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

Requiring a SPECIFIC tier building for Shocks and Guards would, yes, severely restrict Soviet players.

Requiring EITHER t1 or t2 built essentially boils down to no requirements at all. as currently because noone reaches 2CPs on Combat Engineers alone.

It is worth noting that while they were produced in Special Rifle Command (most of the beta), Guards or Shocks replaced Penals. I feel this was a solid design choice - we are too used to be able to just pop out our elite call-in doctrinal infantry. But both Shocks AND Guards are considerably stronger than any other infantry Soviets have to offer, and completely separating them from tiering structure gives a wide variety of possible openings for a Soviet player, and the ability to supplement their already strong starts (going either t1 or t2) with doctrinal units.

so far , 81% of respondents believe at least some call-ins should require a building first. Relic, are you listening?

so far , 81% of respondents believe at least some call-ins should require a building first. Relic, are you listening?

out of a whopping grand total of of 76 people out of 5000+...

Ostheer T3 is equivaltent teching to Soviets getting T3/T4... If you think about it, a P4 can come out at similar times as a t34.

If you make the heavy tanks require T4 for Ostheer, then you are disadvantaging them compared to Soviets. It should be equally scaled.

Anyway, increasing CP to 15 also works well along with tie in teching.

I would love to see a tech cost for call-ins, for both factions SOV/OH...

Heya,

Since my own work is not contained within the NDA - I've recently talked to Relic about a suggestion for the Call-Ins that mixes the current approach and the polar opposite (buildable from tiers). I personally prefer such an approach over keeping it in tiers for a few reasons I'll elaborate at the end. I'll try to keep it short and not go into too much details, as I think you can easily understand the idea.

Every Call-In unit gets a tech requirement attached to them. From the simplest Assault Grenadier / Assault Engineer at 0CP to the high tier units like Tiger. This could be something like Tier 1 for Assault Grenadiers or Tier 2/3 for Greyhounds (LT or Cpt) and T3/4 for T34/85s or Battlephase 2 for a Command PIV. Something that simply fits the units tech level itself - not necessarily the exact building from where it would be buildable, but just the tech level. Those requirements are definitely not set in stone, but are just a first guess for the tech level and might need adapting.

Now regarding obtaining such a unit. There are two ways, either via a call-in button like it is now or to build it straight from your HQ. Building it straight from your HQ is only possible if you meet the tech requirements and has a normal build time. Calling it in via a button does not require a certain tech level, but comes at a Premium cost (15-20% of the unit).

Why I prefer such a solution? Because it allows you to have a better differentiation. You can balance Call-Ins depending on if they are to supplement your army (then you usually meet the tech requirements and can build them) or if it's a pure Call-In strategy. The latter ones will be punished a bit more as the current Call-In meta is going to a degree against the idea behind Call-Ins. Yet such a change does not completely make Call-In strategies unfeasible. The first 2-3 units should still come cheaper than if you had teched, but at the same time teching would've given you earlier access to other units and might've been better in the long run.

So! I think its time for a halfway report and analysis (to take a page from ImperialDane)!

First of all, thanks to everyone for a remarkably civil and constructive thread. Even a Mod has passed through and remarked on that. Well done! Dis is how we should roll here on CoH2.org!

Second, thanks to everyone who voted and posted. We got some good stuff here.

Now to the meat!
_____________________________________________________________________

1) The results of the poll so far:

As Akula calculated, there is a 81% approval that tying Callins would be a good thing. Its an even split between Vehicles only, Supers only and All off the above, so there definately is a wide split differentiation there about what to apply it to,, but that overall some tier tying would be good. Nobody voted for Infantry only The vote for no tier tying in any form, was not far behind each selection above.Coming out to about 1/5 of the total vote.

2) The discussion so far:

A) Instant or Built:

Something I had overlooked in the initial poll, but that Bulgakov quickly pointed out, was if some or all callins that are to be tier tied, should they remain instants? Or be actually built from the tier structure? There are arguments for both options, and also stratified on which kind of unit we are talking about. Definately a core consideration with timing ramifications. Overall, to my perspective, it is currently leaning slightly towards Instant. Especially for the earlier tier callins, the additional time to build might force some infantryand early vehicles out of their window. Its a difficult point, and one that I think can also be different for different tiers, as Relic sees fit, and inorder not to burden build orders too hard timewise, in addition to the fact they must tier to get them.

B) Replace tier units with Callins, or Callins in addition to tier units:

A relatively new issue raised in the thread by drChengele, but very important imo. Once upon a time, many callins did replace a unit in the native tier roster. This was discontinued by Relic, but is something that has to be atleast peripherally considered if a tier tying (which also used to be a "thing" but was discontiuned, but in a different form than is proposed now) where to make a return. Imo,there is space make some callins replace units, and others not. Deoending on how and to what tiers callins are tied to, especially considering the different systemic tier and unit structure of differet factions, there is space for variation. I encourage everyone participating to say a word or two about this point.

C) What tier to tie what to:

There is an almost even split in the poll between tying Vehicles (which includes Supers), tying Supers only, and tying ALL units to tiers.
Different posters, from a different set of the above, have differing but good opinions and arguments. Overall from the discussion however, to my view as I have tried to nurture this thread and read every word, the concensus seems to be steongest regarding the Supers. It is the common denominator in opinion that Supers should be tied to tier, though opinion on other callins is divided. Especially on infantry, and there have been good posts both for and against tier tying on those again, but I do recommend, for starters, a focus on the Supers. Discussion is certainly open on all vehicles, and even infantry, but our strongest concensus atm is on Supers, and perhaps we can deal with the rest at a later point in more specific detail to those, since they do seem to be more difficult to address and alsonperhaps, a less immediate pressing balance concern.

But what then defines a Super? Some are more or less obvious, but as Cortes pointed out, callins like T34/85, have a wierd kind of "between tiers" status that presents some problems. Some posters, forgive me for not mentioning you, have done a great job in posting suggested tier-tied lists for individual factions. I think overall, Sov is the hardest to reconcile with the proposal, because of its essentially different tier structure and relation to Commanders. If you can, I think people posting more faction based lists on what tier to tie what callins to, would help build a framework and a basis to start biting into that.

_______________________________________________________________________

In conclusion, as the OP of this thread, I will use my small perogative, and elaborate a little on what I think would be the advantages, and potential difficulties, of this proposal, and also what this thread and its feedback has taught me since I originally made it.

I) I think best would be to start with Super tying to tiers. The rest can come later. I was frankly surprised at rhe vote for all vehicles, and infact all callins, to be tied, but I havent yet thought enough on non-Supers to really concretely make a delineation. Supers are the element there is most consencus in, and, as the most powerful units in the game, carry a degree of gravitas for changes. If the Super project works, then there is a strong basis for comparison to changing all vehicles or all callins overall, into a tier tied structure.

II) There has been repeated concern, that tying callins to tiers would result in less meta diversity.
I answer this in two points, for what I think is actually a net increase in meta diversity, over what we have now:

-First, Tier Diversity!
That callins are marginalising and cutting out native tier core units, as a result of better cost efficiency due to not requiring tiers PLUS also that callins are generally better than tier units (as supported by points from I<CoH and Katitof respectively). Though at initial impression, it would seem that tying callins to tiers would reduce the meta potential, what is important that counteracts that, is a more cost efficient and competitive tier variety. Because tier units will be able to compete costwise, because you have to buy the tier anyways if the suggestion goes through, inorder to callin units, you actually, finally have built that tier. So as a direct result, you can actually build tier units at a competetive price! So whatever small diveesity was lost in the current tierless callin system, is answered covered and reciprocated by a more valid native tier variety!

-Second, Non-callin Commanders!
I think most will agree, that non-callin Commanders have been extremely marginalised by callin-Commander options.
The abilities and functions on non-callin Commanders are great, and an enormous diversity, but due to the reasons stated above, are squeezed out because they cant compete with the cost efficiency, and upgraded unit status, than callin-Commanders provide. By tying tiers, especially to the signature "Supers" of many callin-Commanders, non-callin-Commanders can utilise their abilities while relying on native tier units, because, as the suggestiin is intended to be universal to all factions, your opponent also is delayed and forcibly tiered to respond, either with native units, or callins. This would finally allow non-callin Commanders to shine as they deserve, and reintroduce all kinds of diversity in meta, because so many of these Commanders are currently almost entirely unplayed!

_________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading, you who have.
(Sorry to those who dont, but there is no way I can TLDr this post )

Thanks to all posters for keeping the thread clean, ontopic and constructive, which is a huge achievement.

Now, to quote ImperialDane once again:

BACK TO THE BATTLE!

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.

And you still are going for Call ins tanks, you are not improving the viability of other non call in commanders because stock units are lackluster (or it´s synergy), specially in comparison to WFA units. (I don´t see OKW meta to go double P4 and while E8 are good, the other commander can play perfectly with Shermans, Jacksons, AT guns and zooks)

And you still are going for Call ins tanks, you are not improving the viability of other non call in commanders

See my two last points in the above post for my answer to that.

See my two last points in the above post for my answer to that.

Which are not answering my points. That is not going to affect the performance of the units, both call ins and stock units.

I think it´s an obvious answer of what unit would you field between a 76 or an 85. There is still no place for the SU76 and the overlapping T70.
OH is still going to suffer from a mp draining teching system, Panthers are not going to see the light in 1v1.

I´m gonna say this again, it´s not a matter of JUST attaching Call-ins into Building/Tiers, you need to change the performance of stock units to put in line with both new factoins.

Which are not answering my points. That is not going to affect the performance of the units, both call ins and stock units.

I think it´s an obvious answer of what unit would you field between a 76 or an 85. There is still no place for the SU76 and the overlapping T70.
OH is still going to suffer from a mp draining teching system, Panthers are not going to see the light in 1v1.

I´m gonna say this again, it´s not a matter of JUST attaching Call-ins into Building/Tiers, you need to change the performance of stock units to put in line with both new factoins.

While some units are definitely under performing (SU-76 why you fail so bad) and need to be looked at they at least will be on the same price level as call-in units. Right now teching and buying a single T34/76 costs only 30 fuel less than not teching and calling in two T34/85s. If 85s were tied to T3/T4 a player could have two 76s earlier and for 40 fuel less than two 85s.

I agree that attaching call-ins to tiers isn't going to solve all of the balance issues with the game but I hope you would agree it is at least a step in the right direction.

Bump for more opinions.

While some units are definitely under performing (SU-76 why you fail so bad) and need to be looked at they at least will be on the same price level as call-in units. Right now teching and buying a single T34/76 costs only 30 fuel less than not teching and calling in two T34/85s. If 85s were tied to T3/T4 a player could have two 76s earlier and for 40 fuel less than two 85s.

I agree that attaching call-ins to tiers isn't going to solve all of the balance issues with the game but I hope you would agree it is at least a step in the right direction.

Yeah sure, i was really on favour of doing this prior to WFA.
If this was OH vs SU and OKW vs USF, implement it right away. Right now it would be just a step in the right direction which would just bring into the table the problems which seems not as evident to others.

So I played some 2v2 games recently and I think call ins got out of control. Benefits you get are tremendous and there is really no reason at all to tech and build T3/T4 for any of the factions we have currently in game with maybe OKW being an exception.

As Wermaht me and my team mate were able to field 6 Tigers in a single game. T1, T2 - holding of with PaKs until 11 cp and voila. I had fuel for almost 2 of these when I reached 11 CP, why would you go regular units if you can get Tigers?

Another game as US I had fuel for 2 and a half E8 by the time I reached 9 CP.

With Soviets waiting for double T-34-85 or IS2 or ISU-152 is no brainier as well.

It just occured to me it would be hillarious to require T2 for Guards and T1 for Shocks. It is a terrible idea, of course, and will never happen, but lots of cheese strats (Guards + Snipers, Soviet Tsunami w/ Maxim spam + 1 Zis into Shocks and B4) would be circumvented.

I prefer call-ins as they are as it offers a lot more strategic options, decisions.

I dislike super tanks and would rather see them come at a lot higher CP.
Preferably I would like super heavies to be less effective/more vulnerable to standard units. Like lets say KT in COH1, it was quite powerful but slow and vulnerable to ATG's and AT infantry.

currently there are tanks that can defeat 2x ATG, supported by infantry, on their own. Without worrying to much unless there is opposing super tank on the field.
Also variety of powerful call-in abilities are making combined arms play in 2v2 and up quite difficult, while rewarding spamming armor. There is no fun in that either, for me anyway.

The problem is that call-ins are cheaper to field and better than the stock units.

Forcing players to tech in order to be able to use call-ins is the best solution. And it wouldn't limit the strategic options, just less BS in-game.

Heya,

Every Call-In unit gets a tech requirement attached to them. From the simplest Assault Grenadier / Assault Engineer at 0CP to the high tier units like Tiger. This could be something like Tier 1 for Assault Grenadiers or Tier 2/3 for Greyhounds (LT or Cpt) and T3/4 for T34/85s or Battlephase 2 for a Command PIV. Something that simply fits the units tech level itself - not necessarily the exact building from where it would be buildable, but just the tech level. Those requirements are definitely not set in stone, but are just a first guess for the tech level and might need adapting.

Now regarding obtaining such a unit. There are two ways, either via a call-in button like it is now or to build it straight from your HQ. Building it straight from your HQ is only possible if you meet the tech requirements and has a normal build time. Calling it in via a button does not require a certain tech level, but comes at a Premium cost (15-20% of the unit).
run.

Good idea but if you think about it, taking the t34/85, you need 120 fuel for soviet tech + 280 for the call in makes 400 fuel for 2x t34/85... WTF

If you now say you could build them single in hq, with reduced cost, you still need 120 fuel for the tech and approx 130 for a t34/85 this is just game breaking.

Further on going for such a commander is combined with a risk because you will be deprived of armour until you get the CPs. The German player will have a p4 or something else out way before thoes t34/85s so for that reason.... where is the reward for that risk??


Some thing to consider...

If you say you can build them in your t0, refering to t34/85, this would mean that if you go t4 ,which represents the tech lvl, the soviet would have t4 units with t34/85 single build on the field which would mean a bigger unit variety and advantage for soviet.


So my suggestion keep it the way it is since its quite balanced now.

Good idea but if you think about it, taking the t34/85, you need 120 fuel for soviet tech + 280 for the call in makes 400 fuel for 2x t34/85... WTF

If you now say you could build them single in hq, with reduced cost, you still need 120 fuel for the tech and approx 130 for a t34/85 this is just game breaking.

Further on going for such a commander is combined with a risk because you will be deprived of armour until you get the CPs. The German player will have a p4 or something else out way before thoes t34/85s so for that reason.... where is the reward for that risk??


Some thing to consider...

If you say you can build them in your t0, refering to t34/85, this would mean that if you go t4 ,which represents the tech lvl, the soviet would have t4 units with t34/85 single build on the field which would mean a bigger unit variety and advantage for soviet.


So my suggestion keep it the way it is since its quite balanced now.

P4 comes out faster than T-34-85s either way, teching or not. You always get the reward as the P4 is inferior to the 85s and without teching you can spam more 85s 'cuz of the resources you have. Which is retarded that call-ins are cheaper to get than stock units and overperform them compleatly.

If they are buildable from T0 and need teching.....they are still powerfull, but less spamable due to the fuel you spent on T3/T4.

And about the current system....it's way beyond balanced and punishes teching extremely, nevermind the spam and abuse strats. Pushing the CP and adjusting cost prices don't solve the issue of this gamebreaking bs.

The problem is that call-ins are cheaper to field and better than the stock units.

Forcing players to tech in order to be able to use call-ins is the best solution. And it wouldn't limit the strategic options, just less BS in-game.

I am not sure if you realize that in order to attach call-in units to buildings(especially expensive super heavies), the cost of unit will have to be reduced to make them viable option. to offset cost of tech.
At the same time any subsequent super tanks would be cheaper and therefore creating even larger balance issues.
I cannot see it work effectively without major rework of units, costs, balance testing, etc

Also I don't quite understand how 'having to tech to use specific unit' being only option is same as weighing up decision whether to tech-up or skip tech up and go for call-in and then tech up.
Or don't tech up at all and keep fighting with only call-in's. Or decide to risk it by stalling enemy and see what he's move is and then decide to counter it by spending resources.
Not to mention that some call-ins don't require fuel so you can chose to play for ammo instead of fighting it out over fuel, making enemy think they have upper hand, etc, etc.

To me there is massive tactical and strategic difference between 2 setups