Login

russian armor

Company of Call-Ins 2 - An Argument for Change

5 Nov 2014, 23:46 PM
#1
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Hello everyone, I'll go ahead and warn you that this will probably be a long thread - one that has been on my mind for a while now. I think that I've finally managed to finish gathering my thoughts regarding the call-in system in Company of Heroes 2. I will be posting this in other places in order to, hopefully, get Relic's attention and I urge everyone to keep this thread constructive and on-topic. I'm not saying my ideas are perfect, nor are they all original but I think we can at least all agree that the call-in system in this game needs a major overhaul - at least if Company of Heroes 2 wants to have a healthy future.

We've suffered for too long under the meta revolving almost entirely around call-in tanks. Sure it was sort of cool at the beginning, to be able to skip tech and still be able to compete - and perhaps that should still be a possible and valid play style, however currently doctrinal tanks are being heavily relied on (mostly by Ost/Sov) becuase they're simply too efficient - especially when compared to non-doctirinal tanks. Let's crunch some numbers to get to the bottom of this issue, starting with the Ostheer faction:

Cost of a P4:

T1 + BP 1 + T2 + BP 2 + T3 + P4:
(80/10) + (200/45) + (120/15) + (200/55) + (160/25) + (350/125) = 1110 manpower/275 fuel

Cost of a Tiger: (I'm operating under the assumption that T2 is a necessity because of how strong it is)
T1 + BP 1 + T2 + Tiger
(80/10) + (200/45) + (120/15) + (740/230) = 1140 manpower/300 fuel

As you can see the resource cost difference is quite minimal. Sure the P4 has the potential to come out sooner but it is also a significantly more risky investment, which is why we see Tigers - and not P4s in most top level games. The Tiger is safer because it is *much* harder to kill, plus has a disgustingly strong main gun. Furthermore, on a deeper level, the Tiger is a safer investment because you do not have to invest any resources into BP 2 or T3 - instead you can put those resources instantly onto the battlefield and being saving once you're at 9 or 10 CPs. You know when your tiger is coming, you know when to save, which means you're able to pour resources into holding the map during the mid game.
The T34/76 falls into the same sort of traps when compared to the T34/85 and IS-2. There simply is not much, if any reason to risk teching to these T3 units when playing it safe and saving for a call-in is simply more efficient in numerous ways.

I'll go ahead and add here that the Panther is, thankfully, in a nice spot for team games for both Ost and OKW. I'd like to figure out a way for Ost to be able to field it in normal 1v1s, but that'll have to be a thread for another day. Back to the point.

Now let's look at the second major issue with these doctrinal tanks. Their power level relative to non-doctrinal tanks. The P4 and the T34/76 are relatively balanced - especially considering that the P4 costs more. The P4 will win most of the time, however good use of the T34 can swing fights in it's favor - Relic has done an excellent job of balancing these units against each other asymetrically, they both have their strengths and can be used against each other effectively. Now, let's compare the T34/76 to the Tiger. How many T34/76 is it going to take to kill a Tiger? My gut instinct tells me at least 3, and that's assuming that there are no PaK40s around. Maybe some one has run hundreds of simulations on this specific tank battle (although I doubt it). What I can tell you for certain is that it will take at the absolute least, two T34/76 to beat one Tiger - and that is being generous. When you factor in the cost of tech, the Tiger is actually coming out ahead in efficiency because two T34/76 plus the T3 tech would be 320 fuel - which is more than a tiger with standard tech costs taken into account. When you start looking at needing 3 T34/76 to counter a single tiger, it gets worse. This same principle can be applied to the IS-2 vs P4 or the P4 vs T34/85. Simply put, the non-doctrinal tanks cannot compete with doctrinal tanks efficiently, relegating them to fringe strats or punishing weaker players. The standard tanks are, quite frankly, more or less obsolete once doctrinal armor hits the field.

I'll go ahead and clarify here - I'm not trying to argue that stock tanks are not viable. Sure they are, kind of, but your resources will almost always be better invested in a doctrinal tank - especially considering any kind of even game.

Hopefully by now it has been made clear why something needs to change so let's get to some suggestions on fixing this problem. Please, I encourage everyone to share their ideas on how to help Relic with the problem at hand.

Solution 1 - Probably one of the most frequently mentioned solutions to doctrinal tanks is to force a tech choice from a player in order to "unlock" the ability to requisition them. For example a Soviet player would need to construct either T3 or T4 in oder to call-in T34/85s, or IS-2s, etc. By the same token an Ostheer player would need either T3 or BP3 in order to call in Tigers. (This would apply to all call-in tanks). OKW would need all buildings constructed. I think that USF could stay as-is with regards to their call-ins since they're not nearly as game impacting as other faction's doctrinal tanks - although E8s might need at least two of: Liet, Capt, Major. This is probably my personal favorite solution because I think that it would allow more of a transition between early game, mid game, late game and super late game. Right now what we have is early game, kind of mid game and then super late game since most medium armor is simply ignored. I would love to see defined transitions between the different stages of the game signaled by the arrival of medium armor and then later on the arrival of heavier armor. This would have the added effect of severely punishing people trying to camp for heavy armor, because they'd have to pay most of the cost of medium armor up front anyways.

Solution 2 - Push back call-in CPs even further. My gut would say something like... 14-15 CP for T34/85s, 16-17 CP for IS2/Tiger and 20-21 CP for JT/ISU/Elefant. I would hope that having to stall this long for doctrinal armor would encourage players to tech, but also allow for those players that want to not tech to be able to do so without being punished too hard. The actual numbers would need testing. Not a clever or elegant solution but maybe it would work.

Solution 3 - Increase the current cost of doctrinal tanks, but reduce the cost if a specific tech requirement is met (probably same tech requirement as in Solution 1). This solution would be quite similar in practice to Solution 2 in that it would, hopefully, encourage players to build medium armor because they're essentially paying an cost for not doing so - but it would still give players a choice - whereas Solution 1 does not. At the very least this would go towards addressing the efficiency differential between doctrinal tanks and non-doctrinal tanks.

Anyways, I think this thread is getting long enough, and I think I've said more than my fair share - as well as covered everything that I've been mulling over the past couple of days. I'm looking forward to hearing other ideas on this topic - or reasons why the call-in system is actually fine and balanced (perhaps it is?).
6 Nov 2014, 00:34 AM
#2
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

Solution 1.
6 Nov 2014, 00:41 AM
#3
avatar of Bryan

Posts: 412

I'd definitely agree the call in tanks need to be addressed, and have for a long time. Unless your in a lurch already, stalling for call in tanks vs a player who goes normal tech is not too hard, unless they really pull off something nice or you feck up. In close games, imo, in 1's allot of the time it is about who makes the mistakes rather then big plays.

Which is fine, but currently, call in tanks is more efficient and less risky, it just makes sense and thus reduces the variety in strats that are actually used. Aside from the cost efficiency of call in's, you also have a unit advantage on the field due to savings on tech costs, whilst the player who techs does get a tank earlier, you have to keep in mind, he invested in that tech and will have less on the field, plus a vulnerable time period whilst they tech.

Between the importance of holding the map, which are quite big in COH2 and all territory points give resources + cost efficiencies of call in's, you see allot of big t0/1 play and some support weapons. If the call in's were changed, I reckon you'd see a possible shift in strats/play styles and more doctrines would become more competitive.

Edit: Imo solution one would be the simplest and easiest to implement. Perhaps a more innovative solution could be created, but at least this would be a step forward and some progress, can re-evaluate it further down the line (a new meta will always emerge that may get stale, but if it has a few more competitive options then that sure would be an improvement!)
6 Nov 2014, 00:54 AM
#4
avatar of Lucas Troy

Posts: 508

I like the teching idea - you probably know this already, but Cruzz implemented that in this "Kappatch" mod.

Current situation is a little tricky IMO because you have to invest resources to unlock the crappier tanks like T-34/76, ie, you have to "research" to get early war stuff, but if you just wait long enough, you get later war equipment like T-34/85s for free. Making everything require a research or tech investment would be nice.

Since building soviet T-34 hits you as bad as losing a T-34/85 (in terms of fuel), players are taking a rather large loss just by building tech buildings.
6 Nov 2014, 01:10 AM
#5
avatar of spajn
Donator 11

Posts: 927

I think callin tanks should require tech building but also they should have a long cooldown, lets say 10 minute cooldown on callin for medium tanks and maybe even longer on Heavy tanks, this way you can't do "only callin tanks" because your production of callin units won't allow you to keep up compared to stock units. Also if someone choose t-34-85 commander there would still be a reason to build t-34-76 due to the cooldown mechanic.

Also this would fix the "going for Tiger then banking resources to call in the next Tiger immediately when the first one dies". Callin units would add flavour and variety to the game just as they are intended to with this system and would make callin units feel more special to kill or loose because you simply can't just calll in a new one whenever you got resources.
6 Nov 2014, 01:16 AM
#6
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Nuclear Arbitor was correct. My thoughts later on in this thread. Please delete me.
6 Nov 2014, 01:21 AM
#7
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

i only saw e8 mentioned once, and not in the first block. the e8 counters the IV so hard that IVs are effectively useless against E8s. it's about the same as the IV and 34/85 matchup, although i haven't tried that one in quite a while.

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Nov 2014, 01:16 AMNapalm
Reserved for my comments


don't do that; the thread moves past you and then people don't see what you have to say.
6 Nov 2014, 02:04 AM
#8
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

One thing I actually forgot to mention in my initial post - I could edit it in at some point.

I've also considered limiting the ISU, JT, Elefant and KT to one per game - just like the Tiger Ace is limited. Thoughts?
6 Nov 2014, 02:09 AM
#9
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

personally i don't like that; you can easily lose heavy tanks, particularly in team games, to bad luck and then the point of the faction is gone. i dislike the ace for that reason. putting a MUCH longer timer on them would be a good thing though, like the 7 min cooldown on termies in dow2. additionally, it could start when the vehicle dies to insure an opening for the other player.
6 Nov 2014, 02:12 AM
#10
avatar of dpfarce

Posts: 308

In the games that I have watched/played in 3v3/4v4, Call-ins are NOT a problem.

The temptation to go for call-ins is always there. Go T1+T2, get 2-3 PaK, then save up for Tigers.

However, this is a quick and easy way to get yourself swarmed by 5-7 t34s at 14 minutes and a loss of the game thereafter.

A similar problem exists for Allies, although less so because the USA player will always tech. But if you sit back and AFK for ISU, you will be overwhelmed by ostwinds/p4s vs good players
6 Nov 2014, 02:25 AM
#11
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

In the games that I have watched/played in 3v3/4v4, Call-ins are NOT a problem.

The temptation to go for call-ins is always there. Go T1+T2, get 2-3 PaK, then save up for Tigers.

However, this is a quick and easy way to get yourself swarmed by 5-7 t34s at 14 minutes and a loss of the game thereafter.

A similar problem exists for Allies, although less so because the USA player will always tech. But if you sit back and AFK for ISU, you will be overwhelmed by ostwinds/p4s vs good players


have to disagree with you there.

imo, call ins are a huge problems inn 3v3+.

it is easier to hold out for them beause you have teammates to depend on, you just need to know what each others are doing. and in late game, many times it turns into tiger, kt, jt, isu152 fest which is boring and non doc tanks cept panthers get out classed way too much
6 Nov 2014, 02:54 AM
#12
avatar of Hitman5

Posts: 467

I think the best solution is probably where players are actually forced to spend fuel, otherwise the issue may not change in some cases and it's simply a further delay.

I think Solution 1 + Solution 2 (but not as extreme) would be the best option imo. Also agree that cool down timers need to be increased. I think around 6-8 minutes would be enough.
6 Nov 2014, 03:00 AM
#13
avatar of dpfarce

Posts: 308

the King Tiger isn't a call in.

The Jagdtiger costs 435 non-OKW fuel. That is extremely difficult to 'spam'.

While it may seem easier to rely on your teammates for protection, this isn't the case. If you want an example of allied super medium armour spam, take a look at the most recent game that I have casted.

This is not to say that people don't use call-in tanks, should the game get late. But the Early-Mid-SuperLate strategy is not an effective strategy in high level 4v4s.
6 Nov 2014, 03:28 AM
#14
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

the King Tiger isn't a call in.

1. The Jagdtiger costs 435 non-OKW fuel. That is extremely difficult to 'spam'.

2. While it may seem easier to rely on your teammates for protection, this isn't the case. If you want an example of allied super medium armour spam, take a look at the most recent game that I have casted.

3. This is not to say that people don't use call-in tanks, should the game get late. But the Early-Mid-SuperLate strategy is not an effective strategy in high level 4v4s.


my bad about kt.

1. i wasnt talking about spam. it is a super effective call in and i believe this thread talks about efectiveness of call ins. and i dont know how you get 435 fuel, unless you are coutning 66% fuel income which is silly because okw gets plethora of other advantages for that disadvantage.

2. well i guess its my words against yours but it is totally the case for me. it is totally viable for 2 out of 4 germans players to hold out for tigers or jt while they fend off with paks and 2 other guys medium armors.

3. i don't really get what you are saying there. but even if all players go for t3 or t4 and get non-doc tanks, because of a huge amount of caches usually involved with 3v3+, unless the players are bleeding tanks left and right, doctrinal choices for tanks, t34/85, is2, special sherman, tiger, and some more eclipse the effectiveness of non doc tanks pretty easily.
6 Nov 2014, 03:56 AM
#15
avatar of dpfarce

Posts: 308




3. i don't really get what you are saying there. but even if all players go for t3 or t4 and get non-doc tanks, because of a huge amount of caches usually involved with 3v3+, unless the players are bleeding tanks left and right, doctrinal choices for tanks, t34/85, is2, special sherman, tiger, and some more eclipse the effectiveness of non doc tanks pretty easily.


I agree with you, that doctrinal tanks are better than non-doctrinal tanks. But I don't believe that is a problem, because why would you want to pick a doctrine that works as a downgrade? Hence I believe the problem lies purely with call-in spam, not with call-ins being better than non-doc tanks.

Furthering your point about the fuel caches in 3v3,4v4; This is why waiting for Call-ins is less effective. High fuel income means that you will have enough fuel for tanks before you hit 10-11 CPs. waiting 3-4 CPs while your opponents run around with 5+ medium tanks, I believe is highly dangerous
6 Nov 2014, 04:00 AM
#16
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

Hey Ciez you have some good points. Very well articulated post with calculations and reasonable thinking. While i wholeheartedly agree that call-in meta is a very big problem, i want to point out some important things.

1. Not all factions have the same degree of call-in dependency (OKW, and to some extent Ostheer and USF).
2. USSR relies on call-ins to be competitive,

I would advise against blanket changes to the tech and call-in system without careful inspection of problematic factions. EX: hitting call-ins would not really affect OKW (unless you really need that Jagdtiger), but would hurt the Soviet faction a lot due to their lackluster core units. Not saying i do not support your proposals ( i 100 percent support change in call-in meta), but there are some individual cases that must be addressed along with call-in changes.
6 Nov 2014, 04:05 AM
#17
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053



I agree with you, that doctrinal tanks are better than non-doctrinal tanks. But I don't believe that is a problem, because why would you want to pick a doctrine that works as a downgrade? Hence I believe the problem lies purely with call-in spam, not with call-ins being better than non-doc tanks.

Furthering your point about the fuel caches in 3v3,4v4; This is why waiting for Call-ins is less effective. High fuel income means that you will have enough fuel for tanks before you hit 10-11 CPs. waiting 3-4 CPs while your opponents run around with 5+ medium tanks, I believe is highly dangerous


I played a game where (when WC1 was CP 1) my enemy sacrificed his riflemen squad in order to get out his WC1 faster. If you sacrfice your stock infantry, then you get CP's faster than tweedling your thumbs for the CP. If you or your enemy is aggressive, then you also get CP's faster for killing units and losing units. In the long run, its worth speeding up the CP's for callins. Timing of CP's isnt always the same.
6 Nov 2014, 04:13 AM
#18
avatar of Jinseual

Posts: 598

The only problem I see with the game is that once you see a Tiger come into the field, you will see a lot more Tigers, soon if the game goes on long enough there will be more Heavy tanks than there have ever been medium tanks. The Heavy tanks are also a lot more cost efficient and sometimes were thrown away only to be easily replaced. Relic should probably limit the number of heavy tanks a player can call in like You can only call on 3 Tigers in one game, and 2 Elefants and 1 JadgTiger but that's it.

Or the best one yet, is to make tanks have a fuel upkeep, and Heavy tanks have a significantly more higher fuel upkeep then mediums. Just a thought.
6 Nov 2014, 04:24 AM
#19
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Hey Ciez you have some good points. Very well articulated post with calculations and reasonable thinking. While i wholeheartedly agree that call-in meta is a very big problem, i want to point out some important things.

1. Not all factions have the same degree of call-in dependency (OKW, and to some extent Ostheer and USF).
2. USSR relies on call-ins to be competitive,

I would advise against blanket changes to the tech and call-in system without careful inspection of problematic factions. EX: hitting call-ins would not really affect OKW (unless you really need that Jagdtiger), but would hurt the Soviet faction a lot due to their lackluster core units. Not saying i do not support your proposals ( i 100 percent support change in call-in meta), but there are some individual cases that must be addressed along with call-in changes.


Yeah I think my next essay will be on the relative power level between the mediums, heavies and even super heavies. It is just insane. P4 vs T34 is pretty even, but either of those vs Tiger or IS-2 is hopeless. Likewise Is-2 vs Tiger is somewhat even (I think the Tiger still wins?) but either of those vs an ISU or Ele or JT is, once again hopeless. It's like the difference in high school football(soccer), college football(soccer) and then world cup football(soccer).

I think that Soviet could compete though if Ost call-ins were harder to reach since you generally fight their call-ins with your own. A bigger fear of mine would be Ost vs USF. The P4 is complete garbage against the Jackson - at least the Tiger has enough HP to back off and hide behind PaKs. But yes, you make a good point - it would certainly be something to test.
6 Nov 2014, 05:05 AM
#20
avatar of FestiveLongJohns
Patrion 15

Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2

I think the reasons for changing the call in structure are obvious, and relic is aware of them. I personally like leaving the most strategic options available, and I don't know if option 1 allows for this. I think that those who wish to stall for call ins should still have that option available to them, but at a significant risk.

Pushing back the CP requirement would allow those that choose to tech to punish their opponent, but this is sort of counter intuitive, because shock units tend to rack up the XP on both sides, and this shortens the window needed for these units to make a significant impact before the bigger, badder call ins arrive.

Perhaps a combination of a small CP increase, and option 3 could be used. I would love to see a relevant mid game again, I hope relic has something in the works. I don't know how much more of the call in meta I can stomach.
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

701 users are online: 1 member and 700 guests
Farlon
2 posts in the last 24h
36 posts in the last week
136 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45066
Welcome our newest member, Fid McSauce
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM