Suggestion: Attach Call-ins to Buildings/Tier again.

How about re-attaching some or all Call-ins to be built from Tier structures, as they once where?

Pro: Rationalises Call-ins a bit back into conventional Buildings/Tiers, at cost and timing.
Cons: Limits some meta possibilities by requiring Tier paths inorder to get specific Call-ins.

Thoughts and analysis?

_____________________________________________________________________________

Second Question:
If Call-ins are attached to Buildings/Tier, should they be instant or built?
( ) -INSTANT
( ) -BUILT

(Copy/paste question and "X" your preference in your post)

I think there should be a building requirement for super vehicles but I don't think they shouild have to be built there. Instant call-in is part of the package.

I think there should be a building requirement for super vehicles but I don't think they shouild have to be built there. Instant call-in is part of the package.

Good point. Unfortunately I cant add questions to the poll anymore...

Added question to OP.

I think the call-ins should require one of either tank building (which doesn't matter), then adjust the fuel costs accordingly. Plus make the T34-85 call-in a single unit like in advanced warfare doctrine.

I agree, all heavies. ISU, IS2, JT, TA, Tiger need to be tied to teching teching teir 4, maybe even have all buildings not sure about that. Also I personally think all Heavy tanks need to be 15 plus cps. More encouragment to use high teir units instead of just relying on Heavy call ins.

What exactly qualifies as a "super" vehicle here? Do medium tanks such as the T34/85 qualify or is it limited to the big beasts like the ISU-152?

Instead of a specific building requirement I think a general tier requirement would be the most effective way at gating vehicle call-ins while still maintaining a lot of teching flexibility. For example, to access heavy tank call-ins a soviet or ost player would need T3 OR T4 built. This way strats such as going T4 as soviets and using the KV-1 call-in for a front line tank would still be viable.

The largest issue with call-ins right now is that by not teching a player can stockpile a large amount of fuel before they hit 10 or 11 CP then spend it all on call-in tanks. If you watch the recent Barton vs Cruzz replay Barton is able to call in 3 ISU-152 in a relatively short time span because he only builds T1 the entire game. Forcing construction of later tier buildings would put an end to these strategies and make the units these tiers produce more competitive with call ins from a total fuel expenditure point of view.

I agree, all heavies. ISU, IS2, JT, TA, Tiger need to be tied to teching teching teir 4, maybe even have all buildings not sure about that. Also I personally think all Heavy tanks need to be 15 plus cps. More encouragment to use high teir units instead of just relying on Heavy call ins.

This.

Me three, I agree.

What exactly qualifies as a "super" vehicle here? Do medium tanks such as the T34/85 qualify or is it limited to the big beasts like the ISU-152?

T34/85 is an anomaly, indeed, that is tough to fit into this suggestion.

Is the double, or the single, a T4 equivalent, or even a Super?
Hard to say, considering mostly its a regunned T34 which exchanges AI for AT.
But I think the other stats on T34/85, iirc, do justify it as a T4 unit. Its sufficiently "better" than T34.

Ive re-written this post no less than 6 times in the last hour, cos I keep critically thinking of angles that negate my previous proposal for this anomalous choice.

I think the best I can do, especially considering Sovs intrinsic split Tier structure, is to propose the following, if Supers became T4 dependant (which so far seems to be the polls preferred option).

Are they a Super? For cost and the efficiency of 2×chassis + 2x barrels. Sort of. The single build option however, is certainly not a Super, and just scrapes T4 equivalence (as compared to the usual T34 chassis)
But its also just basically a regunned T34 (T3 unit), with a small overall stat improvement.

____________________________________________________________________________________

So as a compromise, Id suggest it so:
-That T3 can "upgrade" existing T34s to T34/85s, for the difference in cost, with T34/85 Commander.
-That T4 can build/callin them as they are, with T34/85 Commander.

____________________________________________________________________________________

This way, atleast in part, Sovs split Tier options are reconciled, so that both Tier progressions can build/upgrade for them.
Also, in this way, even a T3-T4 Sov build, can still access T34/85s, in two different ways, and still keeps other unit builds open without undue cost, in either or both tiers, by upgrading existing T3 built T34s, or callin at T4.

You hit me with a hard one, dude!

Discussion definately open on this one.

Adding all call-ins to building would make the game more fum and remove the call-in meta. No more retarded stuff like call-ins > tech and stock vehicles and the price difference.

Assault Grens into T1.
T-34-85 to T3.
Stug-e to T3.

+1 to the general idea

No. They shouldnt. Because that would take away even more possible strategies out of the game.

However, what should happen is that going heavy t3/t4 is overall just as effective as waiting for call in units.

No. They shouldnt. Because that would take away even more possible strategies out of the game.

However, what should happen is that going heavy t3/t4 is overall just as effective as waiting for call in units.

I disagree.
Waiting for heavies is not a strategy that punishes enough at this moment.
(Talking about teamgames, which are just as important as 1v1 games)
Waiting for a tiger isn't that dangerous, so why go for a PIV? Why go for a panther?

On the second thing your said;
If the tiger is as effective as going heavy t3t/t4, why would you go tiger?
No, it has to have something special, something positive about waiting for the call in.

I disagree.

Ive got the feeling that we actually both agree because:

Waiting for heavies is not a strategy that punishes enough at this moment.
(Talking about teamgames, which are just as important as 1v1 games)
Waiting for a tiger isn't that dangerous, so why go for a PIV? Why go for a panther?

thats my exact opinion. Something has to change, no doubt. Going for call ins should be as effective as using core units in t3 or t4, but it currently isnt. That has to change, so that we get access to more viable strategies. Im against removing strategies to make others more viable though.

On the second thing your said;
If the tiger is as effective as going heavy t3t/t4, why would you go tiger?

Because depending on the situation going for a tiger might be a better choice than going for t3/t4. Currently its almost always a better choice. And thats the problem.

Thats why i said it should overall be just as effective, but since we are playing a RTS in certain situations one choice will be simply superior. And thats good: As long as it isnt always superior

However, what should happen is that going heavy t3/t4 is overall just as effective as waiting for call in units.

If you think about it for a minute, thats exactly what the proposal is aimed at achieving.

So inlight of that, either I dont understand what you mean, or you may have misunderstood the actual repercussions of the proposed change.

If you think about it for a minute, thats exactly what the proposal is aimed at achieving.

So inlight of that, either I dont understand what you mean, or you may have misunderstood the actual repercussions of the proposed change.

No your proposal would remove call-in units as we know them and make them tiered units with or without build times.

Havint the option not to tech and invest the ressources you save by doing so in more units should be a viable strategy but also have distinct drawbacks. Thats currently not the case as call in units are just too effective compared to tier core units. Making every unit a tier unit is the most simple solution, but also the one that reduces the amount of strategies the most.

I agree about call in meta, it has to change. I'm hesitant about tying it to structures though.

The best (and simplest) way to go about it without a complete reworking of how the callins function is to significantly raise the cp requirement to match intended role. Super heavies coming very late indeed, dominating heavy/mediums (t34/85, e8) coming late and the designed "medium counters" coming a little later than intended targets. This would punish simply waiting.

I am very much for making all dual tank callins single callins.

I also really like the upgrade 76 to 85 idea, but that is in the complete rework category.

No your proposal would remove call-in units as we know them and make them tiered units with or without build times.

Havint the option not to tech and invest the ressources you save by doing so in more units should be a viable strategy but also have distinct drawbacks.

But it should not be a viable strategy. this shit is slowly killing the game as every doctrine in a 1 vs 1 situation is dependent if its good based on its call ins. Rifle company is not really such big deal except the e8. if it was not for the e8 the other commanders would be way better.

Basically people skip tech 3 and 4 use call ins and both sides expect it. its becoming such a routine to play this game

No your proposal would remove call-in units as we know them and make them tiered units with or without build times.

It doesnt "remove" them at all.
They are still Commander specific, still provide variety and choice, but yes, they would coincide with tiers. And they do so, ironically, for good reason, exactly for the points you explain below.

Havint the option not to tech and invest the ressources you save by doing so in more units should be a viable strategy but also have distinct drawbacks. Thats currently not the case as call in units are just too effective compared to tier core units. Making every unit a tier unit is the most simple solution, but also the one that reduces the amount of strategies the most.

Everything in the post above is infact supportive of the suggestion, and supports it on the points you made.
Its a strange irony. If you wish, I can detail how it does so in PM. Id rather not do so here in the thread since it would potentially lead to a long semantic argument that is in none of our interest, nor the threads

Overall, I think its my fault, because I didnt elaborate enough on the repercussions and details in my OP.

TLDR:
Goddam my complex sentence structure that confuses even me..

Tiering Call-ins would improve diversity by:
A) Making core units more viable.
B) Still allowing Commander Call-ins.
C) Making non- Call-in Commanders more viable and competetive than now.

As we stand now, we depend on Call-ins.
So much of the meta revolves around them.
That is not diversity.

We do agree on the problem, but not on the solution. Which is why Im against your proposal (which I fully understand) because I do not think that it is the best (albeit the most simple. But no: The most simple solution is definitely not always the best one).

There is a good reason why call-in-units tied to tiers were removed a long time ago and quite frankly even with the issues that are present now I dont want to see that return but rather see a different solution.

Skipping tiers and filling the gaps with doctrinal units was viable in vCoH and yet the tier units all had a good place in the game resulting in a lot of different strategies. Thats what I want for CoH2