Petition For Return of Grenadier Dual Weapons

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[DasNoob]

I had to clean a lot of shit up... wtf?

Ok, I'll leave this thread open as it seem like there is a lot of people who want to debate this subject, but stick to sound arguments if you ever want to have ANY chance of influencing the dev team.

FYI, Latios was already on a final warning for Flaming/Baiting/Bad conduct.  His actions in this thread have warranted his removal from posting privileges.


Keep it clean, on topic, numbers based.

[CommanderHolt]

Honestly, all I see in this thread are the a few people who wants this change reverted. If the "overwhelming" majority wanted this to be reverted, then why don't they feverntly post here too?

[EIRRMod]

Well, not everyone reads the forums.

In future, something like headlines might roll on a tickertape
/offtopic

[Lt_Apollo]

most players never post, you haft to ask peaple for there opinions from luancher or vent. i tryed to convay this with quotes but sadly i guess it did not carry.

[31stPzGren]

No.  Thats an incredibly negative spin on how development is being done, and tbh hurtful.
Numerous times we have stated that if a change is bad - they are easy to revert.  Now, the definition of bad =/= unpopular.

I know its an incredibly negative spin, but that would appear to be the image that some of us are getting. I would say I'm getting that image. Sometimes the effort you put in don't tally with the results you get at the end of the day.

The truth is also as well that, after a while, people get "used" to the changes and stop complaining about it. It can be due to a multitude of reasons such as; they gave up arguing about it, the change was bad but not bad enough to warrant bitching about it everyday or they can't be bothered any more. This is of course the more negative aspect of looking at things.

That is why threads like this, will always support the more vocal of the community.

The change is in line with everything else I have done, and is *consistant*, it should have been done earlier, so that the effects can be measured for longer.

I have stated the reasons they were made, several times over now.
Previous Development teams didnt even respond with the rationale for why changes were made.

The problem is people need to identify with your rationale (which sadly is one of the toughest things around). For example right now you guys are saying it is intended for diversity in play style, where as the community insists that that it does not promote diversity in play style, which they are actually right.

Picture the option of; Having Grenadiers w/ 1 weapon and Grenadiers w/o weapons as compared to having grenadiers w/2, w/1 or w/0 weapons. You have a three theoretically options (as compared to two) to take which people do fully utilise actually.

The forums have always supported the most vocal of the community, as well as certain "closed" discussions. Flaming and negative feedback discourage participation by other members of the community.

Again, I sacrifice a LARGE portion of my free time to keep this alive.
Why would I make changes that dont make sense?
Just take a step back, and analyse how much this REALLY affects your companies focus of power.  If you were using one unit to the exclusion of others, then perhaps that may be the problem?

The problem in this part is, people use units to the exclusion of others for a few reasons. For myself, I believe in using the cheapest units to fulfill basic roles. I like using volks but the availability system limits my capability to do so. You can always argue about it being cheap PP wise etc. The mentality is that, why spend on a unit which you will lose anyway? Why do I have to spend more, to play my own preferred play style, when others could have their own play styles without paying?

Similarly, if they find that double schrecks or lmgs are the most economical solution to problems, they won't want anything else.

Such as what?

I can rely on them to hit usually and deal consistent damage. They can be dropped to hunt hummels, they have fire up etc. They are really two different units with very different roles as well as having different manpower and mu costs. Suffice to say, when I was playing, the AB w/ RRs did most of the AT job for me.

Against any decent wehr player your sniper is just going to get triple bike rushed and killed off.

Its a scissors paper stone argument. Not everyone has a triple bike call in and likewise, not everyone gets double schreck/lmg grens which requires snipers to take out etc.

If dual schreck is pop efficient, just give it extra popcap like 1 or 2 for double weapons as well.

Thats really awkward to program in, especially since it doesnt add an extra guy.

No it isn't. You can simply allow them to buy a NEW unit at 6 or 7 pop cap. Dropping of schrecks... would of course be probably an issue.

Very true, PzGren. Except that all of our changes can just be as easily changed back as they were implemented. Frankly, many haven't given it a chance. Instead whines about the change and says to us that we(the devs) are infringing on their freedom of choice and making the game unplayable.

This is not helpful in any manner.

Some of the changes do infringe on the freedom of choice. However, perhaps a better way to mitigate the issue, is to comment more on the changes like for example;

Price of Mp40s to be reduced for 5 munitions

Why - We find MP40s to be underused and that they are a very valuable part of a good wehr army, giving diversity to tactics. We don't intend to make MP40s overpowered, hence only a slight 5 Munition drop in price which we are willing to consider a 10 Munition drop as well if this goes well and does not makes volks overpowered. The drop in price is also due to the consideration that MP40s is mounted on a weak platform.

Future Prediction - We think that the drop in munition would convert those who sit on the fence, thinking the price is not justified and will marginally increase the appears of MP40s on the battlefield, reducing "elite infantry" rush tactics and also to be used as a cheap alternative to KCH. However, this change will not convert the most hard lined people who'll refuse to use them until they are dirt cheap.

Potential Problems Faced - The increase in MP40s usage would reduce the effectiveness of allied play in pure infantry usage. However, the 5 (or 10) drop in munition is a very minor change. Based on our statistics of company composition, 40% of manpower is spent on infantry and 50% munitions is spent on infantry upgrades. At the current price, only 1 or 2 mp40s can be bought as an extra which is a change of about, a 10% increase assuming all infantry upgrades is spent on mp40s.

Issues - If you face any issues with this change, please post specifically and clearly why on the balance forum. Attaching replays will be helpful as well.

I'm simply providing this as an example of how you can reduce this type of threads from springing all over.

Honestly, all I see in this thread are the a few people who wants this change reverted. If the "overwhelming" majority wanted this to be reverted, then why don't they feverntly post here too?

The large majority do not participate in balance discussions usually... Just look @ the names and you'll only see the regulars.

[DasNoob]

I'll weigh in my personal feelings on the matter.  Over the last 2 years I have gone back and fourth between using duel shreks and only a single one.

I personally stopped adding the double upgrade simply because I felt like the survivability of that single squad was not enough to out weigh the alpha strike that simply fielding 2 single shrek squads could accomplish.  

I also had 0 influence in the current changes as an fyi  

@CommanderHolt.... In life there is always a "vocal minority" and that is what you are seeing on the boards.  The vast majority never speak out as loudly as the vocal minority.  The vast majority probably couldn't give a s$*t about most changes done to the mod and just join the launcher and play the game.

[Illegal_Carrot]

The MU cost vs effectiveness.  Now, these units will be *more* effective for the MU you spend, purely because they are doctrinal, and restricted in number.
ATM, WM is suffering from the double weapon nerf - and these units (Especially Rangers and Commandos / Com Piats) are running unchecked.

I've never really had an issue with Commando PIATs, though. Out of all the elite inf in the game, I'd say AB are the most cost-effective, too much so, infact. They do to vehicles what Commandos to do inf, though I feel AB are much easier to support, aswell. Anyways, just my 2¢.

[BigDick]

i used some double lmg grens (expensive in munitions) to stop brit blobs and one double shrek in my start callin because that gave me at least a little chance against all these quad/m8/sherman rushs

[sarcasm]
but lucky that you nerfed the quad to make such gimmick starts useless
[/sarcasm]

[31stPzGren]

I had to clean a lot of shit up... wtf?

Seriously, stop this deleting of posts nonsense. The very first post I made on this thread was NON-INFLAMMATORY and did not have any vulgarities or insults at all. It simply expressed my personal opinion. Yes, it was glaring and unpleasant but if it is contrary to the truth, people have eyes to see and will make their own deductions as well as the dev team themselves being able to refute it if its untrue.

When the moderators or dev team (you know who you are) start deleting posts like that, you simply reinforce the notion that you want to enforce your own personal views and remove everyone else's views who are contrary. You're just reinforcing the negative image of yourself.

[Lt_Apollo]

imo the nerf to grens should have gone in with the nerf to elite inf. right now well its dam wacked out. if your going to nerf one side the other needs to be kept in check.

[DasNoob]

I had to clean a lot of shit up... wtf?

Seriously, stop this deleting of posts nonsense. The very first post I made on this thread was NON-INFLAMMATORY and did not have any vulgarities or insults at all. It simply expressed my personal opinion. Yes, it was glaring and unpleasant but if it is contrary to the truth, people have eyes to see and will make their own deductions as well as the dev team themselves being able to refute it if its untrue.

When the moderators or dev team (you know who you are) start deleting posts like that, you simply reinforce the notion that you want to enforce your own personal views and remove everyone else's views who are contrary. You're just reinforcing the negative image of yourself.

Sometimes mistakes are made in cleaning 4 pages of flamage.  Sorry If your first post was not inappropriate. 

[Illegal_Carrot]

None of my posts were derogatory or inflammatory in any way, and all were informative and voiced valid complaints, yet several just disappeared.. I can understand you cleaning out the flames, but what was wrong with any of my posts?


EDIT:
Half of what you said was trolling after EIRRmod had given you his thought process/answers, if the other half wasn't but got deleted along with it sorry m8.  What I tried to delete was the quick one line, 3 quote garbage, back and fourth "posting without thinking" tit for tat spam.

Das-

[EIRRMod]

imo the nerf to grens should have gone in with the nerf to elite inf. right now well its dam wacked out. if your going to nerf one side the other needs to be kept in check.

And my usual response to that is A. Im one person, and B. Im do this in my free time ;p

Patches happen when they happen.  If this upsets you too much, you might want to wait until version 1.0.

Otherwise, try to enjoy whats here, and essentially a beta.

[Schultz]

-MU Focus : The amount of munition has to do with the amount you provide us with. Starts going full on munition is a new thing. It has to do with the new reinforces mode, and the high amount of munition provided.

- In terms of performance..
When all that people try nowadays is to find the best gimmick start of course people will want to defend against that.
Starting with quads and clowncars and light vehicles need to be proper countered. Why wehr needs to change its strategy and "diversify" its at capabilities when theres this monotonous spam of cheap/ low pop vehicles coming from the other side.

[Unkn0wn]

-MU Focus : The amount of munition has to do with the amount you provide us with. Starts going full on munition is a new thing. It has to do with the new reinforces mode, and the high amount of munition provided.

Even if we give people less munitions the amount they pack into the first 25 pop will remain the same as that's the most crucial moment to 'overwhelm' your opponent with superior units, upgrades, etc. People have ALWAYS gone for the 'best possible start' with that 25 population. That includes a heavy munition focus.

[SaintPauli]

I like the idea of diversifying the armies by limiting the numbers of LMGs/schreks and that you guys made up for this by introducing new faust/mines. I would however like proposed that who get what get changed into the following: 

Dual LMGs: Defensive
Dual schreks: Blitz/Stromtroopers - possibly Terror.


Defensive:
This fraction relies on 88s and moveable ninjapaks for AT.  Dual LMGs are most useful here.

Terror:
Terror has both Zeal and Inspired Assault. They don’t really need dual LMGs/shrecks. Dual shrecks is however most useful with Inspired Assault.

Blitz:  
Blitz cannot afford and doesn’t need the dual LMGs because of MG44 Stormtroopers. Dual schreks is however VERY needed on Stormtroopers to make their ambush effective. At the moment all fractions have the option of dual schreks by unlocking the Blitz reinforcement package (arguably the most usefull one even before this). Limiting the dual schreks to Blitz will help balance the reinforcement packages.


On a side note 1: Smoke was taken away from blitz to make room for this. I think this is sad because the smoke ability ads flavor to the game. Drop Territorial Blitzkrig instead, capping speed is fast enough to make this ability useless.   

On a side note 2: Since you are limiting axis handheld AT you might want to look at the allied ones at the same time.

[Baine]

Dual LMGs: Defensive
Dual schreks: Blitz/Stromtroopers - possibly Terror.


Defensive:
This fraction relies on 88s and moveable ninjapaks for AT.  Dual LMGs are most useful here.

Terror:
Terror has both Zeal and Inspired Assault. They don’t really need dual LMGs/shrecks. Dual shrecks is however most useful with Inspired Assault.

Blitz:  
Blitz cannot afford and doesn’t need the dual LMGs because of MG44 Stormtroopers. Dual schreks is however VERY needed on Stormtroopers to make their ambush effective. At the moment all fractions have the option of dual schreks by unlocking the Blitz reinforcement package (arguably the most usefull one even before this). Limiting the dual schreks to Blitz will help balance the reinforcement packages.

^This.


Also, did anyone else remind this Thread of Return of the Jedi?

[Unkn0wn]

On a side note 1: Smoke was taken away from blitz to make room for this. I think this is sad because the smoke ability ads flavor to the game. Drop Territorial Blitzkrig instead, capping speed is fast enough to make this ability useless.   

No, still there.

[Schultz]

-MU Focus : The amount of munition has to do with the amount you provide us with. Starts going full on munition is a new thing. It has to do with the new reinforces mode, and the high amount of munition provided.

Even if we give people less munitions the amount they pack into the first 25 pop will remain the same as that's the most crucial moment to 'overwhelm' your opponent with superior units, upgrades, etc. People have ALWAYS gone for the 'best possible start' with that 25 population. That includes a heavy munition focus.

No its not how it used to be in old eir. You needed a ton of resource bonus to field the ridiculous amount of stuff people ended up having.
Very few invested so high at their start. Risk of destruction and losing a great proportion of your munition was evident, and also fielding a couple high equipped units and the the majority of the army being vanilla troops wasnt a good tactic when fighting large and consuming in resources games.
Now the unbandance of munition makes a lot of units run unchecked as it was mentioned. For example how do you intend to limmit rangers, commandos whatever ? By further increasing costs, by applying even more components to the formula ?
Well for one new variable in the equation further ones are born.

[Tymathee]

I like the diversity, I'm seeing different builds now. Axis even without shrecks have the best anti armor capability of all the factions. (paks, panthers, goliaths, at half tracks, marder) and thats just the mainline at that i can think of, not even going into the doctrinal.

Now, as for the allies, I'm sure things will be changed in time but flaming and "screaming" over every change is counter-productive, as eirrmod stated earlier in the thread, the way you guys go about it juts goes to show how dependent you were on those units and that they're headed in the right direction.