Some thoughts.

[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

[TheWindCriesMary]

 Macro strategy is just as important as micro abillity.

 Pre-determined builds, even with some small room for customization, completely ignores that fact.

 I'm just glad I don't ever have to worry about this mod's dev team losing their sanity long enough to implement that kind of game-killing idea.

 -Wind

[Nevyen]

I'm not sure where the idea of predetermined builds comes into the current discussion wind but oh well I agree that pre-determined builds is not a good idea.  A pre-determined build in my view is you get what you get and that's it, no room at all for choice.

The macro strategy your suggesting still exists and in allot of ways can be enhanced its a shame you suggest the idea is "insane" but that's your prerogative in all things some people see the benifit some see the negative.

Personally always felt the game needed more restrictions on company builds as i saw this current silliness a long way off, it featured in allot the work and discussion that the dev team worked on about a year and half ago.  The cap system and the soft cap system was the basis of those ideas.  I just felt that there should be minimum spends as well as soft maximum spends. In then end we just went with the maximum spend caps but that in my opinion has always never really dealt with the issue.  

Lionel I have no idea how long you have played 40k but back in 2nd ed such compositions didn't exist and there was allot of very silly systems in place.  Hell even 3rd edition 40k was a my hero is better than yours fest.

5th edition really didn't change it that much but the jump from 3rd to 4th was massive.

[TheWindCriesMary]

I'm not sure where the idea of predetermined builds comes into the current discussion wind but oh well I agree that pre-determined builds is not a good idea.  A pre-determined build in my view is you get what you get and that's it, no room at all for choice.

The macro strategy your suggesting still exists and in allot of ways can be enhanced its a shame you suggest the idea is "insane" but that's your prerogative in all things some people see the benifit some see the negative.

 Almost the entirety of most recent page in this thread is about predetermined builds and how it would crystallize gameplay down to who has better micro rather than who can come up with the most cunning/gimmicky companies.

 -Wind

[11on2d6]

I honestly hope the dev team doesnt limit creativity to a level below what we currently can achieve without oversupplying, it would be a massive step back imo.

EIR isnt just about how you use the units, its also about how you build your company, this is why being good at Vcoh doesnt mean you will be good at EIR. People need to realise that like anything you can improve your company building skills, as well as your ingame skills.

If you lose, get better - stop finding excuses. 

[BigDick]

1) Super-high ammounts of stomping at the time(high-ranked people purposefully shying away from equal fights and chosing to fight noobs instead). Most notoriously at the time of my mentoring : Aloha and Bigdick(Yes, I just pointed fingers. Boo-hoo if it offends the two germans).

Says Mr "I use retard spam moron companies only to stack with Shockcoil,Mukip,Nightrain etc." completely devastating any positive feeling about this mod for new people about persons who did not played EiR for month

and actually my at least 30 last games i did not played with same persons in team more than 2 times in a row

Bigdick, I don't see that working at all since there is a Warmap coming, which from my understanding will be the primary mode of play. I don't know the details about the Warmap but I am pretty sure that it would be counterproductive to have a warmap where it forces you to play both sides equally.

Other than that it's actually a great idea, I know I would hate it at first because playing as Allies is simply boring, but in the end I think the benefits the system brings would outweigh that negative.

actually i see that problem too
but i think whats making the mod frustrating is how long it takes to get games going and that the games are mostly not balanced in terms of players.

Its like people are to frighten to join a game because it will be probably very unbalanced. It would be a win-win situation for everyone if sides and teams are mixed automatically by some kind of skill rating.
Because there is a to small playerbase to get same average skill rating for each side if a system is not choosing a side for the players.

Additional most people are like u and don't like playing allies that much because they feel boring.

Reasons may be the following:

- less famous tanks in RL and in COH
- not much unique special interesting weapons/equiptments in RL and CoH
  (wehrmacht had so much futuristic and visionary stuff in ww2)
- at least the us armee has some kind of skunkish cheating reputation in RL nowadays and in times of WW2

and it will be almost impossible to make most people like playing allies at the same level as the axis

the only thing i can see that would make it happen is fucking up balance to a point where it is impossible to win as axis

The problem has always been the rank 5 and 200 free pps per account after the reset, which allows people to say "lol @ availability pool". The weapon cache pool will just polish it a little, it won't magically fix anything.

actually that assumption is not right
spam and flat sided companies exist always in eir not just since there are free pp to avoid grinding
it never got fixed maybe a bit slowed down by availability pools

i posted an idea how that may be fixed more than one year ago but either devs did not liked it or did not understood it

it was like introducing a cost increasing modifier for each unit type like by the first M8 for 280MP and the second one for x*280MP and the third one for x*x*280MP and so on where x is adjusted for each unit type

so the 10th M8 may be cost more fuel than a croc (e.g. if x=1.1 so 10% more pricing for each aditional M8 => 10th m8 = 207fuel) so people think about if they really want that or if they may try to get some use out of a different unit

[Nevyen]

Almost the entirety of most recent page in this thread is about predetermined builds and how it would crystallize gameplay down to who has better micro rather than who can come up with the most cunning/gimmicky companies.

 -Wind

Well this is really about what is deemed  as predetermined, the theory that im positing that you have a minimum spend as well as the soft cap maximums would not really instill predetermined builds but  I guess I see where your coming from, dont agree but i see it .

I see it differently, and see it as constructive limitations to limit the spamming that is seen as a problem by the community.  Its not really "insane" as your suggesting, and would still allow macro strategy as well as the micro.

But I think this is mute you have your position I have mine and really it comes down to what the Dev will do.  I think its tad unfair to class a persons idea as "insane" but there you have it.



 

[Mysthalin]

I class it as rather insane to force a person to use, say, 2 greyhounds in any armour company when he has no idea on how they operate. Or 3 shermans when all he wants is double pershings.

[Nevyen]

Well it was an example the theory and the application are different,  I wasn't suggesting something as draconian as that as a hard rule I just threw that idea out there.

Never mind like i said it was an idea, Its not "insane" it has logic behind it, but I guess it sits in the no-one is interested in working the idea basket so ill drop it.

Have a nice day.

[Mysthalin]

Everything that is classed insane still has a strand of logic behind it, Nevyen .

[Nevyen]

That's how I usually class you when i think about the best word to describe your ramblings

Insane with a small amount of logic.

The joy of the internetz !
I shall go back to my world of table top gaming and not deal with all this stupidity of spamm i guess

[tank130]

Almost the entirety of most recent page in this thread is about predetermined builds and how it would crystallize gameplay down to who has better micro rather than who can come up with the most cunning/gimmicky companies.

 -Wind

I think you misunderstood the previous pages. No one is suggesting predetermined builds. In fact, I even said I do NOT want predetermined builds.

I class it as rather insane to force a person to use, say, 2 greyhounds in any armour company when he has no idea on how they operate. Or 3 shermans when all he wants is double pershings.

Pershings are an unlock. I would assume any minimum build requirements would have to be adjusted to accommodate doctrinal selections.
I do not think it is insane to force someone to use greyhounds if they are running an armor company. It's part of learning the game and bettering your skills. The first time I used a sherman I sure as the hell didn't know how to use it.

Well this is really about what is deemed  as predetermined, the theory that im positing that you have a minimum spend as well as the soft cap maximums would not really instill predetermined builds but  I guess I see where your coming from, dont agree but i see it .

I see it differently, and see it as constructive limitations to limit the spamming that is seen as a problem by the community.  Its not really "insane" as your suggesting, and would still allow macro strategy as well as the micro.

I really think this is the best solution for limiting spam that has ever been put forth. It allows customization ( macro ) of your build while greatly reducing the ability to spam.

I will be taking your idea to the top dog.

[Smokaz]

what if you had a "weekly" supply that allowed for 1-2 spam games but had low minimum available values so making this somewhat risky?

[tank130]

what if you had a "weekly" supply that allowed for 1-2 spam games but had low minimum available values so making this somewhat risky?

What would be the point of deliberately creating something that allowed spam?

[TheWindCriesMary]

Additional most people are like u and don't like playing allies that much because they feel boring.

 This is really far off the mark. The American doctrine has remained the most popular both in vCOH and EiR since the game came out in terms of players. It's my least favorite, but it has consistently had the most EiR player accounts in every single version of EiR for the past 2 years and probably longer.

Reasons may be the following:

- less famous tanks in RL and in COH (The sherman tank is arguably the most iconic tank of the war hands down, although that is subjective)
- not much unique special interesting weapons/equiptments in RL and CoH (this is entirely subjective)
  (wehrmacht had so much futuristic and visionary stuff in ww2 -) True, but arguably so did the Americans
- at least the us armee has some kind of skunkish cheating reputation in RL nowadays and in times of WW2 (This doesn't even make sense, and seems fueled more by nationalistic prejudice rather than anything substantive)

and it will be almost impossible to make most people like playing allies at the same level as the axis Except that the allies are played just as much, if not more (Americans anyways)

it was like introducing a cost increasing modifier for each unit type like by the first M8 for 280MP and the second one for x*280MP and the third one for x*x*280MP and so on where x is adjusted for each unit type

so the 10th M8 may be cost more fuel than a croc (e.g. if x=1.1 so 10% more pricing for each aditional M8 => 10th m8 = 207fuel) so people think about if they really want that or if they may try to get some use out of a different unit

 That was actually an interesting idea and I said so at the time.  I personally think it is a good idea, so i'd keep championing it.

 -Wind

[Mysthalin]

I do not think it is insane to force someone to use greyhounds if they are running an armor company. It's part of learning the game and bettering your skills. The first time I used a sherman I sure as the hell didn't know how to use it.

Learning the game and bettering your skills should be done at the pace each individual so choses - not because the game, for some arbitrary reason, forces you to use a unit type your intended company theme has no relation to.

[TheWindCriesMary]

 I'm with Mysthalin on this one.

 The most appealing aspect of a persistency mod, in my opinion, is the ability to think outside the box and develop innovative strategies.

 Macro planning and strategy development is what combines with micro in-game ability to make this mod superior to Vcoh.

 -Wind

 

[AmPM]

I'm with Mysthalin on this one.

 The most appealing aspect of a persistency mod, in my opinion, is the ability to think outside the box and develop innovative strategies.

 Macro planning and strategy development is what combines with micro in-game ability to make this mod superior to Vcoh.

 -Wind

 

Which of course, would be fine if units had an increasing cost associated with them for each unit of the same type you purchased.

1 PaK and 1 Schrek on field is pretty lethal to a single vehicle. 2 vehicles it usually dies and doesn't even kill one. 3 vehicles and its over.

I think a rather elegant solution however, would be to increase the damage multiplier of medium tanks vs light vehicles. AKA, T17/Puma/M8/Stag get raped by Sherman/P4/Crom

[Spartan_Marine88]

Which of course, would be fine if units had an increasing cost associated with them for each unit of the same type you purchased.

I think that should only kick in once you have gone oversupply.

But then again they are possibly taking out oversupply so who knows

[AmPM]

I think that should only kick in once you have gone oversupply.

But then again they are taking out oversupply so...

Exactly, and it causes its own problems of 5th M8 is no longer in balance with other units if used by itself due to the increase in price.

Another solution would be to undo the health increase, move it back to being purchasable with Mu and reduce the fuel cost. This may not stop the units from being used en masse, but it will prevent spamming ATGs and support to back them up. This would create a truly 1 dimensional company that is counterable within a reasonable expectation of a  "balanced" company.

[BigDick]

This is really far off the mark. The American doctrine has remained the most popular both in vCOH and EiR since the game came out in terms of players. It's my least favorite, but it has consistently had the most EiR player accounts in every single version of EiR for the past 2 years and probably longer.

but how you explain that people need to wait in average longer for a game on axis side?

- less famous tanks in RL and in COH (The sherman tank is arguably the most iconic tank of the war hands down, although that is subjective)

Ok, probably i should have added famous in a positive light

if most people think about shermans they say tommycooker tin can, piece of crap, mass production
if they think about tigers kingtigers panthers jagdpanther etc. they think about strong powerful crazy big tanks
they think about them like "my home is my castle"
that has nothing to do with their performance its just the impression people get when seeing such tanks.

- not much unique special interesting weapons/equiptments in RL and CoH (this is entirely subjective)

actually its not; they had so many special strange vehicle combinations with completely special tasks

- at least the us armee has some kind of skunkish cheating reputation in RL nowadays and in times of WW2 (This doesn't even make sense, and seems fueled more by nationalistic prejudice rather than anything substantive)

that is in nowhere related to nationalistic prejudice
your american not me how can some comment about a single army (out of >100 in the world) be nationalistic related?

Actually most people don't like the foreign policy of US and their military attitudes.
Probably you don't notice it in US especially because many governments cooperate for political reasons.
But most people hate the us military and their senseless wars without achieving anything except some self-serving reasons of american vulgar capitalism.
Most people just don't choose to play the gollums in a video game.
And people probably don't prefer to play us in a ww2 game not because their role in ww2 wasn't important its more because they never risked anything. Its like taking part on a soccer tournament watching the first matchup of cup favorites where the teams had a hard fight just to rush the field some minutes before final whistle to support one team.
It's like letting something else doing the dirty work and getting a win by risking almost nothing.

and it will be almost impossible to make most people like playing allies at the same level as the axis Except that the allies are played just as much, if not more (Americans anyways)

Mr obviously since we have no game modes like 3vs1 there have to be equally people taking part on each side in eir.
That does not change that it is more hard and time consuming to get games going when playing axis