The time factor

Agreed. People just want to put an MG42 in a defensive position where it can cover the whole area with it's wide arc and call it a day. God forbid that you should smoke it and kill.

but you can already smoke it and kill it in Live games!

tada, thats where im getting at.

eee-sports, more like eek-sports

You are forced to tech because the alternative is having stronger low tier units dominating making everything else irrelevant. The game gave you "illusion" of choice.


As Aerohank said before, it's a problem with how the economy system works in COH2. You are incentivized to get units which require fuel to get, because those are the only units which are efficient mp wise. The game is not about who get's more fuel, is about who get's to make the most cost efficient mp trades as manpower is a constant resource which can't be improved.

Throughout the lifespan of COH2, mp only units, early light vehicls and munition based upgrades/abilities have been nerfed progressively therefore making teching a must. The final nail in the coffin has been call in vehicles requiring tech (which on the other hand made obsolete tech units otherwise).



If you want a prolonged early game phase then we should return to:

-Stronger snipers, which forces more infantry squads (in order to overwhlem) and light vehicles to be used.
-Rollback nerfs to mortars, which makes artillery units not necessary as much.
-Rollback nerfs to all light vehicles and light tanks, which makes them mandatory to be tech, build and counter.
-Nerf/removal of snares. You'll need more infantry squads early on to deal with vehicles.
-Rollback nerfs to MGs.
-Rollback nerfs to mines.

You are forced to tech because the alternative is having stronger low tier units dominating making everything else irrelevant. The game gave you "illusion" of choice.


As Aerohank said before, it's a problem with how the economy system works in COH2. You are incentivized to get units which require fuel to get, because those are the only units which are efficient mp wise. The game is not about who get's more fuel, is about who get's to make the most cost efficient mp trades as manpower is a constant resource which can't be improved.

Throughout the lifespan of COH2, mp only units, early light vehicls and munition based upgrades/abilities have been nerfed progressively therefore making teching a must. The final nail in the coffin has been call in vehicles requiring tech (which on the other hand made obsolete tech units otherwise).



If you want a prolonged early game phase then we should return to:

-Stronger snipers, which forces more infantry squads (in order to overwhlem) and light vehicles to be used.
-Rollback nerfs to mortars, which makes artillery units not necessary as much.
-Rollback nerfs to all light vehicles and light tanks, which makes them mandatory to be tech, build and counter.
-Nerf/removal of snares. You'll need more infantry squads early on to deal with vehicles.
-Rollback nerfs to MGs.
-Rollback nerfs to mines.

Not really, one was not forced to rush to last tier (and back tech).

Game pacing ("prolonged early") is not the "rush final tier" syndrome.

Point here is that there is change that has being going on with patch and it continues with this patch. And the question is is this good direction or not?

If it a good change lets make tech choices irrelevant for all faction and be done with (make all tech linear).

If it not a good change lets stop moving at that direction.

Not really, one was not forced to rush to last tier (and back tech).

Game pacing ("prolonged early") is not the "rush final tier" syndrome.

Explain further cause i don't get your point. I'm saying that before, you were not forced to tech because you could either win with low tier units, light vehicles and/or then transition to call in vehicles. Teching becomes mandatory once you nerf those winning conditions.

Point here is that there is change that has being going on with patch and it continues with this patch. And the question is is this good direction or not?

If it a good change lets make tech choices irrelevant for all faction and be done with (make all tech linear).

If it not a good change lets stop moving at that direction.

Well, it's the only path to take if you want units to not be overpowered (even though they have weaknesses).

Explain further cause i don't get your point. I'm saying that before, you were not forced to tech because you could either win with low tier units, light vehicles and/or then transition to call in vehicles. Teching becomes mandatory once you nerf those winning conditions.

There are many tech changes:
Tech become progressively cheaper (and comes even cheaper in the patch)
Back teching become more cheaper/easier
Call in unit are practically tech units now
Final tier now provides bonuses for most factions.

All that have create a "rush the final tier" syndrome. Question is that a good design?
Imo the answer is no

Well, it's the only path to take if you want units to not be overpowered (even though they have weaknesses).

No it not there are plenty of option to to avoid the "rush the final tier" syndrome.

The only question here is if "rush the final tier" syndrome is superior design. If it is make tech "linear" for all faction and be done with. (it would make think allot easier to balance)

If it not lets stop going down this path or even back truck in some point so that there are other option instead of having to "rush final tier" in every single game.

Explain further cause i don't get your point. I'm saying that before, you were not forced to tech because you could either win with low tier units, light vehicles and/or then transition to call in vehicles. Teching becomes mandatory once you nerf those winning conditions.

For people who do not know what it means, its all the "cheeze" and "op crutch" everyone was so happy to see removed from early and early-mid game that allowed wins before med tank phase.
In the aftermath of these changes over the years, nothing else remains but rush to end tech as that is the only thing that can reliably seal the game anymore.

There are many tech changes:
Tech become progressively cheaper (and comes even cheaper in the patch)
Back teching become more cheaper/easier
Call in unit are practically tech units now
Final tier now provides bonuses for most factions.

All that have create a "rush the final tier" syndrome. Question is that a good design?
Imo the answer is no


No it not there are plenty of option to to avoid the "rush the final tier" syndrome.

The only question here is if "rush the final tier" syndrome is superior design. If it is make tech "linear" for all faction and be done with. (it would make think allot easier to balance)

If it not lets stop going down this path or even back truck in some point so that there are other option instead of having to "rush final tier" in every single game.

You are only giving me a "no it's not" answer. I've already given you a reason as to why it happens and we can take a look back at how the game has progressed and why.

Tech becomes cheaper and accesible because the tools those limited tiers provide are no longer good on their own.

The question is simple: can you win with low tier units and light vehicles without the need of teching at all? The answer is not because we purposely nerf those options.

There are many tech changes:
Tech become progressively cheaper (and comes even cheaper in the patch)
Back teching become more cheaper/easier
Call in unit are practically tech units now
Final tier now provides bonuses for most factions.

All that have create a "rush the final tier" syndrome. Question is that a good design?
Imo the answer is no


No it not there are plenty of option to to avoid the "rush the final tier" syndrome.

The only question here is if "rush the final tier" syndrome is superior design. If it is make tech "linear" for all faction and be done with. (it would make think allot easier to balance)

If it not lets stop going down this path or even back truck in some point so that there are other option instead of having to "rush final tier" in every single game.

Honestly I totally do not agree with you. The design now is vastly superior to earlier stages of the game.

More expensive tech doesn't make the game more diverse. Tech doesn't cap the VPs nor kill the enemy so players just end up not teching what they don't absolutely need. A good example we see in game are the molotovs - players can use conscripts for 50 minutes and never tech molotovs. This is not something that makes the game more fun.

Making call-in units tech units has been the single best change this game has gone through in its entire lifespan. Before this, your only counter to call-in doctrines were other call-in doctrines. As again, tech doesn't do any DPS, so if your opponent is spending his 230 fuel on a tiger, and you are spending your 230 fuel on T4 and a T34/76, you lose. This was horrible game design. It absolutely killed diversity.

Making back-teching more feasable is another great change as it prevents the 50-minute games where you only play with 30% of your roster.

Honestly I have no idea what your ideal version of CoH2 looks like. Do you want people to go back to only using call-in commanders? Do you want some factions not to have access to basic tools like AT guns or healing without paying extreme amounts of resources for them if they decided to Soviet T1 or OKW T2 respectively?

You are only giving me a "no it's not" answer. I've already given you a reason as to why it happens and we can take a look back at how the game has progressed and why.

Tech becomes cheaper and accesible because the tools those limited tiers provide are no longer good on their own.

The question is simple: can you win with low tier units and light vehicles without the need of teching at all? The answer is not because we purposely nerf those options.

We are not talking about wining in low tier, we are talking about making "rushing last tier" the best option.

This sentence says it all:
"While the upgrade could have stood on its own, it did not give an incentive for players to rush towards their final tier.."

The Mobile reserves can be viable as T3 upgrade but we choose to move back to T4 because we want players to rush the final Tier.

This is choice not a necessity.

....

I fully understood your opinion and respect it. I simply would like to see what other people think.

Tying premium medium to t4 was an improvement (although there where other option or implementations) but having all call in tied to tech is unnecessary (and killed allot of doctrinal vehicles) and the current implementation if far from perfect.

I have my own personal vision of how thing could work in Coh2 but this is not about what I would like to see. This about a direction that has been taken is it being slowly implemented and imo it should be thought and debated more before one continues down this path.

We are not talking about wining in low tier, we are talking about making "rushing last tier" the best option.

This sentence says it all:
"While the upgrade could have stood on its own, it did not give an incentive for players to rush towards their final tier.."

The Mobile reserves can be viable as T3 upgrade but we choose to move back to T4 because we want to player rush to the final Tier.

This is choice not a necessity.

I guess you are too dense to comprehend a simple concept. I'm leaving this conversation.

I guess you are too dense to comprehend a simple concept. I'm leaving this conversation.

bye bye and Happy holidays.

Vipper I made two lenghty posts to find out what you are talking about and I still don't know what your point is. This thread made it to 50+ posts now and keeps going in circles.

You keep repeating 'rushing final tier' and present it as bad but don't give reasoning besides e.g. 'stale build order' which in turn is just a claim without back up.

Back up your claims, otherwise this thread is pretty nonesense. Multiple people had to guess what the main underlying point of yours is and agreed that it likely is either tech timing and/or the need to tech up at all, then they pointed out the consequences of alternatives (like call ins or viable strong LV strats etc, which we already had in the game). You in turn keep repeating that these arguments were not the main point of the discussion and that it were about last tier rushes. You completely ignore the core of these arguments.

What is this?

Vipper I made two lenghty posts to find out what you are talking about and I still don't know what your point is. This thread made it to 50+ posts now and keeps going in circles.

You keep repeating 'rushing final tier' and present it as bad but don't give reasoning besides e.g. 'stale build order' which in turn is just a claim without back up.

Back up your claims, otherwise this thread is pretty nonesense. Multiple people had to guess what the main underlying point of yours is and agreed that it likely is either tech timing and/or the need to tech up at all, then they pointed out the consequences of alternatives (like call ins or viable strong LV strats etc, which we already had in the game). You in turn keep repeating that these arguments were not the main point of the discussion and that it were about last tier rushes. You completely ignore the core of these arguments.

What is this?

There is little point to argue if the "rush to final tier" is happening or not, it is happening.

Take the mobilize reserves upgrade in ver 3 for instance it was buffed and move to T3 as a sidetech. Then the mod team decided it should stay buffed and come for free at T4 not because it would not work in T3 but because they wanted to people to rush T4.

Even someone does not believe that "rush to final tier" is happening I have little reason to argue with him, because this thread is about his opinion weather such path is good or not.

This thread is about people giving their opinion if that is a good thing or a bad thing. Aerohank has clearly said that he likes changes that make tech linear and not a choice for players and mrgame2 has already posted that he does not like these direction. This is thread where people can say if the like it or not and say what in their opinion the benefit of the direction they prefer are.

If people actually think that tech should only be there as time constrain I would suggest that instead of buffing lower tier units to make all faction tech linear and be done with.

If people prefer that tech choice are meaningful I would suggest to stop the "final tier rush" mentality and make other tech option viable strategy.

There is little point to argue if the "rush to final tier" is happening or not, it is happening.

This is factually incorrect. In the current meta LVs are very popular. You can't rush for a final tier and spend fuel on LVs at the same time. That's not how rushing works.

Take the mobilize reserves upgrade in ver 3 for instance it was buffed and move to T3 as a sidetech. Then the mod team decided it should stay buffed and come for free at T4 not because it would not work in T3 but because they wanted to people to rush T4.

The idea was probably to give the player the option between going T70 or going for earlier upgraded infantry. You still have not explained why giving players and option of rushing high tech is a bad thing.

If people prefer that tech choice are meaningful I would suggest to stop the "final tier rush" mentality and make other tech option viable strategy.

Other tech choices are viable. Nobody is skipping over LVs in 1v1. The exception perhaps being 4v4s, which I honestly think is fine since it simulates bigger battles which would have more heavier equipment involved.

There is little point to argue if the "rush to final tier" is happening or not, it is happening.

Compare to when? Release+1-2 years? Maybe. But you yourself said that these versions are so old you don't want to discuss them. There were true medium rush metas 2-3 years ago. Also as Aerohank said, LVs have become mandatory or at least meta 2 years ago so there seems to be incentive not to rush mediums/final tier.

snip

Multiple people have provided their opinions about your claim as well as the alternatives, yet you brush those off as "not the point of this thread".

You also made a lot of claims and do not back them up.
How does making mostly backteching more available decrease unit/build diversity? There are some points to be made for this but a lot against, and you keep ignoring the ones against. What are the alternatives? You don't discuss any of them although others and I have pointed towards them. And there is absolutely no use to saying a direction were "good" or "bad" if you neglect the alternatives.

This is factually incorrect. In the current meta LVs are very popular. You can't rush for a final tier and spend fuel on LVs at the same time. That's not how rushing works.

No it not factually incorrect, many patch changes have increased the benefits of getting final tier. That does not mean that one can survive getting to final tier without producing any vehicles at all.

There is little point in arguing on this, the question is not weather is happening or not but weather it should be happening or not.

The idea was probably to give the player the option between going T70 or going for earlier upgraded infantry. You still have not explained why giving players and option of rushing high tech is a bad thing.

And imo it was a good idea, the player could make a decision on how he wants to player the game.

Imo changes that turn tech choices into "brain dead" decision are in the wrong direction.

I see not benefit from bundling molotovs and AT grenades for instance or having the option to unlock MR at T3 and pay resources for it when it comes for free at T4. Most players have forgot that it was even an option.

If one wants to make all faction tech linear like ostheer, one should simply make BP upgrades for all faction be done with it. I personally prefer when faction are designed differently, play differently and tech differently.

I also prefer it when the gap between meta strategies and off meta strategies in narrow and going off meta does not mean auto defeat.

I also prefer when the player can choose when to tech or what to tech in each stage of the game. Imo it add an extra level to game instead of simply having to micro units.

Other tech choices are viable. Nobody is skipping over LVs in 1v1. The exception perhaps being 4v4s, which I honestly think is fine since it simulates bigger battles which would have more heavier equipment involved.

And they are becoming less viable with each patch, that does not mean some will skip light vehicle, it simply means that one is encouraged to get to his final tier ASP.

The majority of people will already built their final, I see not reason whyd there be further encouragement to getting faster to T4. I would rather give them option choosing other options instead.

Did making the majority of call in, require tech improved the game? Imo it did not, it simply killed a number of unit and strategies.

Compare to when? Release+1-2 years? Maybe. But you yourself said that these versions are so old you don't want to discuss them. There were true medium rush metas 2-3 years ago. Also as Aerohank said, LVs have become mandatory or at least meta 2 years ago so there seems to be incentive not to rush mediums/final tier.

Stalling for call in has been a viable strategy until it was completely removed around a year ago.

As already explained that does not mean that tone will go for their final tier without building any vehicle at all. One will simply the way that allow him to get the there the fastest.

Multiple people have provided their opinions about your claim as well as the alternatives, yet you brush those off as "not the point of this thread".

They have not provided their opinion on weather tech should be a simple time limitation and "rushing for final tier" should be encouraged or not.

Only Aerohank and mrgame2 have provided their opinion. Even you have not provided your opinion on this question. Do you agree with Aerohank who thinks making all faction having a similar tech system in game would fine:

"I wouldn't mind if in CoH3 each faction had an Ostheer-like tech design. With Ostheer you have to make strategic choices on how you spend your resources, but you have the freedom to assign these resources wherever you see fit. "?

You also made a lot of claims and do not back them up.
How does making mostly backteching more available decrease unit/build diversity?

It does not. What it does it making rushing for final tier more viable since one can gain the bonus of the final tier like: MR, all out war, Anvil/Hammer bonuses, Major bonuses with sacrificing less.

It becomes more of "braindead" decision instead of calculated the pro and cons of the options.

What reduced the unit diversity is overlap of unit from higher tier. One will simply not build a SU-76 if the SU-85 is available and it clearly a better choice.

What reduces build order diversity is if there is gap between tech choices. If the a single tech is so impactful that it is must one will simply choose the build order that allow him to go for that tech faster.

There are some points to be made for this but a lot against, and you keep ignoring the ones against. What are the alternatives? You don't discuss any of them although others and I have pointed towards them. And there is absolutely no use to saying a direction were "good" or "bad" if you neglect the alternatives.

There many alternatives:
Keep MR in T3 now that it buffed so the player has choice when and if to unlock it.

Keep AT grenades and Molotvs separate so a player can choose when or if he want to unlock them

Make certain unit call in (not mainline tanks) so player have the option to use them instead of
having to use their final tier.

Make end tier unit more specialized that they do not make lower tier unit complete obsolete.

In the end of the day make a decision and stick with it, instead of adding bandaid on bandaid:

Either make all factions with completely linear tech like Ostheer and designed them accordingly
or
Accept that some faction will have holes in their roaster and make sure they are viable even with those holes...

Stalling for call in has been a viable strategy until it was completely removed around a year ago.

As already explained that does not mean that tone will go for their final tier without building any vehicle at all. One will simply the way that allow him to get the there the fastest.

As I already said, call in strats bring their own problems. Their removal brought more good than harm which seems to be the general concencus in this community since I can't remember a huge discussion seriously doubting this decision, quite the contrary actually.

... Even you have not provided your opinion on this question. Do you agree with Aerohank who thinks making all faction having a similar tech system in game would fine:

"I wouldn't mind if in CoH3 each faction had an Ostheer-like tech design. With Ostheer you have to make strategic choices on how you spend your resources, but you have the freedom to assign these resources wherever you see fit. "?

I have stated that the current build of the game is better than the previous ones we had, so the direction so far has been good in most cases.
Ostheer's teching system is complicated but probably the best one to time units and allow for strategic choices. It is a nightmare to balance though, plus the current design of some CoH2 factions does not allow for an Ostheer like teching (you can't strip away any more units if the faction was already designed with holes in the rooster by default), so this discussion for CoH2 is quite useless. For CoH3 it is an interesting one.

It does not. What it does it making rushing for final tier more viable since one can gain the bonus of the final tier like: MR, all out war, Anvil/Hammer bonuses, Major bonuses with sacrificing less.

Which one is it then? Because previously you said this:

That imo creates a number of problems. One of the biggest is greatly decreases build diversity since player are "given an incentive to rush towards their final tier" creating a singe optimum tech choice.

It becomes more of "braindead" decision instead of calculated the pro and cons of the options.

The main alternative to up teching were call ins. Those got removed because They allowed a player to save a shit ton of fuel by not teching at all and investing everything into the call in tanks. Players that teched instead could be absolutely devastated. In general, there is nothing bad about this system, but it does not work in CoH2: Because you cannot know if your opponent techs or not since the base sector is not accessible (I think Elchino already made that point). There is barely any counterplay to call in strats until it is already too late, therefore they got removed. The units were made viable in a different way though: As real alternatives to stock units.
Yes, "strategy" in terms of "do I tech up or not" was removed. What was not removed is your choice of units, which contributes to the strategical/tactical decision making. Instead, the changes even increased the diversity.

There many alternatives:
Keep MR in T3 now that it buffed so the player has choice when and if to unlock it.

Keep AT grenades and Molotvs separate so a player can choose when or if he want to unlock them

Make certain unit call in (not mainline tanks) so player have the option to use them instead of
having to use their final tier.

Make end tier unit more specialized that they do not make lower tier unit complete obsolete.

In the end of the day make a decision and stick with it, instead of adding bandaid on bandaid:

Either make all factions with completely linear tech like Ostheer and designed them accordingly
or
Accept that some faction will have holes in their roaster and make sure they are viable even with those holes...

Most of these alternatives won't do anything towars the point you critisize
No player will skip T4 because of MR (or AT nades/molotovs, you can see them in the current build already that you are critisizing).
Are you talking about doctrinal call in vehicles? Or making stock units default call ins? Because if it is the first then no player will skip the final tier.

And as I said above: If a faction is designed with holes already, then it is hard to strip more units. These factions need a full tech tree OR OP units to make up for these holes and the predictability of their game style.

You can throw a lot of alternative ideas out, but if you are convinced by them you must provide some reasoning why they could be better than the current implementation.

As I already said, call in strats bring their own problems. Their removal brought more good than harm which seems to be the general concencus in this community since I can't remember a huge discussion seriously doubting this decision, quite the contrary actually.

And the complete removal of call in units created an equal amount of problem, a large number for units where simply left to oblivion while certain stock units that enabled the strategy also suffered the same fate.

Middle ground exist and is viable.

I have stated that the current build of the game is better than the previous ones we had, so the direction so far has been good in most cases.
Ostheer's teching system is complicated but probably the best one to time units and allow for strategic choices. It is a nightmare to balance though, plus the current design of some CoH2 factions does not allow for an Ostheer like teching (you can't strip away any more units if the faction was already designed with holes in the rooster by default), so this discussion for CoH2 is quite useless. For CoH3 it is an interesting one.

One can do what ever ones likes, there are many option and all is need a vision, because currently it does not seem to be one.

One simply has to decide if all tech should linear or not and adjust the patch changes accordingly.

The discussion is far from useless since tech change continue to happen and the questions is very relevant. Should the change go toward a linear teching for all faction or should faction retain as much of the tech identity as possible.

Which one is it then? Because previously you said this:

I explain in detail what it is, it is the combination. Having more than one viable tech option in my opinion is good for the game and can increase build order diversity. It is as simple as that.

The main alternative to up teching were call ins.

No.
Different faction worked differently, OStheer/UKF had a linear teching
OKW/USF had choice tehcing
Soviet has a little bit of both and access to numerous doctrinal options.

Those got removed because They allowed a player to save a shit ton of fuel by not teching at all and investing everything into the call in tanks. Players that teched instead could be absolutely devastated. In general, there is nothing bad about this system, but it does not work in CoH2: Because you cannot know if your opponent techs or not since the base sector is not accessible (I think Elchino already made that point). There is barely any counterplay to call in strats until it is already too late, therefore they got removed. The units were made viable in a different way though: As real alternatives to stock units.
Yes, "strategy" in terms of "do I tech up or not" was removed. What was not removed is your choice of units, which contributes to the strategical/tactical decision making. Instead, the changes even increased the diversity.

Removing main battle tank call in was step in the right direction, removing most call in is not and has created a number of issues.

Most of these alternatives won't do anything towars the point you critisize
No player will skip T4 because of MR (or AT nades/molotovs, you can see them in the current build already that you are critisizing).

We are not talking about skipping about T4 we are talking about making it desirable as soon as possible or an option better suited depending on the factor of a specific game (resources available, strategy, opponents strategy, map, game duration...).

Are you talking about doctrinal call in vehicles? Or making stock units default call ins? Because if it is the first then no player will skip the final tier.

And as I said above: If a faction is designed with holes already, then it is hard to strip more units. These factions need a full tech tree OR OP units to make up for these holes and the predictability of their game style.

I have not suggested that faction with holes in them should have bigger holes. I simply pointed that one to choose of either completely removing these holes or decided to keep the original design and find other solution instead of adding bandaid over bandaid.

You can throw a lot of alternative ideas out, but if you are convinced by them you must provide some reasoning why they could be better than the current implementation.

I brought alternatives ideas because you asked me to. Point here is that we not keeping the current implementation or the original faction but we are moving toward a direction so the question is if the direction is good or not.

I have to guess from your post that you agree with Aerohank that the different tech systems of faction do not actually adding anything to game and if all faction had a linear tech system thing would be fine. (Hope I have represented Aerohank opinion correctly and apologies if I have not)