Login

russian armor

Remove FRP? yay or nay.

PAGES (8)down
nee
31 Jan 2016, 06:50 AM
#141
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jan 2016, 02:08 AMpigsoup

2. When you mass retreat as sov, you are GONE for 1 minute +. If you mass retreat with FRP, you are GONE for 20 sec.

Then is the problem that Soviets need FRP like three other factions do, or that three factions need to be like Soviets?

I am not disagreeing with the disparity of FRPs per se, but I do think that FRP is a good thing especially for larger maps. If Soviets and Ostheer also had FRP, then I would think that's a better solution than no one has it, given that three factions already do and it's a workable mechanic, plus there are mods out there that allow Soviets or Ostheer to utilize a form of FRP.

As for species, well I'm glad I'm not classed as a dickface.

FRP is a way easier to use, needs no micro, does not eat pop cap. You simply do click-click.
With HT you need to micro HT behind your troops all the time and at some point you gonna lose it. Let's say, schreck blob is coming from side, so you need to switch maxim, get cons behind cover, move HT behind maxim. That's damn way more of micro, instead of click retreat a go back in few seconds and at some point so won't be able to control efficiency crew weapons, at guns, cons, tanks and ht.

Still if I retreat blob, how many HTs I need to get back to the same point? How much more micro I need when compare to 5 volks blob mass retreating and mass coming back in next XX seconds?

Plus, if I get under suppression it's over. HT won't help me.


Halftracks are more than just transporting blobs back from base, they let you manoeuvre troops up ahead. Judging the worth of Halftracks relative to FRPs without considering the whole of their benefits is not a fair assessment.
Halftracks may not prevent suppression, but they still allow transport and reinforcing even in enemy territory, on the move. It's more a matter of swapping disadvantages: you can't take a Mechanized HQ truck with you into battle, but you can retreat to a closer position. For Ostheer/ Soviets, you CAN take a source of reinforcement and transportation with you, but you don't get to retreat to a closer point. Asymmetry.

But I do agree with you that a light vehicle that offers such critical support can be so easily lost is a problem I have had with halftracks, despite their low cost relative to combat vehicles. And I also didn't agree with the patch that removed reinforcement when you upgraded the halftracks.
If it were up to me I'd just add an FRP upgrade for Soviet halftracks so they act like USF major, the cost is resources plus cannot transport nor can they upgrade weapons. For Ostheer due to their larger use of bunkers I'd think something like Command Bunker can be FRP as well as reinforce, but cannot garrison any infantry.
At least then the arguments for FRP evaporate. After all the entire problem with FRP is that some factions have it while others don't. Given that maps can be large and the ability to play custom match types, FRP shouldn't be removed but instead given to everyone, you just design it in a way so it's asymmetrical.
31 Jan 2016, 10:11 AM
#142
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Giving FRP to SU and OST would change only one thing.
Games would becaome huge cluster fuck.

The question is, why Relic gave FRP to WFA factions in first place.

You ca use asymetrical design for units, tiers but not for something what give you 5-10min better map presence during 1h game becasue it's no longer asymetrial but unbalanced.
31 Jan 2016, 10:20 AM
#143
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
Giving FRP to SU and OST would change only one thing.
Games would becaome huge cluster fuck.

The question is, why Relic gave FRP to WFA factions in first place.

You ca use asymetrical design for units, tiers but not for something what give you 5-10min better map presence during 1h game becasue it's no longer asymetrial but unbalanced.


Lets image FRP in m5 or 251 :foreveralone:.
31 Jan 2016, 10:39 AM
#144
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 06:50 AMnee

Then is the problem that Soviets need FRP like three other factions do, or that three factions need to be like Soviets?

I am not disagreeing with the disparity of FRPs per se, but I do think that FRP is a good thing especially for larger maps. If Soviets and Ostheer also had FRP, then I would think that's a better solution than no one has it, given that three factions already do and it's a workable mechanic, plus there are mods out there that allow Soviets or Ostheer to utilize a form of FRP.

As for species, well I'm glad I'm not classed as a dickface.
...


there it is.

your argument breaks down to: i like FRP, please don't take it away from me. and nothing more.

all that bullshit excuses you've been coming up with to somehow bolster your claim like FRP deter blobbing and other substandard arguments can rest easy now.
31 Jan 2016, 10:52 AM
#145
avatar of poop

Posts: 174

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 10:39 AMpigsoup


there it is.

your argument breaks down to: i like FRP, please don't take it away from me. and nothing more.

all that bullshit excuses you've been coming up with to somehow bolster your claim like FRP deter blobbing and other substandard arguments can rest easy now.


I would like FRP gone as much as anyone, BUT, I do also believe it makes the game more fun having it as an option.

Ideally I would like it available to all factions, EVENLY*, but without massive changing and re-balancing* that is simply not possible, an I highly doubt relic would go through that much effort when it is easier just to remove the skill.

* they would all have be non-doctrinal, and cost/time about even or on-par with their benefits.

**without giving a new unit or ability to halftracks, Soviets and Wermacht would have to make the bunkers retreat-able. and give soviets non-doc forward HQ... or something.. whatever is way unlikely given the glacial pace relic works the balance.
31 Jan 2016, 11:15 AM
#146
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617



Lets image FRP in m5 or 251 :foreveralone:.


Soviet can do it with the commisar, too bad he is only in ToW/mods. Same with the Ostheer's Forward Resupply Base.
31 Jan 2016, 11:21 AM
#147
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

forward retreat points should be really removed, especially when looking at 3v3/4v4 maps where from middle to home base retreat can last 30 secs and back on the field takes like 1 minute or even more, that's why some 4v4 maps are best for OKW
nee
31 Jan 2016, 12:46 PM
#148
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 10:39 AMpigsoup


there it is.

your argument breaks down to: i like FRP, please don't take it away from me. and nothing more.


no different than your own.
31 Jan 2016, 18:14 PM
#149
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 10:39 AMpigsoup


there it is.

your argument breaks down to: i like FRP, please don't take it away from me. and nothing more.
...


tell me again how FRP does not promote blobbing and how 300-500mp is too expensive for saving of 5-10 min.
nee
31 Jan 2016, 20:44 PM
#150
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

Blobbing is discouraged because concentration of force in a fixed predictable location, resulting in easier time wiping it out. I don't blob and retreat when I know the enemy has the means to kill me off as I do so. Which means that 300mp could very well have been for nothing...especially if Mechanized HQ gets destroyed because I opt to fall back to base.

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 10:52 AMpoop

Ideally I would like it available to all factions, EVENLY*, but without massive changing and re-balancing* that is simply not possible, an I highly doubt relic would go through that much effort when it is easier just to remove the skill.

* they would all have be non-doctrinal, and cost/time about even or on-par with their benefits.

**without giving a new unit or ability to halftracks, Soviets and Wermacht would have to make the bunkers retreat-able. and give soviets non-doc forward HQ... or something.. whatever is way unlikely given the glacial pace relic works the balance.


I've tried a mod where Ostheer's doctrinal Field Artillery Officer could use retreat point, effectively becoming the USF major in function. Makes it a lot like OKW when you build bunkers around him, but like Major, hes just three guy squad that can be wiped easily. Obviously restricted to commanders that use him, so you can never get FRP and Tiger for example.
I find the mod very useful when playing large maps like Lorch. It's not an original idea but it certainly makes playing Ostheer on large maps much more bearable, given USF and British's own FRP ability. The author didn't make a Soviet equivalent though.
I think at least from doctrinal side FRP for Ostheer/ Soviets would be interesting. I'd think it would have to be rather common unlock though; however, one can easily look to the least-used Soviet/ Ostheer commanders for a solution, if you add a FRP unlock to these commanders they would prove immensely useful, though at the expense of calling in Tiger or IS-2. But making them doctrinal will also discourage these commanders from being used in matches where FRP is likely not a priority, like the smallest 1v1 maps. But then again if they are added among the useless commanders that's not going to be as big an issue; in small maps I'd still prefer a Tiger or Stormtroopers instead of being able to retreat Pioniers to a nearby bunker.
I don't know how it can be non-doctrinal: putting in a unit like Commissar would make it too similar to USF major, and problematic if he can comes earlier (USF is T4, whereas British/ OKW can be T1, ignoring the upgrade cost) as he's a squad by himself and not an upgrade like Major.
I've seen mods where there is a distinct Luftwaffe Officer squad with his own portrait, but we still have the same problem of being too similar to USF Major etc. Given they have bunkers I'd say Ostheer deserves FRP the least, so making it doctrinal is better option, on top of maintaining asymmetrical design. I suppose bunkers could get a fourth upgrade that precludes the other three, but while the interface makes that possible I think it looks weird to have four upgrade options. Unless you want to upgrade after a previous upgrade, which seems weird, though more balanced as that means more resources and more time spent on an FRP for units you don't have yet and may not afford. Then again, there's Fear Propaganda Artillery that forces units like AT guns to retreat, with no speed or accuracy benefits.
31 Jan 2016, 21:01 PM
#151
avatar of dOPEnEWhAIRCUT

Posts: 239

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 18:14 PMpigsoup


tell me again how FRP does not promote blobbing and how 300-500mp is too expensive for saving of 5-10 min.


Well for one, you can't blob infantry you don't have because I keep bombing the hell out of your forward retreat point when you mass retreat.
31 Jan 2016, 22:08 PM
#152
avatar of Volsky

Posts: 344

The only time FRPs become a problem for their user is if he cocks up and the enemy makes it into sword-hitting/mortaring range. And in that case he's stuffed unless he has a KT or other uber tonk in his back pocket.

FRPs reduce micro tax, offer on-the-spot healing (except for the Brits, who can heal their troops/blobs on the move, en masse), and allows you to rapidly outmaneuver your opponent. If I dick up and get caught in an MG, and HAVE to retreat, I'm looking at 60s+ to get back into the fight, not to mention reinforcing. If he dicks up, he's looking at MAYBE 30s+, probably less since most players will retreat at the first sign of trouble, then come back and try again.

The halftrack argument is foolish; Ost can get away with a medic bunker and command bunker, they don't even need the HT, and the Soviets can't upgrade theirs to actually deal respectable damage anymore. So I've got a fragile transport with a fairly meh .50cal that gets ganked by the nearest source of hard AT before you're able to do anything. Its mobility is not enough to make up for its fragility, the fact that it's tied into T3, the fact that it eats 5 pop, and the face that no matter what you do, it WILL die at some point during the game, forcing you to replace it.

I ALWAYS bring an M5 into battle as the Soviets, otherwise their field presence SUCKS. However, it's a bitch-and-a-half to keep it from getting pimpsmacked by gobs of Axis AT past the 30 minute mark, especially if it's against OKW and large amounts of Shreks. We're not even considering the horror that is, and always has been (since vCoH) halftrack pathing. It's a massive micro tax in any fight that sees rapid advances or retreats.

Meanwhile, an FRP user need only mash the magical T key to return to healing, reinforcing goodness.
--------------------------------------------------------
FRPs are neat, I guess, but I think they should be removed and replaced with more conventional options. The Brits have the forward assembly, so they can reinforce without having to run back to base. OKW is sort of stuffed, but you can soft retreat to the medtrack without much trouble. The US already has the ambulance, which, while even more frail than an M5, offers heals and reinforcements in the field nonetheless.

If we are against removing FRPs, then I suggest enacting an aura, tied to the FRP entity itself (be it the Major squad, medtrack, or assembly) that would alter the retreat bonuses of all player squads that retreat while the 'retreat to FRP' ability is active, thus removing any and all retreat bonuses other than the removal of suppression and the increase in movement speed. Something like this should be fairly easily coded, even for a novice RGD user.
31 Jan 2016, 22:33 PM
#153
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2



Well for one, you can't blob infantry you don't have because I keep bombing the hell out of your forward retreat point when you mass retreat.


read the thread please
31 Jan 2016, 22:41 PM
#154
avatar of dOPEnEWhAIRCUT

Posts: 239

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 22:33 PMpigsoup


read the thread please


I did. And it screams "I can't adapt so please make the game easier for me by removing a feature that frustrates me". I could waste my time by developing a more thorough post and explain how to counter FRPs extremely well like so many other players already have, but you'll just respond with:

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2016, 10:39 AMpigsoup


there it is.

your argument breaks down to: i like FRP, please don't take it away from me. and nothing more.

all that bullshit excuses you've been coming up with to somehow bolster your claim like FRP deter blobbing and other substandard arguments can rest easy now.


So why bother?
31 Jan 2016, 23:13 PM
#155
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2



I did. And it screams "I can't adapt so please make the game easier for me by removing a feature that frustrates me". I could waste my time by developing a more thorough post and explain how to counter FRPs extremely well like so many other players already have, but you'll just respond with:



So why bother?


:facepalm:

yes, i can't adapt. so i waited a year and half for this thread.
12 Feb 2016, 01:46 AM
#156
avatar of poop

Posts: 174

remove this shit already for fucks sake
PAGES (8)down
4 users are browsing this thread: 4 guests

Livestreams

United States 201
United States 17
unknown 8

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

795 users are online: 795 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49125
Welcome our newest member, Xclusive
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM