Cost System should be reworked

[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

[tankspirit668]

Bad idea. I mean to be completely honest people who spam pay PP, they lose a single unit they have to pay PP to get it back. Putting multipliers are just a bad idea in general thats like punishing someone to have more then one AB with RR's I mean.. really? And spamming one general type of unit would cost a lot of PP's and won't be able to buy their doctrain abilities. So no stupid multipliers.

Completely honest people would pay a higher price then for certain units they spam. And they`d pay it every time they field their company then, instead of just paying pps for refreshing their oversuplied units. I don`t know why you think you will be punished soo hard for using two rrs, we are not talking about numbers here, but the cost increase should be higher than for riflemen , eg.
People with all doctrines abilities and a lot of vetted units can spam units with nearly no penalities. They need them just for off maps and refreshing their spammed units. And that sucks, so if you see it that way , it`s more balanced between level 8 accounts and level 1 accounts and thats another point you cannot do with the current system.

[BigDick]

my dear lionel23 i think this idea is fantastic because it would mean game over for completely retarded companies like 3 howi and 14 rangersquads

or 10 T17 or 11 stugs or 6P4 ... are history then

i know that now all these unit spamers will cry because they get punished for monotone companies that outspam players who use unit diversity

and to say US will get punished because they have just rifles and not volks and grens is bullshit because

- e.g. cost modifier for riflemen 1.05 for volks 1.1 and for grens 1.1

e.g. getting 6 rifles 1.05^5 last riflemen = 33% more expensive than the basic price
getting 6 grens 1.1^6  last gren 77% more costly

getting 3 volks and 3 grens last gren/volks 1.1^3= 33% more expensive

[tankspirit668]

Why don't you suggest a simple hardcap system since you don't seem to applying this equally to all units, just a certain type which would be silly to bring in a new system to deal with a handful of units, unless you plan to hit the basic units and plan to punish players for not making a company how you like it.

I don`t like playing a game, where you get buffs for certain units and then you just spam that certain type of unit and you are getting nearly no penality for spamming one unit type. So I tell you , if you want to play a game with just one otr two different units play checkers. And this should not be checkers but a nice rts game , where vareity matters.

[CrazyWR]

since when has variety mattered in an RTS?

[MonthlyMayhem]

Why don't you suggest a simple hardcap system since you don't seem to applying this equally to all units, just a certain type which would be silly to bring in a new system to deal with a handful of units, unless you plan to hit the basic units and plan to punish players for not making a company how you like it.

I don`t like playing a game, where you get buffs for certain units and then you just spam that certain type of unit and you are getting nearly no penality for spamming one unit type. So I tell you , if you want to play a game with just one otr two different units play checkers. And this should not be checkers but a nice rts game , where vareity matters.

You are getting a penalty...You have to pay PP..

[Tymathee]

since when has variety mattered in an RTS?

echo...

but seriously though, what RTS game hasn't had some semblance of spam?

[lionel23]

The problem with your analogy though is that not all units are uniform, they are not hard counters.  Many units in this game are soft counters, say the Churchill is primarily an Anti-inf tank, but can soft counter some armor.

What do you expect US to use if you restrict Riflemen, doctrine infantry, and ATGs and the one good tank we have? Force us to get our crappy support teams?  Buff all US teams to match exactly Wehr teams then I'll field US weapons, cause right now a vickers or mg42 is way better than anything the US has, and yes I've used them and they are crap, just like the 'powerful' 2-inch mortar that the Brits have to deal with.

@ Bigdick, I'm sorry if you can't deal with 3 howitzer when in fact I really only field 1 every game, boohoo.  The other two I keep in my company mainly for leaderboard and rarely do I bring it out.  And really rangers are that hard to kill? 4 man M1 squad with 2 bazooka, give me riflemen to buy two bazookas and you'll see me 'spam' riflemen with mass double bazookas and BARs and we'll have a game then hmm?

The problem with this system is too much of the Allied stuff is underpowered.  T17 becoming nondoctrine or greyhound becoming as tough as a t17, Sherman upgun needing to do real damage, Sherman Jumbo heavy armor needs to be introduced, things like that have to be done first before you can even consider such a hard-capping system (and don't tell me otherwise because it's very obvious to me that you want to cap one or two allied units in particular, where I can just as easily say the same with Wehr with Panthers and P4s, but you know what?  You deal with it, make your own counters in your company to fight it.  If you can't figure out a way to fight it when you have perfectly resaonable counters, then you should indeed get punished by the hard counter for them).

Rangers hard counter? Ostwinds, hands down.  SMGs on them? They better rape for a unit that costs over 200+ MU just like a double shrek storm squad SHOULD blow away a tank with its ambush.  A mortar SHOULD own AT guns, these are called COUNTERS and need to be used as such.

Your suggestion would require a complete repricing of all units, removal of all PP costs on units, reduce pool costs for all units, because you're double if not triple nerfing companie, and adding on to such a discussion, why not punish people for buying too many off-maps and battle advantages?  Why should I be punished for actually fielding a unit when I can buy 6-7 bombing runs then?  A cost multiplier didn't help in that situation as people still complain the unstoppable off-maps and the devs have already made it known that more things will be on the field (artillery) and such to be counterable and stoppable.  So there can't be any restriction on howies, and if you did want to cap my rangers, I better see storms capped harder being they are cheaper, I should be able to field 8 rangers why Wehr players need to field less than 6, and we'll see who is happy now.

[BigDick]

You are getting a penalty...You have to pay PP..

paying pp doesnt matter when you reached rank8 and T4

that only punish new people without max out companies

and you can still have some crap like 7 T17 without paying pp

[tankspirit668]

You are getting a penalty...You have to pay PP..

Which is not enough as it seems....

[BigDick]

since when has variety mattered in an RTS?

echo...

but seriously though, what RTS game hasn't had some semblance of spam?

the kind of worthlessness of an RTS grows exponentially with the number of spam

coh is no stone paper scissor like world in conflict there is unit variety

@lionel i will not comment your posting because my reply wouldn't be very nice u.....

[tankspirit668]

echo...

but seriously though, what RTS game hasn't had some semblance of spam?

Complete the sentence :
In good RTS Games .......

A ) it`s common to spam one or two units of the same type and it rocks to overwhelm the player by sheer numbers.

B ) You don`t stand a chance by spamming one unit type , you  have to use some more units in combination to win a battle.

[Smokaz]

What units being spammed is the origin of this idea?

Are rifles being "spammed" too much?

T17s are being dealt with. Terrror is being changed. There exists no concensus that Stugs are OP when they are spammed. Five Panzer 4 companies are annoying, but they are hardly OP and the upgun sherman discussion is leaning towards a buff of the upgun.

Lionels company is no basis for a balance argument. Rangers with zooks only are soft counters to tanks even with tank reapers, and zooks alrady handle most light vehicles without it. Counter them with infantry or shoot them with tanks from long range where they are ineffective at best.

Other than well-managed t17 spam against a company other than terror (which is too good on its own) wehrmacht has zero problems countering anything the allies put out unless the wehrmacht player is being outplayed. Great wehrmacht play is rewarded.

If you have trouble countering something or wonder if a combination of units/doctrine choices are OP, post a well-worded argument about it on the forums and you will receive input on it. Before you reach this point you should discuss with fellow players how they handle the situation you are havimg trouble with.

Stop sucking or crashing your head into other company's walls. The balance forum is crawling with discussion, but there's freaking no discussion in the strategy forum. Why is that? Maybe there's a tendency to cry first, and then attempt to devise a counter?

There are mentors, helpers and other players around more than willing to discuss with you if you encounter something ingame you find hard to counter. If you doubt what they say, ask them to post a replay of it or explain in more detail.

As for EIRR not being a rock-scissor-paper game.. I disagree. There's certainly soft counters, but most of the time there's a more or less perfect action you can take against a certain combination of units. Sometimes its more difficult to counter something than it is to execute it, but if you execute your counter and kills his units that still leaves you the winner, and his choice of units and strategy the inferior one in the end. Its the beauty of the game when you annihiliate someone using combined arms, or fight off a superior force through unit positioning and indirect support like mines, blocking vehicles.. etc.

[BigDick]

smokaz its funny that u comment about the performance of upguns when you not even use them and asked me why i use all my shermans with upguns in my inf company in a game...

i told you because they fucking pwn P4s for just 60mun and they are an insta win (except some T4 doc buffs like german steele heat rounds or fatherland defense) and they do okish against infantry


and no one said "rifles being spamed to much" in general but my inf company with M1 carbines and some other stacking buffs on riflemen has 22-24 squads without iam punished for that huge amount

[tankspirit668]

The problem with your analogy though is that not all units are uniform, they are not hard counters.  Many units in this game are soft counters, say the Churchill is primarily an Anti-inf tank, but can soft counter some armor.


@ Bigdick, I'm sorry if you can't deal with 3 howitzer when in fact I really only field 1 every game, boohoo.  The other two I keep in my company mainly for leaderboard and rarely do I bring it out.  And really rangers are that hard to kill? 4 man M1 squad with 2 bazooka, give me riflemen to buy two bazookas and you'll see me 'spam' riflemen with mass double bazookas and BARs and we'll have a game then hmm?
The problem with this system is too much of the Allied stuff is underpowered.  T17 becoming nondoctrine or greyhound becoming as tough as a t17, Sherman upgun needing to do real damage, Sherman Jumbo heavy armor needs to be introduced, things like that have to be done first before you can even consider such a hard-capping system (and don't tell me otherwise because it's very obvious to me that you want to cap one or two allied units in particular, where I can just as easily say the same with Wehr with Panthers and P4s, but you know what?  You deal with it, make your own counters in your company to fight it.  If you can't figure out a way to fight it when you have perfectly resaonable counters, then you should indeed get punished by the hard counter for them).

So basically ,you want to become this game into an allied is underpowered thread again. That`s not what this thread should be about.  So, if allies are underpowered, why do you say you are using commonly / need only  one  of your three howitzers usually. That makes no sense if allies were underpowered. If you usually only field one of three howitzers in ypur company you can live with a price increase.  

Rangers hard counter? Ostwinds, hands down.  

If you consider an Ostwind a Hardcounter against Rangers, I say it`s a soft counter.

Your suggestion would require a complete repricing of all units, removal of all PP costs on units, reduce pool costs for all units, because you're double if not triple nerfing companie, and adding on to such a discussion, why not punish people for buying too many off-maps and battle advantages?  Why should I be punished for actually fielding a unit when I can buy 6-7 bombing runs then?  A cost multiplier didn't help in that situation as people still complain the unstoppable off-maps and the devs have already made it known that more things will be on the field (artillery) and such to be counterable and stoppable.  So there can't be any restriction on howies, and if you did want to cap my rangers, I better see storms capped harder being they are cheaper, I should be able to field 8 rangers why Wehr players need to field less than 6, and we'll see who is happy now.

There would be no need, a little need or repricing, and definition of the cost multiplier of each unit. You are getting more and more  off topic. I`m discussing the pricing of units here and not of offmaps. And there can be a restriction on howies and there should be, may it be a pretty steep price increase after every purchase, like we discuss or whatever. The price increase after every purchase will hurt storm spam companies, too. You want this thing to get emotional , I want it to stay on topic.
 

The current system is :

• Costs Of Unit
• PP Costs Of Unit
• Unit Pool Costs

Instead of:

• Costs Of Unit
• Cost Multiplier

[Smokaz]

Also, a lot of people cry their eyes out when they get owned by a strat that aims to overwhelm their forces with sheer numbers of one unit type that needs specific counters. Examples could be countering a triple t17 start when you have a regular wehrmacht "safe" start like: mg, mortar, shrek, pak and a volk or some other non-at infantry. Starting like this isn't "safing it". Its assuming that the other player is bringing his own equivavelent of your counters.

If you are worried about spam, the key is to scout. Bring out a small starting callin like a halftrack with a capper (could be a pio) and a bike. If you hear vehicles in his spawn just head towards him with the bike, losing a bike to find out he's starting with 3 m8s is nothign compared to having too little AT when they arrive to attack.

A couple of patches back when R mode was introduced, players wisened up very quickly. They started spotting for the enemy's units to avoid being creamed by their start, thus losing you to the game. Somehow this has grown very uncommon again. If you don't have a recon or a MI, you have to scout manually. Walking blindly into a situation assuming the enemy will play your game is a player error.

smokaz its funny that u comment about the performance of upguns when you not even use them and asked me why i use all my shermans with upguns in my inf company in a game...

i told you because they fucking pwn P4s for just 60mun and they are an insta win (except some T4 doc buffs like german steele heat rounds or fatherland defense) and they do okish against infantry


and no one said "rifles being spamed to much" in general but my inf company with M1 carbines and some other stacking buffs on riflemen has 22-24 squads without iam punished for that huge amount

[/size]


I respect your opinion, but there are far more players that agree with me when I characterize the upgun as lacking. The p4 gives up nothing for the skirts, the upgun gives up some anti infantry ability and reload. There's also been zero threads about carabines being OP, so why bring that up? Its a great t4, but the platform does not gain any durability and squad members lost reduces firepower. I'll smash your infantry company if you rely on rifles as your main anti infantry.

There's also nothing wrong with people using the units that their doctrines buff, whats the point of doctrines if people didnt do that?

Maybe you should release a guide to helping other players get the most of their upguns.. that should rattle up some support, bigdick. I mean pak plays a few games with stugspam and writes a guide and everyone is going "LOLOLOL STUGS R OP!".

[tankspirit668]

Stop sucking or crashing your head into other company's walls. The balance forum is crawling with discussion, but there's freaking no discussion in the strategy forum. Why is that? Maybe there's a tendency to cry first, and then attempt to devise a counter?

Maybe this game is not enough about strategy, but more spamming ?
I don`t cry like US OP or something, but there`s  a long history of spam in EIRR. And on some points there are people enjoying playing spam companies, probably because it works. And as it was mentioned before you are getting a Doctrinal Buff for Unit A, so in a way you are getting rewarded  to put Unit A in masses in you company, with nothing but a small fee on every purchase. If this Unit A is hard to kill the small fee gets even smaller.
So the proposed pricing system will balance units just on their prices, as a counterbalance, if you like to say so, to the tendency of spamming doctrinal buffed Unit A.

As for EIRR not being a rock-scissor-paper game.. I disagree. There's certainly soft counters, but most of the time there's a more or less perfect action you can take against a certain combination of units. Sometimes its more difficult to counter something than it is to execute it, but if you execute your counter and kills his units that still leaves you the winner, and his choice of units and strategy the inferior one in the end. Its the beauty of the game when you annihiliate someone using combined arms, or fight off a superior force through unit positioning and indirect support like mines, blocking vehicles.. etc.

It`s not a real rock paper scissors game, but players should use more than three or four fighting units and get rewarded for doing so, for putting more variety in their companies, for learning how to use some more units in the right way, what is not the case at the moment. The beauty of the game is indeed killing units by tactics as you state by by right timing, right placement, positioning, okay. But additional beauty lies ahead: more unity variety in company builds.

[CrazyWR]

Um, please show me a company with only 3-4 types of units in the ENTIRE company, and I'll believe you.

[BigDick]

The p4 gives up nothing for the skirts, the upgun gives up some anti infantry ability and reload.

because a vanilla sherman is way better at AI as a vanilla panzer4

There's also been zero threads about carabines being OP

i thought eir shouldnt be balanced on things like who cries more?
and its a difference if you have strong stacking doctrine buffs on a small amount of units or if you spam that unit....
and exactly the spam thing can be lowered by increasing unit cost by for each additional unit

There's also nothing wrong with people using the units that their doctrines buff, whats the point of doctrines if people didnt do that?

wrong? its killing the variety of this mod/game and its killing the fun
but actually everyone who want to win will spam units giving most benefit...but its boring its killing all fun
im actually bored of my m1 carabines stacking buffed riflespam company
im bored of my british grit zeal vet3 bren/recon tommy hoards
im bored of facing companied with 10T17 or 14 rangers or only volks....

maybe im bored of eir because im seeing thats not that different to vCOH in games >1v1
unit diversity limited everyone spams single unit types...

my motivation to play eir over vCOH (except 1v1) was to have something were you can field unit combinations from the beginning...where you don't limit yourself by teching and blobbing some stuff late game....

[Smokaz]

From his posts, bigdick wants three things dicscussed.

- How upgun is a better upgrade than the skirts
- How carabines are OP if you field 20+ rifles
- How a vanilla sherman is better AI than a P4

If you are convinced of these things being true, I am sure a public discussion of this is in your interest. Make the threads.

[MonthlyMayhem]

Okay so this new cost system, implying AFTER you buy one new unit you automatically have to pay a multiplier price.. Okay say I want to field 6 AB with RR's I don't think thats spamming, 3 call-ins, alright. Say the multiplier was 1.1, lets do the math.
1st squad:280 MP
2nd squad: 308 MP
3rd squad: 338.8 MP
4th squad: 372.68 MP
5th squad: 408.95 MP
6th squad: 450.94 MP

Rounding all of this off it comes out to roughly 1852 MP... Which leaves a normal company with only 6148 MP, plus if you want to have tanks with it would be more which scales down the whole game. If you want to do a resource multiplier at least come up with a certain "pool" for each unit which you think is not spamming and THEN I might actually consider supporting this. Just MAYBE, either that or create more of variety for allied infantry because we honestly only have one non-doctrinal infantry. So how could you get mad or annoyed at an allied player for spamming their only infantry unit... :s well other then engineers