Rotating Pool Idea

[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

[Tymathee]

Just an idea. Reserve stays the same but you can switch say 6 infantry pool for 6 vehicle/tank/support pool. You get less Infantry but you can throw in more support weapons.

If you think that a 1 for 1 switch would make things unbalanced then maybe like this. 10 infantry pool for 6, or 12 for 6. You don't just get less of something else you cripple it.

Of course the issue here would be when it comes to vehicles and tanks as you could effectively take out all of your vehicle pool and swap it for armor and spam armor, which is why you can only do it once per game and it costs SP to do it, say maybe 2-4, just a beginning idea.

There's also an idea of starting with 0 pool and you're able to fill it in and you can't have over say, 99 (most are divisible by 3)

so like in my rCA, there's a total of 210 pool cost, 78 inf, 36 veh, 42 arm and 54 support.

In my second idea, all coys start with 20 pool at each level and you can move up how much  you want but u can't go over 96 and you can't have two with more than 50. So say I want a lot of support. I'd go like this

32 20 50 96 because i dont want any vehicles, i have some infantry, supporting tanks and tons of support weapons.

This would also eliminate the reserve pool since you can customize and wont need the extra as it would make it so u can get +30 on say infantry so ur basically at 62 20 50 96.

Comments, additions? Good idea, bad idea? Anyone see a way to exploit this?

[CrazyWR]

works for me, but leads to more spam companies, which a lot of people dislike, although it would be more of a throwback to old EIR where there were no pools and you could buy whatever you wanted provided you had the resources for it...

[Masacree]

This is called "resources". As you buy more infantrymen, you have less available to spend on support weapons. The only issue with the resource system is some mooks spend all of their resources on one type of unit (ie tanks) to the exclusion of all else. The "availability" system stops this from happening by requiring a certain amount of your "resources" be spent in other categories of units (ie infantry or support weapons ect.) Allowing the availability system to be used for other categories of units undermines literally the entire purpose of it.

This is literally one of the dumbest things I've ever read. You might as well remove the availability system. Which is a tenable position, but not what you're arguing for.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

Spam companys are quite easy to counter(if its not commando piat spam that instant gibbes all of your inf) but what is alot worse than spam is an inf blob company that moves to fast to be counterd by a blob destroyer and to powerfull to be killed by inf.

[RikiRude]

I'm mixed, for one, I think it would be a cool idea because it would allow you to really customize your coys and like crazy said, would be like old eir. On the other hand (besides the fact it would probably take a while to implement) it would lead to more spam (but tbh I still see all sorts of spam now anyways). I also feel that "reserve" kind of does this already.

[AmPM]

I fail to understand why you would even keep the availability system if you were going to do this, as all it means is that I can say, go max into vehicles/Armor and spam to my hearts content.

[Tymathee]

^ yeah you could but at a grievous disadvantage to other areas. If you want a ton of tanks, then you'd have few vehicles and support weapons and infantry. Plus, you're also limited in terms of your resources. So sure you can go full 96 on infantry but a lot of them will be vanilla and you wont have much munis left in other areas.

[DarkSoldierX]

personaly I think this is dumb. And if it costed SP is would juts make it dumber because you use PP to oversupply therefore defeating the purpose of oversupplying.

This would just help people make more spam companies.

[AmPM]

^ yeah you could but at a grievous disadvantage to other areas. If you want a ton of tanks, then you'd have few vehicles and support weapons and infantry. Plus, you're also limited in terms of your resources. So sure you can go full 96 on infantry but a lot of them will be vanilla and you wont have much munis left in other areas.

So the same as old EIR where you cried endlessly about spam?

ACtually, I'm all for it, lets also make rotating resource pools and remove the hardcap on all units.

3 Jadpanther/KT company here I come.

4 Tigers with Double repair? Oh yes!

[Tymathee]

did I mention removing hardcaps? w/e ampm just quit trolling already and making up stuff i never even mentioned.

[AmPM]

Well, balance wise, you cannot remove availability from the equation which is what you are suggesting, without removing hardcaps to keep heavy and super heavy tanks viable.

[PonySlaystation]

So the same as old EIR where you cried endlessly about spam?

ACtually, I'm all for it, lets also make rotating resource pools and remove the hardcap on all units.

3 Jadpanther/KT company here I come.

4 Tigers with Double repair? Oh yes!

I think it would make an interesting alternative gamemode in EIR. No hardcapped units, vCoH repair system and medic stations.

The "one KT/Jagd" rule is stupid, double KTs was perfectly balanced, if it's overpowered just increase the cost some. The problem wasn't that you ran out of AT it was that the KT was too cheap, just barely more expensive than the Pershing.

@Tym your idea is innovative but just as someone said it would just mess up balance with spamming.

[RikiRude]

I think it would make an interesting alternative gamemode in EIR. No hardcapped units, vCoH repair system and medic stations.

The "one KT/Jagd" rule is stupid, double KTs was perfectly balanced, if it's overpowered just increase the cost some. The problem wasn't that you ran out of AT it was that the KT was too cheap, just barely more expensive than the Pershing.

@Tym your idea is innovative but just as someone said it would just mess up balance with spamming.

no the problem was 2 KTs with repairs and awesome terror infantry or support weapons backing the KTs up, and the fact that almost all terror companies had the KT. It's nearly impossible (though with the current 17 pounders maybe not) as allies to field enough AT to counter multiple heavy tanks like that AND keep enough AI on the field, it's always been a nightmare.

Could you imagine being an axis player, not having 88s, and having 2 allies both with like 3 pershings and elite infantry?

Although all that I've said is quite moot since EIRR has changed SO much since the 2 KT company days. Though I believe that if you have 2 KT you should not have anymore than say 50fu left over.

[tank130]

Tym..... It's not gonna happen.

But please keep the ideas coming.

[AmPM]

no the problem was 2 KTs with repairs and awesome terror infantry or support weapons backing the KTs up, and the fact that almost all terror companies had the KT. It's nearly impossible (though with the current 17 pounders maybe not) as allies to field enough AT to counter multiple heavy tanks like that AND keep enough AI on the field, it's always been a nightmare.

Could you imagine being an axis player, not having 88s, and having 2 allies both with like 3 pershings and elite infantry?

Although all that I've said is quite moot since EIRR has changed SO much since the 2 KT company days. Though I believe that if you have 2 KT you should not have anymore than say 50fu left over.

KT = 18 pop

3 17pdr = 18 pop

3 57mm = 15 pop

How can you not field enough AT to hold off a KT and still have support?

[CrazyWR]

no reason we can't keep hardcaps on heavies while also unlimiting other units...and if there were no pool limits, ab companies might come back...although a full doctrine might help that more...but then, we've fought this battle before and lost, so I don't expect a different outcome this time.  The system we have now works pretty well.  I doubt any system will make everyone that plays EIR happy...

[AmPM]

But to maintain balance you would need to unlock heavies.

Right now their cap is based on the availability of counters.

By unlocking how many counters are available, you make a single or double heavy less powerful. As such, they then need to be unlocked to keep the balance.

[smurfORnot]

Could you imagine being an axis player, not having 88s, and having 2 allies both with like 3 pershings and elite infantry?

ummm...yes...you would counter it same way you do now  
3 pershings,that means 2-3 KT-s/Jagds for me,dunno where is the problem.
Still,I would like to have 2 KT's in my terror company.

[Tymathee]

Tym..... It's not gonna happen.

But please keep the ideas coming.

it was just a thought.

and lol you'd have to uncap heavies? what would it matter anyway? you'd have 2 or 3, so what, you max out your fuel. like I said, you're still quite limited by resources.