Login

russian armor

A suggestion for FRP

22 Jun 2017, 15:46 PM
#1
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289

My suggestion for FRP is:


1. All armies should have FRP.
2. All FTPs should be doctrinal with same CP

OKW: Add FRP to Overwatch Doctrine and merge it with early warning (will active permanent frp on Battlegroup Headquarters).

USF: Add FRP to Mechanized Company instead of Recon sweep (will active permanent frp for ambulance or major).

UKF: Add Forward Assembly to Advanced Emplacement Regiment and merge it with advanced assembly (will active permanent frp).

Wehrmacht: Add to artillery field officer (like major) or can be add to bunker or halftrack (will active temporary frp for +/- 1 min)

Soviet: Add to halftrack (will active temporary frp for +/- 1 min)( i never played with soviet, so suggest a commander for adding FRP to it )
22 Jun 2017, 16:57 PM
#2
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1

I don't really like the idea to make them non-doctrinal. Given the discrepancies between the usefulness of certain doctrines (and Mech Company is certainly better overall than Overwatch for example), players would more or less be forced into certain unvafourable commanders.

Also, the major for USF comes pretty late compared to a Wehr/Soviet HT or even an Ost bunker, so there could be some disparities here, too.
22 Jun 2017, 17:08 PM
#3
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jun 2017, 16:57 PMGarrett
I don't really like the idea to make them non-doctrinal. Given the discrepancies between the usefulness of certain doctrines (and Mech Company is certainly better overall than Overwatch for example), players would more or less be forced into certain unvafourable commanders.

Also, the major for USF comes pretty late compared to a Wehr/Soviet HT or even an Ost bunker, so there could be some disparities here, too.

+1 (I'm assuming you mean doctrinal)

Other than the fact that I'm opposed to FRPs period, this would be a more unbalanced/doctrine choice forcing ability than pretty much any of the current abilities in commanders (in team games anyway), even disregarding discrepancies (speaking of which, I believe there is more than one ost doctrine with artillery officer).
22 Jun 2017, 17:20 PM
#4
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

I dont think it is a good idea for the reasons already stated above. But I actually have a better one.

You see, all FRPs have the button that toggles them on and off. My idea is that:
1. FRPs should take percent of your resources while active - what kind of resources and how much is up to a debate but I guess half of fuel or half of munition would be fair.
2. Once toggled on, the FRP can't be toggled off for 1 minute.

The advantages are as follows:
1. FRPs have disadvantage, so there is no need to either remove them or implement in all factions - factions are still diverse and the mechanic is deeper.
2. There is actual counterplay to FRP - if you attack them during one minute from enabling, opponent cant safely retreat everything to base.
3. All the gameplay mechanics that would be removed with FRPs, like looking for best spot for truck, pushing the major with ambo and so on are still kept in the game - it doesnt become any more shallow
4. Players can still choose to have FRP on all the time but they pay a huge price. That makes blobbing playstyle hard to pull off, but still a rare possibility. This is good becouse no tactical choice should ever be completely vanished.
22 Jun 2017, 17:39 PM
#5
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jun 2017, 16:57 PMGarrett
I don't really like the idea to make them non-doctrinal. Given the discrepancies between the usefulness of certain doctrines (and Mech Company is certainly better overall than Overwatch for example), players would more or less be forced into certain unvafourable commanders.

Also, the major for USF comes pretty late compared to a Wehr/Soviet HT or even an Ost bunker, so there could be some disparities here, too.


i said Ambulance OR major, even Captain is good
22 Jun 2017, 18:21 PM
#6
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289

I dont think it is a good idea for the reasons already stated above. But I actually have a better one.

You see, all FRPs have the button that toggles them on and off. My idea is that:
1. FRPs should take percent of your resources while active - what kind of resources and how much is up to a debate but I guess half of fuel or half of munition would be fair.
2. Once toggled on, the FRP can't be toggled off for 1 minute.

The advantages are as follows:
1. FRPs have disadvantage, so there is no need to either remove them or implement in all factions - factions are still diverse and the mechanic is deeper.
2. There is actual counterplay to FRP - if you attack them during one minute from enabling, opponent cant safely retreat everything to base.
3. All the gameplay mechanics that would be removed with FRPs, like looking for best spot for truck, pushing the major with ambo and so on are still kept in the game - it doesnt become any more shallow
4. Players can still choose to have FRP on all the time but they pay a huge price. That makes blobbing playstyle hard to pull off, but still a rare possibility. This is good becouse no tactical choice should ever be completely vanished.


i like your idea, resource could be MP or munition and i think munition is better but half is too much, 30% or 35% is better.

but still i believe wehrmacht and soviet should have FRP because of FRP is very effective in Large maps.
22 Jun 2017, 20:48 PM
#7
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1



i said Ambulance OR major, even Captain is good


Yes, but this would still force you to go into a certain direction, if it is bound to the Captain for example. And then we would have the problem with heal, where the ambulance could heal as well as the heal bunker and the OKW heal, whereas Russians would be confronted with that problem. I see where you are coming from, but the doctrinal thing simply is too hard to put into reality, imo.


+1 (I'm assuming you mean doctrinal)

Other than the fact that I'm opposed to FRPs period, this would be a more unbalanced/doctrine choice forcing ability than pretty much any of the current abilities in commanders (in team games anyway), even disregarding discrepancies (speaking of which, I believe there is more than one ost doctrine with artillery officer).


Yes, ofc I meant doctrinal, my mistake. Probably you would always see the same doctrines in large team games, simply because not having a FRP is such a huge disadvantage. But forcing the players into a certain direction (especially since the commanders would have to be stock commanders for fairness) doesn't seem like a viable alternative to the already mentioned alternatives here and in other threads.

22 Jun 2017, 21:03 PM
#8
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jun 2017, 20:48 PMGarrett

Yes, ofc I meant doctrinal, my mistake. Probably you would always see the same doctrines in large team games, simply because not having a FRP is such a huge disadvantage. But forcing the players into a certain direction (especially since the commanders would have to be stock commanders for fairness) doesn't seem like a viable alternative to the already mentioned alternatives here and in other threads.


Definitely.
22 Jun 2017, 21:47 PM
#9
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987

Remove them all completely. Problems solved.
23 Jun 2017, 06:28 AM
#10
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289

Remove them all completely. Problems solved.


Remove them all completely ?!! why ? because you dont like FRP ? nice reason, so remove Brace ability + Advanced assembly + Air Supremacy Operation and ... because i dont like them
23 Jun 2017, 09:14 AM
#11
avatar of Nano

Posts: 212



Remove them all completely ?!! why ? because you dont like FRP ? nice reason, so remove Brace ability + Advanced assembly + Air Supremacy Operation and ... because i dont like them


Because people for some reason wont stop or be happy until this game is boring faction A vs boring faction B
23 Jun 2017, 14:40 PM
#12
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987



Remove them all completely ?!! why ? because you dont like FRP ? nice reason, so remove Brace ability + Advanced assembly + Air Supremacy Operation and ... because i dont like them


No

Because:

1. Suppression is much less powerful when an army only has to retreat a short distance
2. Blobbing is less punished for reason stated above
3. The disadvantage to Soviets and Ostheer is too great when they play against factions with FRPs
4. It messes with the dynamic nature of the game


These are pretty objective reasons that I think any player can appreciate. Whether or not you agree that the problems are as severe as I see them is another matter.

But it's got nothing to do with "I don't like it". I play a lot of OKW and some Brits. I use FRPs. But I think they harm gameplay.


And I agree with you about brace. That also needs to go.
23 Jun 2017, 14:47 PM
#13
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

My suggestion is to GIve to all allies faction a regular ability to establish a Forward Headquarters (sov).
23 Jun 2017, 15:01 PM
#14
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289



No
Because:

1. Suppression is much less powerful when an army only has to retreat a short distance
2. Blobbing is less punished for reason stated above
3. The disadvantage to Soviets and Ostheer is too great when they play against factions with FRPs
4. It messes with the dynamic nature of the game

These are pretty objective reasons that I think any player can appreciate. Whether or not you agree that the problems are as severe as I see them is another matter.
But it's got nothing to do with "I don't like it". I play a lot of OKW and some Brits. I use FRPs. But I think they harm gameplay.
And I agree with you about brace. That also needs to go.


but you should be happy with my suggestion or with ferwiner, our suggestions will add a limitation for FRP, with this limitations you will see:

Suppression is more effective + very less blobbing + ostheer and soviets can use a temporary FRP for better Balance.

my wish is removing Brace but i am sure British players dont like this idea so we need another way: adding a cost (for example 50 munition) for Brace and then i think there is no problem with this.
23 Jun 2017, 15:31 PM
#15
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

I dont think it is a good idea for the reasons already stated above. But I actually have a better one.

You see, all FRPs have the button that toggles them on and off. My idea is that:
1. FRPs should take percent of your resources while active - what kind of resources and how much is up to a debate but I guess half of fuel or half of munition would be fair.
2. Once toggled on, the FRP can't be toggled off for 1 minute.

The advantages are as follows:
1. FRPs have disadvantage, so there is no need to either remove them or implement in all factions - factions are still diverse and the mechanic is deeper.
2. There is actual counterplay to FRP - if you attack them during one minute from enabling, opponent cant safely retreat everything to base.
3. All the gameplay mechanics that would be removed with FRPs, like looking for best spot for truck, pushing the major with ambo and so on are still kept in the game - it doesnt become any more shallow
4. Players can still choose to have FRP on all the time but they pay a huge price. That makes blobbing playstyle hard to pull off, but still a rare possibility. This is good becouse no tactical choice should ever be completely vanished.


That could be a nice idea.

For the Major, I would probably make it so that he can still move while the FRP is active (assuming the downsides you mentioned). That way the unit will, for once, be able to support an offence with its abilities.

One of the issues with current FRPs is that you can activate/deactivate them at will, making blobbing even less punishable by artillery, compared to EFA factions.

Another idea I had was that the FRP structures would have a 'Recall' ability:
- Free/Cheap (e.g,. 10 muni)
- 20-60 seconds cooldown
- Can be cast on 1 infantry squad to make it retreat to the FRP
- Cannot be cast on teamweapons etc

For the attack:
- That way you can still have something acting like a FRP to help reinforce individual squads
- If your faction lacks scouting-capable squads, you can still send one squad forward and retreat it

For the defence:
- You retain the ability to rapidly recall and reinforce weaker squads
- You just won't be able to pull your entire blob back at once, allowing for territory to change hands, and enabling fluidity where there was none
23 Jun 2017, 16:00 PM
#16
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

Most of guys WHo vote for FRP to stay are have no idea of what is RTS means have no idea of Origin of COH - Postioning and COmbined arms . Let make another DOW or Ashes of SIngularity or CnC
23 Jun 2017, 16:39 PM
#17
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7



That could be a nice idea.

For the Major, I would probably make it so that he can still move while the FRP is active (assuming the downsides you mentioned). That way the unit will, for once, be able to support an offence with its abilities.

One of the issues with current FRPs is that you can activate/deactivate them at will, making blobbing even less punishable by artillery, compared to EFA factions.

Another idea I had was that the FRP structures would have a 'Recall' ability:
- Free/Cheap (e.g,. 10 muni)
- 20-60 seconds cooldown
- Can be cast on 1 infantry squad to make it retreat to the FRP
- Cannot be cast on teamweapons etc

For the attack:
- That way you can still have something acting like a FRP to help reinforce individual squads
- If your faction lacks scouting-capable squads, you can still send one squad forward and retreat it

For the defence:
- You retain the ability to rapidly recall and reinforce weaker squads
- You just won't be able to pull your entire blob back at once, allowing for territory to change hands, and enabling fluidity where there was none


I like the forward recall ability.

Can you make it manpower free then (remove upgrade cost, add munnition cost to each retreat call) so it remains useful sitational ability in 1v1 as well. And give something similar to sov/ost as well (m5 or command bunker ...)
nee
23 Jun 2017, 18:42 PM
#18
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

The biggest issue with making FRP for everyone is just how to add it to the EFA factions; WFA pretty much ahs the diversity covered, so the closest to practical and least revamped would be to utilize existing assets (ie bunker upgrade or halftracks). But that's already a risky change due to the shifting of emphases.

I suppose in regards to Soviets some of their less useful commanders could replace an ability with a form of FRP unlock. But that's a very broad idea and certainly runs into the question of what's considered a useless commander or useless ability: as rare as Rapid Conscription or Riegel mines are, they do have their place in some matches. This might also shoehorn the idea into parts of the game that are too predictable for a mechanic, ie the rule being that a commander that can deploy units like Guards or IS-2 can never have FRP unolck.

In hindsight I think Relic should have designed the FRP factions to have weaker and smaller infantry, that would at least make squad preservation harder to achieve in general with compensation of making unit preservation easier to manage; in contrast the size of Grenadiers could have been increased so while they don't have FRP they at least got more men to increase firepower and survival against enemies that do.
23 Jun 2017, 19:13 PM
#19
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987



but you should be happy with my suggestion or with ferwiner, our suggestions will add a limitation for FRP, with this limitations you will see:

Suppression is more effective + very less blobbing + ostheer and soviets can use a temporary FRP for better Balance.

my wish is removing Brace but i am sure British players dont like this idea so we need another way: adding a cost (for example 50 munition) for Brace and then i think there is no problem with this.


You said "Remove them all completely ?!! why ? because you dont like FRP ? nice reason"

Then you said "but i am sure British players dont like this so we need another way"

So If Brits don't like it - that's a good enough reason but if Anyone else "doesn't like it" it isn't? Shame. Shame. Shame.

In any case I gave you the reasons based on gameplay quality. You have not explained why those arguments are invalid.

"but you should be happy with my suggestion" lol. Wow. Basically "You must like my ideas but I will ridicule yours!!1!"

No, I am not happy with your suggestion. Or with your concept of how to discuss ideas. Flat denial and demanding everyone agree with you automatically does not a discussion make.
23 Jun 2017, 19:25 PM
#20
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



That could be a nice idea.

For the Major, I would probably make it so that he can still move while the FRP is active (assuming the downsides you mentioned). That way the unit will, for once, be able to support an offence with its abilities.

One of the issues with current FRPs is that you can activate/deactivate them at will, making blobbing even less punishable by artillery, compared to EFA factions.

Another idea I had was that the FRP structures would have a 'Recall' ability:
- Free/Cheap (e.g,. 10 muni)
- 20-60 seconds cooldown
- Can be cast on 1 infantry squad to make it retreat to the FRP
- Cannot be cast on teamweapons etc

For the attack:
- That way you can still have something acting like a FRP to help reinforce individual squads
- If your faction lacks scouting-capable squads, you can still send one squad forward and retreat it

For the defence:
- You retain the ability to rapidly recall and reinforce weaker squads
- You just won't be able to pull your entire blob back at once, allowing for territory to change hands, and enabling fluidity where there was none


The problem with recall ability implemented like that is that most people who are against removing FRPs, will see this pretty much in the same way as they would see complete removal.

With my solution, the player has a choice to play the way he did before - but with a handicap. This, in my opinion, solves the general problem of lower ranked players liking the way it is and higher ranked players opting for FRP removal. That is becouse with well chosen cost, using FRP like before will make sense only in lower ranked games and in higher ranked games it will be often toggled on and off, so will act somewhat similar to your idea. That way we get best of both worlds.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

890 users are online: 1 member and 889 guests
FK9DD
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49432
Welcome our newest member, weekprophecy
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM