Company of Call-Ins 2 - An Argument for Change

It would also encourage combined arms.

No, it would FORCE combined arms and that is bad. I'm not arguing that the ISU or jagdtiger is totally fine as it is, that would be absurd. I'm simply suggesting that limiting the amount of them that can be called in doesn't really solve anything as far as diversifying the metagame. It doesn't change the fact that they're overpowered either.

So I think they need to have their performance adjusted such that calling them in even multiple times is viable in the right situations but not overpowered.

I think solution 1 will just change the meta, not diversify it. Forcing players down any given path unnecessarily removes strategic depth from the game. Personally I'd prefer if all call-in units were inferior to their tech counterparts. I'd simply swap out shocks with penals, 85s with 76s, etc etc. I'm pretty doubtful that's ever going to happen though.

Elite Armor is a good example of this. Those panzer 4s are terrible compared to non doctrinal options. If all call-ins were on the same level, you'd see them to fill holes in armies but not completely compose them.

I do like this idea, the armored US commander is quite a good example for how this could work. Also this method means that you can instantly call on less powerful units to replace losses not vastly superior ones.

Only place this falls down is with the super heavies. You cant give all ost commanders the ability to build tigers or ele's nor the SU ISU/IS-2. For me the best thing would be to keep those doctrinal but allow them to be built from the HQ once CP's have been acquired. One the things i hate about call ins the most is how you can instantly replace super units.

Upping the cps needed to get the call ins wont change much as cps accumulate far faster after 20 mins into the game due to the army size getting bigger and fights being more frequient . Adding tier requirements will go long way improving the meta , but imo howitzers will have to get some love on the german side to make them a competitive alternative to tigers , and perhaps panzerwerfers to make them competitive compared to panthers . Another thing that could be done is to add some bonus for massed medium tanks like + 5% increased accuracy for the top gunner up to 15 or 20% ( i know it will promote "tank blobbing" but its a solution to make mediums more effective )

I think if a unit is so strong that allowing all commanders to purchase it would be imbalanced, that's a massive red flag that that unit is imbalanced and needs to be toned down. Trying to stop people from purchasing an overpowered unit by limiting it to one commander clearly doesn't work. It just means that everyone picks that commander every... single... game...

No, it would FORCE combined arms.

but isnt that the point of coh2? cough cough...not just using infantry blobs

Solution 5:
Increase efficiency of AT weapons against heavies specifically.

Reasoning:
The problem is that Tigers, IS2s, ISUs, KT and so on don't really have proper counters. Even if you know that someone stalls for Tigers, there isn't much you can do in terms of counter-play in order to punish the strat. The go-to solution right now it to go for your own call-ins basically and try to get them out first.

Of all factions, I find that OST has the easiest time of handling heavy call-ins, mainly because of the performance of the pak40.

So assuming we want to keep our call-in strat options open (that is, skipping tech in favor of IS2s Tigers, etc.), I would work towards re-balancing AT guns to be about as threatening to heavies as Pak40s are right now.

Proposed Changes:
-Increase target weakpoint on all vehicles so they can penetrate heavies more reliably.
-Increase penetration values of Zis3 to match those of Pak40: 210.0/200.0/190.0. The Zis will still have a lower fire rate.
-Increase Stuart's shell shock penetration values to more reliably penetrate heavy rear armor.
-Increase 57mm AP round penetration values to more reliably penetrate heavy frontal armor (I couldn't find the current values).
-I wouldn't increase the raketenwerfer's penetration values but I would give it more mobility. See Kappatch.

Summary:
Stalling for heavies can still be a viable strat but it should also have a viable counter in AT guns and AT abilities. AT guns already have their own counters so we create a proper rock-paper-scissors cycle.

I like Solution 1 because I love the medium armor vs medium armor game play that CoH 2 has to offer. In my utopian dream version of CoH 2 I'd probably force players into building medium tanks because they're fun to use, fun to watch, and fun to play against - plus they were a pretty major part of WW2. I will concede the point that allowing players to make choices on whether or not they want to tech is more important than my personal opinion and it is more important than realism. Preserving player choice is the superior method of fixing this from a design perspective and I think Relic should take that into consideration.

This.
I would like to have battles with a couple of medium armor on each side, rather than ISU vs Tiger. Although as many of other guys point out that this could restrict the play style.

I really feel like bringing back critical hits would help this quite a bit. Things like engine damage, track off's, injured crew members etc. You could even change some abilites around it, such as changing guards button ability to focus on tank traps.

Making new ways to destroy the tanks doesn't have to be the route taken to fix the problem, adding new ways to disable tanks can also solve the problem.

Heavy tanks should not reverse at full speed. Never understood why tanks should reverse as fast as they go forward. Its okay i guess for medium tanks but Heavy tanks should be punished hard if they overextend but their topspeed is not far off from a medium and the acceleration is still too fast for Heavies.

Nice post, I agree with it in spirit. I don't see any reason to limit the number of heavies though. I've never lost because my opponent called in two jagdtigers, usually the first one was more than enough.
...

not in 1v1 and maybe 2v2... but limiting heavies one per time or per game would help 3v3+

I think part of the problem with call-ins is that they are often jus better versions of what you can get, there are actually rather few truly niche units that have utility through commanders. Let's face it, a Tiger is just a super Panther/Panzer4, it has identical abilities, just superior stats. Anytime you are not playing as a Tiger commander, you would just do the same with those vanilla tanks, just with more caution.
But there are other commanders that offer some competition not by other units bu by abilities: Jaegar Infantry for example introduced no new units at all, but all the abilities were reasonably effective, and applied to most units. Although it focuses on infantry, it allows one part of the fight to be dominated while alleviating pressure on your anti-tank work.

One way of introducing competing commander abilities beside call-ins would be introducing new unit abilities that give unique critical damage. Button vehicle is not only Soviet-specific, but also relatively rare since it depends entirely on A) commander chosen can deploy Guards, B) you upgrade them to DP and C) use the button ability. Surely a commander ability that offers this in other factions or through other avenues can serve as part of a new commander? A Ostheer or OKW commander that offers something like Panzerbuchse AT RIfle to be able to button and take on light armour would be both an interesting angle towards Axis AT tactics and also refreshing: button is not possible other than using upgraded Guards in this game. In other words, introducing vanilla abilities of one faction into another faction that has never had them would be an interesting way to provide new ways to play the game, all without resorting to calling in ever-more powerful exotic badass units.

Even types of critical damage could be used as part of commander abilities (there are apparently a lot of unused ones left from the betas). An ability that allows your units to, say, "attack vehicle crew" could instill temporary or permanent criticals that inhibit vehicle operation in ways other than engine damage: for example this ability could give one of four possible outcomes: driver is injured, momentarily immobilizing the vehicle but is otherwise functioning (can still shoot); loader injured, where the rate of fire is reduced but the vehicle can still move normally, allowing escape; or commander is injured, reducing LOS and accuracy. These are great aids when used in conjunction with regular abilities, all which require regular use of vanilla units rather than replacing them with call-ins that, really, are just there to do more of the same with less difficulty. Moreover, such abilities introduce new tactics, not less.

Another prospective example is a USF commander whose abilities include medium tanks to fire WP rounds to disable enemy infantry. This is pretty much identical to the Ostheer's stunshot, but frankly, since when is that a horrible idea for the USF player, especially if regular weapons like Jacksons and bazookas have horrible performance? Being able to stun an enemy vehicle is not what USF players can do with regular units, not even with existing call-ins, and would be of great benefit and bring conditional balance to the faction. An ability that allows Ostheer to salvage would also be a suitable alternative to choosing a commander that allows for an expensive Tiger; salvaging wrecks is a viable option throughout the match, whereas a unit such as a Tiger depends entirely on available popcap, available resources and having reached CP.

Another part of the problem with call-ins is that, at least for Soviets, most of the units' details such as veterancy and abilities are identical, they are just better versions of what you can bring. IS2 and T34/85 are really just super versions of the T34 in function: they all have the same vet1 ability, capturing points. A commander that offers new and different abilities for vanilla units is already reason enough to try them, besides does anyone really call-in T-34/85s or IS2s with the mind of capturing points with them? A T-70 can do that just fine if not better.

In short, new commanders should start focusing on improving existing units, not more exotic call-ins. Commanders like Mechanized Assault isn't great because it lets you use your units in new and different ways, it's great because you end up not needing to use most of your regular units at all.

Sure they're the developer and they have the final say, but I'd hope that any developer takes their community's opinion into serious consideration when making major changes to their game. Relic has done this in the past, and I believe they're still willing to listen to us.

I'm not in the betas or whatever programmes, but I'd like to cite War Spoils in response and in refutation of your aforementioned opinion (you know where I'm goign with THAT one!).

As for tiers, Tier 3 and 4 are most susceptible to problems associated with call-ins, given that most call-in vehicles are of the super tank sort of variety. Most infantry call-ins are circumstantial (long range mortar, AT and shock infantry for Soviets, MG34 for OKW, paratroopers) and thus less prone to problems associated with call-ins (not to ignore units like Dshk or Panzerfusiliers), not to mention most T1-2 vehicles are either non-replaceable (nothing substitutes an Ostheer halftrack through commanders, except perhaps Urban Assault's Forward HQ) or are replaceable but often at a time where you might not afford just waiting for the CP and resources to get it; Tier1-2 therefore remain relevant to the game. Specifically, Soviet Lend-Lease allows M5 call-in WITH SMG GUards at like 5CP, but that's a time where you might have already built T3 and allowed for tanks, plus the quadmount upgrade requires T3 built as well.

You can take my calls in from my cold dead hands

http://www.coh2.org/replay/26700/you-can-take-my-call-ins-from-my-cold-dead-hands

I think the community is under estimating how important this issue is. Time for a bump for more discussion or are we all on the same page?

Definitely agree on the issue, and I think Solution 1 would be the simplest.

Also, I think -- and have said so in various threads -- the ISU, Jagdtiger and Elefant need to be limited to 1 per player. The other day I watched this cast, and it just ceased to be enjoyable the moment the second ISU came in and shredded all the hard microing and unit preservation work done up until that point to dust (not that it was super fun to see the first one do it either). For me it is totally clear that superheavy units kill fun and tactics in this game, while medium armor play is -- like already mentioned here -- much more fun and authentic to play and watch.

Also, medium and heavy tank reverse speeds need to be toned down.

I have yet to be convinced that making call ins harder is desirable.


Thus far this appears to be mostly grognards complaining that COH2 does not work the same as COH1.


I'll post my thoughts in detail later.

No, it would FORCE combined arms and that is bad. I'm not arguing that the ISU or jagdtiger is totally fine as it is, that would be absurd. I'm simply suggesting that limiting the amount of them that can be called in doesn't really solve anything as far as diversifying the metagame. It doesn't change the fact that they're overpowered either.

So I think they need to have their performance adjusted such that calling them in even multiple times is viable in the right situations but not overpowered.

This is a serious question and I'm not being flippant, did you feel the same about the Wehr Tiger/USA Pershing in vCOH where only one could be called out at a time? I thought it was a smart way to go because it meant you had to treat those babies as the rare commodities they were while still allowing players to get super heavies that were great than all other tanks just like in real life.

A lot of people complain about call ins but I think they add so much flavor to the game and it's a welcome addition. That being said I do think more teching needs to be required to prevent minimal tech investing players to stall for call in tanks.

And then of course the heaviest tanks of all KT/Jagdtiger were only able to be called once and if they were destroyed that was it.

This is a serious question and I'm not being flippant, did you feel the same about the Wehr Tiger/USA Pershing in vCOH where only one could be called out at a time? I thought it was a smart way to go because it meant you had to treat those babies as the rare commodities they were while still allowing players to get super heavies that were great than all other tanks just like in real life.

Context is everything and call-ins were extremely different in coh1. They had no fuel cost, fuel was only earned by fuel points, they came later, you had to choose a certain path in a commander tree, only one commander had access to that particular unit, and so on.

Given those units' power levels, I think the cap was necessary in that context, but not ideal.

Now that the flawed design of allowing players to call in heavy tanks without spending any fuel has been removed (except for the tiger ace for some ridiculous reason), so too can the lazy balancing method of hard capping units be removed (except for the tiger ace for some ridiculous reason).

Context is everything and call-ins were extremely different in coh1. They had no fuel cost, fuel was only earned by fuel points, they came later, you had to choose a certain path in a commander tree, only one commander had access to that particular unit, and so on.

Given those units' power levels, I think the cap was necessary in that context, but not ideal.

Now that the flawed design of allowing players to call in heavy tanks without spending any fuel has been removed (except for the tiger ace for some ridiculous reason), so too can the lazy balancing method of hard capping units be removed (except for the tiger ace for some ridiculous reason).

Every commander should have at least 2 of first 4 items in the following list of all different types of abilities but certainly no more than that to provide for flavor and balance but have trade offs:

1) call in vehicles/tanks
2) call in infantry/support teams
3)emplacements and on map artillery
4) off map artillery and strafing
4) economic boosts fuel drops, medical, muni and fuel conversion, etc.
5) tactical boosts like recon, fast capping/de-capping, smoke drops
6) tactical abilities (crew repair, smoke discharges, camouflage, sprint)
7) unit upgrades (spotting scope, PPSH, G43, Wehr camo, etc)

Probably missing a category but you get my drift. The top 4 are strongest and most likely to result in imbalance if 3 or 4 are present

Every commander should have at least 2 of first 4 items in the following list of all different types of abilities but certainly no more than that to provide for flavor and balance but have trade offs:

1) call in vehicles/tanks
2) call in infantry/support teams
3)emplacements and on map artillery
4) off map artillery and strafing
4) economic boosts fuel drops, medical, muni and fuel conversion, etc.
5) tactical boosts like recon, fast capping/de-capping, smoke drops
6) tactical abilities (crew repair, smoke discharges, camouflage, sprint)
7) unit upgrades (spotting scope, PPSH, G43, Wehr camo, etc)

Probably missing a category but you get my drift. The top 4 are strongest and most likely to result in imbalance if 3 or 4 are present

Allow me to further illustrate using COH1 then COH2 examples.
COH1:
All 3 Wehr and USA commanders had at least 2 of my top 4 abilities but none had all 4

Defensive- Numbers 3&4 you had 2 great off map arty, 88 emplacements and the rest were all passive buffs or tactical abilities you could activate.
Despite only having 2 of top 4 this was a strong commander because of all the early game availability of passive buffs and commander abilities. However a complete lack of call ins meant you had to leverage your early game into real advantages to make up for that hole.

Blitz- Numbers 1&2 are present with storms, Stuh, and tiger. This commander had best call in array of all forces and doctrines but to compensate for that they had no arty/strafing or on map emplacements. This commander lacked any passive buffs or ability buffs other than blitzkrieg but that came so late it barely mattered as everyone wanted the tiger. To recap, great call ins but little else to speak of.

Terror- Numbers 1&4 with King Tiger, fire storm and V1. This commander was a nice fit between defensive and blitz. It had just as good off map arty support (maybe better), some decent tactical abilities like zeal, propaganda. and Of course it had a great call in tank. So to recap, you had a little less wary game strength than defensive but more than Blitz but late game was definitely better than defensive doctrine and about the same as blitz late game.

All these commanders had to give up something in certain areas which led to pretty good overall commander balance I.e. While terror equally seems to be the consensus 1v1 favorite in final patch, none of these commanders were a joke like so many COH2 ones are.