It is currently Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:13 am



Welcome
Welcome to Victoria 2 multiplayer forum.


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:03 pm
Posts: 19
Otto von Saxony wrote:

Would you think either my original proposals would be sufficient?


For mass assault, no. It doesn't really change that much and is especially lacking in buffs to the left of the tree, but I do like the changes that you suggested, just that it is not enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 12:00 am
Posts: 28
Yo everyone integrated support isn't even the stronger half of that choice.
Line artillery gives more SA than support artillery at just over 2:1 ratio. Let's call it 2:1 for simplicity sake.
+50% SA from integrated support means you now get 1.5 SA.
+10% SA for line artillery from the other side means you now get 2.2 SA.
As long as you have 3 line artillery battalions in your division the left side is better than the right side, ignoring the org factor. Going more than 3 line artillery just stacks the advantage harder.
I have no idea why people pick integrated support over dispersed support. I guess it's good for the org for special forces divisions that get loaded up with support brigades and don't use line artillery, but I'd rather have the higher soft attack on my base infantry divisions.

If you nerf one side, nerf both. Make Left side +5% line artillery SA and make right side a total of +20% SA, +10% from each. Keep the org the same. This will give countries a clear choice on if they want better infantry divisions or better special forces.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 12:00 am
Posts: 28
Sothar wrote:
I think the best nerf you could actually apply is drop the first research of Superior Firepower to 10% soft attack, and then maybe do the integrated support nerf as well. Soft attack is king in the meta ATM. Maybe increased hardness on motorized or drastically reduced cost of mechanized would shift the meta up to where hard attack actually matters.

Agreed but with my version of the integrated/dispersed support choice nerf. That should make it more even with the others. And maybe buff some part of mass assault.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:03 pm
Posts: 19
JozyAltidore wrote:
Yo everyone integrated support isn't even the stronger half of that choice.
Line artillery gives more SA than support artillery at just over 2:1 ratio. Let's call it 2:1 for simplicity sake.
+50% SA from integrated support means you now get 1.5 SA.
+10% SA for line artillery from the other side means you now get 2.2 SA.
As long as you have 3 line artillery battalions in your division the left side is better than the right side, ignoring the org factor. Going more than 3 line artillery just stacks the advantage harder.
I have no idea why people pick integrated support over dispersed support. I guess it's good for the org for special forces divisions that get loaded up with support brigades and don't use line artillery, but I'd rather have the higher soft attack on my base infantry divisions.

If you nerf one side, nerf both. Make Left side +5% line artillery SA and make right side a total of +20% SA, +10% from each. Keep the org the same. This will give countries a clear choice on if they want better infantry divisions or better special forces.


With the right division templates the line artillery side is better like you say, but most of the time I have fewer than three line artillery per division. There are viable division and army compositions that do not use any line artillery at all for some countries. Still, the line artillery side does work great when you have artillery spam divisions; you just have to be a country that can do that well.

Edit: Saw what Otto said below and am genuinely surprised how many line artillery you need to make it worth it.


Last edited by Yodoodles on Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 1:10 am
Posts: 66
JozyAltidore wrote:
Yo everyone integrated support isn't even the stronger half of that choice.
Line artillery gives more SA than support artillery at just over 2:1 ratio. Let's call it 2:1 for simplicity sake.
+50% SA from integrated support means you now get 1.5 SA.
+10% SA for line artillery from the other side means you now get 2.2 SA.
As long as you have 3 line artillery battalions in your division the left side is better than the right side, ignoring the org factor. Going more than 3 line artillery just stacks the advantage harder.
I have no idea why people pick integrated support over dispersed support. I guess it's good for the org for special forces divisions that get loaded up with support brigades and don't use line artillery, but I'd rather have the higher soft attack on my base infantry divisions.

If you nerf one side, nerf both. Make Left side +5% line artillery SA and make right side a total of +20% SA, +10% from each. Keep the org the same. This will give countries a clear choice on if they want better infantry divisions or better special forces.


Your assessment of Line Artillery vs Support Artillery benefit from either path is completely wrong as your applying additive modifiers multiplicatively. It's not 18 × 1.5 and 37.5 × 1.1 but 30 × (1-0.4+0.5) and 30 × (1+0.25+0.1).

More detailed rebuttle:

1934 artillery has 30 base soft attack. Line artillery get +25% for 37.5 soft attacks, while support artillery gets -40% for 18 soft attacks.

+10% soft attack from dispersed support make line artillery go to 30+(25+10)% soft attack or 40.5, net gain of 3. +50% from integrated support makes support artillery 30+(-40+50)% soft attack or 33, net gain of 15. Therefore, you need to deploy 5 line artillery battalions to get the same absolute increase in soft attacks. Furthermore any support battalions that have soft attack further benefit integrated support over dispersed; what's more integrated support increases all support battalions org by +20, which means 7 inf + 2 art + ENG + sart has +3.6 org. Conversely the +0.2 recovery rate increases the same divisions recovery rate by +0.036 which saves you about a day of recovery time. However, the more support companies added the better integrated support gets relative to dispersedo in both cost efficiency and combat efficiency.

Note: 1 sart + ENG + recon at 1939 tech level gives +26 soft attack which cannot be matched unless you use 7 line artillery which means your division now counts as an artillery division. Seeing that most nations do not get an artillery staff officer and that the nation's most able to spam the artillery being the USA gets a whooping two staff officers buffing marines/mountain/airborne you essentially need 9 artillery (26+25%/4) brigades to exceed that combat power output.

Now you can argue that your division will have more soft attack if you add more artillery anyhow, but baring a few niche divisions integrated support would still give a larger or equal bonus.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 12:00 am
Posts: 28
RIP me. Tested it and you're right. Well I as America was just giving the Axis a handicap...

Nerf that **** to the ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:01 pm
Posts: 28
integrated support could probably go from 50% extra sot attack to 30-40%


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 1:10 am
Posts: 66
After hearing some more comments here is my new(er) proposal:

Note the specific doctrines that receive changes are already planned I just wanted to make the net change clear.

Superior Firepower net changes
+5% production cost on Infantry equipment/artillery/ATG/AA/SPA/SPAA/TD/Tanks

Integrated Support
-15% soft attack #should make dispersed better for larger division, and integrated better for small divisions

Mass Assault
+4% reinforcement rate
+10% entrenchment

Mass Mobilization
+10% infantry breakthrough (specifically the battalion does not include any other form of infantry)
+5 leg infantry org
-0.5 militia combat width (This is only relevant if we include Militia in the mod for the next game, and if we don't its not much of a nerf)
- New doctrine after last choice that give +10% factory output (The idea here is that its for large manpower low industry nations)

Deep Battle
+5 all infantry org
+2 Tank org
-0.20 Mountaineer/Airborne/Marine width
+10% all infantry breakthrough

Edit:

forgot to add that Superior firepower Shock and Awe branch had -5% soft attack

Edit 2:
Mobile Warfare
Blitzkrieg
+20% armored VARIANT breakthrough (this is not buffing regular tank breakthrough!)

Modern Blitzkrieg
+2-% armored VARIANT breakthrough (this is not buffing regular tank breakthrough)


Last edited by Otto von Saxony on Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Discussion on Doctrines
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:01 pm
Posts: 28
for moblie warfare you should make all buffs that apply to tanks apply to all variants aswell


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
suspicion-preferred