resource incomes

This is a just a thought to kick around.

Someone the other day, in some thread, I forget which, said that resource incomes - ammo and fuel - were too low. I'm going to suggest the opposite case.

I've been exploring the workshop UGC maps, one of which is a conversion of the Carentan map from CoH1. Whether as an accurate copy or as a choice by the designer, it had fewer strategy points than normal, but the usual pair of ammo and fuel.

And I actually had a great time playing it. The result of fewer points was less fuel and ammo income, which shifted the emphasis onto manpower heavy play. It was much harder to get vehicles, and consequently they were more important. Likewise for weapon upgrades etc. Offmap abilities and the like could not be spammed; putting down a mine was a real cost/benefit decision. Similarly, taking and holding the fuel and ammo points was more important than usual.

There were many knock-on effects. With fewer vehicles, fighting positions and bunkers lived longer and had a more significant impact. Because there were more infantry - because manpower was the dominant resource you had to spend - mortars and MG's were more important.

It felt quite different; I liked it. So I'd just like to throw it out and see what other people think.