Reinforcement Rebalance

Hi All
was thinkin about a takin a looksy at relationship of reinforcement costs and the units to which they belong

as of now reinforcement costs are based on the unit cost and the number of models in the squad and divided in half
for example grens costing 240mp and having 4 models have a reinforcement cost of 0.5(240/4)=30
this seems like a good formula, until you look at EFA squads and soviet elite squads, using grens as a baseline we can compare rifles, whom are unarguably superior having a reinforcement cost of 0.5(280/5)=28

now despite being more durable, and flexible, rifles are actually cheaper per head than grens

similarly we can compare penals at 0.5(300/6)=25
this means not only do penals hit harder and take more punishment, but they are easier to replace as well....

now volks, 0.5(250/5)=25, still cheaper than grens, and on par with penals (lel)

i feel like here is where we are running into so much imbalance in our infantry game...

my proposal is as such: treat all non conscript and osttruppen squads as a 4 man squad for the sake of reinforcement

so the new values would be as follows:
grens 0.5(240/4)=30
volks 0.5(250/4)=31.25
rifles 0.5(280/4=35
penals 0.5(300/4)=37.5

to ME this seems more in line with performance. more expensive to get, more expensive to maintain to go with superior performance
if we were to also apply this to soviet team weapons (whom are cheaper still, due to the weapons themselves "costing" and thus the crew being cheaper) we can help normalize bleed and most importantly- give conscripts a role

allowing merge to remain allows the soviet to stem the bleed with merge and using cons as bullet magnets while specialist squads do their jobs, i dont believe merge would be too strong simply because of cons slightly larger squad size- those models will bring the offensive capability to max, but weaken the durability of the squad (making it more vulnerable to focus fire)


anyways thats what im thinking, thoughts?

At first sight it does seem unfair. But grens only need to reinforce 4 models (120 mp). If penals get down to one man,a player will need to spend 5x25 = 125 and having multiple penal squads, will start costing you dearly in the long run. For riflemen, it is a different story. USF has nothing else than these units at the start of the game, making them expensive (as they once were), would make USF obsolete since the bleed and upkeep would keep them locked in their place. USF is one of the easiest factions to bleed with sniper play or good mg and grenadier placement because they only have riflemen at the start. Add in a mortar and they will cry themselves into a corner (unless you play on maps that favor USF). This makes the 112 mp reinforcement cost (for 4 models per squad if down to 1 model) a hefty cost when you have 3 or 4 running around.

At first sight it does seem unfair. But grens only need to reinforce 4 models (120 mp). If penals get down to one man,a player will need to spend 5x25 = 125 and having multiple penal squads, will start costing you dearly in the long run. For riflemen, it is a different story. USF has nothing else than these units at the start of the game, making them expensive (as they once were), would make USF obsolete since the bleed and upkeep would keep them locked in their place. USF is one of the easiest factions to bleed with sniper play or good mg and grenadier placement because they only have riflemen at the start. Add in a mortar and they will cry themselves into a corner (unless you play on maps that favor USF). This makes the 112 mp reinforcement cost (for 4 models per squad if down to 1 model) a hefty cost when you have 3 or 4 running around.

Well reinforcing up to 6 members is an option if you don't like reinforce up to 4...or if you actually thing that 4 men squad bleed less use CE instead of conscripts...

This argument hold not water because if you have to reinforce to more models it means you stayed in the fight longer, took more damage and spent less time going back to base...

One only has to reinforce if one has lost model not because his squad have more members.

When it comes to OP if one want to be "fair" one has to take into account how difficult is to actually lose a model and thus one should compare effective HP (Target size/armor).

Actually what I find real imbalanced is the reinforcement time being linked to reinforcement cost. This make small expensive squads like pg, obers not only to have to retreat early in fear of wipe but also have to spend too much time reinforcing. Reinforcing time should be standardized for poor quality, mainline and elite entities.

The proposition is by all means terrible. You compare reinforcement of one model to the strength of a squad, that is why you get the wrong result. A 4 men penal squad is weaker that 4 men gren squad - that is why it costs less menpower.

The proposition is by all means terrible. You compare reinforcement of one model to the strength of a squad, that is why you get the wrong result. A 4 men penal squad is weaker that 4 men gren squad - that is why it costs less menpower.

Is it tho? 4 man penal squad has the same effective health as a gren squad, does less damage per shot but pumps out shots faster, also once any vet is down penals greatly outclass grens, grens do get the lmg but even that womt save them...

Anyways the idea is that aquad size improves durability and slows dps loss but not necessarily lets you bleed more efficiently in trades. I would harldy say that the damage a penal squad can inflict before losing 5 models is only worth 5 mp over what grens can do, especially given the unforgiving nature of small squads (i.e. micro tax being higher)

You put a lot of effort into this idea, but it is terrible. It's too much thought for something that is supposed to be easy.

- If you want balance, then you must have mirror squads.
- Grenadiers having 6 men and costing 300.
- Penals costing 300 and having 6 men.
- Conscripts replaced with Strelski. Costing 300 and having 6 men.
- Riflemen having 6 men.
- All with 100% same stats.

Then you give .50 cal squad to Americans at T0. With MG42 stats.
Same with Russian. Give Maxim 100% same stats as MG42. Same cost.
- Make MG42 a 6 man squad.
- Make T34/76 cost 350-125 (12 pop) give it Pz4 stats. Same w Cromwell.
Same with Sherman 75.
- Make T34/85 cost same as Panther. Give T34/85 Panther stats. Same w Comet
Same with Sherman E8
- Give Pershing/Churchill/and Tiger - King Tiger stats and cost. All need 100% tech to make their heavy tank. All heavy tanks now core. No need for commander/doctrine. (same as king tiger).

If that is NOT what you advocate, then, your arguments holds no water
thedarkarmadillo.

The game is this :
You have 2 choices :
4 man squad with bolts and T0 MG42 (Gren+MG42 or INF section+Vickets)+bunkers+late game super tank (Trench/bunker)(emplacements)
(Panther/Comet)

or you can have 5-6 men squads with auto weapon, Forward Retreat Point,
late MG (USA, OKW). US have smoke, OKW have cheap mines and late super
tank.

Now... you want Grenadiers to be equal to Riflemen AND have MG42 AND bunkers?

Some have 2+1 some have 1+2 some have 3+0+0 some have 1+1+1.
You would like to have 3+3+3

Like chess. One has 18x pawns, one has 6 queens.
hey! It's unfair! He has 18x pieces. I ought to have 18x queens vs 18x pawns. THEN it would balanced

thedarkarmadillo... you should have designed COH...

Logic :
USA Riflemen can upgrade +2 bar.
Wehr Grenadier should upgrade +2 LMG42 to make things fair.
(but bar are way weaker than LMG42 and cost way more)

USA Riflemen should only upgrade +1 BAR.
because Wehr Grenadier can only upgrade +1 LMG42
(but LMG42 can upgrade away from HQ, and doesn't have a fuel cost)

SU Guards have 2x PTRD and 2x DP28.
Grenadiers should start with 2x LMG42 and can upgrade 2 more for 60 mun.
(= Gren with 4x LMG42)

The game is now balanced.