Profile of MissCommissar

Just make maxim be like all other HMGs in game. Wide are of fire, good AoE supression, long time setting up. You may even save death loop after that - Maxim will be awesome, useful as support for my mass of cons and nice for defensing my points.

Nobody spams MG-42s, Vickkerses and such HMGs. Why? Cos they are supportive, no reason to make them too much. Maxim's design and conception should be changed, really.

most useless doctrine

Someone forgot about soviet Defensive doctrine... Or about Royal Artillery.

From my own experience of using that interesting and unusual doctrine I should say only 1 thing - it would work better in vCoH, than in CoH 2. Reason is simple - map and points design.

In vCoH maps were much bigger, had more points on them and each point had way lesser control area. With such map design that was much more simplier to capture enemy points in back and close sectors. And closed area sectors would be much bigger, cos each point itself has not so much around ("close pocket arty" works ONLY on enemy captured closed sectors). With all that - Encirclement doctrine and it's main ability "Close pocket arty" would be really effective and dangerous.

But in Coh 2 maps are smaller, less points and each has way more territory under control. With all of that - effectivness of Encirclement doctrine becomes way lesser, because even if you captured backpoints, even if you closed enemy sectors - there will be pretty small closed areas and they won't include enough enemy units and structures, destryoing which will justify your efforts and resourse investment into closing sectors. A lot of enemy units/structures may stand in areas of backpoints, which will become neutral or your own and won't be affected with "close pocket arty".

And also - that's pretty hard to capture and hold long enough points with such design, cos maps are small - enemy units can get pretty fast from base or frontline to your infantry/tanks, which capturing points, kill them and restore control, open sectors.

I think something should be done about it. Of course, it's pretty stupid to suggest changing of entire game map design just for one doctrine (but I think, that old design was better even without it). I think Encircliment doctrine should be buffed, for to make it more effective on such small and low-point-avaialabe-to-capture-for-to-close-sectors maps. Maybe "close pocket arty" should affect not only closed sectors, but also parts of sectors around. Maybe other abilities should be improved, for to make closing pockets more simple, cos right now it's just like special operation for you - to close enemy sector. It's fun, it's challenge for you and that's what for I like that doctrine. But it's so lame to lose, when you invested yourself in that "spec-ops" so hard, and your enemy just breaking your plans because of poor map design without any problems...

P.S. There are a lot of same doctrines, like Partisans or like that, which also hardly depended in their efficiency on maps or such stuff. We can also discuss them, but personally I worry more about Encirclement, because... it's pretty unusual and interesting one. Gives you non-standart gameplay.

Well you can see it like this 2: Ostheer player needs to make an ostwind to get your planes down.

Well... not only ostwind can deal with planes. 222 cars can, MGs on tanks can. And even StuG G can get MG, jesus...

First of all I should say - I don't like how Relic remaked doctrines like Elite, Soviet Industry, Riflemans and all others, personal opinion. Those doctrines were uniqe, they gave you special and interesting playstyles and gameplay (like Encircliment doctrine gives now). But, spirit of Communism (or retardism) equilied those uniqe doctrines and they became same boring and common, as all others... Pretty sad to see, how good and creative ideas were destroyed under push of "competitive" players, hello from Cold Tech.

But that's not main point of topic. That one is about Soviet industry doctrine and 1 serious problem in that. Look at this:

1. Repair stations cost - 75 ammo.
2. 20-30 fuel drop cost - 100 ammo. (with risks of loosing that to AA).
3. No additional ammo drop for you, like some Ostheer ammo-dependend doctrines have (CAS, Osttrupen).

As we can see, for to use all posibilites, which gives you that doctrine you have to spend enourmous count of ammo. Mostly, people have to choose between building repair posts and getting small (but sometimes important) boosts of fuel, cos you never will have enough ammo for to get both of them, if we will also keep in mind spendings on mines, grenades and such stuff.

I think, it would be more fair and reasonable to change ammo cost on fuel drop to MP cost, like Luftwaffe supplie drop has. That's actually very strange, that for 200 MP without any risks of AA Ostheer can get 50/100 fuel/ammo and USSR for 100 ammo getting only 20-30 fuel and with risks of AA shot.

So, I suggest to let Lend-lease and Soviet industry fuel drop cost 200 MP, like luftwaffe one. It drops at base, ok, but we know again, that Ostheer luftwaffe drop can't be broken with allie's AA, but soviet's can. So, it is you "assymetry" and "balance". + Before "nerf" soviet industry changed MP income to Fuel, so - everything is correct here.

Ideas?