Profile of voltardark

Jump back to quoted post15 Aug 2014, 23:55 PMGreeb

This issue is being discussed in plenty of threads, and I agree too.

Mistakes early game are not as relevant as they were in CoH1.
That way is very hard for factions like USF, which specializes in early-middle game, to be relevant in teamgames.

Personally I propose a reduction of the manpower perceived related to your map control.
By doing that, losing map control early game should be more punishing, making more difficult to make comebacks.

Jump back to quoted post15 Aug 2014, 23:04 PMwooof

ok youre right. there is a slight amount of variation in points. but the point i was trying to make was even 1v1 typically have that many points. 14 points is the norm for the vast majority of maps regardless of size. so you can make the claim that large team games should have reduced income because it is multiplied by the number of players, but to reduce fuel because large maps have more points is inaccurate.



thank you for using real numbers and taking the time to make a factually accurate post. i wish more people would do the same.

while your changes would reduce tanks by 1-2 per player (which i would actually welcome), i think the negative consequences would outweigh this.

changing fuel incomes by such a big amount would impact early game timings for every faction other than soviets. for example, the germans pak and 221 would be delayed making soviet t1 harder to counter.

my original point about okw munitions conversion also still stands. reducing all fuel incomes by about 6/min indirectly buffs the munitions conversion relative to other factions. but on the other hand, these changes would also have to be lessened for okw because of how their income was designed. you would have to take less than 1 fuel away from each point for okw players since they already only get 2 fuel per point. then okw is getting a weird fraction like 1.4 fuel per point...

another negative effect this change would have is to make call ins even more attractive. people already dont tech because of the high fuel costs. if you lower fuel income, theres even less reason to tech for tanks. youre not only delaying non doctrinal tanks and making them come out closer to the call ins, but youre also making teching costs have a larger impact. so you either have to redesign teching costs and/or change CP requirements for team games as well.

the point im trying to make is, while having less tanks in team games would probably be a good thing, its not nearly as simple as cutting fuel income. that would have a lot of side effects beyond just what you intend to change.



i think a lot of people would disagree on this point. the jackson may be harder to use, but its one of the best tanks in the game when used well. 60 range, 240 damage td with high speed and a turret and for a low cost as well. its also more accurate than an su85. once it hits vet1, its able to further increase its accuracy by 10% and penetration by 40% with its ability. really the only drawback this thing has is its durability. just keep it at long range and away from infantry (which is where tds should be anyway).