Login

russian armor

Mobile Defense Doctrine

Best change for the Ostheer Puma?
Option Distribution Votes
8%
30%
22%
35%
5%
Total votes: 37
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
16 Sep 2019, 15:32 PM
#1
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 1922

From what I've heard, most 1v1 players think that this doctrine has been nerfed into death due to the puma arriving way too late compared to OKW puma. (and basically only 1-2 minutes earlier than a stug)

Comparing the timing from Ostheer and OKW puma, it seems like placing it in Ostheer t2 seems to be better I guess? Just straight up putting it into t2 would be probably slightly OP, so what about making it a T2 with sidetech for ~100mp/15 fuel like AEC? Or T2 requirement on top of 3-4 CPs.
16 Sep 2019, 15:45 PM
#2
avatar of Stormjäger

Posts: 733

A few thoughts on Mobile Defense from my personal experience with it.

I was stuck at lv13 with Ostheer for a long time and looked for a new doctrine to build around. I gave Mobile defense an try (this was all before the May patch when Ostheer was on life support) and saw mixed results.

Counterattack tactics needs to be removed. Ostheer is the most munitions starved faction in the game early on and there’s none to spare for decap speed.

Panzer tactician is amazing as always.

The Puma is stuck in a bad spot. Battlephase two comes too late and there’s no point getting the Puma, since with a bit more fuel you can get a T3 tanks. Either deploy it earlier or give T2 a sidetech to unlock the Puma, like the Soviets get for T3 7man conscripts where you pay more to get them earlier.

Osttruppen come way too late. I get the flavour where you sustain losses and want units to plug gaps, but a 0CP single Osttruppen squad would vastly improve the doctrine, especially recently with how early you can get Panzergrenadiers.

The command panzer IV is indeed good. I’d keep it as it is.

My suggestions for this doctrine would be:

0CP Osttruppen squad
2CP Panzer tactician
2CP Breakthrough Equipment
5CP Puma (at T2 and requiring either BP2 of unlocks with 150mp/20 fuel sidetech)
9CP Command Panzer IV
16 Sep 2019, 16:01 PM
#3
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2178 | Subs: 4

The puma was never the issue, it was the call in CP4.
Being able to skip all teching and get both a good AT vehicle and a fantastic AI vehicle was what put this doctrine over the line.

With the CP4 tied into teching the puma is balanced with forcing you to get locked into this doctrine for a good AT answer to allied light vehicles.

Remove the battlephase requirement from puma, it just comes too late. Leave it in T2 so it has to go through a build time and can't be shat out as a panic call-in, but give it a 5CP requirement like it used to have so it doesn't come too early. It doesn't need to be sidetech, the "cost" is locking into a doctrine.
16 Sep 2019, 16:06 PM
#4
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 3921

cp4 is now useless for his doc, as it does not give bonus health to puma and stug
16 Sep 2019, 16:33 PM
#5
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1921 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2019, 16:01 PMTobis
The puma was never the issue, it was the call in CP4.


Personally I do agree with this, and even though I think the Puma at T2 (with a build time and maybe with a 4-5 CP hybrid system) would likely not be overpowered, I do think it has a very high risk of making MobiDef hardcore meta again simply because the Puma is so much more reliable at countering Allied light vehicles than Ostheer's other options. And I'm not sure if we'd want that to return. People got sick of MobiDef being picked 9/10 games.
16 Sep 2019, 17:21 PM
#6
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 1922


And I'm not sure if we'd want that to return. People got sick of MobiDef being picked 9/10 games.


That was one of my concerns as well, but why are some allies factions allowed to do call-in strats with Greyhound and Valentine so easily for the reason "there is no good place for them in any of the tech structure" (which is true), but then the Ostheer Puma has such steep requirements. Unlike with the 2 other mentioned call-ins there is a place to put it behind tech. But Battlephase 2... the same requirement of StugE and CP4 does not seem right
16 Sep 2019, 17:42 PM
#7
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1257

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2019, 16:01 PMTobis
The puma was never the issue, it was the call in CP4.
Being able to skip all teching and get both a good AT vehicle and a fantastic AI vehicle was what put this doctrine over the line.

With the CP4 tied into teching the puma is balanced with forcing you to get locked into this doctrine for a good AT answer to allied light vehicles.

Remove the battlephase requirement from puma, it just comes too late. Leave it in T2 so it has to go through a build time and can't be shat out as a panic call-in, but give it a 5CP requirement like it used to have so it doesn't come too early. It doesn't need to be sidetech, the "cost" is locking into a doctrine.


I haven't played a lot of 1v1's, but what used to be nice was that I could just build T1 + T2 and use call-ins. It was like playing Soviets back then. Since you have to get BP2 anyway, the Puma doesn't arrive much earlier than a Stug, and the newly improved Ostwind isn't too bad compared to the CP4. Now it seems like you're not only NOT getting a panic Puma, you're losing access to Tigers/MHT's/etc.

It is strange that it builds from the Light Mechanized building but requires Battlephase 2. Dropping the BP2 requirement and setting the build time probably equalizes the timing with the OKW puma.

The Osttruppen should be 0 cp and single squads. At 3 cp it should be something like Relief Infantry, except that Relief Infantry is worthless currently.
16 Sep 2019, 17:49 PM
#8
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 1922



The Osttruppen should be 0 cp and single squads. At 3 cp it should be something like Relief Infantry, except that Relief Infantry is worthless currently.


Wouldnt it be quite useful at 3cp if the chance for lmg42 was 100% on both squads? Right now it's only 25%. And I dont think we need a third 0cp osttruppen commander
16 Sep 2019, 18:08 PM
#9
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1434 | Subs: 1

I've previously suggested making it side-tech like AEC so I like that idea (though I think you'd want to reduce the price of the Puma itself so that the tech cost is included). Though I think Tier 2 + CP requirement as a light vehicle version of the new heavy armor requirements could work just as well. It's pretty obvious that BP2 is waaaay too late.
16 Sep 2019, 20:25 PM
#10
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 537


The Puma is causing a real dilemma: We dont want the PAnic Puma meta back (because the doctrine is the only one which gives you Puma access) but Aerafield is of course also right in showing that the unit and the whole doctrine is in a really bad state.

I personally would prefer a radical solution: Replace the Puma but give the doctrine a really strong unit back. Additionally the Osttruppen reserve should be replaced.

I think the 250 from German infantry would be a great fit, and this could be the chance to give the wehrmacht its own elite inf call-in.

Doctrine could look like this then:

  • Passiv SdKfz250 or CP2 250 with Pgrens
  • Passiv CommandoPz4
  • 0CP Counter Offensive Tactic
  • 2CP Panzer Tactician
  • 2CP Wehrmacht Falls

16 Sep 2019, 20:27 PM
#11
avatar of A. Soldier
Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 2705 | Subs: 2

To be honest, and this is jut my own personal opinion of course, I'd just simply either replace the Puma or Command Panzer IV with a King Tiger.

A lot of people would like to see an Ost KT and I think this would be the best doctrine to put it in as it fits the theme perfectly.

Plus maybe replace the Osttruppen reserves with the regular osttruppen call in or a special squad that can merge, maybe repair and have an upgrade to Panzerbusche 39s since they won't be able to build trenches and sandbags so they'll need more utility.
16 Sep 2019, 20:44 PM
#12
avatar of DerbyHat

Posts: 1024 | Subs: 1

You don't even have to touch Puma if other parts of doctrines are improved:

- Turn Osttruppen Reserves into something useful like AT-rifle Osttruppen.
- Let Counterattack Tactics decap quicker instead of cap quicker (it's called counterattack amirite).

If Puma timing gets changed though, I think it should just be buildable from T2 at 5 CP's.
16 Sep 2019, 20:45 PM
#13
avatar of Stormjäger

Posts: 733

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2019, 20:25 PMSmartie

The Puma is causing a real dilemma: We dont want the PAnic Puma meta back (because the doctrine is the only one which gives you Puma access) but Aerafield is of course also right in showing that the unit and the whole doctrine is in a really bad state.

I personally would prefer a radical solution: Replace the Puma but give the doctrine a really strong unit back. Additionally the Osttruppen reserve should be replaced.

I think the 250 from German infantry would be a great fit, and this could be the chance to give the wehrmacht its own elite inf call-in.

Doctrine could look like this then:

  • Passiv SdKfz250 or CP2 250 with Pgrens
  • Passiv CommandoPz4
  • 0CP Counter Offensive Tactic
  • 2CP Panzer Tactician
  • 2CP Wehrmacht Falls



If you wanna give Falls to the Ostheer, which imo would be a good fit, it needs to be through either the Luftwaffe Support or Close Air Support doctrines.
16 Sep 2019, 20:57 PM
#14
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2178 | Subs: 4



Personally I do agree with this, and even though I think the Puma at T2 (with a build time and maybe with a 4-5 CP hybrid system) would likely not be overpowered, I do think it has a very high risk of making MobiDef hardcore meta again simply because the Puma is so much more reliable at countering Allied light vehicles than Ostheer's other options. And I'm not sure if we'd want that to return. People got sick of MobiDef being picked 9/10 games.

I don't think making a doctrine useful is a good reason to leave it... not useful?

It should be a goal to make as many doctrines viable as possible, right now it is just not worth using ever.
The game is in a much better state than it was 2 years ago. Ostheer has been dealing with allied light vehicles fine without the puma all this time. Making the Puma relevant again just opens up another viable commander, it isn't 100% necessary right now to rely on the puma. I'd expect mobile defense to be popular again after this, but not any more than the other meta commanders right now. Don't let past memories of this doctrine taint your thoughts. You said it yourself, it wouldn't be too strong.
16 Sep 2019, 21:02 PM
#15
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 1922

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2019, 20:57 PMTobis

I don't think making a doctrine useful is a good reason to leave it... not useful?

It should be a goal to make as many doctrines viable as possible, right now it is just not worth using ever.
The game is in a much better state than it was 2 years ago. Ostheer has been dealing with allied light vehicles fine without the puma all this time. Making the Puma relevant again just opens up another viable commander, it isn't 100% necessary right now to rely on the puma. I'd expect mobile defense to be popular again after this, but not any more than the other meta commanders right now. Don't let past memories of this doctrine taint your thoughts. You said it yourself, it wouldn't be too strong.


+1
16 Sep 2019, 21:50 PM
#16
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1257



Wouldnt it be quite useful at 3cp if the chance for lmg42 was 100% on both squads? Right now it's only 25%. And I dont think we need a third 0cp osttruppen commander


Getting both of them with LMG42's would make it worthwhile.

I wouldn't replace the Puma in this doctrine like some people are suggesting. The Puma is in a league of its own with vision, speed, good AT, and decent survivability.
16 Sep 2019, 21:53 PM
#17
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6283 | Subs: 1

Both Puma and CP4 where nerfed to oblivion because of this commander.

These 2 units should simply not be in the same commander.

Then both of them could be re-balanced.

Both units could become build-able from HQ like Panzer j with the Puma requiring requiring BP2 or T2 and the CPzIV requiring PB3 or T3 or CP restrictions.

16 Sep 2019, 22:23 PM
#18
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 1922

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2019, 21:53 PMVipper
Both Puma and CP4 where nerfed to oblivion because of this commander.

These 2 units should simply not be in the same commander.

Then both of them could be re-balanced.

Both units could become build-able from HQ like Panzer j with the Puma requiring requiring BP2 or T2 and the CPzIV requiring PB3 or T3 or CP restrictions.



as Tobis already mentioned, the real issue of the old doctrine was being able to skip t3 and t4 just by getting some pumas to shutdown the light vehicles, followed by a very fast command p4 to finish the game. This isnt possible anymore with CP4 requiring t3. If people would just spam pumas again they have 0 tanks and extremely delayed tech
16 Sep 2019, 22:52 PM
#19
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6283 | Subs: 1



as Tobis already mentioned, the real issue of the old doctrine was being able to skip t3 and t4 just by getting some pumas to shutdown the light vehicles, followed by a very fast command p4 to finish the game. This isnt possible anymore with CP4 requiring t3. If people would just spam pumas again they have 0 tanks and extremely delayed tech

This is commander design issue/consistency and not a balance issue. Having Puma (build-able in t2), CPzIV (call-in) and Panzer J (build able from HQ) all having different ways of becoming available makes little sense and confuses things for no good reason.

Having to built T2 to get access to an doctrinal vehicle make little sense, is rather unique and
very restrictive.

All 3 units can become build able from HQ and have different tech requirement. That will make them more consistent while increasing built diversity at same time.

When it comes to the commander design I had pointed out that no tech call-in with good AT and good AI should not be available in the same commander a long time ago.

Actually in order to fix commander one should set some rules and redesign many commanders.
16 Sep 2019, 22:53 PM
#20
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 810

Why can't you just make it buildable from HQ after BP2 is complete. Same requirements as current STUGE(but that ones callin)

I think build time is good to give players who rush light vehicles time to use them before insta callins end them after selecting the doctrine.

I also made a whole thread on this like last month with a whole rework idea (It includes a 250 HT) MOBILE DEFENSE since when are osttruppen mobile :guyokay:

Still good to keep bringing this up though I think it would be neat to have some strats that arent tiger though that thing is the meta now.
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
  • The British Forces flag [c.B] Guard2707
  • Soviets flag [c.B] Brosras
  • Oberkommando West flag 女性主意
  • Ostheer flag 101 Airborne Divison
uploaded by koreanmaphack

Board Info

214 users are online: 3 members and 211 guests
SturmtigerCobra, SneakEye, maithusjaney
185 posts in the last 24h
1321 posts in the last week
7002 posts in the last month
Registered members: 66051
Welcome our newest member, KristyLiguy
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM