Conversion abilities destroy flow

Hey guys

Conversion abilities like spend ammo to get more fuel from Lend Lease and spend fuel for more ammo from CAS are IMO really bad for the flow for the game.

You can get a T70 out extremely fast and tech all the way, though it has a huge downside of the planes having a huge chance to get shot down.

CAS destroys the entire weakness of Werh being ammo starved and forces the opponent to micro alot higher then you do. Same with the fuel to ammo conversion Doctrine that has the Stuka dive? You can actually keep spamming the ability in teamgames and deny 1 part of the map constantly in late game when your army hit pop cap and it doesn't matter if you spend the fuel.

I don't understand how this is balanced. Top 20 people 2 vs 2 get such a huge boost from these doctrines and ruin the flow of the game. You can only wait/retreat. I think it's frustrating. In 1 vs 1 it really depends on the map, but that already says something.

I would suggest making the ability cheaper and with alot less resources gain back and with a bigger cooldown. Or make it drop as a plane as well. At least the lend lease plane can get shot down. Fuel to ammo conversion is just an instant click button.

Lend Lease really ain't a problem considering it'll just be shoving XP into AA units' mouths when prepared.

Though yeah, Fuel to Muni is a huge problem on CAS.

I think these abilities have trade offs in a 1v1 but are incredibly unfair as more players are added to the game

I think these abilities have trade offs in a 1v1 but are incredibly unfair as more players are added to the game

Exactly.

If it is the transfer abilities themselves we would see more complaints about Osttruppen doc with the same ability that has been out forever. I've never had a problem with the soviet resource drop(probably because its never used). Plane call ins just need a fixed amount of time from ability use to payload delivery.

CAS is the doctrine with fuel to munition transfer and stuka dive bomb. Are you referring to Luftwaffe supply as well? If so this doc is entirely map dependant, with a significant advantage on maps like Lienne with uncontested fuel and the left corner being the territory to own allowing muni drops and flame drops to protect them.

A fixed delivery time would solve the effectiveness of the attack runs, fixing maps is another beast altogether with some doctrines being better than others on different maps.

How do you feel about soviet industry?

Soviet Windustry can literally only affect one player. Luftwaffa supply drop and muni drops can be passed down the line to other players

maybe like a 5 minute cooldown on the CAS conversion?

Soviet Windustry can literally only affect one player. Luftwaffa supply drop and muni drops can be passed down the line to other players

Industry is horribly designed and it really shouldn't be your go to answer for "well designed commander for increasing resource income". Luftwaffe supply by design is great for helping team mates, but is obviously not as viable in small game modes like 1's or 2's.

The problem with Luftwaffe supply is that to many maps have uncontestable fuels.

Well Industry is a cool idea, use the stock not so great units in conjunction with an iconic them of the Soviet union. They just have not found the perfect balance between manpower drain and fuel increase. At one point it was incredibly OP and then into the ground it went.

It does modulate resources but with draw backs shared by no one else but the player.

Luftwaffe is viable just not as strong as call in meta, so its never seen.

The opel fuel truck was nerfed and only affects one player for this reason. It was completely unfair back before WFA came out in team games. One player would set up caches, another would do opel trucks, and the axis late game was rofl stomp

Fuel transfer to munitions is also only one player but that's the main topic of this thread. As for Luftwaffe supply you spend 200 mp for 50 fuel or 150 munitions, which is roughly 40 seconds of mp income for 2 minutes of fuel or munitions dropped over the span of one minute.

I wouldn't be opposed to a 1-3 minute cooldown after the drop timer ends as right now on the proper map you can have a limitless supply of munitions and still come out 30 munitions on top after dropping a flame strike. Maybe even half the cost and return to 100 mp for 25 fuel, 75 munitions on top of the cooldown.

On a well balanced map with fuel and munitions in contested territory you have 1 minute to respond and potentially steal these resources, so again I feel we shouldn't punish a doctrine for poor map design.

These care packages can be destroyed by any explosive so an arty strike on the territory circle can destroy all the crates or push the harvesting unit off the point enough to attempt an attack. I don't know if you can target them with small arms or if you need to use attack ground or barrage. They can also fall into rivers and off the map resulting in a significant loss of return on your investment.

Well he does suggest its map dependent in a 1v1, but game breaking in 2v2

Well Industry is a cool idea, use the stock not so great units in conjunction with an iconic them of the Soviet union. They just have not found the perfect balance between manpower drain and fuel increase. At one point it was incredibly OP and then into the ground it went.

It does modulate resources but with draw backs shared by no one else but the player.

Luftwaffe is viable just not as strong as call in meta, so its never seen.

The opel fuel truck was nerfed and only affects one player for this reason. It was completely unfair back before WFA came out in team games. One player would set up caches, another would do opel trucks, and the axis late game was rofl stomp

Soviet Industry defeats it's only point of existing. If your limit is fuel income, then switching that limit to MP changes nothing. You will get as many tanks as you always could have but the limit factor is INCREASED since you get reduced MP as you take up pop cap but not as you make tanks with fuel.

Luftwaffe isn't super viable outside of 3's and 4's because it starves Ost for MP even more, so your fucked even harder for teching.

Well he does suggest its map dependent in a 1v1, but game breaking in 2v2

It's map dependent in all game modes, it's far less effective on maps with contested muni points and fuels because you will spend long periods of time without being able to drop supplies for fear of giving it to the enemy or losing the point.

Soviet Industry defeats it's only point of existing. If your limit is fuel income, then switching that limit to MP changes nothing. You will get as many tanks as you always could have but the limit factor is INCREASED since you get reduced MP as you take up pop cap but not as you make tanks with fuel.

Luftwaffe isn't super viable outside of 3's and 4's because it starves Ost for MP even more, so your fucked even harder for teching.



It's map dependent in all game modes, it's far less effective on maps with contested muni points and fuels because you will spend long periods of time without being able to drop supplies for fear of giving it to the enemy or losing the point.

Well when you explore 1v1s, try industry out. What most people do is wait to activate it to create a buffer of man power so that with the increased fuel rate you dont run out of Manpower. But the main point here as I said is that Industry has not perfected the trade off between manpower and fuel.

In 1v1 you are manpower starved (at least against USF) but its not bad at all in 2v2. That is one of the reasons Windustry works best in 2v2 as opposed to any other game mode.

While it is map dependent, we have a game where majority of the maps have a "safe" fuel or munitions that is more orientated to your side.

If we had more maps like the new winter 2-4 player map with one fuel, Like you said this commander would not come out much.

Really the bigger issue that has existed since release is how certain meta born gimmicks overshadow other units and create a false sense of uselessness about them.This is quite the case for many of the commanders Axis have since they do not utter rely on them like Soviets to do well. Luftwaffe is simply overshadowed by commanders such as Mechanized.

When people dont look past these veils we have what happened after WFA released and USF early game was adjusted. People thought OKW were terrible, and there were not. After adjusting some of the allies toys people started to figure out that OKW had fantastic units. Notice how almost nothing has been adjusted until recently because players did not look deep enough into the game.

As for the resource modulation here is why its not fair. As PQ has said in his blog, there has to be trade offs between decision and gain. If you play starcraft II, a comparison you could get is what if in multi player games only one side was allowed to use Mules to gather resources For their allies while the other side was restricted to regular resource gathering. Not quite fair is it that one side can spoon feed their Protoss player into the later stages of the game quicker with minimal risk to them.

If both sides had equal abilities it would be at least balanced. But instead its not, and the allies version gets shot down by free AA if there are OKW players around.

We are playing a game where one side has a better late game. Fuel is the biggest determining factor in how successful your late game is. Mostly safe fuel drops for one side and not the other means the late game side can quickly get out their better toys. Also the munition drops allow axis whom have better munition sinks and are generally starved to easily bypass the phase of the game where they are designed to struggle.

TLDR Resource modulation in team games is bad because it skips intended disadvantages and is not equally spread out between the different sides

I don't think we should hamstring axis abilities because their ally counterparts are worse, that goes against the entire asymmetric design of the game. I wouldn't be opposed to soviet supply being buffed, but because soviets depend on call ins for late game you would most likely only see this in arranged teams with a support build.

As for fuel being the determining factor late game for axis, I completely disagree. Even if you maintain units like you are supposed to you will still be held back by manpower far more often as Wehrmacht unless the game is really long or you suffer heavy tank losses.

This doc just starts to snowball significantly in the late game where you already have most of your standing army so your manpower is mostly for reinforcement or replacement. This is something of a problem for all large team games where resource management is thrown out the window and you end up churning out tigers and is2s as soon as you lose one.

This doctrine also mirrors the tactics the Wehrmacht actually employed after the encirclement of Stalingrad not that this should determine much for balance.

+1 to OP

I don't think we should hamstring axis abilities because their ally counterparts are worse, that goes against the entire asymmetric design of the game. I wouldn't be opposed to soviet supply being buffed, but because soviets depend on call ins for late game you would most likely only see this in arranged teams with a support build.

As for fuel being the determining factor late game for axis, I completely disagree. Even if you maintain units like you are supposed to you will still be held back by manpower far more often as Wehrmacht unless the game is really long or you suffer heavy tank losses.

What about it is hamstringing exactly? there are plenty of other commanders that can be used without the resource modulation abilities.

Allies commanders are also pretty fine without them

Bringing Luftwaffe supply to the level of its soviet counterpart would make it as useless as the soviet one. I would prefer a buff to the soviet version rather than a nerf to Luftwaffe supply.

The chances of them removing a commander altogether is about zero, so the only other way to get rid of these commanders would be a nerf into the ground which I feel is even worse than a few 4v4s getting even more out of hand than usual.

There are enough unused commanders in the roster already, I feel we should balance them in the ways I have suggested in previous posts here in this thread.

What about it is hamstringing exactly? there are plenty of other commanders that can be used without the resource modulation abilities.

Allies commanders are also pretty fine without them

His point is that you should buff Allies resource conversion abilities to be the same instead of removing them from Axis.

While it is map dependent, we have a game where majority of the maps have a "safe" fuel or munitions that is more orientated to your side.

This wasn't the case for a good period of time, and we should go back to that period design wise. All fuel points and capture points should be equally able to be contested by the enemy team.

We are playing a game where one side has a better late game. Fuel is the biggest determining factor in how successful your late game is. Mostly safe fuel drops for one side and not the other means the late game side can quickly get out their better toys. Also the munition drops allow axis whom have better munition sinks and are generally starved to easily bypass the phase of the game where they are designed to struggle.

Yes the factions are retardedly designed. Why Allies are best in the early to mid game and Axis best as late game makes no sense when it plays directly against all conventions of skill and tactics.

TLDR Resource modulation in team games is bad because it skips intended disadvantages and is not equally spread out between the different sides

Team synergy is not the enemy here, the availability of it how ever is. Allies need more tools to enable team work.

Ability itself is not a problem. CAS is. Infantry-focused doctrine, which counters anti-infantry weapons such as katy and artillery emplacements (and even tanks for some extent) on its own is bad design. Only weapons which stands against CAS is isu and priests.

And then CAS planes uncounterable by AA.

Lol.

Ability itself is not a problem. CAS is. Infantry-focused doctrine, which counters anti-infantry weapons such as katy and artillery emplacements (and even tanks for some extent) on its own is bad design. Only weapons which stands against CAS is isu and priests.

And then CAS planes uncounterable by AA.

Lol.

I'll give you the artillery emplacements but if your losing Katyushas to CAS but not priests there might an issue.