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

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

1) What is the "good reason" call-in tie to tiers was removed?

2) "Skipping tiers and filling the gaps with doctrinal units" is though exactly what I and some others think is part of the problem in CoH2. Its cutting out tiers, and tier units. Its also cutting out non-Call-in Commanders with an otherwise interesting array of abilities too. Its reducing diversity, and making the game call-in centric and dependant.

3) You say my "simplest solution" is not best. What do recommend you instead?

1) What is the "good reason" call-in tie to tiers was removed?

It greatly limited possible BOs and therefore led to a stale, boring, predictable meta.

2) "Skipping tiers and filling the gaps with doctrinal units" is though exactly what I and some others think is part of the problem in CoH2. Its cutting out tiers, and tier units. Its also cutting out non-Call-in Commanders with an otherwise interesting array of abilities too. Its reducing diversity, and making the game call-in centric and dependant.

That is the design of some doctrines. And you can't see the real problems, which are:

1)Doctrinal units are just raw upgrades over stock ones
2)Costs often prohibit using normal tier armor with conjunction and lack of doctrinal unit hard caps, encouraging spam(mainly for super heavies but this doesn't exclude medium armor)
3)Average at best cost effectiveness and performance of stock units, especially for soviet side as OKW and USF doesn't have this problem.

3) You say my "simplest solution" is not best. What do recommend you instead?

Something that fixes actual problems, not a half arsed solution that doesn't make sense.

1) What is the "good reason" call-in tie to tiers was removed?

2) "Skipping tiers and filling the gaps with doctrinal units" is though exactly what I and some others think is part of the problem in CoH2. Its cutting out tiers, and tier units. Its also cutting out non-Call-in Commanders with an otherwise interesting array of abilities too. Its reducing diversity, and making the game call-in centric and dependant.

3) You say my "simplest solution" is not best. What do recommend you instead?

1) What Katitof said

2) It is part of the problem, in its current form. I'd rather change the form instead of removing the viability of skipping tiers but mitigating the disadvantages of doing so through call ins alltogether.

3) I wont say that I know the perfect solution, but making Ostheer and soviet T4 more attractive would be a start. Furthermore I still think that the pace of the game phases is a problem and in this case that even lategame super units arrive too early. When Im playing a 2v2 I never have the feeling that Im weakening my mid game by waiting for super units too much. Its not "Holding out" for a late call in, but just waiting a bit without having major problems.

It greatly limited possible BOs and therefore led t a stale, boring, predictable meta..

Not as much as the current system which not only squeezes out tier units, but also non-callin-Commanders.

As I outlined, I believe my suggestion results in a net increase in diversity due to:
1) Tiers being built, and hence more core units.
2) Makes non-callin-Commanders more viable.
3) Call-ins are still there, so no diversity lost.

The change to dissacociate Callins from Tiers, RESULTED in our current boring meta.
The game as it stands reovlves almost completely around callins.

Why? In large part, because as as ICoh2 pointed out, the cost efficiency.
Callins are fundamentally cheaper than tier options, in addition to the fact they are "upgrades", per your own words.
Callins are RESTRICTING meta and builds, in the current system.
My suggestion seeks to address that for the 3 core points I listed above,

That is the design of some doctrines. And you can't see the real problems, which are:

1)Doctrinal units are just raw upgrades over stock ones
2)Costs often prohibit using normal tier armor with conjunction and lack of doctrinal unit hard caps, encouraging spam(mainly for super heavies but this doesn't exclude medium armor)
3)Average at best cost effectiveness and performance of stock units, especially for soviet side as OKW and USF doesn't have this problem.

1) Wat. Should Doctrinals be a downgrade over stock ones instead? Ofc they are an upgrade, and that is represented in cost. Irrelevant argument. Quashed.
2) If all factions involve a tier requirement for Callins, this is no longer an issue, because it is shared across all factions. You arent thinking far enough along the repercussions. The status quo is changed for everyone and all. Your argument defeats itself because currently costs are exactly what prohibit tier units, in favor of callins, which dont have the tier cost. Your position is illogical. Currently tier units cost MORE than Callins. This is not a subjective matter. Its a direct result of the cost of tiering, which is exactly what my suggestion seeks to correct and equalize, to the result that Callins can be brought in, in co junction with your first illogical and unrepresented point, as "upgraded" and better units than tier units, but at their also nominally higher cost. Currently tier units cant compete for the simple obvious fact that they require the tier cost first, whereas callins, dont. Its simple arithmetic.
3)I dont understand your sentence or point. Please rephrase or elaborate.

Something that fixes actual problems, not a half arsed solution that doesn't make sense.

1) Mine fixes actual problems, as explained above.
2) Nothing "half-arsed" about it. Reported for insult though.
3)Just because it doesnt make sense to your universally recognised bias and antipathy, doesn mean it doesnt make sense overall. A normal person asks for elaboration when one doesnt understand or so ethind doesnt make sense to them, rather than falsely assume that because you dont understand it, it is automatically false.
4) Easy to criticise from a position of nothing. If you have nothing as another option, mine still stands better above your nothing. Spend time, effort and produce a solution of your own then, as I have. An argument of "yours is crap, another would be better" has no weight unless you refer it to another option, which you have not provided. Produce one. Id love to see it.

Call ins should require a specific tech tier, but still be instantly deployed rather than built.

commanders unlocking unit options in tech tiers sounds fine, as long as no existing units get replaced as it worked before.

commanders unlocking unit options in tech tiers sounds fine, as long as no existing units get replaced as it worked before.

I agree completely, except as was pointed out, T34/85 in particular may need a change.

My solution was to make T34s upgradeable (so it doesnt technically replace it) at T3 to 85s, and a normal callin at T4.

There may be other units that sort of straddle 2 tiers that havent been brought up yet and which I cant think of, but I am ready to deal with those as they are brought up.

1) What Katitof said

Alright, then my answer to him is to you as well. By all means, respond to it separately from if you wish.

2) It is part of the problem, in its current form. I'd rather change the form instead of removing the viability of skipping tiers but mitigating the disadvantages of doing so through call ins alltogether.

I dont understand what you mean.
"Change the form"?
Can ypu please elaborate?

As to the "viability of skipping tiers" vs"mitigating the disadvantages of doing so through callins", that is infact resolved and addressed in my proposal. Those are two sides of the same coin, which are "fixed" by adding a tier progression in cost and time. There is no current "disadvantage of doing so through callins" as you say, atm. Thats the problem. As you said earlier, callins are too cost efficient, due to no tiering cost. We already agreed on that. I dunno why you see a contradiction there. Please explain.

As Katitof also pointed out, callins are generally an "upgrade", and as ypu pointed out "more cost efficient".
Quite a problem, eh?
My solution, involve the tier cost. It resolves both the upgrade and cost efficiency problems.

3) I wont say that I know the perfect solution, but making Ostheer and soviet T4 more attractive would be a start. Furthermore I still think that the pace of the game phases is a problem and in this case that even lategame super units arrive too early.

You ask for a solution that makes T4 more attractive, as a start.

Doesnt fixing callins, especially the Supers, to T4, make an enormous incentive and attraction to getting T4?
Thats sort of the point, isnt it? So my proposal already answers that. Its a concrete incentive to T4.

Your second sentence also supports my suggestion. You said that "the pace of the game phases is a problem and in this case that even lategame super units arrive too early". Well, my suggestion integrally involves a T4 cost to those, hence delaying them in timing and cost. Concretely meaning they arrive later, which was your concern.

When Im playing a 2v2 I never have the feeling that Im weakening my mid game by waiting for super units too much. Its not "Holding out" for a late call in, but just waiting a bit without having major problems.

That will still be possible per my suggestion, because all relevant callins will also be equally tier dependant.
They will be just as delayed as you.

Currently the game almost entirely revolves around callins, which necessitates certain Commanders, which cuts out the other Commanders, and also cuts out the native core tier units, because they are too expensive, even though they are generally weaker than callins.

We are playing in a less diverse game than this could be. That is the entire point of my suggestion.
A) It increases the prevalence and cost-efficiency of TIER units, per tier cost, as compared to callins.
B) It also makes, by extension, the huge variety of on-callin Commanders more playable, because they can then rely on tier u its too, at cost, without callins, with their ability layout.

I want more diversity too, just like you, but I despair that Im not explaining it correctly and understandably how crucial it is to fix the "cost efficiency" differential ypu yourself well pointed out, between callins and tier units (and by extension the enormous amou t of Commanders who are cut out of meta because they DONT HAVE callins).

See what I mean, man? I want the same thing as you.

commanders unlocking unit options in tech tiers sounds fine, as long as no existing units get replaced as it worked before.

It would obviously solve most of the issues regarding this problem and made balancing call-ins much easier.

I think the biggest problem with the super-heavy tanks is that they come too early. I would be happy if Relic simply gave a huge increase to the CP cost of the super-heavy tanks, to force them to come out much later.

Tying the medium tanks (T-34/85s, Easy 8s, PIV battle group, etc) to a tier or tier building would be worth trying out as well.

It would obviously solve most of the issues regarding this problem and made balancing call-ins much easier.

You know the funny thing about that, is I believe it would also make tier core units easier to balance.

When callins are built, or called, from a tier structure, suddenly the cost efficiency thing goes away, and very importantly, Commanders without callins start becoming much more viable for what else they offer.

Its less of an issue in lower tier equivalents, but once you reach T4 kind of units, the cost of a call in just doesnt "fit" their core tier equivalents.Imo Callins should be a Commander specific diversity ONTOP of an existing tier, not a shortcut around it.

Here we are now, in a game overrun by Callin Commanders.

I believe my suggestion returns the value of core tier units, non-callin Commanders and retains callins at their nominal cost, for a much better and wider diversity than now.

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.

exactly. i voted all call ins need tech. i guess that would screw over ass grens and ass pios... so if i could i would change back to heavies. for sure needs a tech requirement thrown on mediums, IE fucking easy 8 spam and t34/85, and heavies.

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.

Especially:
Also I personally think all Heavy tanks need to be 15 plus cps

YES! +5

exactly. i voted all call ins need tech. i guess that would screw over ass grens and ass pios... so if i could i would change back to heavies.

Good point. This is partially mitigated though by Battlephase, which is a mandatory expense.

I will figure your vote to be a "Super".

Overall, I included the option of infantry for a wider perspective, but because of the way the game is built, this poll is indeed more interested in the turnout of the vehicles and supers as callins, because of commensurate tier costs, their proliferation on Commanders, higher cost and generally a more lasting, effective and prevalent mid-late game presence.

But yes, good job pointing out assgrens and asspios.

Over all some very good ideas here. The mid to late game armor transition is pretty quick. Would be nice to extend out the mid game by bumping up CP requirements.

It greatly limited possible BOs and therefore led to a stale, boring, predictable meta.


That is the design of some doctrines. And you can't see the real problems, which are:

1)Doctrinal units are just raw upgrades over stock ones
2)Costs often prohibit using normal tier armor with conjunction and lack of doctrinal unit hard caps, encouraging spam(mainly for super heavies but this doesn't exclude medium armor)
3)Average at best cost effectiveness and performance of stock units, especially for soviet side as OKW and USF doesn't have this problem.


Something that fixes actual problems, not a half arsed solution that doesn't make sense.

What you think is not relevant as you are a 2vs2 player and this is mostly a 1 vs 1 issue not to mention that i smell of bias soviet would be the most affected by it.

Be wary of what you ask cause it might come true.

Haven´t we had a similar situation on release? Yeah i know many things have change but something i think you might be ignoring is WFA.

1- I wouldn´t touch infantry. Not worthy the struggle with this.

2- What about light vehicles and medium tanks ? Dodge, M3, M5, 251 and on the other hand command tank, Stug-E, Sherman,single T3485, Ostwind... Command Panther, double T3485 and P4 are "heavies"? I think they need different requirements. Also on how teching works on WFA, it´s not a struggle for them to "tech" and use callins.

3- "3)Average at best cost effectiveness and performance of stock units, especially for soviet side as OKW and USF doesn't have this problem." Stealing his words and something i´m surprised you just dodge to answer.
US: can rely on Sherman in combination with Jackson + Effective escalable infantry (including light AT) AND cost effective teching system.
OKW: versatile tech system with cost effective units and abilities

That´s the problem with Soviet faction design as a whole, which relies heavily on doctrinal choices in comparison to both WFA or OH (before they killed T4 and strangely "changed" Stug role).

4- If you want to implement this, theres others thing which need to be changed for vcoh2 factions.

A- This is not specifically related to vehicles, but there must be certain rework on vet1 abilities.
B- Overlapping roles of certain units. Name it Penals with cons, T70 with T34 and Su76 on T4. For OH it might be the Stug.
C- Adjustments of heavy mp drain and fuel of Ostheer teching system.
D- I still feel that Panther could get a SLIGHT fuel (5-15), even if it has to trade a bit in convertion with MP.


Conclusion:
As how is the system right now, requiring tech for call ins isn´t going to make T4 (both OH or SU) attractive. Fix this and THEN add tech requirements to vehicles Call ins.

T3/T4 for SU
BP2 for medium (Stug E-Command Tank) and BP3 (Heavies) for OH
T4 for WFA (no much difference from the actual meta)

As how is the system right now, requiring tech for call ins isn´t going to make T4 (both OH or SU) attractive. Fix this and THEN add tech requirements to vehicles Call ins.

I dont understand this though.

How does requiring T4 tech for callins, not make T4 attractive?

Its pretty attractive, if you have to build it to get your call-ins.

I dont understand this though.

How does requiring T4 tech for callins, not make T4 attractive?

Its pretty attractive, if you have to build it to get your call-ins.

That makes T4 as attractive as having to do a fat, ugly chick before you are allowed to talk with attractive blonde friend of her makes the first one attractive.