what's your favourite doctrine

pan-Asian.

axis

axis, motorized infantry + tanks + sp anti air = blitzkrieg

Hard to say. Pan-Asian is the best early game but late game kinda just withers down into nothingness. Comintern is very stable early and late game but I hate that you can't ever get a good navy with Comintern (at least not without the numbers advantage) Axis is a classic because of blitzkrieg but you have to pay a heck ton of attention to your economy.

All I can say is that is it definitely not Allies

I'm split between Comintern and Pan Asian. I don't have a problem fielding a powerful navy with Comintern. I'd actually argue it's the best for the navy because of their cruisers. The problem with Comintern is air defense, they get delayed access to SPAA and interceptor upgrades. Pan Asian is the easiest to establish air superiority, has the increased speed and view range together with increased terrain bonuses make it very powerful in the hands of a skilled and active player. However, Comintern's day one ability to research rocket arty is strong in the early game and their decreased production costs can be a powerhouse in the mid and late game.

6thDragon wrote:

I don't have a problem fielding a powerful navy with Comintern. I'd actually argue it's the best for the navy because of their cruisers.

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

6thDragon wrote:

I don't have a problem fielding a powerful navy with Comintern. I'd actually argue it's the best for the navy because of their cruisers.

Really? I find that unless I extensively prioritize naval research, then I will never catch up to my opponents. Pan-Asian obviously has the battleship and naval bombers, Axis will utterly destroy you, and Allies always have the technological advantage (but is the easiest to counter as Comintern, since you can easily mass produce cruisers and destroyers). The reduced damage for me really effects the reliability of Comintern navy, dunno you tell me how you play...

6thDragon wrote:

_Pyth0n_ wrote:

6thDragon wrote:

I don't have a problem fielding a powerful navy with Comintern. I'd actually argue it's the best for the navy because of their cruisers.

Really? I find that unless I extensively prioritize naval research, then I will never catch up to my opponents. Pan-Asian obviously has the battleship and naval bombers, Axis will utterly destroy you, and Allies always have the technological advantage (but is the easiest to counter as Comintern, since you can easily mass produce cruisers and destroyers). The reduced damage for me really effects the reliability of Comintern navy, dunno you tell me how you play...

Cruisers are always the first thing I research on day one (and rocket arty). Once cruisers are done, I start researching arty. I crank out the level one cruisers until about day three/four. Day four is always researching SP arty and SP rocket arty...no exceptions. Then I'll research level three cruisers and upgrade them straight to level three. Subs and aircraft carriers are situational. I usually just focus on cruisers and destroyers and try for a 5/2 ratio. After day five, I always prioritize cruisers for research. I'll look at the opposition to determine how aggressively to prioritize researching/upgrading destroyers. If there are any strong axis players, I'll give it a higher priority. By ignoring battleships, I can usually keep cruisers at the max level of research after day five and acquire a lot of them (relatively speaking).

Idea's still sound tho, can counter basically anything else

You're not wrong that those would be a challenge. The most challenging naval encounter I had was against a strong Axis island player who put up a really good fight with mainly battleships and naval bombers. He went after my partner when he was in a vulnerable position and it took both of us to bring him down. Although in our defense, we both started landlocked.

However, consider the economic side of it. Battleships are resource hogs and axis cost an extra 10%. Cruisers are much more resource friendly and Comintern 15% get a production cost discount. I can probably get two Comintern cruisers for every axis battleship. The axis player would still be smart to also research and build a cruiser or two to defend against naval bombers and a destroyer or two to defend against subs (I'm doing the same, but cruisers are less vulnerable to subs compared to battleships). But by focusing on cruisers only, it's easy to give them research priority and keep them upgraded.

6thDragon wrote:

However, consider the economic side of it. Battleships are resource hogs and axis cost an extra 10%. Cruisers are much more resource friendly and Comintern 15% get a production cost discount. I can probably get two Comintern cruisers for every axis battleship ... focusing on cruisers only, it's easy to give them research priority and keep them upgraded.

Bingo, you win the efficiency prize.

Comintern level 3 cruiser has 81 HP. I'm right now staring at a stack of Allied level 2 battleships which have 60 HP each. They do 1.6 times the damage of my cruisers. With a 2:1 numbers advantage, my cruiser navy can easily match the Allies battleship navy mano a mano. And it's much faster (1.5 times faster) and shrugs off naval bombers.

10 Commie cruisers = 810 HP and 68 damage per round.

5 Allied battleships = 300 HP and 55 damage per round.

Ugly battle for the Allies.

After 5 rounds, the Allied fleet will be gone, and the Commie cruisers will be at ~70% strength.

Just add 1 destroyer to the stack to find lurking subs, and your navy can handle anything.

Yeah, cruisers are better at naval battles than battleships. Actually the main USP of battleships is coastal bombardment, at which they're better than cruisers. As that is an important fleet role, it counts for something!

Commiterm, just spam arty and heavy tanks sit back and relax

Pan-Asian is best

I prefer the commintern doctrine - It allows mass production of troops (low cost). I have noticed that spamming helps in this game a lot. It also enables you to put more resources to jazz up your economy.

One con, might be the less damage part tho- you continuously need to research new levels to nullify the advantage your opponents have.

Overall i have won whenever I have taken Russia or any similar nation.

Allies. Many of you may dislike this doctrine, but it is quite good. You are able to mass produce units at an impossible rate in the first few days. I got to over 60 units in the first four days in game. This doctrine is useful for building a large navy to dominate the oceans. As New Zealand I had a navy of 20 battleships lvl 5, 20 cruisers lvl 4, 40 destroyers lvl 5, and 30 submarines lvl 6. Also, your research costs and speed are reduced giving you an advantage.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Yeah, cruisers are better at naval battles than battleships. Actually the main USP of battleships is coastal bombardment, at which they're better than cruisers. As that is an important fleet role, it counts for something!

vietcong2005 wrote:

Allies. Many of you may dislike this doctrine, but it is quite good. You are able to mass produce units at an impossible rate in the first few days. I got to over 60 units in the first four days in game. This doctrine is useful for building a large navy to dominate the oceans. As New Zealand I had a navy of 20 battleships lvl 5, 20 cruisers lvl 4, 40 destroyers lvl 5, and 30 submarines lvl 6. Also, your research costs and speed are reduced giving you an advantage.

Pan-Asian, I find them the best because of their air superiority, for someone that relies on air support 100% of the time it's the best, fighting other doctrines may be hard but if the bombers can do their job then you may not even need to fight them.

Sewur wrote:

Omg playing New Zealand must be real pain -10% movement speed in such isolated nation... It must take forever to reach mainland meanwhile you are surrounded by 20% faster pan-asians

Exactly.

I did this a few games ago. I won, but it was torture.

I like Comintern since they scale safely, although their early game is kinda slow. Late game they're probably the best doctrine. Their -10% damage seems to balance their stronger artillery but you will feel their doctrine buffs later on.

Allies also slow, and if enemy has anti air you gonna struggle.

Havent tried it but it seems like Comintern counters them. Allies rely on mechanized troops and Comintern has strong artillery which handles them well and counters Allies' SP artillery. If you build enough interceptors to defend Allies' Tactical Bombers you are good to go. Also you outscale them if you focus on limited amount of troops so you arent outleveled.

Pan-asians also counter them with huge speed difference and stronger interceptors.

So it seems to be kinda lame doctrine, which is quite safe and slow and can adapt to others but not really good in anything.

Axis has nice units buffs and their early rush is quite strong especially if you border any other doctrine. If you joined a game a couple hours ahead of your opponent you can rush him before he has a chance to react. You can get one city safely with big stack and play on defense untill your opponent leaves the game.

I feel like they fall off later on though.

Pan-asians are fun if you are going to stay active all day long (maybe night too) and dominate early game. Good thing is that this doctrine doesnt border axis anywhere so you wont die at first day. But they do border Allies so you can abuse that.

But playing that doctrine you can feel pressure to keep conquering and being the first one to attack or you will end up with big stack going at you with no way of stopping it. If you are even to others then you are behind. You can always bunker up in Australia though. No one will try to even touch you because they are probably invested in land troops and wont like to provoke naval war .