Login

russian armor

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

PAGES (7)down
13 Aug 2014, 17:39 PM
#101
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Thank you for moderating your own thread successfully, Cannonade. :)

Lessons to be learnt here,guys.

I'm away


Thanks, although I fear that unless someone smarter than me can provide a complete and specific list to make this suggestion actually practically possible, it seems to be doomed to failure as a "good on paper, impossible in practice" hypothetical...
13 Aug 2014, 18:37 PM
#102
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



Thanks, although I fear that unless someone smarter than me can provide a complete and specific list to make this suggestion actually practically possible, it seems to be doomed to failure as a "good on paper, impossible in practice" hypothetical...


IMO is a matter of time and decision on their part, if they want to fix or rather improve this area of the game.

It´s a matter of wether they want to start touching sensibles things. Such as teching costs for OH, performance/cost of certain units, diversity performance of some tiers, etc.
It´s a matter of wether they want to change the gameplay concept we have at the moment.
14 Aug 2014, 19:26 PM
#103
avatar of Pedro_Jedi

Posts: 543

On my part, I consider limiting heavy tanks on 1 per game should bring a good result. Apparently, though, this does not seem to be popular.

It does not address the t34/85's, and that's intentional. On these babies, I think that maybe they should be limited to #T3 OR T4# (as in "any one built unlocks them"), so someone could build T1 or T2 and build T3 or T4 and unlock them.
14 Aug 2014, 19:44 PM
#104
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

And pushing back the call-ins would definietly help the underused (with no call-ins) commanders to be more used. Attaching thus opens up more stratigies while we get less cheese.
14 Aug 2014, 20:49 PM
#105
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

And pushing back the call-ins would definietly help the underused (with no call-ins) commanders to be more used. Attaching thus opens up more stratigies while we get less cheese.


I´m gonna say this again. Pushing back call-ins would just mean teching T3 till callins arrive and then replace them.

Delaying them won´t mean that performance of stock tanks is going to be better neither the underused (edit) commanders (Edit).
14 Aug 2014, 20:58 PM
#106
avatar of blitz1337

Posts: 184



I´m gonna say this again. Pushing back call-ins would just mean teching T3 till callins arrive and then replace them.

Delaying them won´t mean that performance of stock tanks is going to be better neither the underused tanks.


How so? If it takes an extra 10 mins for an IS2 to arrive then P4's will own the battlefield.

Likewise with T34's and Tigers. Delaying them means stock tanks will have a bigger window to get vet and to push advantages.
14 Aug 2014, 21:06 PM
#107
avatar of scheme

Posts: 29

Here is the root of the problem with call-in cost effectiveness:

Once you have the cps, you can get your 1st (and every following) easy8 for, if i remember right, 350mp/135f. Meanwhile, to get your 1st p4, you must spend 400mp/100f to tech, and build a 160mp/25f building, and then 350/125f for the p4.

So, the 1st P4 costs 910mp/250f! What would justify that kind of investment? What are we getting for that extra 560mp/115f? Does the p4 come out significantly earlier than 9cp? No, certainly not 560/115 worth earlier. Is the access to stugs, ostwinds, the flame upgrade to HT, worth 560mp/115f ? No. Is the p4's performance worth the extra 560mp/115f? Fuck No.

In fact, your 1st p4 costs nearly as much as 2 easy8s. So lets consider the price differences of 2 easy8s compared to 2 p4s:
2x easy8: 700mp/270f
2x p4: 1260mp/375f (down to 630/187 each)

This is exactly why most ostheer players dont bother teching to t3, just bank that 910mp/250f, and spend it on a tiger...which, by comparison, is much more worth the cost.

[bold]
My suggested solution: make the cooldown on call-in tanks like 7 minutes. That way, all the investment cost of teching/buildings gets some inherent value - the ability to build tanks as soon as you have the resources (instead of being limited by the cooldown).
[/bold]

EDIT: I included the cost of teching to t2 in the analysis. However, even if we remove that cost based on the assumption that we're teching to t2 no matter what happens later, the calculation changes slightly (subtract 200/45) but certainly does not change the conclusion - the benefit of teching as ostheer is not worth its cost even within the faction, and is glaring compared to callings like the single t34/85, kv1, easy8.
14 Aug 2014, 21:26 PM
#108
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

Cannonade, I don't understand why you say there are core design problems, but then want a List with all the numbers?

What is wrong with:


Ostheer heavy armor requires T4 (Tiger, Ele, Tiger Ace).
Ostheer medium armor and light vehicle require T3 built (P4 command tank, Puma, Stug-e).

OKW's call-ins require 2 HQ buildings set up (P4, Ostwind, Jagdtiger, P5 command tank)

USF's armor call-ins require Major (E8, M10, M4 105mm, M7)

Soviet call-ins require T3 OR T4.


?
14 Aug 2014, 22:17 PM
#109
avatar of 5trategos

Posts: 449

Increasing the CP cost on callins based on current performance is probably the easiest solution.

That's the core of the issue after all:
It's simply too easy and cost-efficient to hold out until callins are unlocked.

So make it harder to hold out. The mechanism for that is already in place.
14 Aug 2014, 23:49 PM
#110
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



How so? If it takes an extra 10 mins for an IS2 to arrive then P4's will own the battlefield.

Likewise with T34's and Tigers. Delaying them means stock tanks will have a bigger window to get vet and to push advantages.


First, i wanted to say commanders on my original post (see edit). It won´t make underused commanders more popular neither stock unit more effective. Hence, people will still rely on Call in tanks.

People are just gonna tech T3476 and then callins, on the other hand, people will just get P4 and then Tigers.
People will still spam E8 due to to teching design of the faction (even if you attach call ins to Tier). It´s not as expensive to get a major, plus the unit has its advantages.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Aug 2014, 21:06 PMscheme
...


Reference:
-BP1 200mp 45f
-BP2 200mp 55f
-T1 80mp 10f
-T2 120mp 15f
-T3 160mp 25f

You don´t have to get into consideration some cost since there are things that you are oblied to get on both factions.
You need BP1 for LMGs and RNades. Also for getting T2 (unless you want to skip it and get a "quick" T3 (it was plausible before the teching timing changes).
Either you wanted or not, you are forced to get this things earlier or later.

Real tech cost for getting a P4
-BP2 + T3 = 360mp + 80f

Why am i using this price? Because it´s not realistic on playing without T1+T2 and BP1 is not optional.
On the other hand is not like the USF isn´t gonna get something like Bars, Nades, Ambulance, T2/T3/T4.

________________________

Stalling for Tiger: you save 360mp + 80f + P4 cost = 710mp + 205f
710mp + 205f =/= 910mp + 250f

________________________

Edit: i see that you realize the prices. Yeah, while teching vs call ins is a COMPLETE DIFFERENT issue, theres has to be some tweaking on the teching cost of OH.
15 Aug 2014, 00:36 AM
#111
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


What is wrong with...


1- New faction don´t rely as much on Call in tanks as EFA.
2- Teching cost and opportunity differs greatly with OH, a bit with SU and mostly nothing with USF and OKW.
Neither of them have an expensive mp/fuel cost for what they get. As USF you get units, as OKW you get utilities. It´s "not optional" not getting 2 trucks and it´s not as a heavy drawback getting a major. Compared that to going BP2+BP3+T4


Increasing the CP cost on callins based on current performance is probably the easiest solution.

That's the core of the issue after all:
It's simply too easy and cost-efficient to hold out until callins are unlocked.

So make it harder to hold out. The mechanism for that is already in place.


And we are still on the same meta. Stall with "lower end" tanks, and then go Callins. I´m fine if this was OHvsSU and USFvsOKW. But this is not the case.
It´s been for a while that either teching diversity (T3-T4 overlapping units for soviets and the design of "not being" able to field both) or cost/performance (OH teching/units) are some issues.
15 Aug 2014, 07:09 AM
#112
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752


Ostheer heavy armor requires T4 (Tiger, Ele, Tiger Ace).
Ostheer medium armor and light vehicle require T3 built (P4 command tank, Puma, Stug-e).


OKW's call-ins require 2 HQ buildings set up (P4, Ostwind, Jagdtiger, P5 command tank)

USF's armor call-ins require Major (E8, M10, M4 105mm, M7)

Soviet call-ins require T3 OR T4.


Lets try running with this list as a basic framework for how to implement this, for purposes of this discussion.

So guys, what are opinions on this list in quote?

Any objections/additions/support for it?

______________________________________

Scheme: Yeah, thats pretty much the kind of cost efficiency issues I was seeking to address with this.
Calli s have circumvented/bypassed the entire Tier based core of the game.
Rather than being an additiinal diversity to meta, they have instead more or less completely replaced native tier units, and marginalised nin-callin Commanders.

elchino7: Tier tying would be the first step in equalising callins back into the tier and cost structure. Performance of individual units can be adjusted afterwards and though the point is noted that yes, native units still are quite crap in comparison, atleast the tiers will be built, rather than completely bypassed as now, meaning a non-callin Commander option can rely on native units at a more cost efficient ratio to the opponents expenses on the callins. Its sort of secondary to the proposal, whether people will build native units or callins once they have built the tier. What is primary to the proposal, is that they will infact have built the tier inorder to have the callin option activated in the first place.

Strategos: Yes, CP increases are feasible too, and I figure they can be done whether or not tier tie ins are implemented or not. In both cases, it helps draw out the time tier units have to operate before statswise superior callins arrive. Blitz made a similar observation.
25 Aug 2014, 19:44 PM
#113
avatar of Ducati
Benefactor 115

Posts: 164

I feel that linking call in's to tech forces players down a preset path vs giving them a choice. Right now there is not draw back to the call in choice.

What if your tech buildings effected your economy in a similar manner to the supply depot in CoH? I propose that all factions get increased economic upkeep penalties for mid/higher pop cap numbers. The more you tech (and/or build the various tech buildings) you get economic relief that returns the upkeep numbers to the current rates. This way players have the choice of doing a call without teching but there is a significant economic penalty for doing so.

Sure you can call in a tiger or T34/85's without teching but your manpower/min will prohibit you from keeping a versatile reenforced army over the long run.
25 Aug 2014, 20:31 PM
#114
avatar of ASneakyFox

Posts: 365



I´m gonna say this again. Pushing back call-ins would just mean teching T3 till callins arrive and then replace them.

Delaying them won´t mean that performance of stock tanks is going to be better neither the underused (edit) commanders (Edit).


The idea for requiring the appropriate buildings to be built is so that the superior Call-ins can't be deployed for less than the cost of the native faction units (through skipping the tech costs).

The fact that the unit must be "built" instead of instantly called in isn't really as important as requiring that the tech be researched. Thats the main balancing factor that need to be implemented IMO.
25 Aug 2014, 20:39 PM
#115
avatar of ASneakyFox

Posts: 365

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Aug 2014, 19:44 PMDucati
I feel that linking call in's to tech forces players down a preset path vs giving them a choice. Right now there is not draw back to the call in choice.

What if your tech buildings effected your economy in a similar manner to the supply depot in CoH? I propose that all factions get increased economic upkeep penalties for mid/higher pop cap numbers. The more you tech (and/or build the various tech buildings) you get economic relief that returns the upkeep numbers to the current rates. This way players have the choice of doing a call without teching but there is a significant economic penalty for doing so.

Sure you can call in a tiger or T34/85's without teching but your manpower/min will prohibit you from keeping a versatile reenforced army over the long run.


That would just make resources really complicated to keep track of. The net costs would still need to be the same for balance. So why not just go for the simpler "require the tech building"? You dont have to build the other units in the building if you want the call ins.
25 Aug 2014, 21:34 PM
#116
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Why don't you link the popcap to the territory hold? Just make sure it isn't possible at all to only hold 1/3 of the map and still be able to call-in super heavy.
All those issues are link to that "easy" popcap and upkeep design. And was mitigated in vCoh.

There are some other ways to limit call-in link having a Victory point cost per call-in unit, make Tiger/ISU costing 100 victory points and you'll definitively see less of them in hands of bad players. You can also do the same with E8 and all other med-tanks with a cost of 50 victory points per tank and all other freaky small units like falls/vetted rifles etc.. + dodge and mech troop cost 3,5 or 10 points.

In fact I don't care, the only unit I call-in is the dodge :p for the rest I'm 100% with you, call-in meta is an issue.

Edit:
Coming back to popcap, you can link the call-in to territory hold. It was use in Sudden Strike game. You must hold 2 victory point for 10 or 15 minutes (not in a raw) to be able to call-in med tanks and 25 minutes to call-in Super Heavy.

In fact, CP aren't really working today cause they were design for vCoh meta, which isn't anymore the same than Coh2, so it need to be changed to something that has a cooldown or a timer linked to the game victory process, not anymore a timer independent of it like are CPs.


25 Aug 2014, 22:30 PM
#117
avatar of Ducati
Benefactor 115

Posts: 164



That would just make resources really complicated to keep track of. The net costs would still need to be the same for balance. So why not just go for the simpler "require the tech building"? You dont have to build the other units in the building if you want the call ins.


I'm pretty sure the resource/upkeep system is already complicated. I don't think what I have proposed is a whole new layer of complexity. However I haven't looked at the code. The coders @ relic are talented, if my solution is a direction they want to head in I'm confident they could make it happen.

I think this is a better solution than linking to tech as it forces a player to make a strategic decision. Getting the call-in with out tech has economic repercussions as a trade off for the shock of early units. You can go down that path but its then a gamble.
25 Aug 2014, 22:36 PM
#118
avatar of Lucas Troy

Posts: 508

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Aug 2014, 21:34 PMEsxile
Why don't you link the popcap to the territory hold? Just make sure it isn't possible at all to only hold 1/3 of the map and still be able to call-in super heavy.
All those issues are link to that "easy" popcap and upkeep design. And was mitigated in vCoh.

There are some other ways to limit call-in link having a Victory point cost per call-in unit, make Tiger/ISU costing 100 victory points and you'll definitively see less of them in hands of bad players. You can also do the same with E8 and all other med-tanks with a cost of 50 victory points per tank and all other freaky small units like falls/vetted rifles etc.. + dodge and mech troop cost 3,5 or 10 points.

In fact I don't care, the only unit I call-in is the dodge :p for the rest I'm 100% with you, call-in meta is an issue.

Edit:
Coming back to popcap, you can link the call-in to territory hold. It was use in Sudden Strike game. You must hold 2 victory point for 10 or 15 minutes (not in a raw) to be able to call-in med tanks and 25 minutes to call-in Super Heavy.

In fact, CP aren't really working today cause they were design for vCoh meta, which isn't anymore the same than Coh2, so it need to be changed to something that has a cooldown or a timer linked to the game victory process, not anymore a timer independent of it like are CPs.




Trouble with original CoH territory = pop cap approach is that it makes come backs less likely, meaning that matches get boring fast if someone gets an early advantage.

In CoH2 there's more reason, at all levels, to stay in even if you are losing, because you might turn it around.
25 Aug 2014, 22:42 PM
#119
avatar of ASneakyFox

Posts: 365

If you got an income advantage from teching up for instance, how much extra income should that bring? how long until the income it brings pays for the tech costs? If it pays for the tech costs in 2-3 minutes or so then eveyrone would rush to tech up not buy any units and then save. If it takes a bit longer then no one would ever tech up and just buy call ins as they do now.

Itd be less complicated to just say "ok call ins require tech buildings"
26 Aug 2014, 16:00 PM
#120
avatar of Ducati
Benefactor 115

Posts: 164

If you got an income advantage from teching up for instance, how much extra income should that bring? how long until the income it brings pays for the tech costs? If it pays for the tech costs in 2-3 minutes or so then eveyrone would rush to tech up not buy any units and then save. If it takes a bit longer then no one would ever tech up and just buy call ins as they do now.

Itd be less complicated to just say "ok call ins require tech buildings"


It would not be an income advantage, it would be avoiding income penalties. If you were to tech the upkeep cost would mirror the current levels. Should you avoid teching then your income would be significantly lower. Think tiger ace or industry docs.

Less complicated does not necessarily equal the best or even right solution.
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

675 users are online: 1 member and 674 guests
shinasukac
8 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
147 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45326
Welcome our newest member, xotip14389
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM