It's time to look at Axis infantry divisions.

[steve1]

Okay, but do you have anything substantive to add to the discussion besides complaining about people who are better at the game than you?

A common issue I see among Axis infantry divisions is overspecialized units that aren't strong enough in their specialized role to compete with the masses of Allied generalist units. A lot of these divisions rely on a min/maxing play style, where you screen for your specialist units with cheaper ones. For example, screening for self-propelled guns with captured French tanks or for Panzergrenadiers with 10-15pt disheartened troops. Unfortunately what often ends up happening in practice is that the combined strength of a lot of Allied units that are decent at more than one thing wipe through the fodder units and then kill off the specialist units (or worse, get the jump on the specialist units and then freely slaughter the fodder units — such a mistake is punished much less for the Allies).

This is especially evident in the wealth of 1v1 tournament replays we have for review thanks to shoutcasters, where these divisions don't have an ally to help cover their weaknesses and consequently are seen less frequently except for by players with a particular affinity for them. The poster child of this problem of course is the overpriced Jagdpanther that soaks up too many points to fight an equivalent point value of Allied combined arms, but it exists across all phases in most of these divisions.

I'm curious to see what the forum thinks of the 17. SS-Panzergrenadiers, the Axis infantry division absent from the discussion thus far. I suspect it's not a coincidence as I happen to think they're the strongest one of the lot, having access to versatile infantry with the combination of affordable(!) PzGrens/Stosstrupp, significantly better armor than most in the form of the elite Stug III and abundant Stug IVs, and an all-around strong AT selection.

To close down your first question, try rereading...

"When you experiment with these weak divs you mention, you get mashed up but it's these divs that can be interesting to try and get a tune out of"

More often than not you will lose with these divs. It's why playing with these divs is not always enjoyable because you will come up fave divs used by people who only way to win or rank higher. I actually quite like the idea of playing completely random divs and seeing what cones from it.

Regarding the 17th, I haven't played them for a while but remember their units as expensive and it's hard to cover a full front. I might be wrong. I know in good hands you will be up against continually rocket spewing art.

 

[darkfireslide]

I'm curious to see what the forum thinks of the 17. SS-Panzergrenadiers, the Axis infantry division absent from the discussion thus far. I suspect it's not a coincidence as I happen to think they're the strongest one of the lot, having access to versatile infantry with the combination of affordable(!) PzGrens/Stosstrupp, significantly better armor than most in the form of the elite Stug III and abundant Stug IVs, and an all-around strong AT selection.

17th SS is very meta for the reasons you listed, but it's not technically an infantry division, it's a mechanized division. But if you want to think of it as the best "infantry" division for Axis, that's completely fair, because it does play like one, and it's the best after LSSAH, 2. Panzer, and 9. Panzer. So 4th best, I guess, better on some maps than 9. It's one of the more well-rounded and fun to play Axis divisions and definitely the best infantry style deck for Axis.

 

[Mister Maf]

17th SS is very meta for the reasons you listed, but it's not technically an infantry division, it's a mechanized division. But if you want to think of it as the best "infantry" division for Axis, that's completely fair, because it does play like one, and it's the best after LSSAH, 2. Panzer, and 9. Panzer. So 4th best, I guess, better on some maps than 9. It's one of the more well-rounded and fun to play Axis divisions and definitely the best infantry style deck for Axis.

Ah, so it is. That makes sense.

To close down your first question, try rereading...

"When you experiment with these weak divs you mention, you get mashed up but it's these divs that can be interesting to try and get a tune out of"

More often than not you will lose with these divs. It's why playing with these divs is not always enjoyable because you will come up fave divs used by people who only way to win or rank higher. I actually quite like the idea of playing completely random divs and seeing what cones from it.

Regarding the 17th, I haven't played them for a while but remember their units as expensive and it's hard to cover a full front. I might be wrong. I know in good hands you will be up against continually rocket spewing art.

I did see this in your original post and did not consider it a substantive contribution to the discussion on how to improve a set of underpowered divisions. Your perspective in other words is that the entire selection of infantry divisions for one of the game's two factions should remain underpowered for the purpose of putting yourself at a disadvantage for fun. That's an untenable solution in a competitive multiplayer game. This isn't Wargame where there are so many combinations of factions and specializations on both sides such that some must inevitably be allowed to be weaker to preserve the balance of their combined power in coalition. The Axis has 14 divisions available to them, and none of them can pull a By Our Powers Combined like they can in Wargame — and out of all of them, the only good infantry deck apparently isn't even technically an infantry deck. In a game that breaks down every map into zones where both infantry and armor specializations have a role to play, this must be corrected if there is to be any semblance of inter-faction balance. If you want to play at a disadvantage, play against somebody who is better at the game than you.

Edit: I feel compelled to say that I get where you're coming from here because I too thoroughly enjoy the challenge of playing underpowered decks in Wargame. My default go-to is Canadian mechanized. Canadian mechanized is awful but just good enough to win with if I play well. But if I want to play seriously, well I can always fall back on bringing the rest of the Commonwealth also. Axis doesn't have that luxury when all of their infantry decks are subpar.

 

[steve1]

Ah, so it is. That makes sense.


I did see this in your original post and did not consider it a substantive contribution to the discussion on how to improve a set of underpowered divisions. Your perspective in other words is that the entire selection of infantry divisions for one of the game's two factions should remain underpowered for the purpose of putting yourself at a disadvantage for fun. That's an untenable solution in a competitive multiplayer game. This isn't Wargame where there are so many combinations of factions and specializations on both sides such that some must inevitably be allowed to be weaker to preserve the balance of their combined power in coalition. The Axis has 14 divisions available to them, and none of them can pull a By Our Powers Combined like they can in Wargame — and out of all of them, the only good infantry deck apparently isn't even technically an infantry deck. In a game that breaks down every map into zones where both infantry and armor specializations have a role to play, this must be corrected if there is to be any semblance of inter-faction balance. If you want to play at a disadvantage, play against somebody who is better at the game than you.

Edit: I feel compelled to say that I get where you're coming from here because I too thoroughly enjoy the challenge of playing underpowered decks in Wargame. My default go-to is Canadian mechanized. Canadian mechanized is awful but just good enough to win with if I play well. But if I want to play seriously, well I can always fall back on bringing the rest of the Commonwealth also. Axis doesn't have that luxury when all of their infantry decks are subpar.

I did not say that axis divs should remain underpowered. Only that i play them because they present different challenges, but because people generally play the go to allied divs I will consistently take a pasting which takes the fun away from using them.

I can not comment on how I think they should be improved for better balance because I don't have that in depth knowledge and the wrong suggestion can very likely break the div in another way, possibly making it OP, and removing the unique feel to the div.

I also said a random pairing would be good for 1v1 games but this isn't something you can make happen without using eugen designed stock divs or forcing a user to custom all divs first. A forced random div game is not going to happen. But is it any less likely than redoing the divs?

 

[Herr_Robert]

"Pro players" is an interesting term. These are just ranker obsessives and you usually see them play with the same OP divs, over and over again. Maybe calling them OP is harsh but they certainly are strong in most areas. When you experiment with these weak divs you mention, you get mashed up but it's these divs that can be interesting to try and get a tune out of them. Playing with the usual suspects like 2ID, 4AD etc gets formulaic and repetitive but the rankers love formulaic for their stats.

Eugen needs random div set in quick or ranked play to make playing these divs worth while.

I think he's talking about skilled players on the Discord - that may or may not play ranked/quickplay. I don't like playing ranked competitively myself because not knowing your opponent's division 1.) favors playing with OP divisions or 2.) favors Allied divisions if none of the players picked an OP div, since the Allies are far more versatile. Making divisions random wouldn't work because that would favor the Allies; they only have 1 truly bad division (6AB) while the Germans have 3 (12SS, Lehr and Pegasus), and the Allied divisions are better on average.

 

[steve1]

I think he's talking about skilled players on the Discord - that may or may not play ranked/quickplay. I don't like playing ranked competitively myself because not knowing your opponent's division 1.) favors playing with OP divisions or 2.) favors Allied divisions if none of the players picked an OP div, since the Allies are far more versatile. Making divisions random wouldn't work because that would favor the Allies; they only have 1 truly bad division (6AB) while the Germans have 3 (12SS, Lehr and Pegasus), and the Allied divisions are better on average.

That's very true. Random wouldnt work actually.

Funnily enough, those are divs are like trying to play with! I guess no more.

 

[Kent_Lang]

I enjoy playing the inf divs but the biggest gripe with luftlande is no early AA and low available AT. Bad AT and AA is a consistent problem for the Axis, especially early on and almost all their divs suffer from this even though allies get a lot of competitive tanks.

 

[zeimer]

All divisions have different playstyles. Choose what you like best. Lehr is said to be weak, but i solidly outplay oponents with it in non-ranked games(75% win ratio). Same for axis inf divisions, including 352th. When you have experience with the deck and that of oponent, you can move mountains.

 

[Wehrwolf81]

@darkfireslide
I very much agree to the topic opener. The question is, if Eugen still listens, if you post in these forums. After all SD 2 won't be published by Paradox. Haven't seen a staff member of Eugen in here for quite a while. You should post this directly at the Eugen forums in my opinion.

 

[Drang]

Unfortunately, this is an authentic representation of the capability of German formations. Unlike the allies, who attempted to keep all divisions at approximately similar levels of capability, German forces did have tiers of divisions, with some formations simply being less capable than their counterparts. That said, I do think a small increase in the availability, cheapness and earliness of availability of certain standard units - an extra STuG here or there, for example, or perhaps a few more B2s for 716, and maybe an extra support slot here or there, would be in order to help them out.

 

[piforums]

They the devs must try and please as many customers / gamers as they can so they keep it generic ??? Anyway, there are a lot of mods that change things many I think to ones liking but then how this rolls over to doing multiplayer with mods it may be a nightmare who knows.