*

Account

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 22, 2024, 11:50:11 pm

Login with username, password and session length

Resources

Recent posts

[November 01, 2024, 12:46:37 pm]

[October 05, 2024, 07:29:20 am]

[September 05, 2024, 01:54:13 pm]

[July 16, 2024, 11:30:34 pm]

[June 22, 2024, 06:49:40 am]

[March 08, 2024, 12:13:38 am]

[March 08, 2024, 12:12:54 am]

[March 08, 2024, 12:09:37 am]

[December 30, 2023, 08:00:58 pm]

[February 04, 2023, 11:46:41 am]
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 007 Availability - Tweak #1  (Read 26940 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tymathee Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 9741



« Reply #20 on: August 24, 2009, 07:59:58 pm »

it's obvious its necessary if you're losing to it.  The fact is, both sides field a lot of vehicles and the allives have learned how to defeat a lot of axis builds now, it'll turn the other way eventually but for now it seems thea llies have the upperhand i guess. I really don't know what to say, the fact is both sides have counters but light vehicles i think have the biggest advantage becase of at accuracy.

Wehr's best solution is upgunned puma's, they do really good vs light vehicles and for PE, the IST does really well vs light vehicles as does the way underused uhh, damn if orget its name lol but because of its rapid fire gun, it does really well vs vehicles and as it vets gets a real good accuracy boost.
Logged

"I want proof!"
"I have proof!"
"Whatever, I'm still right"

Dafuq man, don't ask for proof if you'll refuse it if it's not in your favor, logic fallacy for the bloody win.
EIRRMod Offline
Administrator / Lead Developer
*
Posts: 11009



« Reply #21 on: August 24, 2009, 08:36:46 pm »

Quote

I think I need to not play this mod for a while, I'm becoming to disgruntled.


Took another loss to light vehicle/tank destroyer spam backed by 57mms, feeling the same way. Had 4 light vehicle kills and 4 tank kills on my panther, still wasnt enough to help my 2nd panther get ahead enough for it to not be killed by t17s and m18s attacking me. They sure have succeeded in making the armor spam of the allies realistic, but the cost to my enjoyment of the mod has been great.

Right now the light vehicle armor spam is really annoying to fight as wehr as all your AT is so pricey and vulnerable to light vehicles, while your heavy armor can't really fight m18s and m10s cost-effectively especially if they have stuff like AP rounds or flank speed.

Sure I can gear my company towards defeating all this kind of crap, but I dont see allies completely rewiring all their AI and AT options because of specific allied doctrines or builds. If Im gonna defeat this combination without outplaying my opponent badly, I need to field a unneccessary amount of AT as wehr.
So, you feel the Vehicle pool of the allies is too high?
I was thinking of lowering it(vehicle), increasing another of their pools.

No company build should be able to overwhelm another company without severe weaknesses in others - what youre describing sounds like it isnt happening =/
Logged

Quote from: brn4meplz
Shit I'm pretty sure you could offer the guy a cup of coffee and he'd try to kill you with the mug if you forgot sugar.
Quote from: tank130
That's like offering Beer to fuck the fat chick. It will work for a while, but it's not gonna last. Not only that, but there is zero motivation for the Fat chick to loose weight.
Quote from: tank130
Why don't you collect up your love beads and potpourri and find something constructive to do.
AmPM Offline
Community Mapper
*
Posts: 7978



« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2009, 08:44:15 pm »

Its not vehicles, its the light vehicles that do it. You don't need to use Tank Destroyers, you can just use ATG spam supported by light vehicles.

Lower the number of light vehicles in non-Armor companies, lower the support pool in Armor companies. Raise the Armor pool in armor companies but not the light vehicles. Raise infantry on AB, raise Support on Infantry.
Logged


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Tymathee Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 9741



« Reply #23 on: August 24, 2009, 08:49:14 pm »

i'd be all for raising infantry's support if we got m ore than one thing that helped support weapons and that's L&L. If anything, airborne get stronger support weapons when they get that AB support T3 and then any t4rl.
Logged
Tymathee Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 9741



« Reply #24 on: August 24, 2009, 08:50:37 pm »

and i guess you can include TR cuz of the atgs butg thats it. Everything else benefits rifles.
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2009, 08:53:22 pm »

I base this on what I have seen ingame as wehr in lot of games now, and its those freaking quads, t17s and m18s just being spammed the hell out of with mindless zombie use of rifles just being sucided to help outattrition the axis infantry based AT.

There's no weaknesses to this as long as you have any kind of armor left that can defeat infantry without at. Even if it takes several minutes for a m18 to kill of 2-3 defenseless volks, it will happen and that retarded ass 1 man mine detector engineer squad hiding in the corner of the map can cap and secure victory.

The new availability system still needs more work before we can put an end to the super spam, my attempt at getting stupid amounts of storms (which sadly sucked) and the freaking mainstream blob of light vehicles backed by atgs
Logged

SlippedHerTheBigOne: big penis puma
SlippedHerTheBigOne: and i have no repairkits
SlippedHerTheBigOne: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #26 on: August 24, 2009, 08:54:05 pm »

....makes me unsure of its current implementation.
Logged
EIRRMod Offline
Administrator / Lead Developer
*
Posts: 11009



« Reply #27 on: August 24, 2009, 09:04:26 pm »

....makes me unsure of its current implementation.
Well, Im all ears Smokaz.

AmPm suggested something - how bout you too?
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #28 on: August 24, 2009, 09:12:08 pm »

I kinda think vehicle and armor pool should be the same, albeit a bit bigger and that pool cost of all light vehicles should go up 1 point each.
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #29 on: August 24, 2009, 09:14:17 pm »

I also think at guns should go up 1 point.
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #30 on: August 24, 2009, 09:24:27 pm »

I also think AMPMs suggestions for infantry and airborne are good calls. You go way too fast into reserve in infantry and airborne just by fielding the units your doctrine is supposed to be all about.

Theres a design decision to be taken - right now the armor doctrine could easily swing both ways as it buffs both light vehicles and armor. But I think it would be better for balance if it emphasized strengthening american armor like m18, m10, pershing and sherman over t17, m8, quad. These vehicles already are immensily useful compared to their wehrmacht counterparts (because of what I call the principle of anus pounding wehr infantry support with light vehicles), while the basic american armor is comparably worse off like the wehr light vehicles.

Logged
CrazyWR Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3616


« Reply #31 on: August 24, 2009, 09:35:18 pm »

I'm gonna go watch the replay before I post Smokaz, but using nothing but storms and panthers for AT and vanilla storms with bundles is a failbuild...sorry, I was off, you also had 1 MG, 1 ostwind, and some vanilla grens and assault nade volks.  What the hell do you expect?  Using infantry based AT vs light vehicles fails.  Try getting some freaking paks.

You're complaining that your gimmick company isn't defeating a normal armor company build.  What do you expect from 2x Armor company players?  Are we supposed to spam vanilla rifles?  Our doctrine is based around vehicles and tanks, so we use as many of them as we can.  Its already the weakest of the American doctrines...all it takes is 3 pieces of AT together on the field to stop it cold.  For some reason you never felt like putting that much AT out.  You knew within 2 minutes of the start that it was double armor spam, and still never had enough AT on the field...
Logged

1. New tactics? it's like JAWS, first one in the water dies

RCA-land where shells fall like raindrops and the Captain is an invincible god
CrazyWR Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3616


« Reply #32 on: August 24, 2009, 09:36:15 pm »

3 pieces of AT per armor company player.  Sorry for not specifying above.  They aren't going to have the infantry to overrun you.
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #33 on: August 24, 2009, 09:48:29 pm »

Im not complaining about that game, the stuff you guys were doing is what i've seen in the majority of my games and thats where I am voicing my concern from. As for my build I had 2 panthers (basically all my fuel in AT) and triple double shreked storms, so your point about me using too much infantry based at falls on its own lack of credibility. Please dont make it out like I lose a game and then come here crying my eyes out on the forum before more people than yourself have commented on the issues I am trying to draw a picture of.
Logged
CrazyWR Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3616


« Reply #34 on: August 24, 2009, 09:54:47 pm »

Using infantry based AT fails against light vehicles.  You know that.  So storms are useless against them.  Panthers can't hit light vehicles all the well either.  Paks are the answer, but for some reason you refuse to use them.  Also, volks with fausts are cheap and definitely will shut down light vehicle spam.  2 fausts and 1 pak hit and the vehicle is in deep trouble.
Logged
Falcon333 Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 1125


« Reply #35 on: August 24, 2009, 09:56:29 pm »

Using infantry based AT fails against light vehicles.  You know that.  So storms are useless against them.  Panthers can't hit light vehicles all the well either.  Paks are the answer, but for some reason you refuse to use them.  Also, volks with fausts are cheap and definitely will shut down light vehicle spam.  2 fausts and 1 pak hit and the vehicle is in deep trouble.

Contradiction?
Logged

"Chance favors the prepared mind"
CrazyWR Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3616


« Reply #36 on: August 24, 2009, 09:57:23 pm »

Ya, I meant shreks.  My bad.  I was gonna edit, but I can't edit in a stickied thread I guess.  Fausts are guaranteed to hit, so they're a different situation.  Anyways, he had no fausts.
Logged
EIRRMod Offline
Administrator / Lead Developer
*
Posts: 11009



« Reply #37 on: August 24, 2009, 10:05:22 pm »

Well, the way I see it, the system is too lenient in some ways, and too strict in others.

Parts to tweak (that we can I mean)
Individual pools
Reserve pools
Unit pool costs.

Atm, I think the issue is the low pool costs, OR the high reserve pool.
Logged
Unkn0wn Offline
No longer retired
*
Posts: 18379


« Reply #38 on: August 25, 2009, 02:54:35 am »

Don't forget the perception of 'light vehicle spam' can also stem from:
- Too much fuel units in comparison to other resources and units fielded
- Vet 1 light vehicle bonuses granting received accuracy 0.8 making infantry based AT a terrible counter
Logged
Malevolence Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 1871



« Reply #39 on: August 25, 2009, 03:15:09 am »

Don't forget the perception of 'light vehicle spam' can also stem from:
- Too much fuel units in comparison to other resources and units fielded

Increase manpower! :/
Logged

Akranadas' Greatest Hits, Volume 1:

Quote from: Akranadas
Vet has nothing to do with unit preformance.

Quote from: Akranadas
We are serious about enforcing this, and I am sure you all want to be able to have your balance thought considered by the development team with some biased, sensationalist coming into your thread and ruining it.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

TinyPortal v1.0 beta 4 © Bloc
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.9 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.08 seconds with 36 queries.