A simple solution to promote/reward tech by add T0 tank/TD
Posts: 503
USF-Jumbo Sherman (They don't need another TD as much as they could use better late game main battle tank)
UKF-Archer tank destroyer (They could use an alternative to their only other true AT tank the Firefly, also it was a very unique and effective unit)
USSR-KV-1 except not full of suck like it is now. This tank needs to be in their main arsenal to give them a main battle tank that can actually take punches which the 34/76 isn't remotely close to doing. I could also go for T34/85 since they were built in even greater numbers than the 34/76 by the end of the war.
Ostheer-Hetzer I'm sure it won't happen now that the Flame Hetzer is coming to the OKW, but this would be great to see in the Ostheer arsenal and would provide a good mix of AT/AI/ambush capability that overlaps too much with the JPIV of the OKW to be added to their stock arsenal. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Marder III but I don't think it would get built much as the Stug already fills the turret-less long range TD role nicely.
I try not to make pipe dream posts but I know this probably won't happen. However, there is no reason it couldn't be implemented and Relic has shown willingness to make changes to core army composition such as removing the Sturmtiger from OKW T4 and placing in the PIV Ausf. J.
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Posts: 503
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
We already have this with OKW who can build the KT once they tech all their buildings. People are always complaining about Call-In Meta and how cheap it is that some commanders/factions can get away with barely teching and they have good points. Why not give every faction it's own T0 tank/TD as a reward for teching up throughout the game.
USF-Jumbo Sherman (They don't need another TD as much as they could use better late game main battle tank)
UKF-Archer tank destroyer (They could use an alternative to their only other true AT tank the Firefly, also it was a very unique and effective unit)
USSR-KV-1 except not full of suck like it is now. This tank needs to be in their main arsenal to give them a main battle tank that can actually take punches which the 34/76 isn't remotely close to doing. I could also go for T34/85 since they were built in even greater numbers than the 34/76 by the end of the war.
Ostheer-Hetzer I'm sure it won't happen now that the Flame Hetzer is coming to the OKW, but this would be great to see in the Ostheer arsenal and would provide a good mix of AT/AI/ambush capability that overlaps too much with the JPIV of the OKW to be added to their stock arsenal. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Marder III but I don't think it would get built much as the Stug already fills the turret-less long range TD role nicely.
I try not to make pipe dream posts but I know this probably won't happen. However, there is no reason it couldn't be implemented and Relic has shown willingness to make changes to core army composition such as removing the Sturmtiger from OKW T4 and placing in the PIV Ausf. J.
I like the Basic idea. I would like is/Tiger/pershing thought. This could bring great variety to commanders and would free up the choice.
Still, Wont happen because Relic needs the money
Posts: 503
All right so you mean you get these vehicles when you tech every tier for these factions? You don't mean literally everything, right.
I mean except for British, once you tech all Tiers you have option of building the unit from your T0. It would work in the same way that the KT can only be built once all trucks have been placed. For Ostheer, I wouldn't say they have to build all 4 buildings but they would have to research every battle phase. Soviets would have to build all tech buildings (no BP cost and cheap T1 & T2 so not unreasonable). USF woudl have to get Lt., Capt, Major and UKF would have to research their tiers plus an additional T0 tech that would only be available to be researched after platoon and command posts were researched.
Posts: 503
I like the Basic idea. I would like is/Tiger/pershing thought. This could bring great variety to commanders and would free up the choice.
Still, Wont happen because Relic needs the money
Hell you could give the SU an IS-3 and it wouldn't cost Relic money. They already have issued the 2 IS-2 commanders and I dont' think anymore will be coming. IS-2 call in would still be worth it in Shock rifle if you wanted to avoid cost of teching T4 similar to current Shock Rifle meta of KV-8/IS-2s.
What this would promote is more teching which I think most would agree is a good thing. Only having 1 extra unit wouldn't rob Relic of commander special units either.
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
Hell you could give the SU an IS-3 and it wouldn't cost Relic money. They already have issued the 2 IS-2 commanders and I dont' think anymore will be coming. IS-2 call in would still be worth it in Shock rifle if you wanted to avoid cost of teching T4 similar to current Shock Rifle meta of KV-8/IS-2s.
What this would promote is more teching which I think most would agree is a good thing. Only having 1 extra unit wouldn't rob Relic of commander special units either.
Like i said i Support your idea, many pros / few to zero cons!
Posts: 2053
Posts: 503
Why does tech need to be rewarded, anyways? Ostheer and Soviets never got anything by teching and they somehow survived. Then to make things cool, USF and OKW got bonuses for their teching structures. UKF base artillery is... Extremely crap. Regardless, you spend resources to tech for the sake of winning, not for getting a pat on the back for doing something you would do anyways for the sake of the match...
How about to punish players who don't tech and just rely on call in's then? What this would do is give players a reason to go beyond the minimal teching and just wait for call ins without further drastically changing call-in structure...especially SU with their underwhelming T4, USF with their mediocre T3 and Ostheer who have a quality T3 and good T4 but the final BP tech + T4 building is very costly.
Also, getting beefy T0 units as a final reward for doing all your tech would open up more commanders to being usable....I mean how many times do you hear a player say they would use a certain commander but it has no call-in armor and their stock armor blows. I know, i know it's really only a problem for SU and USF but you get my point I think.
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2
Building everything to get your end game unit isn't really a decision nor does it encourage actually building stuff from those tiers since the fuel would just be saved for the T0 unit instead. I think people get this misconception that "combined arms" for the sake of diversity is skillful play....its not. Skillful play is when you make a smart decision to get unit B instead of another unit A because it actually makes your army stronger in that particular situation, not because some guy in Vancouver made a arbitrary decision to require more variety.
Something that would actually make the game harder and raise the skill gap a bit would be to change up the population/upkeep system. Many units take up far too much population, leading to less total units and also less manpower for buying new units. I played a vcoh 1v1 the other day and I had 6 rifles, a Ranger, a M18, 2 engineers, 3 AT guns, a mortar, and a stolen MG42 and I still had 220 income and a little bit of spare population. I'd rather see high unit counts with a moderate amount of variety than far less units with more "combined arms." The game is more interesting when you are micro'ing a bunch of stuff all over the place versus putting 50% of your attention towards a vehicle that takes up 1/3 of your population like its a MOBA hero. Theres some things that worked better in the original game that are probably never going to be changed because it would require some radical redesign (commander system for example), on the other hand population tweaks are a change that would be really easy to roll out in just one patch.
Posts: 503
The reward should be having access to units that are superior in the given situation because you made the right decision tech-wise. For example an Ostheer player is rewarded teching T4 for Panthers/Panzerwerfer against a player that has a SU85 and infantry blob. In coh1 a WM player was rewarded for rushing Pumas if the US player invested heavily early in triage/BARs/nades and didn't make a large impact with them. Brits are pretty much fucked because 1>2>3 tech structure does not reward picking the right building. Soviets could be redeemed by removing the T3 before T4 requirement. More global upgrades would also help in that regard but I highly doubt that is going to happen.
Building everything to get your end game unit isn't really a decision nor does it encourage actually building stuff from those tiers since the fuel would just be saved for the T0 unit instead. I think people get this misconception that "combined arms" for the sake of diversity is skillful play....its not. Skillful play is when you make a smart decision to get unit B instead of another unit A because it actually makes your army stronger in that particular situation, not because some guy in Vancouver made a arbitrary decision to require more variety.
Something that would actually make the game harder and raise the skill gap a bit would be to change up the population/upkeep system. Many units take up far too much population, leading to less total units and also less manpower for buying new units. I played a vcoh 1v1 the other day and I had 6 rifles, a Ranger, a M18, 2 engineers, 3 AT guns, a mortar, and a stolen MG42 and I still had 220 income and a little bit of spare population. I'd rather see high unit counts with a moderate amount of variety than far less units with more "combined arms." The game is more interesting when you are micro'ing a bunch of stuff all over the place versus putting 50% of your attention towards a vehicle that takes up 1/3 of your population like its a MOBA hero. Theres some things that worked better in the original game that are probably never going to be changed because it would require some radical redesign (commander system for example), on the other hand population tweaks are a change that would be really easy to roll out in just one patch.
fair point but there are still choices because you can pump out lots of call in tanks got instance as SU and just use it with T3 or you can tech to get T0 units.
I also would like to see pop cap of units reduced because it only takes a few tanks and you find yourself maxed out if you didn't suffer infantry squad wipes.
Posts: 474
snip
My main gripe with this game will always be popcap.
So many strategies that you just can't do because if you try to make something that goes near the 100 popcap limit and your stuck with 3 at guns, a tank, 2 rifle squads, and one engineer guy for repairs. You're going to get screwed by that massive at/ai inf blob coming at you no matter what you do.
Livestreams
19 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.615222.735-2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, vibhak
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM