Pinned

How to play the Allies doctrine: day to day report with British Columbia on World at War

Updated on 21 November, after the release notes of the 11th November where drastic changes were added to each doctrine. Please note that my game was played before that so I started with more resources and manpower than what is the case today

Hi everyone,

A lot of players have requested an Allies doctrine guide so here it is.

Allies doctrine appears to be the hardest to play so check it out.

Let's start with their bonuses:

Forum attachment

Troops take -30% less time to produce: this is great as you can build an army fast at the start of the game with your available resources.

Research cost and time reduced by 25%: so not only can you build an army faster than other players but you can save resources in research which enables you to produce even more units or to invest the saved resources in your economy. Having less research time means that you can unlock certain technologies faster. Afterwards you also produce those troops faster. This gives you an extra edge for at least a couple of hours with each new technology that becomes available. Having the ability to produce some medium tanks a couple of hours sooner than the other players could swing the balance into your direction.

Upgrade time and cost is 20% less: resources are limited so having cheaper upgrades means that it's easier to upgrade your units in the early game. I'm immediately thinking about the level 2 upgrade for infantry on day 2 for example which costs a lot of food and goods. Especially goods in the early game happen to be scarce.

Speed decreased with 10%: This is a real bummer, imagine a battle with Pan-Asian which have a 20% speed increase. That's a difference of 30%. I' also thinking about Axis which has higher 15% hitpoints and deals 15% more damage. You don't want an Axis catching up with you and tearing you to shreds.

Overall I like these bonuses. You can play very resource efficient and you get an economical advantage trough-out the game. You can upgrade your army easily and maintain a highly upgraded army which gives you a dangerous edge. The longer the game goes on the more dangerous an Allies player becomes.

Unit bonuses:

Infantry (unarmoured) branch:

Motorized infantry upgrades become available 1/2 days later: This penalty puts you in the disadvantage with an Axis player.

Commando's have a 15% increased attack versus unarmoured units, move 15% faster and the research is unlocked two days sooner.

Paratroopers cost 15% less to produce and have 10% more hit points.

I'm not really enthusiast about those bonusses as both commando's and paratrooper are niche units that aren't used on a large scale. However they can turn the game around in certain situations. When you need them it's good to have the additional bonus. Overall I find the Allies infantry branch rather poor.

Ordnance branch:

Anti-Tank upgrades become available 1/2 days later: I can live with this as artillery, and SP artillery counters armour too.

SP artillery has 10% extra hit points and deals 15% more damage, the upgrades become 1/2 days sooner available. This makes the Allies SP artillery the best in the game.

I'm not really enthusiast about these bonusses either. The Allies ordnance branch is pretty weak overall. Yes I can imagine those SP Artillery stacks running around causing havoc but you need to survive the early game for that.

Tank branch:

Both Light and Medium tank research becomes available 1/2 days later

Tank Destroyer as 15% speed bonus, a 15% reduction in the production cost and the upgrades become 1/2 days sooner available.

Also here there are no significant bonusses. Luckily the Tank Destroyer is cheaper but even with it's 15% speed bonus it's still slow as Allies get a 10% speed penalty.

Also the tank branch of Allies is weak, as a matter of fact I wouldn't even bother making tanks with Allies at all. Axis have good armour, Comintern medium tanks and heavy tanks get a bonus and Pan Asian Light tanks get an additional speed bonus which makes them completely OP. You can't simply cut it with Allies tanks.

There's one light at the end of the tunnel which is the Allies Tank Destroyer, the best TD in the game. In combination with the best SP artillery in the game you should be able to stand your ground against the armoured units of other doctrines.

Air branch:

Interceptor upgrades become 1/2 days sooner available

Tactical bombers have 15% extra damage output against light armoured units, have a 15% extra range and the upgrades become 1/2 days sooner available.

Strategic bombers have both 15% extra attack range but they get 15% more hit points so they are harder to kill

With the Allies speed bonus the interceptor and Tactical bomber will be instrumental to stop your enemy and to support the advancement of your ground forces. The Allies tactical bomber is the best one in the game. With the increased range of Tactical bombers and interceptor upgrades that become available your range will be larger than Axis and Comintern. The strategic bomber can be useful to disrupt the enemy supply lines, industry, production, fortifications and airbases.. Especially with it's increased range since the 11th November patch.

Allies air force needs to be very careful while fighting Pan-Asian doctrine. Pan-Asian is not only 30% faster but their interceptors have 15% extra range, they deal 15% extra damage versus all planes and just like allies they unlock upgrades also 1/2 earlier so also here Allies have no advantage. The is makes the Pan-Asian doctrine extremely dangerous in air versus air combat. The can attack you fast and retreat faster and you aren't able to counter attack them. As interceptors are better in offense than in defence Allies airplanes will take significant damage while fighting Pan-Asian.

Navy:

Destroyers gets a 15% extra damage output versus submarines, moves 15% faster and the upgrades become 1/2 days sooner available

Submarines: upgrades 1/2 days later available

Aircraft carrier upgrades become 1/2 days sooner available.

As Allies go heavy on the air units an aircraft carrier upgrade that is sooner available means that you can transport more planes to support your beach landings. The destroyer with it's bonus makes it a perfect escort ship for convoys.

However it's still a very weak bonus as allies have a 10% speed penalty. Keep in mind that Pan-Asian battleships are OP and Comintern cruisers also get a good bonus. Axis both have 15% more hit points and deal 15% more damage which nullifies your destroyer bonus. Not to forget that Axis subs get an additional 15% speed increase, deal 15% more damage against ships.

Overall Allies has the weakest navy of all the doctrines.

Secret Branch

Nuclear rocket, bomber and bomb become available 2 days sooner.

The nuclear bomber gets an additional 15% range (just like their strategic bomber) and more importantly their nuclear bomber has 15% extra hitpoints which makes it harder to kill. As you all know, nuclear bombers can get killed easily by interceptors or by the AA level of land units. At least it increases the chance of success a bit.

That's all you get for secret branch bonusses. I doubt that many Allies players will be able to make it to day 18 to make use of it to turn the tide.

My opinion about Allies doctrine:

The Allies doctrine is a powerhouse if the player is left alone to grow stronger. The early game and mid game of Allies is weak to say the least. Yes they can produce their units 30% faster which means you might have a bit larger armies but you'll run also out of manpower faster. The unit bonuses aren't great and the doctrine doesn't excel in anything. This is without doubt the most difficult doctrine to play. Yes the lower research and upgrade cost means that you can get a high tech army faster and easier. However in the early game you don't have the resources available to upgrade your units. Allies is good in the hands of an experienced player. Allies can also be good for beginners as they tend to be less aggressive and make friends first which gives them time to develop their army. Still I'm not gonna hide it, I'm not a fan of the doctrine but I'll give it a try.

My strategy:

I'll try to exploit the few available bonuses so on land I will use stacks of Commando's, SP artillery and Tank destroyers. The commandos should deal with any unarmoured units and the tank destroyers against armoured units obviously and the SP artillery can support with ranged fire. Those land units will be supported by a large fleet of tactical bombers and interceptors. I haven't used Strategic Bombers up till now but as they get a bonus I'll give it a try. Navy is the Allies Achilles Heel that's for sure. So I'll try to stay away from sea battles and only use navy to keep my convoys safe at sea. In addition of these troops all use naval bombers and SP AA, they don't get bonusses but I'll need them to protect myself against an invasion and Axis Attack bombers.

Wish me luck, I'll need it :thumbsup: :thumbup: :wallbash

BMfox
Moderator
EN Community Support | Bytro Gmbh
Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BMfoxCallofWar
Found a bug or need help? Send a ticket here!

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

48 Replies

The 3min was just an example, can also be 10min or whatever, just as long as its within the flight range of your interceptors and still in flight range when your interceptors arrive at the attack location. It's the same amount of micromanagement required as doing this with other Doctrines. You said Allied Interceptors cannot chase the Panasian Interceptors due to the speed gap so I just wanted to clarify that with CoW's air mechanics it is absolutely possible to chase and catch a faster plane with a slower plane, so Doctrine's dont matter in that regard. If you have the micromanagement or activity needed for that is another question, but that's independent of Doctrine.

It wasnt a comment on general Doctrine balance.

freezy wrote:

The 3min was just an example, can also be 10min or whatever, just as long as its within the flight range of your interceptors and still in flight range when your interceptors arrive at the attack location. It's the same amount of micromanagement required as doing this with other Doctrines. You said Allied Interceptors cannot chase the Panasian Interceptors due to the speed gap so I just wanted to clarify that with CoW's air mechanics it is absolutely possible to chase and catch a faster plane with a slower plane, so Doctrine's dont matter in that regard. If you have the micromanagement or activity needed for that is another question, but that's independent of Doctrine.

It wasnt a comment on general Doctrine balance.

You still can only attack them when they fly in, not when they fly out, after they attacked your ground troops for example. My worry is that Pan Asian interceptors are simply too good: 20% movement speed, 30% more line of sight (huge advantage in air vs air), 15% extra range, 15% vs all planes, day of availability -1/-2. You have all that combine in one super fast unit and that against a doctrine which is 30% slower and highly depends on it's tactical bombers. I'm still convinced that the Allies vs Pan-Asian is broken. All the other doctrines are nicely balanced and there's not really a doctrine that's standing out against another.
BMfox
Moderator
EN Community Support | Bytro Gmbh
Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BMfoxCallofWar
Found a bug or need help? Send a ticket here!

Since kiting does not work on air battles I believe Allies still can compete with Pan asian air v air battles.

Although i do not mostly Fight Allies v Pan asian on the air but i do utilise This in air battles in general and therefore think that Pan asian does not Hold a significant domination of the Skies and the advantages will mostly be better used by higher end players.

"In my humble opinion, on the subject matter, topic and content discussed beforehand; I would like to humbly propose, convey my idea on the subject and remark; this, with the help of the afforementioned post" - Karl von Krass
"The Golden Spire is looking for members, Anyone with good sense of game mechanics and a discord account can apply"
Secretary of Nova0213

BMfox wrote:

You still can only attack them when they fly in, not when they fly out, after they attacked
No that's not correct, that's what I wanted to make clear here in my previous posts as I think this mechanic is misunderstood. You can totally attack them when they fly out even if they are faster than you. Your planes will still catch up even though they have lower speed. Their speed doesn't matter as long as they are still within range when the atack timer of your planes reaches 0.

The attack timer aka the travel time of your planes will only go downwards once you gave the attack command, it will never go upwards (e.g. because the distance becomes larger). Let's say the enemy planes are already 5min away from your province after their attack and you give the attack command to your planes at that moment. 5min later the enemy planes are already 12min away from your province and still 7min away from your planes, but your planes still attack them at that moment despite the large gap in distance. That's because your attack timer of 5min ran out at that moment. Your planes then perform a "jump" to the enemy plane position 7min away and still deal their damage to the enemy planes (this only works though if the enemy planes are not out of the flight range circle at that moment).

That is how it works currently in the engine. It is wonky but it basically allows your slower Allied planes to catch faster Pan Asian planes.

I hope it is clear now?

Karl von Krass wrote:

Since kiting does not work on air battles I believe Allies still can compete with Pan asian air v air battles.
Yes that's what I am telling, kiting doesn't work in the engine so speed of the aircraft is not a big factor when issuing attack commands onto enemy planes. It is a minor factor though because faster planes can get out of the flight range circle faster than slower planes.

I can see an advantage for pan asian interceptors but not a major one.

If kiting worked then Plane combat would take a Nosedive (Haha get it?)

"In my humble opinion, on the subject matter, topic and content discussed beforehand; I would like to humbly propose, convey my idea on the subject and remark; this, with the help of the afforementioned post" - Karl von Krass
"The Golden Spire is looking for members, Anyone with good sense of game mechanics and a discord account can apply"
Secretary of Nova0213

Hi BMFox, thanks for the guide, I find it very informative. You certainly are a class act with your respect for your in-game opponent. I wish all players were like that. As has been pointed out by others, joining with your coalition mates is a tremendous advantage, more than any amount of gold would have gotten you.

I have to ask, what happened to your sixth member Kansas? You said he left the discord chat. What happened next? Did you guys attack him, allow him to just go AI, or something else? I'm curious.

Also, how long did it take you to form your coalition? Did you do so on day one or did you try to conceal the fact your alliance was trying to take over the map for as long as possible?

I find it interesting you said North USA would try to play your alliance/coalition mates off against each other. I always research profiles of anyone in my vicinity very early in the game to look for worthy partners, but I understand why you didn't do that under the circumstances you joined this game under.

6thDragon wrote:

I have to ask, what happened to your sixth member Kansas? You said he left the discord chat. What happened next? Did you guys attack him, allow him to just go AI, or something else? I'm curious.
We've let him go AI and we didn't attack him as it was out of the way. The majority of our troops were in Asia.

6thDragon wrote:

Also, how long did it take you to form your coalition? Did you do so on day one or did you try to conceal the fact your alliance was trying to take over the map for as long as possible?
We only made the coalition once North America was united and that is was obvious that we worked together.

6thDragon wrote:

I find it interesting you said North USA would try to play your alliance/coalition mates off against each other. I always research profiles of anyone in my vicinity very early in the game to look for worthy partners, but I understand why you didn't do that under the circumstances you joined this game under.
It's more like N USA didn't check all the players profiles in his vicinity as otherwise he would have seen that we were all in the same alliance.
BMfox
Moderator
EN Community Support | Bytro Gmbh
Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BMfoxCallofWar
Found a bug or need help? Send a ticket here!

BMfox wrote:

6thDragon wrote:

I find it interesting you said North USA would try to play your alliance/coalition mates off against each other. I always research profiles of anyone in my vicinity very early in the game to look for worthy partners, but I understand why you didn't do that under the circumstances you joined this game under.
It's more like N USA didn't check all the players profiles in his vicinity as otherwise he would have seen that we were all in the same alliance.
I agree, they should have noticed that!

I believe assessing player profiles is an intermediate skill in the game. In my last game, there was an alliance acting discretely and I offered to help a nearby coalition of newbies against them. When I pointed out that they were all in the same alliance, two of the newbie coalition players messaged me back asking what proof I had they were coordinating because they hadn't formed a coalition yet. They had no idea what an alliance was. I had to explain it to them very step-by-step.

Perhaps that's an idea for you for an upcoming guide. How to assess other player profiles. You could even combine use of the newspaper for opposition research. I do both of these but could certainly learn a lot from someone with your experience.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Community Guides and Videos
Quick Launch