Solve balance issue regarding call-ins
Posts: 28
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
As a soviet 4v4 player (mostly) I say - no, thanks. At least not unless there are non-doctrinal heavy armor alternative. Like KV-85.
Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2
Permanently Bannedjust add fuel upkeep relic!
Posts: 1740
Ostheer:
Stug III G - T3
Tiger/Ace - T4
Elefant - T4
Puma - T2
Soviet:
T34/85 - T3 OR T4
IS-2 - T3 OR T4
ISU-152 - T3 OR (AND?!) T4
KW2 - T3 OR T4
KW1 - T3 OR T4
KW8 - T3 OR T4
M4 Sherman - T3 OR T4
M3 with Guards - T1 OR T2
OKW:
Jagdtiger - All 3 Buildings built (like KT)
P4 Ausführung J - Mechanized Company Built
Kommandopanther - Mechanized Company Built
Ostwind - Heal or Ressourcetruck built (Or maybe also Mechanized)
USF:
M10 - Captain or Lieutenant unlocked
M8 - Captain or Lieutenant unlocked
Jeep - No unlocks needed
M4 E8 - Major unlocked
M4 Bulldozer - Major unlocked
Priest - Major unlocked
I probably forgot some units but you get the point.
This would add the fact that players would actually try to tech and test new strategies instead of just waiting for the uber call-ins.
Posts: 655
Permanently BannedHighfiveeeee, I like your idea, but it kinda removes the point to having call-in units to begin with. I'd like to see call-ins still used and viable, but not the basis of the meta.
Posts: 1637
Posts: 1108
IMO the best solution for the call in problem is to bind call ins to the techings.
Ostheer:
Stug III G - T3
Tiger/Ace - T4
Elefant - T4
Puma - T2
Soviet:
T34/85 - T3 OR T4
IS-2 - T3 OR T4
ISU-152 - T3 OR (AND?!) T4
KW2 - T3 OR T4
KW1 - T3 OR T4
KW8 - T3 OR T4
M4 Sherman - T3 OR T4
M3 with Guards - T1 OR T2
OKW:
Jagdtiger - All 3 Buildings built (like KT)
P4 Ausführung J - Mechanized Company Built
Kommandopanther - Mechanized Company Built
Ostwind - Heal or Ressourcetruck built (Or maybe also Mechanized)
USF:
M10 - Captain or Lieutenant unlocked
M8 - Captain or Lieutenant unlocked
Jeep - No unlocks needed
M4 E8 - Major unlocked
M4 Bulldozer - Major unlocked
Priest - Major unlocked
I probably forgot some units but you get the point.
This would add the fact that players would actually try to tech and test new strategies instead of just waiting for the uber call-ins.
+1
Posts: 2561
Then fuel upkeep needs to be added to vehicles so that lighter vehicles stay relevant against heavier vehicles.
That's what it will take for the game would be able to be balanced in the late game across all modes
Posts: 1637
First call-ins need to be attached to tech so that they do not get a large resource advantage over players who tech.
Then fuel upkeep needs to be added to vehicles so that lighter vehicles stay relevant against heavier vehicles.
That's what it will take for the game would be able to be balanced in the late game across all modes
I think the combination is a good idea. But fuel prices for tech for all factions should be identical to keep it fair. Wouldnt want a Tiger to be more expensive then a KT for example.
Posts: 728
Posts: 154 | Subs: 2
definately wouldn't want to see the cost increase for getting an easy 8 called in every time or a fuel upkeep it is hard enough getting a couple late game now that there 145 fuel.
Child please! Don't think it would be super-difficult to adjust fuel cost and CP requirements.
NO.
just add fuel upkeep relic!
Wouldnt only encourage saving for late game call-ins? Don't see how that would fix any balance or gameplay issues at all.
---------
I agree with OP, simply put tech-requirements for Doctrinal tanks would fix the horrendous call-in gameplay that is so prevalent right now. How much more interesting wouldnt it be to watch replays and casts if this was the case? "This guy went T4, will he get Panther for AT, Brummbär for AI or Tiger for something with a bit of both?"
You actually have to use your timing to choose when to tech. You can even scout enemy base to get an idea of what he might get! "He went T3? Then he probably won't afford teching t4 later to get his Tiger."
"Oh fuck, I know he has ISU commander and I can see him building T4 now!"
Other units could do well with a maximum amount or very long cooldown at the very least. (I'm looking at you ISU/Elephant!)
Posts: 543
Posts: 2561
Heavy call ins should be limited to 1 per game.I don't like hard caps. It's better to better to keep all builds possible, even if the chances of attaining them are slim.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Heavy call ins should be limited to 1 per game.
So we won't see other stuff except tiger aces ever again? No thanks.
Posts: 154 | Subs: 2
So we won't see other stuff except tiger aces ever again? No thanks.
Hahaha, I thought you disagreed with yourself there. ;j
Posts: 2070
Posts: 154 | Subs: 2
Wouldn't the call-ins being tied to tech hurt Soviets and Ost a lot? It cost a lot to tech up as those factions
If nothing else is changed of course but I don't think that is the point here.
Posts: 2070
Posts: 680
http://www.coh2.org/topic/24647/would-a-swap-between-t3476-and-t3485-be-good-for-the-game
Posts: 154 | Subs: 2
But would players build the units that come out of that tier? Or would they just build the building and continue waiting for call-ins? It will delay the first call-in, but would it change the meta?
Basically you get more bang-for-buck with call-ins. Tying them to tiers will level that out. To counter your enemies units you might want a Tiger and a Brummbär for example. As it is now, it would be insane to get Tiger and then spend fuel/manpower/time to tech to T4 to get that Brummbär. You might as well just get a 2nd Tiger instead. You see what I mean?
Also you could somewhat predict what your opponent is doing a bit and could even delay him by destroying the tier building.
Livestreams
85 | |||||
27 | |||||
23 | |||||
13 | |||||
6 | |||||
157 | |||||
11 | |||||
8 | |||||
3 | |||||
3 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.839223.790+2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.592234.717-1
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.922406.694+1
- 9.1122623.643+3
- 10.265138.658+2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Baqis73421
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM