[Feedback requested] - balancing issues in large team games

Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2015, 02:20 AMacosn

Its mind boggling that the only good artillery the US gets isn't even artillery- it's a strafing run. Maybe it's the same sort of "We wanted to make an authentic game so we did all our research from the History Channel" bullshit that has the Germans getting every toy in the cabinet, but the US and the Soviets get bread scraps, but this is a serious issue- artillery was the hallmark of the US armed forces from Normandy to VE day and for it to be so poorly represented in the game is irritating.

Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 16:24 PMatouba

WHY katyusha comes out so early and counter infantry blobs so well but ostheer have no artillery to use to counter the allies infantry blobs? Werfer is so expensive and so usless.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 00:49 AMpigsoup

because ostheer has mg42 from the get go? russians have no such counterpart, 'cept maybe dshk, which i think has some aoe suppression.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 00:49 AMpigsoup

because ostheer has mg42 from the get go? russians have no such counterpart, 'cept maybe dshk, which i think has some aoe suppression.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 01:35 AMatouba

If the ost players go to MG42/Mortars/Pak40 compined army, not infantry blobs, then they will also suffer from Katyusha which hits the field even earlier than a T34/76.

But when the soviet players go to Maxim/Mortars/Zis3 compined army, they will not be afraid of poor ost army. Because the werfer is so late and usless, high tech cost and high scatter. And the rocket artilley is the best killer for weapon crews.

Ofc I'm not talking about OKW walking stuka, I'm talking about ost. Ost lacks something to counter blobs and weapon crews. They lacks usefull artillery.

In some teamgame cases, as you know, there will be more ost players, they have no way to beat the soviet compined army. The game will be even before Katyushas come out, then the balance breaks, the ost front line breaks so quickly.

Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 14:37 PMpigsoup

it is not about when the first tank comes out. i agree with jadame that cache does add some depth in quickening the pace in exchange for a price of part of a unit. but it still does not change the fact that it is offensively cheap even from 2v2+ and helps teams shit fuel out of their ass. what happens when you see a jagdtiger/KT/ISU/IS2 wielded by a good team. you make a move on it. but by the time you are able to make a move on it, which takes time, the user would have enough saved to just call in another one most of the time. i personally do not like that.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 06:52 AMNinjaWJ

But im saying that the units remain the same. Axis still have stronger armor. Delaying their entry into battle doesn't really help balance. More game time with medium tanks should be good though.

I think the problem you are describing is more of a faction design/ call-in system issue. Most of the tank call-ins are much more potent that non-doctrinal options. If all factions were like USA or Ostheer (they can win with their non-doctrinal stuff), then we wouldn't see such spam of heavy tanks (KT non-doc though :/ )

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 01:35 AMatouba

.... I'm talking about ost. Ost lacks something to counter blobs and weapon crews. They lacks usefull artillery.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 11:24 AMdpfarce

Goodie Goodie, making a post after everyone else has had their opinions.


There appears to be the following trend of gameplay in 3v3/4v4s;

- No mid-game; nobody techs, everyone rushes heavy tanks.
- Axis Heavies being almost unassailable except with
- Artillery Spam
- Cheese strategies such as luftwaffe supply, one guy building 4x caches


Almost none of these problems exist in DOW2.
- DOW2 has FASTER power (fuel) income than COH2, AND their super-units are usually cheaper. Compare: 800/200 for a Baneblade, 760(?)/260 for a KT

Simple reason: by the time you save up for a Baneblade, you're down to 10vps.
(more complex reason: extremely powerful off-map artillery, numerous hard counters, melee units)

I feel honestly that 90% of the problems in 4v4 games can be solved by increasing the rate of VP ticking.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 11:24 AMdpfarce

Goodie Goodie, making a post after everyone else has had their opinions.


There appears to be the following trend of gameplay in 3v3/4v4s;

- No mid-game; nobody techs, everyone rushes heavy tanks.
- Axis Heavies being almost unassailable except with
- Artillery Spam
- Cheese strategies such as luftwaffe supply, one guy building 4x caches


Almost none of these problems exist in DOW2.
- DOW2 has FASTER power (fuel) income than COH2, AND their super-units are usually cheaper. Compare: 800/200 for a Baneblade, 760(?)/260 for a KT

Simple reason: by the time you save up for a Baneblade, you're down to 10vps.
(more complex reason: extremely powerful off-map artillery, numerous hard counters, melee units)

I feel honestly that 90% of the problems in 4v4 games can be solved by increasing the rate of VP ticking.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 11:32 AMKatitof

DoW2 also have power income scaled down for 2v2 and even more for 3v3 to prevent resource inflation and super fast teching.

Just saying.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 11:32 AMKatitof

DoW2 also have power income scaled down for 2v2 and even more for 3v3 to prevent resource inflation and super fast teching.

Just saying.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 11:24 AMdpfarce

Goodie Goodie, making a post after everyone else has had their opinions.


There appears to be the following trend of gameplay in 3v3/4v4s;

- No mid-game; nobody techs, everyone rushes heavy tanks.
...

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 22:00 PMdpfarce

Power income per node is scaled down, but you get 2x as many nodes on the map

= no/little net difference

Jump back to quoted post10 Apr 2015, 07:32 AMCabreza

If there were no caches or reduced resource income I would expect a few things to happen:

1.) More infantry: First and foremost the manpower spent on caches would almost assuredly be spent on an extra infantry squad. Later in the game less fuel would mean less manpower spent on tanks. This in turn would allow for more manpower to be invested into infantry and support weapons.

2.) A longer early game: Less fuel income would directly translate into slower teching and a larger window for light vehicles, light tanks, and even medium tanks.

3.) Heavies will carry a greater opportunity cost: Currently it is possible to tech, build a number of medium tanks, and still have enough fuel to call in a heavy tank when the CPs are met. Without caches heavies will arrive at the same time but players will have to make a conscious choice to forgo or limit teching if they want to be able to afford a heavy tank the moment the CPs are available.

4.) Tank losses will hurt: Since tanks don't bleed fuel like infantry bleed manpower it is possible for teams to acquire enormous stores of fuel once pop cap is reached. This in turn allows players to near instantly replace any lost heavy tank. With less fuel available loosing a tank will be a much larger blow.

5.) There will be less explosions: Without munitions caches there will be fewer off map artillery abilities and plane strikes in 4v4 games and players will be inclined to use these strikes somewhat more tactically. The same will also be true of grenades and other munitions abilities. This will also mean that infantry upgrades will compete to a larger degree with off-map arty for munitions use and in turn make killing upgraded infantry squads that much more rewarding.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 22:38 PMKatitof

Exactly.

Players need to spend 2 to 3x as much requisition to get same power income as they would in 1v1.
What does that mean?

NO RESOURCE INFLATION as all players need to invest just as much in 3v3 as in 1v1 per player.

Same resource spent, no boosted income, no late game imbalance.

Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 22:38 PMKatitof

Exactly.

Players need to spend 2 to 3x as much requisition to get same power income as they would in 1v1.
What does that mean?

NO RESOURCE INFLATION as all players need to invest just as much in 3v3 as in 1v1 per player.

Same resource spent, no boosted income, no late game imbalance.