Hi all, wanted to out forth a thread to discuss something I feel has been neglected in the grand scheme of balance--economic drain.
Long and short, I think some units could be better balanced with the adoption of additional economic strain.
Its a rough idea but here's what I'm thinking:
Large caliber arty: a l munitions income penalty per unit. This will reduce off maps as well as things like mines and make turtling a little less oppressive.
"odd ducks" units like the Sturmtiger and calliope who are devistatingly hard to balance and have unique and fun. Basically have them manually reload (like the sturmtiger) but require munitions to do so. The cost could be adjusted with vet but ultimately they then become a strong unit but requires balanced use or will sink your economy.
Semi elite heavy Armour: units that are iconic but neutered in performance due to the ability to build multiple, slap on a fuel income reduction per and make the units great again. This makes replacing them tougher and having a slight drawback ensures they can be more well rounded and authentic.
As a whole I feel like the mechanism of "economic drain" as a balance tool is forgotten, likely due to the all in nature of the old tiger ace, but I feel it has application.
Economic balance
31 Dec 2020, 20:31 PM
#1
Posts: 5279
#stalinwept
31 Dec 2020, 21:05 PM
#2
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
Sturmtiger with muni based manual reload? WTF?
Static Howitzers already take up a huge chunk of pop cap and reduce your MP income so why do they need to bleed your muni income too?
All of what you suggested makes balancing 10x harder and totally impossible because the number of valuables increases even more. Bad idea.
Static Howitzers already take up a huge chunk of pop cap and reduce your MP income so why do they need to bleed your muni income too?
All of what you suggested makes balancing 10x harder and totally impossible because the number of valuables increases even more. Bad idea.
31 Dec 2020, 22:21 PM
#3
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
To be honest I think these are mostly bad ideas.
Unicorns like the Sturmtiger must be made very cheap to buy then if you constantly pay for them to do anything at all. Why should those be the only unit that need mun to use them? Calliope is not a unicorn, it is a normal rocket arty albeit a strong one.
I assume you count the Panther towards the semi-heavy tanks. But the unit is a necessary part of Axis AT builds, especially if Allies call in heavy tanks. Why should building one reduce fuel income?
Overall I think your post fails to explain why these unit types cannot be balanced around their cost like any other unit.
Unicorns like the Sturmtiger must be made very cheap to buy then if you constantly pay for them to do anything at all. Why should those be the only unit that need mun to use them? Calliope is not a unicorn, it is a normal rocket arty albeit a strong one.
I assume you count the Panther towards the semi-heavy tanks. But the unit is a necessary part of Axis AT builds, especially if Allies call in heavy tanks. Why should building one reduce fuel income?
Overall I think your post fails to explain why these unit types cannot be balanced around their cost like any other unit.
31 Dec 2020, 22:25 PM
#4
Posts: 4928
Personally I am against a unit requiring Munitions to use it's basic attacks. I hated it in CoH1 with the Calliope sitting around taking up popcap and being useless if you weren't floating Munitions. I never want to see it again, unless maybe it's dirty cheap, no more than 15 munitions or so.
As for Artillery it's an interesting idea, but I'm not convinced Artillery needs it. On-map artillery is easily countered by off-map artillery or other on-map artillery.
As for Artillery it's an interesting idea, but I'm not convinced Artillery needs it. On-map artillery is easily countered by off-map artillery or other on-map artillery.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
31 Dec 2020, 22:29 PM
#5
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
To be honest I think these are mostly bad ideas.
+1
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
31 Dec 2020, 22:32 PM
#6
Posts: 1515
Arty spam is only a 4v4 problem. Seldom in 3v3 (well coordinated arranged teams). It's a problem that can't be balanced. You could increase the pop by a bit but that's it.
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
https://coh2stats.com/players/76561198031032150
https://coh2stats.com/players/76561198031032150
1 Jan 2021, 05:44 AM
#7
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Bad idea.
As far as 3v3+ games goes, wouldn't it be much better if the max popcap was reduced? Less volume of units?
Or we just accept people like to see blobs of units and tanks clash in 2 lanes?
As far as 3v3+ games goes, wouldn't it be much better if the max popcap was reduced? Less volume of units?
Or we just accept people like to see blobs of units and tanks clash in 2 lanes?
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
1 Jan 2021, 07:43 AM
#8
Posts: 4928
3v3 and 4v4 could see both popcap and resources reduced imo. The game chugs on 4v4 anyway with all the units and effects present.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
1 Jan 2021, 10:42 AM
#9
Posts: 124
Sturmtiger with muni based manual reload? WTF?
Static Howitzers already take up a huge chunk of pop cap and reduce your MP income so why do they need to bleed your muni income too?
All of what you suggested makes balancing 10x harder and totally impossible because the number of valuables increases even more. Bad idea.
+1. Very bad idea.
1 Jan 2021, 11:02 AM
#10
Posts: 170 | Subs: 1
Sturmtiger with muni based manual reload? WTF?
Static Howitzers already take up a huge chunk of pop cap and reduce your MP income so why do they need to bleed your muni income too?
All of what you suggested makes balancing 10x harder and totally impossible because the number of valuables increases even more. Bad idea.
Instead of a muni related nerf to perfectly balanced and viable arty like ML20 that definitely never only get used for meme compilations or as a gamethrow attempt I'd like to increase player choice by being able to invest muni for faster firing rate. Especially Soviet doctrines with the ML20 are mostly meh (shameless soviet fanboying I know
) so a muni ability like "Extra Munitions" for ML20 that reduces their cooldown for the next barrage would actually make many doctrines more viable while increasing strategic resource management opportunities.
1 Jan 2021, 13:34 PM
#11
Posts: 282
The ressources are already balanced by Pop cap which decrease your manpower. Arty are painful only because when vetted they are to powerful for their popcap.
 | Playercard of [DGM] Cain Le Roi Du Pétrole | |||||||||||||||
|
1 Jan 2021, 14:31 PM
#12
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
As a whole I feel like the mechanism of "economic drain" as a balance tool is forgotten, likely due to the all in nature of the old tiger ace, but I feel it has application.
I like the concept but it's probably too significant of a change for coh2
The soviet crew repair ability used to have a munitions penalty while it was active but I'm not sure if that's still a thing
If it's something in the game by default in coh3 I think it does offer some flexibility. But adding it to the current economy of coh is probably really hard
1 Jan 2021, 16:44 PM
#13
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
It's weird how people are so against this idea when this is also the literal way that the maxim is being handled this patch. A unit that only performs in accordance with its MP cost if you keep feeding muni into it.
1 Jan 2021, 21:59 PM
#14
Posts: 1594
I'm still pushing for caps on the numbers of specific units one can field. Ergo: One arty unit, a limited number of TDs, etc. This would help deal with some of the "Spam" that can happen in teamgames.
I still like the idea of team-wide caps on certain things, but this is very unlikely due to players likely being unhappy that they can't get their doctrinal IS2, for example, due to another player having a Pershing.
I still like the idea of team-wide caps on certain things, but this is very unlikely due to players likely being unhappy that they can't get their doctrinal IS2, for example, due to another player having a Pershing.
1 Jan 2021, 22:25 PM
#15
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I'm still pushing for caps on the numbers of specific units one can field. Ergo: One arty unit, a limited number of TDs, etc. This would help deal with some of the "Spam" that can happen in teamgames.
I still like the idea of team-wide caps on certain things, but this is very unlikely due to players likely being unhappy that they can't get their doctrinal IS2, for example, due to another player having a Pershing.
There are multiple and effective ways of dealing with that kind of spam already in game.
If 4v4 heroes are too passive and prefer their WW1 trench and arty warfeare, then nothing can be done about it.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
1 Jan 2021, 23:31 PM
#16
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
I'm still pushing for caps on the numbers of specific units one can field. Ergo: One arty unit, a limited number of TDs, etc. This would help deal with some of the "Spam" that can happen in teamgames.
I still like the idea of team-wide caps on certain things, but this is very unlikely due to players likely being unhappy that they can't get their doctrinal IS2, for example, due to another player having a Pershing.
It would be a way better approach to promote proper counters instead of limiting units and forcefully "promoting" combined arms. If an Axis players wants 3 Panthers he should be free to do so, as long as Allies have the ability to either counter Panthers or mitigate their effectiveness by focusing down the infantry. Limiting units would heavily limit team play as well since players could not "specialize". And sometimes outright kill it, mixed Allied factions could then - your suggestion - only have 1 Katy per Soviet player on the field OR force USF and UKF players into a fistful of doctrines.
Apart from that, there are also a LOT of practical considerations: What do we limit? Only high tier tanks (like currenty heavies)? ALL vehicles? How do we deal with overlapping units, e.g. both Axis tank destroyers? Do they share a common counter? Do Panthers and StuGs count the same? What about mediums: are 3 mediums already too much or considered an acceptable build? Do we limit infantry as well? Maximum of 4 main lines? Do PGrens/Obers count? USF officers? Is USF not allowed to back tech if they already have 4 mainlines out? What do we do with doctrinal infantry in general? Maximum of 2 support weapons per type? If so, what is the exact reason that I need to 2 ATGs plus StuG and mortar instead of 3 ATGs and Ostwind if I want that?
We'd either have to set these caps high enough so they would probably not matter at all or so low that there will be only a couple of viable builds by default (not even talking about the meta here).
There is no reason for that. If someone wants to pull off a surprisal weird ass strategy, let him do it. The only question is if the opponent not only has the skill, but also the tools to set up a counter-strategy in time. As long as he has the tools available, there will be no need for any unit caps.
2 Jan 2021, 04:59 AM
#17
Posts: 5279
#stalinwept
2 Jan 2021, 15:43 PM
#18
Posts: 1594
i think weve already had a chat on this topic- im not a fan of it for the reasons you listed. there are 2 commanders with the is-2 and if i pick one to use the is-2 and miss out because my team mate didnt build a single tank to squirt his out first.... it would lead to a lot of drops, grieving and generally shitty team mates. it would ruin the game i think.
imagine your buddy purposely NOT helping save your heavy because they want to build their own....
I know, that's the main concern, really. It would work fine in arranged teams, but it would catalyse even stupider decisions being made by random players.
Despite arguments that it would "Reduce build diversity", I'd like to see caps of some sort trialled. Generally people don't "Specialise" as has been suggested, what happens is that one side builds ten T-34/85s, and the other builds 10 PVs.
The thing with 3-4v4 is that concentration of force can too easily win you the game. Had a 3v3 yesterday, where despite bleeding my opposite counterpart hard, my teammates were having such an horrendous time that they allowed their counterparts to build up a KV1 and, like, four T-34/85s and suddenly barrel down the centre of the map and roll us into our base. In a 2v2 you might be able to deal with concentration of force like this, but one guy (And his two raketen) against all that? Not really happening. I probably should have had more mines around, but I was strapped for Munitions (and Sturm man-hours) due to hard fighting down the centre of Across the Rhein.
Even if factions have the tools to deal with these sorts of things (Which I'm not certain they do, not without heavy fuel investment, at least), a single person can't do much against such a large wave. Perhaps expecting a single person to be able to deal with two/three at once is a little silly, but you can't always rely on your teammates.
(I'd have peeled off to help my teammates, but the opposing flank players kept trying to flank and crush me. I did make a mistake in building an LEFH a bit too early, but I think the singular Jagdpanzer I'd have been able to get out wouldn't have been enough to help. Man i wish OKW had handheld AT. Sturms don't count, especially not before the Balans patch.)
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
18 | ||
 |
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
282 | ||
 |
|
|
118 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
494 users are online:
494 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM