense is any more powerful than Allied light vehicle rush, it just forces Allies to be the ones having to invest in early AT for once which is something most players just aren't used to.

The only bad thing about it is that it's getting boring to see it picked every single game.
5 Jul 2018, 09:52 AM
#13
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I honestly don't think mobile defense is any more powerful than Allied light vehicle rush, it just forces Allies to be the ones having to invest in early AT for once which is something most players just aren't used to.

The only bad thing about it is that it's getting boring to see it picked every single game.


The real strength of this doctrine comes from the fact that it puts a massive plug into the only hole wehr has.
5 Jul 2018, 10:07 AM
#14
avatar of Planet Smasher
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 632 | Subs: 1

Make it buildable from t4 also. Do they have to change the puma to a 0 CP requirement to put it in tech?

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Jul 2018, 07:16 AMEsxile
I guess so, I can't find an example showing otherwise.

Units buildable in tiers can still have a CP requirement - no problem at all.
A_E
5 Jul 2018, 10:18 AM
#15
avatar of A_E
Lead Caster Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2439 | Subs: 6

The best change would be to put it in T2 REPLACING the 222.

That way the mobile defense build has another small nerf.
5 Jul 2018, 10:44 AM
#16
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6



The real strength of this doctrine comes from the fact that it puts a massive plug into the only hole wehr has.


Yes it supplements the light vehicle play a bit too well, but I don't think that's the doctrine's fault.
The core problem is most likely the cheaper 222, making a light vehicle AI/AT army a bit too cost-effective.

5 Jul 2018, 11:59 AM
#17
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Jul 2018, 10:18 AMA_E
The best change would be to put it in T2 REPLACING the 222.

That way the mobile defense build has another small nerf.


That's an interesting idea but I don't think it'd kill it that hard. You're only going to hit the button when you need the Puma, so you can still use the 222. If you need to replace 222s you can use 251 flamers provided you've got the munitions of them.

Yes it supplements the light vehicle play a bit too well, but I don't think that's the doctrine's fault.
The core problem is most likely the cheaper 222, making a light vehicle AI/AT army a bit too cost-effective.


It's completely the doctrine's fault. Mobile Defence was king of the Ostheer meta before SBP because of the stronger Command Tank aura.

Ostheer has relatively quick light armor that's countered hard by light tanks (AEC, Stuart, T-70). With any other doctrine overinvesting in OST T2 is risky: every light vehicle gives you an advantage but delays T3, lengthening the window where the enemy light tank rules the field.

The call-in Puma counters that light tank, allowing you to go heavy T2 without the risk other commanders bear in doing so. That Puma isn't tied to tech, allowing you to field two for the price of tech plus an enemy medium tank. Pumas can deal with their weight in everything short of a heavy tank, which is why the KV-1 of all things is SOV's shock unit against them.
5 Jul 2018, 12:14 PM
#18
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1

This commander was a meta since it was released. Katitof explained main reason why is that.

It's hard to change this commander without killing it. Tie puma to t2 with bf 3? Too late to counter other, earlier light vehicules plus with extra 30 fuel and 100mp (i hope i counted correctly) you will get stug3 - way better in destroying vehicules or ostwind - which can also win vs all lights.

switching with 222 (though really creative idea) won;t work becouse 222 will be replace with flame ht.

Something should be done becouse watching every turney game with mobile defense is horribly boring
5 Jul 2018, 12:41 PM
#19
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I'm thinking the way to limit it is to limit the spamability of the Puma: if you can't mass them easily then you can't fight SOV T4/UKF T3/USF T3 with it as effectively.

Reworking it into some sort of Command Puma with a limit of one on the field is one option. Another is combining the Osttruppen Reserves and Puma abilities together: the Puma call-in costs 200MP more and calls in an Osttruppen squad with it.

Not so bad if you're getting one, but if you want three it's gonna cost you a lot of manpower.
5 Jul 2018, 12:44 PM
#20
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36

Btw about mobile defend always meta.
That is not true. Like when ppsh cons spam worked very well or Lendlease there was not every game mobible defend.

It changed back to mobile defend, because other soviets strategies got nerfed. Like rushing m4c shermans or just spam 6 cosn with ppsh vs wehrmacht ( where axis had to get g32 to counter it / hold in)
But now after all this nerfs, t70 is the way to rule again
--> Puma is great vs t70.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

924 users are online: 924 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49074
Welcome our newest member, Kintz652
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM