Fuel Reduction

[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

[AmPM]

Again, important to note is that the received accuracy modifier all light vehicles get at vet 1 makes shreks even worse against light vehicles than they normally would be. This plays a major factor in the perception that shreks are generally unreliable to combat light vehicles with and once the vet list gets reworked this bonus will be swapped out for a received damage modifier.

In addition, it is possible that panzershreks receive a minor price decrease again in a future patch.
I think it's only fair however that the panzershrek's stiuation gets assessed again AFTER measures taken in next patch to reduce light vehicle spam and the general over-abundance of fuel based units in comparison to others.

Also, he kinda let the cat out of the bag last night. But anyway...

If fuel total is reduced, what about units that are NOT a problem that are fuel based? Stuka's are really terrible, and fuel heavy. Nebels are fuel heavy, Howi's, 88's etc all use Fuel.

The lowly HALFTRACK will now effectively cost more, making sure its relegated to gimmicks or not used. Croc Shermans, already considered too expensive, will now be even worse off.

I just put this forward, instead of changing the total fuel available, then balancing all the prices again, why not just increase the cost of problem units?

Too many light vehicles? Increase their fuel cost. Too many tanks? Increase the fuel cost. It provides much more control over how much of what is out there.

Hell, if Fuel goes down say 20%, it basically makes any unit that uses it that much more expensive to field. It will also not effect the company designs that are seen as a problem.

Armor Company for instance, I have 8 light vehicles, 5 Hellcats. I am floating 35fu and have not used ANY Fuel advantages so far. That means to reasonably change the outcome of how many light vehicles are out there we are looking at a fuel drop of 250+ fuel.

This will kill medium tank and heavy tank builds.

[Unkn0wn]

Again, this is actually a separate issue from 'light vehicle spam' (hence why there's other changes particularly affecting light vehicles coming in too) but will indirectly affect it.

[LuAn]

I just put this forward, instead of changing the total fuel available, then balancing all the prices again, why not just increase the cost of problem units?

Too many light vehicles? Increase their fuel cost. Too many tanks? Increase the fuel cost. It provides much more control over how much of what is out there.

Hell, if Fuel goes down say 20%, it basically makes any unit that uses it that much more expensive to field. It will also not effect the company designs that are seen as a problem.

+1

88's, Priest, Hummel, MARDER!

If you lower the fuel the fuel cost for the Marder should go down, since its the original ATWeapon of PE

[Unkn0wn]

If you lower the fuel the fuel cost for the Marder should go down, since its the original ATWeapon of PE

Why? Less fuel means you'll probably need less AT. You could probably buy one less Marder.

[LuAn]

Edith: Oke wrong thought

With less fuel, only the amout of fuel heavy vehicles will probably go down, say i will have to cut back on 1 firefly for the reduction, maybe even two, but then again im gonna use up the fuel i have with as much low fuel vehicles i can, so actually ampm convinced me that even though you reduce the overall fuel there can and probably will be more (less fuel costly) vehicles to fight against.

[AmPM]

All hail our infantry blob overlords!!

Seriously though Unknown, the right way to change it is to increase or decrease the costs of the units. Not change the available number.

So what do you think will be bought with the leftover fuel? Lets see, before I could just squeeze in 4 P4s. So what will I do with the remaining fuel? Buy freakin Puma's. Now the idea becomes, force the enemy to still spend a ton on AT, while I spend more on AI. If I can reasonably expect to only counter a couple tanks and 3-4 vehicles, then hell, I want to make sure I use as many vehicles as possible.

Guess what the problem is, VEHICLE cost, as in its effectiveness for price vs infantry.


This will also VASTLY effect the balance of Doctrines. Vehicle based doctrines become weaker, and infantry and support based doctrines becomes more powerful.

[Unkn0wn]

I think you are exaggerating the impact of 150 less fuel.
With a T1 resource bonus you'll be practically at the original early war values again.

In addition you won't be able to get more vehicles than you currently have in any case as availability will be there to restrict you from doing so.

Why again would anyone take a vehicle based doctrine that will only work on 3 medium tanks?

4 and at least one light vehicle, many more with resource bonuses.

[AmPM]

As I said, all hail our infantry buffing doctrine blob overlords.

Can I have my Allied account changed over to something that will be good? Considering my armor company is solely made to combat enemy armor, that thing there will be less of...

Why again would anyone take a vehicle based doctrine that will only work on 3 medium tanks?

[AmPM]

I think you are exaggerating the impact of 150 less fuel.
With a T1 resource bonus you'll be practically at the original early war values again.

In addition you won't be able to get more vehicles than you currently have in any case as availability will be there to restrict you from doing so.

So, instead of a working availability system, or just raising the cost of the units that are a problem, you are penalizing Vehicle based doctrines, units that are already not really used much and cost fuel, already crappy heavy tanks (Tiger), PE in general, and boosting Airborne, Rangers, Carbines, anything infantry based?

[RikiRude]

With less fuel I feel like armor company will be much less effective and with less tanks wouldn't that create support weapon spam?

[Unkn0wn]

With less fuel I feel like armor company will be much less effective and with less tanks wouldn't that create support weapon spam?

No, at best it will give you 3-4 more unupgraded infantry units. (Assuming that you cut on light vehicles)

You have to realise that in the old EIR the fuel to MP ratio was considerably lower, right now the game is much more armored centered, a little too much.

[AmPM]

Actually it will, less vehicles means artillery and MGs become more important to gameplay.

[LuAn]

Actually it will, less vehicles means artillery and MGs become more important to gameplay.

Is there any Artillery that doesnt cost fuel?

[AmPM]

Mortars, offmaps, Brit Officers. But even then, 100fu for a Nebel is a good buy, it will still kill a ton, and forces the other player to come at your position instead of you assaulting theirs.

It will be like Old EIR, where games revolved around who killed who's support spam fastest.

To give you an idea of what 150fu decrease does to my light vehicle spam armor company total (which I don't use, its too gay), I would go from 15 light vehicles to 12....mind you, this is with still having 5 AP round Hellcats.

[DasNoob]

150 less fuel won't do a god damn thing to stop the light armor spam.  Not one bit.

In fact, it will actually increase players buying cheaper FU units instead of heavy tanks because of the bang for the buck factor, thus increasing the dependency of the smaller tanks.

[Mgallun74]

With less fuel I feel like armor company will be much less effective and with less tanks wouldn't that create support weapon spam?

No, at best it will give you 3-4 more unupgraded infantry units. (Assuming that you cut on light vehicles)

You have to realise that in the old EIR the fuel to MP ratio was considerably lower, right now the game is much more armored centered, a little too much.

yes... right now, being a infantry player, iam forced to take a t4 to deal with the loads of freaking armor i see on the field, instead of a infantry based t4 that would be cooler to use..

[AmPM]

Is it the Medium tanks that are the problem, or the light vehicles?

I have never had a problem dealing with 4-5 mediums, however 30+ light vehicles is a little broken.

[LuAn]

Mhm so with -150 fuel my change would be remove 1-2 Fireflies and add 2-3 Stags/Stuarts?

And for my PE Build this would mean:
Cut back on 2 marders and replace them with 50mm

[CafeMilani]

not the medium ones

the light vehicles are the prob. staghound and t17 aremost broken

[AmPM]

Indeed Luan, with a fuel reduction you are best off maximizing the number of targets they need to dedicate AT to.

So in this instance you can sacrifice some FU based heavy AT, and go more towards ATGs and Piats while still throwing out light vehicles to counter other lights, and mow down infantry.