Login

russian armor

Suggestion: Attach Call-ins to Buildings/Tier again.

PAGES (7)down
6 Aug 2014, 19:07 PM
#41
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752



That makes T4 as attractive as having to do a fat, ugly chick before you are allowed to talk with attractive blonde friend of her makes the first one attractive.


This analogy is false in so many ways.

First of all, whether the chick is fat and ugly or attractive and blond is arbitrary to how Relic balances them.

- Callins having their cost and time efficiency outstripping T4 native units, due to no tier cost (as pointed out by I<CoH2)
- Your OWN point, that callings are "upgrades" that outstrip their equivalents, there is no point in T4 (the ugly chick) because Relic has made the hot chicks so hot, that why bother with that at all.

Hence, the comparison fails completely. Colorful, yes. But false.

Please stop trying to derail and troll an other wise functional thread.
6 Aug 2014, 19:09 PM
#42
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17896 | Subs: 8

Glad you have finally noticed why people really go for call-ins instead of doctrinal armor.
6 Aug 2014, 19:25 PM
#43
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5



That makes T4 as attractive as having to do a fat, ugly chick before you are allowed to talk with attractive blonde friend of her makes the first one attractive.


Not really, the hot blonde does put out in this metaphor.
6 Aug 2014, 19:30 PM
#44
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

the thing is, is not that call in vehicles are too good, it's that TECH vehicles are horrible for the old factions.

For example, if you just spam easyeights, the easyeight replaces the normal sherman. It cannot take the role of neither the jackson, nor the M8 scott. You get quantity in exchange for versatilty.
That makes teching rewarding, since usually you will want jacksons versus panthers or tigers, and m8s versus pak walls.

Now, lets loot at soviet techs. The t-34/85 pretty much replaces in T3, and because all T4 vehicles are pretty bad in 1v1, it makes teching punishing. Theres no reason to tech up at all.

Same with ostheer. Tiger pretty much replaces PIV and ostwind, panther and brumbaar and stug. The only vehicle the tiger doesn't replace is the panzerwerfer, and that is total junk.

The tiger is like a panther + brumbaar in one for cheaper. So why get them?
The thing is, is that the tech units of the old factions need buffs.
6 Aug 2014, 19:33 PM
#45
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130



Psst, let me tell you a secret, but promise not to tell to anyone, alright? I don't want anyone other then you to know it.



Irrelevant, 2vs 2 payers do not understand the economics and unit roster balance in 1 vs 1 as any such problem will have 2v2 will be solved by your partner. Call in units give a commander a rather tremendous economic advantage compared to those that dont have a call in. buts thats something you dont understand.

that the -8 and 85 are over performing for cost will likely be addressed sooner rather then later
6 Aug 2014, 19:36 PM
#46
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Aug 2014, 19:30 PMBurts
The thing is, is that the tech units of the old factions need buffs.


Cant be done.

T4 units would have to be:
-So cheap, to make up for the cost efficiency deficit of the necessary tiering (pointed out by I<CoH2)
+
-So good, to make up for the generally better callin unit stats (pointed out by Katitof)

That the result would be such a monstrous cheap and effective T4 unit that the entire game would crumble around them.

I know its hard to comprehend and envision the cascade and repercussions of the suggested change, but take a little time to think it through.

And thats not even considering the cold hard fact that Callin Commanders are squeezing non-Callin Commanders out of the meta.
6 Aug 2014, 19:38 PM
#47
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

I think it should be as follows;

Infantry- no changes. It seems fine as it is.

Vehicles- Yes, bind them to teching. Lighter vehicles (3 CP and less) (US Dodge, mortar HTs, ect.) should be at early tiers, say Lieutenant for US and T2 for Ostheer. Medium vehicles (up to 7-8 CPs) require T2 or T3 for OKW, Captain or Major for US, battle phase 2 for Ost, for Soviets I don't think they actually have any, refresh my memory if I'm wrong.

Late game vehicles (9CP+) should be tied to more advanced tiers, but the details are pretty hard. Requiring Major for US, T4 for OKW, and either T3 or T4 for Soviets is reasonable, but requiring T4 for Ostheer seems a bit too much while requiring T3 makes it too easy. The latter would also make T4 even less attractive than now. I also find Ostheer to be the least likely faction, besides OKW maybe, to bypass tiers. I very rarely see anyone go T2 straight into Tigers. So maybe bind it to battle phase 3, without requiring the building to be made.

But, I think they should still be instant.
6 Aug 2014, 19:56 PM
#48
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Aug 2014, 19:30 PMBurts
For example, if you just spam easyeights, the easyeight replaces the normal sherman. It cannot take the role of neither the jackson, nor the M8 scott. You get quantity in exchange for versatilty.

Actually the Easy Eight can replace the Jackson to an extent. Its 175 Penetration is the highest of any Medium Tank, compared to the M36's 200. It doesn't have the range or damage, but it makes up for that with superior health and armour. The armour is especially of note, being the highest on any Medium Tank excluding a Vet 2 Panzer IV Ausf. G (215 vs 234).
6 Aug 2014, 21:12 PM
#49
avatar of Charerg

Posts: 8

If I go Rifle Company in a 1vs1, it's just pure Easy Eight spam when I hit 9 CPs. Why would you invest 90 fuel for T4 when all you really need are Easy Eights?

They're much more versatile than Jacksons and even have almost the same anti-tank effectiveness if you factor in their better survivability.

Anyway, to the point.

Light vehicles and infantry absolutely should not be tied to Tiers because there is no real reason for it. If the US Dodge was tied to Lieutenant, for example, it would never be built because AA Halftrack and M20 are much better options at that point. The Dodge is an early game vehicle like M3 and Kubel, it won't survive for more than 6-8 minutes.

However, the heavy hitting vehicles with big fuel prices should absolutely require teching to unlock, because at the moment it is far more efficient to just not go T3 as Wehr even and just save the resources for late game Tiger-spam. Same deal with other similar call-ins (ISU, IS-2, T-34/85, Easy Eight).

That said, they should be tied to tech in a way that does not reduce your options. As Soviets, for example, heavies should only require EITHER T3 or T4, and as Wehr I think the requirement should be just T3. That way you need at least some technology to get access to the more heavy-hitting call-ins, but the system does not restrict your options too much.
6 Aug 2014, 21:20 PM
#50
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130


Actually the Easy Eight can replace the Jackson to an extent. Its 175 Penetration is the highest of any Medium Tank, compared to the M36's 200. It doesn't have the range or damage, but it makes up for that with superior health and armour. The armour is especially of note, being the highest on any Medium Tank excluding a Vet 2 Panzer IV Ausf. G (215 vs 234).


Not to mention that the jackson is a risk. it has no AI at all. the e8 does. its basically 2/3 the power of an AT tank and 2/3 of an AI tank. The result is that both the e8 and the 85 are beyonf stupidly cost effective. both need their price increased to 160 fuel.
6 Aug 2014, 21:29 PM
#51
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

If I go Rifle Company in a 1vs1, it's just pure Easy Eight spam when I hit 9 CPs. Why would you invest 90 fuel for T4 when all you really need are Easy Eights?

They're much more versatile than Jacksons and even have almost the same anti-tank effectiveness if you factor in their better survivability.

Anyway, to the point.

Light vehicles and infantry absolutely should not be tied to Tiers because there is no real reason for it. If the US Dodge was tied to Lieutenant, for example, it would never be built because AA Halftrack and M20 are much better options at that point. The Dodge is an early game vehicle like M3 and Kubel, it won't survive for more than 6-8 minutes.

However, the heavy hitting vehicles with big fuel prices should absolutely require teching to unlock, because at the moment it is far more efficient to just not go T3 as Wehr even and just save the resources for late game Tiger-spam. Same deal with other similar call-ins (ISU, IS-2, T-34/85, Easy Eight).

That said, they should be tied to tech in a way that does not reduce your options. As Soviets, for example, heavies should only require EITHER T3 or T4, and as Wehr I think the requirement should be just T3. That way you need at least some technology to get access to the more heavy-hitting call-ins, but the system does not restrict your options too much.


+1

Spot on.
6 Aug 2014, 21:36 PM
#52
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9

:facepalm: We're three pages in on a Balance thread and you are still together (more or less)? - less of the chick stuff though...:blush:

Kudos! :clap:
6 Aug 2014, 21:52 PM
#53
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

If I go Rifle Company in a 1vs1, it's just pure Easy Eight spam when I hit 9 CPs. Why would you invest 90 fuel for T4 when all you really need are Easy Eights?

They're much more versatile than Jacksons and even have almost the same anti-tank effectiveness if you factor in their better survivability.

Anyway, to the point.

Light vehicles and infantry absolutely should not be tied to Tiers because there is no real reason for it. If the US Dodge was tied to Lieutenant, for example, it would never be built because AA Halftrack and M20 are much better options at that point. The Dodge is an early game vehicle like M3 and Kubel, it won't survive for more than 6-8 minutes.

However, the heavy hitting vehicles with big fuel prices should absolutely require teching to unlock, because at the moment it is far more efficient to just not go T3 as Wehr even and just save the resources for late game Tiger-spam. Same deal with other similar call-ins (ISU, IS-2, T-34/85, Easy Eight).

That said, they should be tied to tech in a way that does not reduce your options. As Soviets, for example, heavies should only require EITHER T3 or T4, and as Wehr I think the requirement should be just T3. That way you need at least some technology to get access to the more heavy-hitting call-ins, but the system does not restrict your options too much.


That's another solution, but about the Dodge. Just put into T0 when the doctrine is picked.
6 Aug 2014, 22:34 PM
#54
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130



That's another solution, but about the Dodge. Just put into T0 when the doctrine is picked.


dodge just needs one cp
7 Aug 2014, 00:57 AM
#55
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 640 | Subs: 1

If all the factions had a tiering system identical to Wehrmacht, then it would be extremely easy to tie the heavy call-ins to a certain tier (or rather, battle phase). Since they don't, however, it is a bit of a problem, especially for Soviets which essentially have two tiers, time-wise.

Well, a set up like this could work :

T34/85 - T3 or T4 built.
Dual T34s - T4 or T4 built.
ISU - T3 or T4 built.
IS3 - T3 or T4 built.

Hell, you could even make the ISU instantly balanced by not touching its stats at all, but requiring BOTH T3 AND T4. Ultra expensive? Yep. Unviable in 1v1s? Probably. Completely in line with the unit's current capabilities? Definitely.

Tiger - Battle Phase 3 researched
Tiger Ace - Battle Phase 3 researched
Ele - Battle Phase 3 researched
Stug III G - Battle Phase 2 researched

Jeep - no requirement
Halftrack callin - no requirement
Easy 8 - Major built
M10 - Major built
M8 - Lieutenant or Captain built

Ostwind Callin (OKW) - Flak truck deployed
Panzer IV Battlegroup (OKW) - Flak truck deployed
Jagdtiger - All 3 trucks deployed

I don't buy the argument that this would impact the strategic depth of the game / limit the build orders and so on. The only, literally ONLY thing that would be affected by this change would be that you would no longer be able to hold out for callins instead of teching. In my opinion callins should not be a "get out of teching free and have awesome armour" card, but rather "here's a supplemental unit type to help with your core army" sort of deal.
7 Aug 2014, 01:04 AM
#56
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

7 Aug 2014, 01:09 AM
#57
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

All of them.

I'm real damn tired of t-34/85's popping out in place of t3/t4 buildings + one tank at most.


Better yet, bring back the whole "Doctirne units have to be produced at a structure".

This would mean Shocktroops/guard rifles being produced in t1, Heavy mortar/ DHSK being produced in t2 etc. You could of course tie some units to only require t0 (Like partisans) but honestly I'm real fucking tired of doctrines providing a well rounded arsenal and letting people ignore tech. Soviets are the worse for this because some of their best units are doctrinal. You can go heavy on t2 weapons crews and then shit out shock troops giving you a stupid strong force.

And then by doing this, you could tweak the INSANE costs of those super heavy units because they would require tech investment to field. You could actually make them affordable.





7 Aug 2014, 01:20 AM
#58
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384


It greatly limited possible BOs and therefore led to a stale, boring, predictable meta.


It's one thing to have interesting teching options (SEE: USF) and it's another to have people skipping tech and still being competitive.

As Soviets you don't even need to build fucking t3/t4 AT ALL to remain viable. They have enough doctrinal tank options that you can have strong vehicles on the field without even investing in tech. You don't even need to spend any fuel (Maybe an M3? and t2) to fucking do it. Wehrmacht spends more fuel teching to t fucking 2 than Soviets have to spend before they can shit out tanks. (Meanwhile Wehr has to tech up and purchase units)

Americans have similar issues with armour company, but atleast those tanks have pronounced weaknesses. M10 has paper thin armour and the bulldozer sherman is lackluster vs moving vehicular targets.

7 Aug 2014, 02:58 AM
#59
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

Better yet, bring back the whole "Doctirne units have to be produced at a structure".

This would mean Shocktroops/guard rifles being produced in t1, Heavy mortar/ DHSK being produced in t2 etc. You could of course tie some units to only require t0 (Like partisans) but honestly I'm real fucking tired of doctrines providing a well rounded arsenal and letting people ignore tech. Soviets are the worse for this because some of their best units are doctrinal. You can go heavy on t2 weapons crews and then shit out shock troops giving you a stupid strong force.

And then by doing this, you could tweak the INSANE costs of those super heavy units because they would require tech investment to field. You could actually make them affordable.


Limiting infantry call-ins to specific buildings would be unnecessarily harmful to the soviets. They aren't designed to build both T1 and T2 so any doctrine with guards rifle or shocks is meant to provide call-ins that can substitute for the tech tier that wasn't built instead of supplement it.
7 Aug 2014, 06:29 AM
#60
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130



Limiting infantry call-ins to specific buildings would be unnecessarily harmful to the soviets. They aren't designed to build both T1 and T2 so any doctrine with guards rifle or shocks is meant to provide call-ins that can substitute for the tech tier that wasn't built instead of supplement it.


i agree soviets commanders are very dependant on their infantry call ins.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

532 users are online: 532 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
40 posts in the last week
146 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45361
Welcome our newest member, Artus
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM