The Propaganda Ministry Calls for Replays

Yes indeed ladies and gentlemen. The Propagandacast is spreading out a bit in material to cover and is now going to cover the EF mod a bit as well. All depends on how well it actually goes in terms of getting replays. If i get none, well i can't cast anything. And i'll try and perhaps get some matches with the mod myself.

Until then, do send in replays to [email redacted] Details like length of game, number of players, name of them, who you are in the game. Things like that are quite appreciated. And certainly also marking the email and replay as EF mod would make it much easier for me to sort it out with all the other replays :)

So cheers to all of you and hope to get some replays.

- Imperial Dane.

P.S. And as some have pointed out. In case you don't know my channel. Why not go have a look ?
http://www.youtube.com/user/Propagandacast?feature=mhee

Daily Episodes, and currently got an archive with over 500 episodes. All CoH.

Last edited July 21, 2012 at 11:17 PM by Imperial Dane

Are you a shoutcaster or something?

That i am indeed good sir. And sadly i forgot to make that clear in the first post silly me.

But i am the guy who runs the Propagandacast :
http://www.youtube.com/user/Propagandacast?feature=mhee
Daily Episodes. and currently over 500 episodes.

Never thought Propagandacast to have interest in EF, as a viewer of your shoutcast (though not a frequent viewer) this is a good news... ;D

Sadly I don't have any reply but I guess you can see the current Great War Tournament for source of replay...
Some of the games there are worthy to view and shoutcast...

Hope it helps somehow...

Well here is the first Episode :
http://youtu.be/bja0MY-iSI0

I'll probably do these once a week unless there turns out to be a larger demand for them.

i realy like the shoutcast :D

looking forward to see more EF casts in the future XD

Yes, was a very good cast for a first time EF guy O0

Wow nice shoutcasts always enjoyed them, even before you made the EF ones ;).

Small note:

The Command Squad doesn't provide a nearby bonus (like brit officers). It gives a global bonus to every infantry unit when gaining veterancy.

Already had several point that one out to me :) But i''ll keep that in mind for the future. Still getting the hang of all of this :)

But glad you all liked it.

Took some time, but i watched some replays that i still have in my folder and picked the best ones.

I can´t describe every game (8 replays) but one is remarkable: Darcreaver vs. Glimmerman133 (he plays decent on this one ;) ) on Karachev

3 heavy mortar + RHS urban doctrine with sniper ace you hardly see normally. In the end glimz crushed him with 3 panthers and a tiger ace.


Other games are mostly 2vs2 games, decent to GG ones.

HF casting!

(you have to log in to see the file below)

Last edited August 6, 2012 at 5:04 PM by Killar

Cool stuff, although some where the soviets win would be nice too :P This is the Propagandacast and not the People's commisariat for Glorious socialist truth. But it does need a bit of variation ;)

But keep on sending them in or linking them or whatever :)

And a new Episode is up.

Watch as the 23rd Tank Corps hammers into the lines of the 147th Infantrie division desperately holding on until Panzers can arrive to stem the Red Tide.. Will it be enough though ?
http://youtu.be/PM5UDfiD2kw

Where do u get these names from?

A bit memory, a bit of .. artistic license in the basic rules of numbers and naming. Usually infantry units would run up to several hundreds, armour units with a few excepts were usually below that.

Otherwise the trick is to remember that the soviets used some different naming conventions, either for cultural or deception purposes. But generally with the except for rifle divisions i think. (and even then they were not fully equal to a western infantry division) They were generally given a larger unit designation. So what would be the equivalent of a western tank division was a Tank corps, cavalry would be cavalry corps and so on. And a soviet corps would be an army. And thus it would go on.

Also one thing is that the soviets did have a bigger and more powerful formation than the Tank corps, the Mechanized corps. Which was a more strong and more combined arms oriented formation, with more infantry, more assets in general. A tank corps would have a few more tanks, but that was it.

Imperial Dane if you want to be particularly creative with a Soviet unit name use Independent xxxx Division (or whatever other unit of size you would like).

My great-grandfather was called for retraining right before Barbarossa and was assigned to an Independent Sapper Division as a Politruk (a Commissar of sorts). Records my family has found indicate that this was in fact a NKVD division created for assault purposes, not a sapper division of any sort.

So if you think it was a particularly harsh, tough or entertaining match I suggest you give the Soviet divisions fighting in it an Independent nomenclature. That or a Guards nomenclature :P .

haha nice new cast XD

the two most epic quotes are just

he makes me a pretty sad propaganda caster XD
and if he means with ridiculous his own performance then yes :P


im realy looking forward to see the next cast XD

Same, I used to (and still do I guess) watch a lot of your regular casts so it's nice to see you moving onto EF.

About the IS-3... it was going to be reserved for the campaign at first, I believe we were we going to add in an IS-2 'Ace' as there was some demand for a turreted 'Super tank' to replace the ISU-152 as a reward, but then we gained access to an animated IS-3 model. Would have been a shame to let the IS-3 sit in our model inventory while the campaign was barely off the ground, so it wormed itself into the regular arsenal. Still, we're not aiming for realism here, Relic's base game also has it's quirky inaccuracies. ;)

IS-3 seems to be really strong in this cast, gladly we have taken care of it ;D... a bit.

Not a very good game but props for the shoutcast Dane :D! I hope you get better games in the future.

Well the next round axis shall win again, right? You have lots of good replays for that matter :D

Well i've certainly gotten the impression that the IS-3 is a pain in the arse to deal with, in particular when people then more or less throws in an IS-2 or .. two. and then throws in some mechanics. A bit too much synergy right there.

Still not sure why the soviets needed to be able to build an IS-2 instead of having it as a doctrinal call in.

No matter how much I agree with that statement, I think it is too late to make something about it. IMO IS2 would have fit on propaganda.

Imperial wrote:
Well i've certainly gotten the impression that the IS-3 is a pain in the arse to deal with, in particular when people then more or less throws in an IS-2 or .. two. and then throws in some mechanics. A bit too much synergy right there.

Still not sure why the soviets needed to be able to build an IS-2 instead of having it as a doctrinal call in.

That is the correct question :P

Imo there was no need to add the IS3 at all. ISU152 would have been great there alone.

blackbishop wrote:
No matter how much I agree with that statement, I think it is too late to make something about it. IMO IS2 would have fit on propaganda.

Super Arty + Super tanks = Super OP

Just look at armour doctrine

On the other hand we balanced the IS2 so nice that its stats fit very well now and represent the real life spot of an IS2 if you look at the strengh compared to Panther, Tiger and KT.

Last edited July 30, 2012 at 11:00 PM by Killar

Yeah, I don't demerit the job you have done, but sometimes I have that feeling when looking at the IS-2 ;D.

blackbishop wrote:
Yeah, I don't demerit the job you have done, but sometimes I have that feeling when looking at the IS-2 ;D.

hehe i know what you mean.

Well i was just saying :P Just seems a bit off. In particular when most people then proceed to largely ignore the entire tank hall and go straight for the IS-2s as soon as they can. Throw in an IS-3.. and well. Go figure.

Can something be done about ? .. As long as you have the manpower to do it i suppose.

Anyways, still open for replays and what not.

Imperial wrote:
Well i was just saying :P Just seems a bit off. In particular when most people then proceed to largely ignore the entire tank hall and go straight for the IS-2s as soon as they can. Throw in an IS-3.. and well. Go figure.

Can something be done about ? .. As long as you have the manpower to do it i suppose.

Anyways, still open for replays and what not.

It's only worth going IS 2 directly if you invested into both Tier 2 upgrades already. If you only teched one upgrade or even none at all it's actually more cost efficient to build T34-85. Those tanks are spammable and have a very powerful gun with a good rate of fire (so they're better as anti infantry because they shoot faster and hit more often). They also perform extremely well against JPs, Hetzers, Panthers, and even Tigers for their cost (400mp/90 fuel).

If you don't believe me watch this game: click

I think removing IS3 would fix the problems. Its just a IS2 on steroids and doesnt offer a different gameplay element.

That would be my immediate suggestion.

@Darcreaver: I don't deny it's power. But largely it seems like people go for the IS2 :P In particular when they also have an IS3. So far that game i showed was really the only replay i had where the T-34 was used in any number that exceeded 2.

Personally I don't like IS-2 because they move slow, shoot slow. That's why IS3 is there, no need to tech - faster, better and thicker IS-2. But it's OP. T34 was the core tank of Soviets in WW2 so I think removing IS-3 and putting IS-2 to this role would be more logical. I even don't use KV Tanks because they are damn slow- a PAK magnet. T-34 is quite awesome tank and has to be used more by removing OP IS-3 and using IS-2 as a Doctrinal Tank.

I think it's fine as is except for the historical correctness. It's more of a King Tiger like counterpart.

EDIT: Speaking of the placement in the mod, that is. I don't think much major design will be changed with soviets. Stat wise, I have a couple things I'd like to change on the IS3.

Last edited July 31, 2012 at 11:53 PM by Cranialwizard

You could always replace the IS-2 with a IS-1 (IS-85) which is the armor of the IS-2 and and the 85mm gun of the T-34/85 as well as move the IS-2 into the IS-3 slot. Then again you could just get rid of the IS-3 as its a reward for the ISU-152.

I'm fairly sure the IS-1 served in a limited amount, with a similar role as the KV-85.

But honestly I think the IS-3 just needs a slight nerf and that's really it.

Quote
EDIT: Speaking of the placement in the mod, that is. I don't think much major design will be changed with soviets. Stat wise, I have a couple things I'd like to change on the IS3.

Quote
But honestly I think the IS-3 just needs a slight nerf and that's really it.

Already done:
- rear armor penetration of IS3 for all at weapons is now on IS2 level
- reduced damage of schreck and pak vs IS3 is now on IS2 level

Meaning that IS3 will be as strong as it was at the front (sloped and thicker armor should stay) but weaker at the rear and AT weapons will deal normal damage. Double schreck grens will be a thread for the IS3 now. What made the IS3 op was that no weapon could deal with it.

Just read something about the IS1. Its actually a 85mm turret on a IS chassis, which is actually very similar to a KV85 soviets have already (concept of putting a 85mm gun onto a heavy tank).

If something will be changed then IS2 replace IS3 and KV tanks will stay as rewards. This makes the most sense to me.

Last edited August 1, 2012 at 12:16 AM by Killar

But what will replace the IS-2 in that case?

Nothing. The 85mm gun is already designed to fight Panther and Tiger.

Hrmm, that seems like it may create some back-lash.

The IS-3 nerfs look good.  The problem with the IS-3 before was that shrecks were not a threat at all.  The IS-3 gun could rip apart Grens and PGs while their shrecks would do minimal damage to it.  If I had one more suggestion, I would suggest the Wehrmacht Panthers get a slight buff versus the IS-3 too.  At the moment they have a very hard time penetrating the IS-3 for what they cost (600 manpower 110 fuel).  The IS-3's resilience to the Panther gun could then be buffed back to its current state with each level of vet.

I would not like to have the IS-2 replaced with the IS-3 because I think Soviets need buildable IS-2s to deal with Panthers.  They had a lot of IS-2s historically anyways, so it makes no sense they should be limited to 1.  However, I wouldn't mind if a "IS-2 Ace" replaced the IS-3 for historical accuracy (stats could be the same), as I suggested a long time ago when the IS-3 first came out.

Last edited August 1, 2012 at 1:39 AM by Yauz

Or you could just buff the damage of the T34-85 vs the Panther a bit more. The gun was in terms of damage more powerful than a panther. But it had lesser penetration due to a lack of velocity.

I mean all those changes could initially cause some problems, but on the other hand. Will they ever get better if they can just rely on the IS-crutch ? Because to a larger extent. It seems like that when people just ignore every tank in the tank hall and go straight for the IS-2.

And of course the meta-game always changes a bit.. But it seems to have gotten stuck on the IS tanks. Simply because that amount of power is considerably easier to get your hands on in comparison with other heavy armour.

IS-2s actually have fairly high tech costs and aren't very cost efficient compared to T-34/85s. The overuse of IS-2s is more due to their survivability against Paks and Shreks than their performance vs Panthers. T-34/85s are very cost efficient against these but go down quite quickly against Paks and Shreks. It might be more worthwhile to nerf the IS-2 vs Paks and Shreks but it is actually supposed to be a breakthrough tank rather than a tank hunter and it fits its role quite well at the moment.

Generally, T-34/85s are a better tech if you have gone T2, because you get a tank hunter and may use support weapons to clear paks/grens etc. IS-2 is a better tech if you rushed T3 because you already have one of the two expensive tank hall upgrades and will need something that is resistant to Paks.

Last edited August 1, 2012 at 9:23 AM by GodlikeDennis

Yauz wrote:
The IS-3 nerfs look good.  The problem with the IS-3 before was that shrecks were not a threat at all.  The IS-3 gun could rip apart Grens and PGs while their shrecks would do minimal damage to it.  If I had one more suggestion, I would suggest the Wehrmacht Panthers get a slight buff versus the IS-3 too.  At the moment they have a very hard time penetrating the IS-3 for what they cost (600 manpower 110 fuel).  The IS-3's resilience to the Panther gun could then be buffed back to its current state with each level of vet.

I would not like to have the IS-2 replaced with the IS-3 because I think Soviets need buildable IS-2s to deal with Panthers.  They had a lot of IS-2s historically anyways, so it makes no sense they should be limited to 1.  However, I wouldn't mind if a "IS-2 Ace" replaced the IS-3 for historical accuracy (stats could be the same), as I suggested a long time ago when the IS-3 first came out.

PE and Wehr panther use the same corsix entry. They are the same tank. We would have to create a own Panther for PE.

My idea was to make the IS2 a multible call in just like a hetzer.

Killar wrote:
PE and Wehr panther use the same corsix entry. They are the same tank. We would have to create a own Panther for PE.

My idea was to make the IS2 a multible call in just like a hetzer.

I wouldn't like the IS-2 to be doctrine specific IMO.  A possible solution would be to make it like the non-doctrinal PE Panther call-in, but overall, doctrinal or not, I feel the IS-2 should cost fuel or else it would be too OP for a multiple call-in.  Dual Panther call-in is already borderline OP, but that's just because the rest of the PE tanks kind of suck.  If Soviets get a IS-2 call in that costs no fuel, compounded with their already formidable arsenal of tanks, there's a problem.

Overall, I really think the IS-2 is fine where it is.  The IS-3 could be replaced by an "IS-2 Ace" with the same stats as the IS-3 for historical accuracy, but that's about it.

And for Dane's complaints against the IS-2, I find them invalid, simply because the IS-2 is not an OP unit right now.  Its the IS-3.  The IS-2s cost more resources than a Panther, and around the same teching costs.  They're also slower than the Panther.  Sure an IS-2 horde can be very powerful, but so can a bunch of Vet 3 Wehrmacht Panthers, for example.

Last edited August 1, 2012 at 3:57 PM by Yauz

I just dont get it, why does this super powerfull doctrine need heavy tank with awesome stats?
Even if schrecks and Paks would make more dmg it would be way better than the ISU152, because its a still the best heavy tank Its Speed makes it just unkillabel, in good hands.
I played on Langers vs a Highrank(Iball16++) 1o1 Player, he used it and won the battel because of it, the Is3 is way to strong vs Wehrmacht tanks. Even 2Panthers are no match for him, thats just ridiculous, think of the Us 4M10 and what happens to a King Tiger, Vet3TIger or a Jagdpanther
JUST REMOVE ALL SORT OF HEAVY TANKS NO IS3 NO IS2 ACE from this doctrine and gave it the SU-100 as a reward unit (cheaper earlier available and/or 2 callabel f.e.), a tankhunter fits well in this doctrine, but a heavy tank is just (sry for hard word) bullshit
Just look at the Pe, you dint give them a e-75 as a reward unit for the JP
The IS3 is atm the biggest balance Problem for EF

Maybe the Ostheer "king" tiger will be enought powerfull to deal with IS3

I mean "royal" tiger who is also "king" tiger.

They also have an Elefant and I think it is also very very powerful unit and it is a tank destroyer

Last edited August 1, 2012 at 4:48 PM by Dreamerbg

Well Panthers arent so effective at killing infantry. From my experience they'll snipe infantry 1 out of every 3 shots. IS-2 seems to get it half the time and it seems to do explodey dmg like a Sherman  :-X

Err.. My complaints about the IS-2 are invalid ? I merely pointed out that in the majority of replays, players go straight for that, they don't bother with anything else in the tank hall most of the time.

I mean i've even seen replays with mister godlikedennis here pretty much ignoring all the contents and going straight for the IS2s.. and then of course the IS3 :P

What are the stats of an IS 2 ? Of an iS 3 ? In comparison with German tanks ? Because i do get the impression that an IS-2 and IS-3 have a lot more health than the Panther that people seem to keep on harping on about.

In fact, i also get the impression that some people seem to think it's meant to be a direct counter to the Panther ?

And more curiously... When someone threw the IS-2 in the tank hall, was the decision really "We need something to absorb panzershreck and AT gun fire" And that is rather where it all falls apart it seems for those claiming the IS-2 is fine. You're tacking on an awful lot of roles for some pretty heavy armour. And then leaving it to be buildable. The axis equivalent would be to allow the wehrmacht to build tiger tanks.

And what would happen if people could build tiger tanks ? They'd ignore pretty much everything else in the Panzer Command. So why did you throw in the IS-2 ? Apparently from what i understand you went out from a "counter" mentality, rathern than apparently thinking how the army ought to operate and then balance out from there.. And then somehow the IS-3 snuck it's way in there as well making things even more hilariously fun.

Now i'm not saying the IS-2 is overpowered. WHAT i am saying is it is malplaced and is essentially rendering largely the entire tank hall ... pointless. Again, nothing against balance, it might be costed perfectly and everything.. But design wise, the placement of it does not fit well at all. And again, throw in the IS-3 and the entire breakthrough doctrine and you essentially end up with way too much synergy. The equivalent of which would be if the wehrmacht could build tigers, call in a King Tiger and then call in luftwaffe troops to repair it all.

Again, individually might work nicely. But together and it just becomes a huge mess. And quite frankly probably just scares off players.

@Dane: AFAIK the IS-2 does slightly better than a Panther. This is assuming both tanks have no vet. Apparently the IS-3 does worse than a KT but from my experience its the opposite :(. And yes, many ppl consider the IS-2 a Panther counter although some ppl just get it to blow s**t up since its so powerful.

@Sir Sharks Alot
IS3 is supposed to be weaker vs KT & Tigers, not supposed to be worse than KT otherwise IS3 would be slower. If IS3 wins without problems vs these guys then we have an issue, although I'm not sure if we already tweaked IS3 for these scenarios.

Last edited August 2, 2012 at 3:50 AM by blackbishop

Well I mean in a 1v1 situation I guess the KT is on top but from what I've seen (and experienced) the KT seems to die first. Maybe cause its supported by IS-2s and veteran AT guns IDK.

Phew, luckily I stayed out of this thread... Oh wait, not anymore... So... nice shoutcasts... err he he

e-gon wrote:
I just dont get it, why does this super powerfull doctrine need heavy tank with awesome stats?
Even if schrecks and Paks would make more dmg it would be way better than the ISU152, because its a still the best heavy tank Its Speed makes it just unkillabel, in good hands.
I played on Langers vs a Highrank(Iball16++) 1o1 Player, he used it and won the battel because of it, the Is3 is way to strong vs Wehrmacht tanks. Even 2Panthers are no match for him, thats just ridiculous, think of the Us 4M10 and what happens to a King Tiger, Vet3TIger or a Jagdpanther
JUST REMOVE ALL SORT OF HEAVY TANKS NO IS3 NO IS2 ACE from this doctrine and gave it the SU-100 as a reward unit (cheaper earlier available and/or 2 callabel f.e.), a tankhunter fits well in this doctrine, but a heavy tank is just (sry for hard word) bullshit
Just look at the Pe, you dint give them a e-75 as a reward unit for the JP
The IS3 is atm the biggest balance Problem for EF

Nah, Breakthrough needs an elite tank. What you're forgetting is that soviets are supposed to have a very strong lategame, similar to Wehrmacht in terms of doctrines and tanks.

However, the thing is that we didn't tweak the soviet reward units much. It was planned to make a seperate patch after the 1.6 release since 1.5 was pretty much broken (tank hunter spam ftw) just for fixing all the reward units. We wanted to get 1.6 out asap so EF would finally be decent to play.

However after 1.6 release the Ostheer internal alpha got in the way, and also we noticed some problems in Soviet AT department, so we're internally trying to fix it, which also delays the release. Currently the KV tanks are OP against infantry AT, too.

The IS3 is definately too strong at the moment, but it's getting nerfed quite massively. On maps which are  like Rouen the IS 3 is especially OP because of it's turret compared to ISU 152. Also AT guns are useless on that map which makes the problem even worse.

Last edited August 2, 2012 at 8:21 AM by dArCReAvEr

I have always been sceptical to the buildable IS2. I can't say for sure if I think it's balanced as it is, so I believe the amount of IS2s could be limited. But let's look at the facts: First of all you have to spend about 200 fuel without getting any tanks or upgrades on the way. Needless to say it's a very risky move against players who know what they are doing.

Also the tank is slow, which means it has trouble dealing with flankers and dodging artillery. A cluster of IS2s even have trouble dodging a v1 from my experience. Then again, this tank is the reason I play PE against soviets. Marders, jagdpanzer 4s, APCR rounds, jagdpanther, teller mines etc makes it easy for the PE to deal with the IS2, even the IS3. The big problem though is that it forces you to go tank hunter doctrine. As wehrmacht I have discovered flak 88s to be the ultimate counter to the IS2, but that again forces you into a doctrine and doesn't work well on several maps. Apparently though, the geschutswagen is also very good against soviet heavy armor, but I feel it lacks the survivality for when a skilled soviet player knows to focus fire on the geschutswagens. You need more or less fully vetted panthers otherwise to effectively counter the IS2 front to front.

On some maps however it is very easy to flank; on a map like that I would gladly choose the T34/85 over the IS2 any day. I know it's popular rushing for the IS2, but the other tanks are definately not obsolete. In a 1v1 for instance you generally need earlier tanks to win. In 2 v 2 I find it extremely effective where one player rushes light tanks, and then skips to IS2s while the other player gets shitloads of T34/85s. This strategy can be applied to bigger games as well. After much time spent owning soviets I feel that they deserve the buildable IS2 considering how weak they are early game on standard resources. I have always found it way easier to play against soviets than western allies due to their weak early game.

Basically, I believe there are three ways to deal with the IS2:
One is to always have a PE on the team, preferrably tank hunter.
Another is to buff some wehrmacht units' armor penetration against the IS2, like the panther.
The third is to set some kind of limit to how many IS2s can be built. Maybe 3, maybe 2, or perhaps make the soviet player have to get some kind of upgrade to exceed the unit limit.

Last edited August 2, 2012 at 9:50 AM by SublimeSimuz