I am abused, I am forgotten, I am worthless; I am the average infantryman

[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

[Unkn0wn]

We're looking into that
Mind you it's only a place holder until the real warmap comes in

Now... any chance of getting the warmap / PP bonus system to give us more map variety instead of gold sector / RTC / abbephail? :p

[Two]

im pretty sure i got 200% pp for playing a game on tanteville 10 mins ago

[CrazyWR]

I second everything Malevolence says

[Malevolence]

The problem with increasing the overall amount of MP is that it will prolong the duration of an average game, this is one of the prime reasons we lowered the amount of MP to begin with. Especially with late war resource bonuses on top of a 9K starting amount you'll be practically up to 10k MP again, right where we started in EIR. Shorter games generally make for more intensive, action-packed games.

Or it could make me extremely cautious with my lower quantity of units, resulting in more support weapon camping, which is exactly what's been happening. Bigger battles means that you can afford to be freer with your unit usage because in the grand scheme of things that one squad of grenadiers isn't that big a deal next to his nine other friends, which honestly I think would result in more intense battles at the start, not the opposite.

I classify "intense action-packed games" as games where there's combat in every minute, and that means that there's going to be attrition every minute, which with smaller companies means that there's bound to be less action because you can afford to attrit a lot less. It will make the game shorter, but it will also tend to make it more dull from what I've found.

That being said, you do have some valid concerns in regards to our current availability. Hence why we will be reworking the availability system, it's already drafted out and just needs to be optimised. I'll see if I can throw out a preview for community input and concerns. For now, I can already assure you that this is going to allow a lot more company variety while still 'preventing' certain powerful units from being fielded en masse.

Well given I can't even buy the units I need for variety now, I'm not sure how this is going to be accomplished without more manpower, but alright. If it doesn't work out as intended, there's always just plain "give us more manpower and see what happens". The only problem here is that a lack of funds and an availability system are working at this issue from both ends at the same time and it's just overdoing company rigidity. I think that the funds is the problem, not the availability, but if you as a dev team would prefer to fix it the other way around, I can only give input based on my experience, I'm not in charge.

[Unkn0wn]

Or it could make me extremely cautious with my lower quantity of units, resulting in more support weapon camping, which is exactly what's been happening. Bigger battles means that you can afford to be freer with your unit usage because in the grand scheme of things that one squad of grenadiers isn't that big a deal next to his nine other friends, which honestly I think would result in more intense battles at the start, not the opposite.

Despite your theory however I think that we have enough evidence to conclude that we did in fact achieve shorter and thus likely more intensive games. Granted though this is likely caused by the significant % increase of munitions and fuel in comparison to manpower amounts. (Manpower was reduced by about 2000 while neither munitions or fuel were decreased) More vehicles and upgrades inevitably leads to less camping. (As you have more tools at hand to make a needed push)

Personally, as someone who has played EIR since day 1 I find that games are generally more action packed than they ever where. Yes there's still games with plenty of stalemates and cautious play but you can't honestly state that this was much less the case in the old days of EIR with 10k manpower. Just because people have more (unupgraded) infantry units at their disposal doesn't necessarily mean that they will be more likely to throw those units away.

Well given I can't even buy the units I need for variety now, I'm not sure how this is going to be accomplished without more manpower, but alright.

I'm assuming that you're referring to infantry and support weapon variety as with the current fuel amounts you can no doubt come up with all kinds of ways to spend your fuel and reach availability tresholds. Lowering the fuel amounts would free up more manpower for infantry and support weapons.

Anyway, only the availability change is set in stone for now.
Whichever route we take, just because we take that route does not mean we are excluding the option of ever trying out route B.

[LuAn]

On a side note: Will there be any anti-blob implemented? Like the Pioneer Negative Group Zeal?

[Unkn0wn]

It has been taken into consideration but is not going to happen, for now anyway.

[RikiRude]

I think if MP base was raised to 8,500 or even 9,000 (might be a bit much?) and MP advantages was made from 300 a Tier to 500 a Tier we would see a whole hell of a lot more vanilla infantry. I think everything would be a little bit more inline.

[Baine]

I think if MP base was raised to 8,500 or even 9,000 (might be a bit much?) and MP advantages was made from 300 a Tier to 500 a Tier we would see a whole hell of a lot more vanilla infantry. I think everything would be a little bit more inline.

No. That won't help, reducing fuel will help though.

[LuAn]

I think if MP base was raised to 8,500 or even 9,000 (might be a bit much?) and MP advantages was made from 300 a Tier to 500 a Tier we would see a whole hell of a lot more vanilla infantry. I think everything would be a little bit more inline.

No. That won't help, reducing fuel will help though.

No!

If you would reduce the overall fuel it would hit PE the hardest because alot of things that require Mun for other Factions cost Fuel for PE.

[Unkn0wn]

While that may be correct, don't forget that PE also generally don't pay a lot for their vehicles compared to all the other factions.

[RikiRude]

read unknowns post as i hit reply =P

[Malevolence]

Despite your theory however I think that we have enough evidence to conclude that we did in fact achieve shorter and thus likely more intensive games. Granted though this is likely caused by the significant % increase of munitions and fuel in comparison to manpower amounts. (Manpower was reduced by about 2000 while neither munitions or fuel were decreased) More vehicles and upgrades inevitably leads to less camping. (As you have more tools at hand to make a needed push)

Shorter doesn't mean more intense if the shortness scales proportionately to the size of your company. 20% less manpower and 20% shorter games means they're only just as intense as they ever were.

Personally, as someone who has played EIR since day 1 I find that games are generally more action packed than they ever where. Yes there's still games with plenty of stalemates and cautious play but you can't honestly state that this was much less the case in the old days of EIR with 10k manpower. Just because people have more (unupgraded) infantry units at their disposal doesn't necessarily mean that they will be more likely to throw those units away.

I've found that having more infantry gives me the margin of error I need to experiment with enveloping flanks and pincers that I just don't have. Back when I could use massive vanilla rifle spam with airborne riflemen I could actually flank and evelope on RTC of all maps, having more vanilla infantry at your disposal is a very good thing because it's an enabler to let you fight more often in more places with more tactical choice. Or just blob and run into an mg42 if you'd really like :p

I'm assuming that you're referring to infantry and support weapon variety as with the current fuel amounts you can no doubt come up with all kinds of ways to spend your fuel and reach availability tresholds. Lowering the fuel amounts would free up more manpower for infantry and support weapons.

But it would also push EiR towards EiR: 2000 point tabletop edition where you have no vehicles, so you get tiger ace syndrome with every tank in your army. I like the number of vehicles there is now, it's just that the infantry doesn't match it. I'd rather see the infantry go up and the vehicles stay the same than vehicles go down.

Anyway, only the availability change is set in stone for now.
Whichever route we take, just because we take that route does not mean we are excluding the option of ever trying out route B.

Spoken as a true diplomat :p

[Unkn0wn]

But it would also push EiR towards EiR: 2000 point tabletop edition where you have no vehicles, so you get tiger ace syndrome with every tank in your army.

Mind you we are really only considering a 100 - 250 F reduction max, nothing drastic. I think some people are under the impression that we'd be halving the fuel amounts or something like that .

I also very much doubt resources (MP and F especially) would get dropped any lower from that point on.
I'm not experiencing the current resource values as EIR: tabletop and I don't think a minor fuel reduction would really change that feeling, or would it? You'll still have games lasting an average of 30 - 45 minutes. (And longer once people get resource bonuses)

[AmPM]

It would destroy the Armor doctrine basically, thats 2 vehicles out of my AT right there.

Need to raise MP and the availability of Volks, Rifles and PG.

[Unkn0wn]

thats 2 vehicles out of my AT right there.

You would also need less AT

[AmPM]

So why are we making the game more support and infantry centric again? The mix is about right right now, just need to supply more vanilla infantry, or find a use for them.

[CrazyWR]

indeed...taking fuel down would nerf Armor hard, along with RE, all of PE, Blitz, and Terror...it would make infantry pretty much the default doctrine choice for Americans...

[CafeMilani]

less axis tanks, that should make you happy

[AmPM]

Nah, I love Axis tanks! I would play Wehr but I got bored of it a couple wars back, and then spent the last 2 wars playing PE.