What defines a cost effective unit?
28 Jan 2018, 03:17 AM
#1
Posts: 64
??? What defines a cost effective unit in CoH 2 ???
Explosions
28 Jan 2018, 03:48 AM
#2
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
Cost-effectiveness means that for the resources you put into the unit you gain more from forcing the other player to use his resources against the unit.
For example, Ostruppen Cheap and cant really duel against other infantry but map control and the mp bleed outweighs the reinforcement cost of manpower that you need for ostruppen
For example, Ostruppen Cheap and cant really duel against other infantry but map control and the mp bleed outweighs the reinforcement cost of manpower that you need for ostruppen
bg /l
28 Jan 2018, 23:33 PM
#3
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
Cost-effectiveness means that for the resources you put into the unit you gain more from forcing the other player to use his resources against the unit.
For example, Ostruppen Cheap and cant really duel against other infantry but map control and the mp bleed outweighs the reinforcement cost of manpower that you need for ostruppen
If you gained more, wouldn't that unit be considered as "over powered"? Unless you meant that a unit performed well for it's price, not that it over or under performed.
29 Jan 2018, 02:53 AM
#4
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
If you gained more, wouldn't that unit be considered as "over powered"? Unless you meant that a unit performed well for it's price, not that it over or under performed.
Definitely becomes an issue because of how that works, for example, the old RE bar spam or Royal Engi Anvil Vickers spam was op because of how cost-effective the units were and therefore would ultimately cause the opponent to bleed so much more resources than you do.
And yes I more so meant well and that over time you gain back the resources you spent on the unit.
bg /l
29 Jan 2018, 06:21 AM
#5
1 
Posts: 2885
If you gained more, wouldn't that unit be considered as "over powered"? Unless you meant that a unit performed well for it's price, not that it over or under performed.
A unit can be cost effective or not depending on the army composition of your opponent, map and so on. Its not generally cost effective but in some specific situation. If it was always cost effective, then yeah, it would be overpowered. But I can't think of any unit that is always a good idea to build.
29 Jan 2018, 07:53 AM
#6
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
A unit can be cost effective or not depending on the army composition of your opponent, map and so on. Its not generally cost effective but in some specific situation. If it was always cost effective, then yeah, it would be overpowered. But I can't think of any unit that is always a good idea to build.
Yup, you're right. Think about pak40, the unit is cost effective if there is tanks, not if you face only infantry.
However riflemen, volks, grenadiers or tommies are always a good idea to build
29 Jan 2018, 08:25 AM
#7
Posts: 587
cost-effective, well I would just see it as "worth the resources".
Things get more complicated when you go into details, and therefor I stick with my definition.
Things get more complicated when you go into details, and therefor I stick with my definition.
Being bad at the game isn't something balance patches can fix.
29 Jan 2018, 08:34 AM
#8
Posts: 1740
I think OP wants to know from the post game stats how efficency is calculated.
It is though God by command has withdrawn every other throne.
And God is saying 'No. These people will deal with me alone.'
And God is saying 'No. These people will deal with me alone.'
29 Jan 2018, 08:47 AM
#9
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
If one compares the Stug and the Panther, the Stug is more cost efficient unit than the Panther because it can counter the same vehicles at cheaper cost and tech cost.
That translates that their little reason to invest in Panther unless you have allot of fuel to spare.
That translates that their little reason to invest in Panther unless you have allot of fuel to spare.
29 Jan 2018, 14:27 PM
#10
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
A unit can be cost effective or not depending on the army composition of your opponent, map and so on. Its not generally cost effective but in some specific situation. If it was always cost effective, then yeah, it would be overpowered. But I can't think of any unit that is always a good idea to build.
Yes I didn't add that it performed well at it's specific job.
29 Jan 2018, 14:57 PM
#11
Posts: 29
I always thought efficiency was calculated through how much damage the unit did. If I build a single Raketenwerfer and it knocks out a load of tanks and light vehicles the efficiency is almost always above a thousand. On the other hand, my Ost Engineers rarely have efficiency over a hundred percent because I rarely use them in combat. I guess any unit can be cost effective if you let it survive in combat long enough.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34857.859+13
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1000
Board Info
645 users are online:
645 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48723
Welcome our newest member, zowinfans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, zowinfans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM