It has been discussed many times so I want to create a poll about that topic to see how many of you would actually favor this gamebreaking decision.
Should Call-Ins such as the Tiger, IS2, etc. only be deployable after a specific tier has been reached/building has been built?
I mmade a list some time ago which can show how it could be done:
So what do you think guys?
Yay or Nay: Bind Call-In Tanks To Tiers?
17 Dec 2014, 08:00 AM
#1
Posts: 1740
It is though God by command has withdrawn every other throne.
And God is saying 'No. These people will deal with me alone.'
And God is saying 'No. These people will deal with me alone.'
17 Dec 2014, 08:11 AM
#2
Posts: 923
Agreed but maybe not forcing two late game tiers for factions not native to doing this in normal play. Unless building cost is adjusted.
I could think with Tiger / Eelephant you don't have to build tier 4 but have tier 3 or 4 built and all the phases unlocked.
Same with IS-2, ISU-152, balance issues with any unit should be fixed in terms of reduced effectiveness not just pushing them a couple of minutes back.
I could think with Tiger / Eelephant you don't have to build tier 4 but have tier 3 or 4 built and all the phases unlocked.
Same with IS-2, ISU-152, balance issues with any unit should be fixed in terms of reduced effectiveness not just pushing them a couple of minutes back.
Disclaimer: Posts made while drunk should not count against this poster.
17 Dec 2014, 08:33 AM
#3
Posts: 351
I think the idea of tying call ins to tech is akward. If you want to not tech and save all your fuel for call ins then that should be an option but I think there needs to be a larger window for medium tanks to punish your opponent for that choice. The most boring but probably simplest option is to just increase the CP requirement on the call ins. If you try and stall for 15 or maybe 20 cps and your opponent invests in tech, you're probably going to have a rough time.
Right now, medium tanks and tech aren't that attractive because the fuel costs are similar and you really don't have to wait that much longer to get the call ins. Tying the call ins to tech and increasing the cp requirements both attempt to make medium core tanks more appealing but I feel like forcing the tech requirement is unnessessarily complicated when all that needs to be done is widen the cp window.
Right now, medium tanks and tech aren't that attractive because the fuel costs are similar and you really don't have to wait that much longer to get the call ins. Tying the call ins to tech and increasing the cp requirements both attempt to make medium core tanks more appealing but I feel like forcing the tech requirement is unnessessarily complicated when all that needs to be done is widen the cp window.
17 Dec 2014, 08:35 AM
#4
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Biding to tier can be deadly for Soviets.
For example, if I want IS2 I need to build 3 tiers, but OKW can build just 2 or even 1 (!!!) to get great tank destroyers (Panther/Jadgpanzer) so it will be very punishing for SU.
Same thing vs OST. You dont have to wait for call ins since you can get Panther (Relic must lower BP cost and increace buildings costs).
The point is, Soviets will suffer from this the most, unless SU85 will get huge buff (or changed for SU100) and T34/76 will be switched with T34/85 and become 7CP medium tank call in.
For example, if I want IS2 I need to build 3 tiers, but OKW can build just 2 or even 1 (!!!) to get great tank destroyers (Panther/Jadgpanzer) so it will be very punishing for SU.
Same thing vs OST. You dont have to wait for call ins since you can get Panther (Relic must lower BP cost and increace buildings costs).
The point is, Soviets will suffer from this the most, unless SU85 will get huge buff (or changed for SU100) and T34/76 will be switched with T34/85 and become 7CP medium tank call in.
17 Dec 2014, 08:39 AM
#5
8 Posts: 2470
nay because it defeats the point of callins.
i think other methods would work better while allowing callins to be independent, reducing the chance of relic screwing them up.
on the other hand, i fully support testing it in an open beta and might change my mind based upon the outcome.
i think other methods would work better while allowing callins to be independent, reducing the chance of relic screwing them up.
on the other hand, i fully support testing it in an open beta and might change my mind based upon the outcome.
17 Dec 2014, 08:50 AM
#6
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
It would make more sense to make it so call in tanks are built in said tier they are tied to rather than called in.
17 Dec 2014, 08:58 AM
#7
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
the thing is in almost every case a call in is a strict upgrade to a comparable tank (the exceptions being the wolverine, stuge, and bulldozer sherman)
i think that in itself should warrant them to be much more expensive than nondoctrinal tanks. instead the first non doctrinal tank is just as expensive as waiting for a call in. the only benefit you get from building tiers is getting the vehicle maybe 3 or 4 minutes earlier.
i think that in itself should warrant them to be much more expensive than nondoctrinal tanks. instead the first non doctrinal tank is just as expensive as waiting for a call in. the only benefit you get from building tiers is getting the vehicle maybe 3 or 4 minutes earlier.
17 Dec 2014, 09:01 AM
#8
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
It would be cool if Relic made the T-34/85 an upgrade option on the T34.
17 Dec 2014, 09:13 AM
#9
Posts: 345
Voted yes but my opinion (talking about 1v1) is that this won´t fix most of the problems...
you can bind tiger to get some battle phase and buildings up, hence, the tiger will arrive later...so if you tech you can punish that OST player waiting for the tiger.....upppps, nowadays, OST player is waiting for the tiger while USF player tech to shermans and jacksons.....How is going to change this with this binding between heavys and tech????? nothing will change in this macht up OST vs USF I think. What´s the difference between survive till 11 cp or 15 cp?? some minutes more camping with paks until tiger arrive.....that´s all.
Same with KT.....OKW player already has to build all tiers to get the KT.....Nothing will change in this match up USF vs OKW.
Not sure how SU players can be afected by this though.
Just my opinion (noob inside!)
you can bind tiger to get some battle phase and buildings up, hence, the tiger will arrive later...so if you tech you can punish that OST player waiting for the tiger.....upppps, nowadays, OST player is waiting for the tiger while USF player tech to shermans and jacksons.....How is going to change this with this binding between heavys and tech????? nothing will change in this macht up OST vs USF I think. What´s the difference between survive till 11 cp or 15 cp?? some minutes more camping with paks until tiger arrive.....that´s all.
Same with KT.....OKW player already has to build all tiers to get the KT.....Nothing will change in this match up USF vs OKW.
Not sure how SU players can be afected by this though.
Just my opinion (noob inside!)
An already muni starved faction (OKW) is now more muni starved and still can't build caches.
17 Dec 2014, 09:48 AM
#10
Posts: 2779
T34 85 becomes doctinal upgrade, everyone happy.
17 Dec 2014, 10:22 AM
#11
Posts: 818
No if i can't kill a tiger with t3476s(of which i need 3 minimum which cost 36 popcap vs tigers 24) then there will still be a need to go guard motor/shock rifle.
I think the goal should be to make it more rewarding to tech as soviets for viable vehicles specifically and ostheer tech costs like a billion manpower so reduce that.
Make more doctrines viable don't just nerf doctrines b/c everybody uses them its not like soviets and ostheer win every game they just use predictible units b/c those units are the only ones you can win with.
Tying to tech solves the wrong problem imo. and mostly just nerfs soviets and to a lesser extent ostheer.
I think the goal should be to make it more rewarding to tech as soviets for viable vehicles specifically and ostheer tech costs like a billion manpower so reduce that.
Make more doctrines viable don't just nerf doctrines b/c everybody uses them its not like soviets and ostheer win every game they just use predictible units b/c those units are the only ones you can win with.
Tying to tech solves the wrong problem imo. and mostly just nerfs soviets and to a lesser extent ostheer.
 | Playercard of -NSO- Hon3ynuts | |||||||||||||||||||
|
17 Dec 2014, 10:30 AM
#12
4 
Posts: 480 | Subs: 1
At the moment some, not all, call in´s are a cheaper and more effective version of tech bound tanks. And this is the problem. You have to choose between a inferior and a superior version. As long as the inferior version is not substantially cheaper and early available people will go for the superior version. So yes, i guess binding call in´s to tech structures is maybe a solution. It needs to be tested. Maybe CP´s costs, resource costs and some units performance have to be adjusted as well.
But tbh the true problem about call in´s is that at least some of them do not fulfill a roll any other tech bound unit doesn't already fulfill. Building them is a either-or decision, they don´t give you something you really need and can´t get otherwise. So from a game mechanic perspective they are needless. I´d like to see unique call in units who add something to your composition and adjust it this way.Thats the way call im´s should work.
But tbh the true problem about call in´s is that at least some of them do not fulfill a roll any other tech bound unit doesn't already fulfill. Building them is a either-or decision, they don´t give you something you really need and can´t get otherwise. So from a game mechanic perspective they are needless. I´d like to see unique call in units who add something to your composition and adjust it this way.Thats the way call im´s should work.
17 Dec 2014, 11:00 AM
#13
Posts: 881
Another quite radical option is to remove the fuel cost on call-ins and increase the manpower cost (yes, like CoH1).
This way everyone can tech, but still needs to save up a good manpower bank to use a call-in ability to augment his tech.
And to prevent abuse, limit call-ins to one at a time.
This way everyone can tech, but still needs to save up a good manpower bank to use a call-in ability to augment his tech.
And to prevent abuse, limit call-ins to one at a time.
17 Dec 2014, 11:09 AM
#14
Posts: 1130
Voted jay especially for the soviets and ost. these factions have tons of commanders and the moment not many are viable because the call in mechanic.
horrida flamma bella
17 Dec 2014, 20:39 PM
#15
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Make more doctrines viable don't just nerf doctrines b/c everybody uses them its not like soviets and ostheer win every game they just use predictible units b/c those units are the only ones you can win with.
Tying to tech solves the wrong problem imo. and mostly just nerfs soviets and to a lesser extent ostheer.
If this came with other changes, maybe.
Simple attaching tanks to tiers...hmmm nope.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
17 Dec 2014, 21:12 PM
#16
Posts: 1637
Just simply...YaY...
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
17 Dec 2014, 21:23 PM
#17
Posts: 211
Nay, tech should be more rewarding. An example would be Soviet tiers having access to T34/85s with the 76s as a call-in ability. (This could also be done to Ostheer but the changes would be too great to be implemented so much time into release.)
Alternatively teching could make call-ins cheaper (better for playing the long game).
Alternatively teching could make call-ins cheaper (better for playing the long game).
17 Dec 2014, 21:39 PM
#18
3 Posts: 322
I would prefer just to see more cost increases so that cheaper units seem like a more efficient choice in more situations. Then people can build tech of their own volition if there is more reason to do so.
17 Dec 2014, 21:41 PM
#19
Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2
No, does not discourage using multiple heavy tanks (it only delays them a couple minutes). Also would punish mid-late game tech more restrictive, such as skipping a T3 unit that would be really useful because you need T4 to get your doctrine unit.
Limit one super heavy per player and remove fuel cost- problem solved. Some people keep saying "but fuel was useless in coh1 late game blah blah blah" but its a bunch of horseshit. WM always had something to spend fuel on, US with heavy infantry focus was less dependent on it but controlling the fuel points was still important for the pop cap and denying it to the Axis player. Manpower is the more important resource in the really late game anyway. Making mid game armor a less attractive choice because sometimes people don't focus on tank spam late game is stupid.
Limit one super heavy per player and remove fuel cost- problem solved. Some people keep saying "but fuel was useless in coh1 late game blah blah blah" but its a bunch of horseshit. WM always had something to spend fuel on, US with heavy infantry focus was less dependent on it but controlling the fuel points was still important for the pop cap and denying it to the Axis player. Manpower is the more important resource in the really late game anyway. Making mid game armor a less attractive choice because sometimes people don't focus on tank spam late game is stupid.
17 Dec 2014, 21:43 PM
#20
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
teching should reward a player by giving them an EARLY vehicle. a panzer4, t34, all could out around the 11-13 minute mark. the benefit of teching is you have this scary (sort of) medium tank that can easily bully infantry and you have to seriously fuck up to lose it.
however, its not often worth getting these vehicles because theres a direct upgrade (IS2, Tiger) that you can call in for pretty much the same resources 3 to 5 minutes later.
the window of opportunity for the medium tanks is way too small
oh and if you want to buff unit stats directly so that 24 pop cap worth of mediums can take on 24 pop cap of heavies, then you need to buff every medium or nerf every tiger. this includes buffing the stug, panzer4, sherman, etc. this whill probably have a lot of unintended side effects, as would nerfing heavies stats directly.
however, its not often worth getting these vehicles because theres a direct upgrade (IS2, Tiger) that you can call in for pretty much the same resources 3 to 5 minutes later.
the window of opportunity for the medium tanks is way too small
oh and if you want to buff unit stats directly so that 24 pop cap worth of mediums can take on 24 pop cap of heavies, then you need to buff every medium or nerf every tiger. this includes buffing the stug, panzer4, sherman, etc. this whill probably have a lot of unintended side effects, as would nerfing heavies stats directly.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
50 | ||
|
|
|
|
40 | ||
 |
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.29244.869+2
- 4.275110.714+13
- 5.259143.644+3
- 6.249150.624+10
- 7.19265.747+5
- 8.14138.788+16
- 9.18878.707+2
- 10.669423.613+5
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
737
Board Info
528 users are online:
528 guests
1 post in the last 24h
30 posts in the last week
141 posts in the last month
30 posts in the last week
141 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44962
Welcome our newest member, SeattleSeoExpert
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, SeattleSeoExpert
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM