GUIDE: Doctrines.

Hello.

I have been playing on the 100 player maps since they were released. Each doctrine requires a massive reevaluation of how to play the game, to the point where your doctrine choice matters more than anything else. I will evaluate the strengths of units and the games doctrines. First let me evaluate all the units as a whole. Then I'll break down the strengths of the doctrines. Comintern, Allies, and Pan-Asian all require micromanaging, while Axis can just put units on a path to the enemy or on a defensive position and trust with relative confidence that they will still be there in the morning. Therefore Axis is the best for those that don't play this game 24/7, and is the easiest doctrine to win as. Having 15% attack power AND 15% health is absolutely amazing and a 10% resource penalty ends up being nothing.

Consider all of Axis units. Each one can be extremely effective thanks to the doctrine buff that makes EVERY UNIT better than those of basically any other doctrine. If you want to use anti-tanks as Axis, do it. Want to make tanks, do it. Focus on ships or subs? Do it. I'll show you what I mean:

Militia: Militia are useless in the early game for axis, but great at end game. At the early game you are nearly always better building infantry no matter the doctrine. At end game however, high level militia are very cheap to build, have stealth, and have an extremely strong state baseline. When other units like motorized infantry are starting to take 12+ hours to build, you can count on militia.

Infantry: Axis infantry aren't the best to make but are the best infantry in the game. They have +15% attack and HP. Comintern just gets a research buff so can make higher level ones a little faster.

Moto Infantry: Get a +15% move speed to an already super fast unit. Also get +15% damage against infantry ONTOP of the +15% damage doctrine bonus for +30% more damage! Amazing unit to use as Axis.

Mech Infantry: Honestly a bit expensive to use but as Axis you get them earlier than everyone. Great to use side by side with moto infantry. When level 3 or 4 moto infantry start taking a long time to produce, try switching to level 1 mechanized infantry from the same production plants and you will see that you can suddenly produce capable units for a fraction of time.

Commando: Garbage but still better than anyone elses. They actually do the same damage to infantry as Allied commandos but are better at everything else since Allied commandos have +15% to infantry but axis has +15% to everything AND 15% more health.

Paratroopers: A waste of resources but situationally very useful. I once saw paratroopers flown across the med to take an enemies capital instantly. Yours are the best if you do make them. Sure, allies get +10% health bonus, but axis get +15% and +15% damage!

Artillery: You get artillery available a little later than everyone else at +1/+2, but yours is the best in the game! Pan-Asian gets a +15% artillery bonus to infantry which is great, but you get a +15% artillery bonus to everything!

Anti-tank: Probably your worst unit. This would be on-par with soviet anti-tank, but even though they get +15% to light armor and heavy tank, they get -10% damage overall so they are worse than you.

Anti-air: These units are amazing and have a historical buff against heavy tanks as the german 88 and 105 flak guns were used against tanks in WW2! They also have a +15% bonus to aircraft giving you +30% more damage than any other doctrine and are the ONLY doctrine with anti-air specific bonus. These puppies are good, honestly I build these towards end-game in place of anti-tank. With the city bonus they get, a small stack of them just makes cities unconquerable unless they hit you with artillery fire.

SP Arty: Kinda expensive, and ordinance plants are expensive to get to high level and are limited in what they can build. Allies get +10% to heavy armor and +10% hitpoints. You get +15% to both, lol. They just get theirs -1/-2.

SP Anti-Air: You get these before everyone else, and yours are strictly better! Allies get them 0/0. Comintern and pan-asian get them +1/+2. You get them -1/-2! Nuff said.

Like, do I even need to keep going? Axis is just better at everything. They even have the battleships in the game. Wait, right? BATTLESHIPS? Axis are known for subs, how can they have the best battleships? Pan-Asian has the best battleships right? Nope, their only advantage is that they get them earlier than axis. Pan-asian battleships have +10% health and damage, however that health buff only brings their units up to +0% since all their units have -10%! This means that Axis battleships, with +15% health and +15 damage from their doctrine bonus are actually better than even the might yamato!! Isn't that nuts? TLDR: Play Axis.

Allies: Unit doctrine bonuses:

Allies: Basic doctrine bonuses.

-30% production time.

-25% research cost.

-20% upgrade cost / time.

-10% move speed.

Allied Infantry:

Your infantry are weak, likely the worst in the game. Motorized infantry which are a staple scout unit in this game get an availability research penalty of one day. You get a minor buff to commandos and paratroopers but those are generally luxury units. You get a HP buff to Mechanized infantry and a reduction in unit cost but they are already expensive and take a long time to produce which doesn't make them any more attractive. Your best bet if you need infantry is to just level up basic infantry as high as possible and supplement them with ordinance and air power. Your infantry are bad. Build the infantry you need to take and hold cities and don't get too tricky.

Allies Ordinance:

Your ordinance is all bad, likely the worst in the game. Wait, what? You read that right. You don't get any buffs to any counter-units (anti-air, anti-tanks) which makes you generally rely on infantry alone for holding ground. SP artillery is amazing and you get a buff to it's damage against heavy tanks and it's... uh...health but it is still an expensive premium unit. Would it not be better to just completely forgo investment in ordinance foundries?

Allies Tanks:

Your tanks are all bad, likely the worst in the game. WAIT? WHAT? What can I say, the allies strength is really quantity. They should be swapped with Comintern. Both your light and medium tanks get a research penalty. Tank destroyers are a fun unit to use and you get a 15% production cost decrease and speed bonus of 15%, but even with that speed bonus they are only 5% faster than other doctrines because of your -10% speed penalty! While fun, they aren't really worth it because they aren't flexible enough to do more than defense. This makes your tanks also sub-par.

Allies Aircraft:

Aircraft. Aircraft make up for all the downfalls of your other units. If you want to play as the allies, learn all the mechanics of aircraft. Your interceptors can be researched gotten a day earlier than axis or comintern which keeps your skies clear of enemy aircraft. Then you have range bonuses on tactical bombers and strategic bombers that can absolutely cut down enemy infantry or destroy their cities and infrastructure. Just don't let your planes die on the runway.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

39 Replies

Here is an attempt to include the comintern upkeep bonus of -30%. On average over all resource types and all units the upkeep / production is 0.047688 (4.77%). To do this properly you would need to integrate the daily upkeep over the number of days a unit exists, but to help think about it let's just try 5 and 10 days.

# 5 days upkeep

axis 1.15 / ( 1.1 + 0.047688 * 5) = 0.8592092

com 0.9 / ( 0.85 + 0.047688 * 0.7 * 5) = 0.8850358

# 10 days upkeep

axis 1.15 / ( 1.1 + 0.047688 * 5) = 0.72928821

com 0.9 / ( 0.85 + 0.047688 * 0.7 * 5) = 0.76025328

So over 5 days of upkeep the axis unit is 0.8592092/0.8850358 -> 97.08% as effective as comintern in terms of dmg/cost and over 10 days it's 0.72928821/0.76025328 -> 95.93%. At 20 days it drops to 94.42%.

So while the daily upkeep is a factor it doesn't lead to an overwhelming difference.

DxC wrote:

I'm not quite following your math there. Ignoring the fact that Axis also get's a 15% HP boost and just focusing on the damage per production cost:

axis 1.15 / 1.1 = 1.045454

com 0.9 /.85 = 1.058823529

So considering only the damage / production cost, comintern is slightly better. However, with stronger per unit damage and the max stack damage contribution of 10, the strong axis stacks are much more effective, especially in non ranged combat. If you are able to range kill everything and not take damage then comintern would have a slight advantage. Otherwise axis is much better due to it's per round damage potential alone, without even considering it's HP boost.

Why ignore the HP boost? I count troop strenght as health and damage, so Axis is 15% stronger overall and costs 10% more so it's 5% stronger than normal troop, agree?

In Commitern you have 15% percent cheaper troops so they would be 15% stronger than normal troop without debuff. Then with the -10% damage it would count as 5% weaker troops because health is the same. So overall it's 10% stronger troop compared to normal.

I don't know the math on big stacks since only 10 troops deal damage, so Axis might be stronger here?

So damage comparison:

axis 1.15 / 1.1 = 1.045454

com 0.9 / .85 = 1.058823

Commitern about 1% better at damage

Health comparison:

axis 1.15 / 1.1 = 1.045454

com 1 / 0.85 = 1.176470

Commitern about 13% better at health

Counting strength as health + damage:

axis 1.15 / 1.1 = 1.045454

com 0.95(?) / .85 = 1.117647

Commitern about 7% better

+ as posted above if you count -30% upkeep bonus you can add couple percent to cost effectiveness

Sewur wrote:

Why ignore the HP boost?
I was trying to give comintern a chance.

Sewur wrote:

I count troop strenght as health and damage, so Axis is 15% stronger overall and costs 10% more so it's 5% stronger than normal troop, agree?
No, you can't simply combine damage percentages and production percentages. You need to calculate damage / cost.

Sewur wrote:

Then with the -10% damage it would count as 5% weaker troops because health is the same.
You're not quite thinking about correctly. Again, you can't simply add and subtract damage percentage and cost percentages.

DxC wrote:

I was trying to give comintern a chance.
I mean commitern is way better at health. You probably commented before i edited the post with more accurate math(your style)?

Sewur wrote:

I mean commitern is way better at health.
I'm not sure where you are getting that. Comintern doesn't get any across the board HP boost. Axis get's +15% HP though. Also, besides combining damage and cost modifiers the way you were you also can't simply add damage and HP modifiers.

DxC wrote:

Sewur wrote:

I mean commitern is way better at health.
I'm not sure where you are getting that. Comintern doesn't get any across the board HP boost. Axis get's +15% HP though. Also, besides combining damage and cost modifiers the way you were you also can't simply add damage and HP modifiers.
damage:

axis 1.15 / 1.1 = 1.045454

com 0.9 / .85 = 1.058823

Comitern about 1% better at damage

health:

axis 1.15 / 1.1 = 1.045454

com 1 / 0.85 = 1.176470

Comitern about 13% better at health

Thats where i get that commies are better at health per cost. And thats significant as you can see. The same way you compare damage so i dont understand where's the problem. Ok so no adding anything Comintern is better at damage alone and health alone per cost

Ok, you are just comparing the HP/cost alone. I was confused by your previous wording. Yeah, the comi HP/cost is quite a bit better even though Axis get's an HP boost.

So given the HP advantage of comintern, does it compensate for the per round attack potential of axis? I did a simple little experiment in dxcalc to test this. In this test axis did a bit better, but there may be other tests where you keep everything as even as possible and comintern comes out better. I'm not sure, but here is what I did. In general, you can build about 12.94 comintern units for each 10 axis units for an equal amount of resources, so we'll use a stack of 10 axis infantry vs 13 comintern infantry. We'll have them attack each other, but it turns out that whoever strikes first loses by a large margin either way. So, we'll look at the lost HP the winner loses when it doesn't strike first. The first image is Axis striking first where comintern wins but loses 11 units (-190.86 HP) over 6 rounds. The second image is of comintern striking first where axis wins but loses 2 units (-122.75 HP) over 4 rounds. So at least in this particular scenario it seems that the axis per round power outweighs the comintern HP advantage. Note that splitting the comintern stack into say two stacks of 7 and 6 units and attacking with both is much worse for comintern where it actually loses even with axis strikes first and axis only loses 107.92 HP. Forgive me if I missed something or made an error.

Forum attachmentForum attachment

I tried with mechanized infantry 4 Axis and 5 Comintern and Com won with 83% HP so i guess untill you fight with stacks with less than 10 troops you will win as Com.

But there must be a flow in calculator since Axis army was slightly more expensive and all died but still calc shows that Com lost more resources.

It isn't really fair to compare with commies overstacked... maybe try it with 6-8?

K.Rokossovski wrote:

It isn't really fair to compare with commies overstacked... maybe try it with 6-8?
with 6 vs 8 comi does better, but that also a little unfair since 6/8 gives comi's more units than the cost of the 6 axis. Do you mean 10/13 is unfair because it is unlikely or uncommon to have a stack of 10 axis units in a melee fight?

The point was to show that a full stack of axis units is more powerful. Of course, when you reduce the stack size the comi's will do better. We already know that comi's attack potential per resource is slightly better than axis and it's HP per resource is quite a bit better.

I think the intent of the game mechanics is to give Axis more powerful stacks. They should win most head-to-head battles. But Comintern should have more stacks in play, because they can build and maintain them more easily. That gives Comintern an advantage in a longer war fought on a large battlefield.

Translating this to the battle calculator, 10 Axis tanks beat 10 Comintern tanks (of course) but then a fresh stack of 10 Comintern tanks comes along and wins. This goes back and forth, sometimes the Axis stack can survive 2 battles, and in the end we expect to see a decimated Comintern stack #13 that just barely beat Axis stack #10.

DxC wrote:

K.Rokossovski wrote:

It isn't really fair to compare with commies overstacked... maybe try it with 6-8?
with 6 vs 8 comi does better, but that also a little unfair since 6/8 gives comi's more units than the cost of the 6 axis. Do you mean 10/13 is unfair because it is unlikely or uncommon to have a stack of 10 axis units in a melee fight?
I mean it is unfair because the 13-stack is overstacked, making it less effective in combat anyway.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

DxC wrote:

K.Rokossovski wrote:

It isn't really fair to compare with commies overstacked... maybe try it with 6-8?
with 6 vs 8 comi does better, but that also a little unfair since 6/8 gives comi's more units than the cost of the 6 axis. Do you mean 10/13 is unfair because it is unlikely or uncommon to have a stack of 10 axis units in a melee fight?
I mean it is unfair because the 13-stack is overstacked, making it less effective in combat anyway.
more health though and more damage to other armour classes like 10 antitank with 10 infantey
知己知彼,百战不殆

K.Rokossovski wrote:

I mean it is unfair because the 13-stack is overstacked, making it less effective in combat anyway.
But it seems like the most effective counter using 13 units. You could overstack both to make it not appear so imbalanced, like, 20 axis vs 26 comi. Axis will still win that. Or you could make 3 10x stacks of axis vs 4 s10x tacks of comi which gives comi a bit extra, and axis still wins regardless of who strikes first. To clarify the point I was trying to make, I don't think axis is necessarily better than comi overall. But in a hypothetical and unrealistic scenario where axis always has a full stack and all battles are melee where both sides attack (first strike random), then axis will outproduce comi in terms of firepower, because comi would lose more than their production advantage could make up for. I guess the most realistic situation that would be close this such a scenario would be where you use mostly air as axis and keep your planes in stacks of 10 or more all the time.

Your ~1.3:1 ratio of comintern to axis, is that production cost only or does it try to account for the (admittedly difficult to calculate) effect of also paying less for upkeep.

jubjub bird wrote:

effect of also paying less for upkeep

You can check this post regarding the effect of upkeep: GUIDE: Doctrines. I didn't directly include this in the 1.3:1 but I did round the 12.94 to 13 which accounts for some of the difference.

z00mz00m wrote:

I think the intent of the game mechanics is to give Axis more powerful stacks. They should win most head-to-head battles. But Comintern should have more stacks in play, because they can build and maintain them more easily. That gives Comintern an advantage in a longer war fought on a large battlefield.

Translating this to the battle calculator, 10 Axis tanks beat 10 Comintern tanks (of course) but then a fresh stack of 10 Comintern tanks comes along and wins. This goes back and forth, sometimes the Axis stack can survive 2 battles, and in the end we expect to see a decimated Comintern stack #13 that just barely beat Axis stack #10.

Yes :) The whole power vs. quantity concept.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Discussions
Quick Launch