Weapon cache update x2

[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

[Groundfire]

"I got access to the discussion where it most certainly was voted down, but i Dont remember"

Yeah, i dont remember the exact reason for why it was, I remember cause I was the one that suggested it at the time.

[Mysthalin]

You know what else would have worked? Simply attaching good costs to whatever units and upgrades deserved the costs - like the volks panzerfaust with 3 uses at 50 munitions(as had been done). Very useable as a supporting AT asset, and still possible to use as main-stray AT if in terror/defensive, instead of lolrush assault spamming blitz.

I know, mind-blowing idea. Having good costs for units.

[smurfORnot]

2 fausts or 1 shreck? I can already tell you what would people pick. Not to mention that those volks with 50mun faust 'cant' be used to recrew stuff,because 2 volks left will die to a breez,and there goes your 50mun.I would honestly rather have grens with shreck+volks,than 2x faust volks.

[Mysthalin]

*shrug* my secondary volks spam coy worked perfectly fine when fausts cost 50 mun.

[BigDick]

How bout you all give me a minute to balance the numbers? mkay?

P.S., incremental compounding costs was voted down. I cant remember why, but this is what we got instead.

You all really want it so badly, bitch and moan some more to Eirrmod and get him to recode the launcher.

i usually don't use rude words and always trying to be as nice as possible but sometimes its better to cut to the chase
this concept is utterly fail and sucks donkey balls and there are no numbers to balance because the whole system makes no sense and is just crap
who ever developed this concept was either drunk and on drugs or is a bit slow
need to be removed asap - fix that shit pl0x by removing

i need to spam scoutcars now because i can't use upgraded infantry anymore and my infantry whenever need to spam tellermines/magnetic at nades cos they have a good mun/pool ratio

24 scoutcars here i come - balanced company lolz

[Killer344]

24 scoutcars here i come - balanced company lolz

lol

[RoyalHants]

+1 for Skaffas idea

[tank130]

"I got access to the discussion where it most certainly was voted down, but i Dont remember"

Yeah, i dont remember the exact reason for why it was, I remember cause I was the one that suggested it at the time.

I love it when the lynch mob settles down and the truth starts to surface.
The Dev team voted down the idea of incremental costs. A large majority of the community was also VERY against the idea. All the typical QQ of "you are restricting my build"

So the Dev team goes back to work and creates another system. And pretty much the same group of people start the QQ and lynch mob all over again......lol

Can any of you in the community explain why some people are not affected at all by the cache, but others claim the game is unplayable? I think we all know PE is screwed, but why the vast differences in unaffected/unplayable in the other factions.

I don't mean the crazy companies people are trying to create on purpose to disqualify the WC. I mean people who had to make no changes to their company after the WC was implemented.

For example: the only change I made to my AB company was removing a repair from a jeep. I only had it on there to use up 10 Muni I had left over anyway, so I didn't give a shit.

[AmPM]

Infantry centric companies got hit hard, my dual t3 BAR Rifle company got pretty screwed because the M18's and BAR Rifles take up huge amounts of pool.

My Blitz company was unaffected due to less vehicles to upgrade and fewer infantry squads/more support weapons.

Terror is mass infantry, got screwed.

Same for my Defensive.

My Armor Company got fucked as well, because it relied on BAR Rifles for it's main AI instead of vehicles.

[lionel23]

Weapon cache doesn't affect my allies companies but my wehr.

I used to run on my defensive I think 20 squads of MP40s and fausts, no ATGs, no tanks, 5 88mms and 4-5 medical bunkers.

On my infantry company, I still run (at work so not exactly sure) around 15 squads of SMG rangers, maybe 2-3 zooks, 2-3 atgs, and 7 chaffee tanks with full upgrades... and I think a single triage center.  No riflemen, no support weapons.

On my mass riflespam company, I still have 30 cache left over for having 20+ squads of SMG riflemen, all equipped with sticky bombs, 2 howitzers and a few ATGs.

On my blitz, I had to lose shreks and repair kits in order to field my 20+ grenadier squads with elite armor, but is the most 'playable' of my Wehr companies.

Terror is unplayable for me at least because I used to KCH spam (like my rangers) byt rangers are 6 cache while KCH with upgrades jumps up to 16 cache, making it effectively unplayable.

[Smokaz]

Wanting to:

- Not use your vehicle pool
- Not field much support other than at guns
- Actually be able to use L3 munitions advantages
- Wanting to use infantry with upgrades heavily

Is not the same as wanting to run some crazy company. These balanced companies unaffected by the weapon cache you talk about are similar to each other. They are not similar to the vast range of specialized "themed" company's that the DOCTRINE BUFFS suggest heavily that you make.

Your the guy shitting on us tank. We players who prefer to run specialized infantry companies are not telling other types of company's about how they should look and what units they should pick.

Why is it a problem to the dev team that people want to play with infantry only? Or get the maximum number of docrine affected units?

So the Dev team goes back to work and creates another system. And pretty much the same group of people start the QQ and lynch mob all over again......lol

When its achieving the same shitty change, of course its being complained about. How. Dense. Can. You. Get.

[tank130]

How. Dense. Can. You. Get.

If you are just going to be an ass, you will get ignored. If you want your opinions to matter or be listened to, then stop being so ignorant towards the people trying to fix the problem.

people who want to play with infantry only or get the maximum number of docrine affected units are not a problem smokaz.
It is when they want to play with infantry only, maxed out with upgrades, supported by tanks with repairs and support units that it becomes a problem.

The purpose of the cache is to prevent mass specialization teamed up with tanks and support. Specialize all you want all day long if you want. But you are going to have to make some sacrifices to the rest of your company to make up for it.

Right now the numbers are not correct and it is not achieving that desired result. But once the numbers are correct, you will be able specialize in infantry only, with upgrades, but you will not have much left to support that specialization.

I will post this again:
1 – AB Rifle (Sticky, Grenade, Bars)
1 – AB Rifle (Grenade)
5 – AB Rifles (no Upgrades)
3 – AB (RR)
2- AB – HMG (No Upgrades)
2- AB – Mortar
4 – AB ATG (AP Rounds)
3 – Rifles (Bars)
2 – Rifles (Bar, Grenade)
1 – Jeep (No Upgrades)
2 – Quads (Repairs)
2 – Sherman Crocs (repairs, Bulldozer)
2 – Sherman (Up gun, 50 Cal, Repairs)
1 – Infantry Halftrack

Available Resources
MP 60 / Mun 0 / Fuel 165

Cache
-14 / 100

Pool
Inf - 23/84
Vehicles – 15/42
Armor - -6/36
Support – 8/48
Reserve – 10/30

Advantages:
2 Man Power
3 Munitions
1 Fuel


I have triple munitions advantages and have been able to use every munition point. So please do not say you are unable to use all your munitions. But I also admit that we need to tweak the numbers, because not everything is working that well. You will have to adjust your companies when this is done. That is the whole point of it. It is for the better in the long run, but you are judging it before it is balanced.

[Demon767]

Guys can you calm down, this is getting ugly, take it to ventrillo

[Smokaz]

Nice company, and when you look at that company you can see that almost any doctrine build would buff parts of it because its so spread out - in other words, not very optimized for its doctrine buffs. Thus your company goes against what the doctrines suggest, even if its "powergaming": getting as reasonably big part of your company buffed by your doctrine as possible.

Copying it into my own launcher, I found that I had 23/84 infantry pool left - so its definitely not the heaviest infantry company possible, which would have no such pool left over right?

Your even getting normal rifles with bars. Not AB lmgs, or AB bars. Just rifles that dont get any buffs from the doctrine. You think you are doing fine and the cache is allowing your company, but to me it this company looks very strained and weird. I'm sure its a fun and great company, but it's not built with company economy in mind.

If a player wants to play with for instance - airborne as AI with the top t4, he has to contend with the higher infantry pool cost of AB without upgrades, the extremity of the upgrade pricing. It becomes very difficult to actually make a company that focuses on infantry and the buffs they receive from the doctrine because of this weapon cache garbage. Other builds like flamers/rrs built around smoke would also suffer.

There's so many straw man arguments being pulled about this thing, I think I will make a scarecrow of them all.

I guess the essence of what I'm saying is that the doctrines in EIRR suggest for you the player to spam whatever unit it buffs and the units that have SYNERGY with those units again, but the doctrines are different and some doctrines are more suited to balanced builds - Like Airborne - which btw is considered lame and weak by myself and most other players I've asked about it - make it unfair. A elite armor blitzkrieg player will run into problems maxing out his infantry pool while still using upgrades.  But why should he? His build wont be mindblowingly amazing, it will just be the units that he wants to get.

Whats the problem with people maxing out on their infantry upgrades and also taking tanks and support weapons? Why is this a problem? Why is it a problem if a player wanted more than 72 pool of m8s? The guy might have the mid or top t4 for m8s which make them either more viable as AT or AI.

Why are you allowed to for instance only allowed to get 7 staghounds - roughly equaling half of your fuel - but you are allowed to spent above 90% of that same fuel on cromwells?

This anti-spam shit isnt fair across the board, it isnt good and it certainly is not SMART. It's horribly complicated and brings more harm than good. Resource pricing on the base units and balancing the doctrines against each other is simpler than having both this cache and the "pools". And what is the reason for why this cannot be done?

[hans]

23/84 infantry pool left - so its definitely not the heaviest infantry company possible, which would have no such pool left over right?

the point is actually that everything is focused on a balanced coy NOW, so u have to built ur comp in a way that makes u use all resources and ur pool. If u have to many support weapons and infantry, delete some of them and spend their res and pool for vehicles.

Your even getting normal rifles with bars. Not AB lmgs, or AB bars. Just rifles that dont get any buffs from the doctrine. You think you are doing fine and the cache is allowing your company, but to me it this company looks very strained and weird. I'm sure its a fun and great company, but it's not built with company economy in mind.

u can get a lot of abs with lmgs and bars, the problem is that u will have coz of higher pool costs alot of resources left and cant buy rifles to support. So u are actually forced to have no ab lmgspam
or such coz if u do so u are handicapped. Mixed rifle and ab with whatever is possible, but then u will have at maximum 3 to 5 ab with lmgs and 4 to 6 ab bars.

If a player wants to play with for instance - airborne as AI with the top t4, he has to contend with the higher infantry pool cost of AB without upgrades, the extremity of the upgrade pricing. It becomes very difficult to actually make a company that focuses on infantry and the buffs they receive from the doctrine because of this weapon cache garbage. Other builds like flamers/rrs built around smoke would also suffer.

if u totally focus on infantry builds u suffer, true, but there u wanna use 10 ab lmgs or 12 flamers+6 rrs or sth around this. Using this is pretty no balanced use. using even half of those is allowed and supportet by the weaponcache. The extreme infantry focus is not possible anymore.

I guess the essence of what I'm saying is that the doctrines in EIRR suggest for you the player to spam whatever unit it buffs and the units that have SYNERGY with those units again, but the doctrines are different and some doctrines are more suited to balanced builds - Like Airborne - which btw is considered lame and weak by myself and most other players I've asked about it - make it unfair. A elite armor blitzkrieg player will run into problems maxing out his infantry pool while still using upgrades.  But why should he? His build wont be mindblowingly amazing, it will just be the units that he wants to get.

thats actually the point the devs wanna change, that one guy spams one or two or wahtever buffed units. U might be right, a guy with 16 m8s that are getting buffed seems to be pretty doctrine focused as armour player. BUT this is no balanced coy. With the new cache its not possible to use such a spam. u also have to rely on units that dont get so heavily buffed. So also having a big part of infantry in ur buffed armour coy is the effect.

the doctrine is the unknown objekt in the discussion but it was also before the point where u can say this doc buffs better then the other doc, thats not alone the weapon cache problem.

Why are you allowed to for instance only allowed to get 7 staghounds - roughly equaling half of your fuel - but you are allowed to spent above 90% of that same fuel on cromwells?

this only shows that the cache is not working and is still in kinda beta


so all in all, u have buffs of doctrines but u cant use them anymore to spam a unit. u have now also rely on units that wont get buffed in the doctrine.

so for ab u also have to get tanks, although they wont get buffed that much

or u have more infantry in ur armour coy

for those who normally used to spam the unit with the best buffs will actually now need to change the thinking. its not working anymore.

if its actually against the intention of the Doctrine is the other side of the coin

[smurfORnot]

for those who normally used to spam the unit with the best buffs will actually now need to change the thinking. its not working anymore.

why dont we remove buffs completely,this way each unit will have equal value 
Whats the point of doctrines,if you cant take half the shit you would wish to have themed army...

[Unkn0wn]

I think the main issue is that the Mun - MP ratio is far too high. We came from 10000 MP, 1800 Mun, 1200 F and went to 8000 MP, 2000 Mun and 1200 F. 2450 Mun even with T3 Mun advantages. I'm surprised no one has really brought this up.

[Smokaz]

Hans, if they wanted us to rely on units not buffed by doctrines they should have put in costs for the doctrine buffs. It's a cold war situation; if mysthalin is fielding 90% doctrine-buffed units I'm forced to consider my own builds and nobody wants to lose in EIRR because its so agitating.

A balanced coy = A coy drawing from all the different pools, I guess? This isn't very fair. Look at PE. Their selection of armor type of pool is very limited. (marder, ist, panther) Also there's the fact that there's no consistency in how the doctrine + pools allow you to field buffed unit, like the staghound vs cromwell situation. So while one doctrine will be suited to balanced builds, others won't.  Just like tanks funny attempt at showing how nice the cache is with a maybe 1/3 buffed company, laughable.

"if u totally focus on infantry builds u suffer, true, but there u wanna use 10 ab lmgs or 12 flamers+6 rrs or sth around this. Using this is pretty no balanced use."

Your saying that its not balanced. Can you detail this more? Why is a infantry and support weapons build so superior to a infantry and tank build? The only thing I can think of is capping - and the problem with suciding infantry to cap the map is a lot more logical to blame by pointing out that veterancy is at a all-time low in power, and at a all time high in requirements.

 Hans, my dear dutch buddy. If - - If - the units and the doctrine selections themselves aren't problematic - how is the specific selection of them able to cause any problems?

"for those who normally used to spam the unit with the best buffs will actually now need to change the thinking. its not working anymore."

Yet for a lot of the doctrines, this is still the case although unevenly.

I guess EIRR will no longer be a mod I can enjoy if I'm forced to draw from all pools. It dumbs the game down too much when risky builds are outlawed, albeit ineffectively. Punishing the individual player won't stop a team of people from producing the same feeling of spam. What I'm refering to is that while a total team spam is reduced, it's not going to matter if the players dedicate themselves to it. I mean who cares how many waves they have, if its 14 waves vs the old 17? Change tries to make gameplay more respectable, but it won't achieve this other than players themselves deciding to play "nice".

And here's the other crux issue: they are trying to force the game into playing out in a certain way but disregarding a much more quantifiable issue with how the game plays out nowadays, which is the remaining problem of how doctrine buffs work and: (drum roll)

The never ending ME/R+ mode. This is the real bad guy behind what you guys perceive to be such bad gameplay. No decent response has been given about how the Dev team perceives the effect of having only meeting engagements normal for a year and how that affects player builds, because there is none. WC shit will in the long run fail on it's own lack of merit once they think enough about it - or it will be so changed that you won't recognize it. I'm surprised to be the most vocal about it, because in my eyes the problem with the doctrines (no increased price for buffs suggesting spam of buffed units) is "established eirr science" that later arguments should build on. The fact that ME+ mode forces a different focus that attacks and defence is also a established fact to me.

[Unkn0wn]

I fully agree with you in regards to the effects of ME/R+ mind you, as do most developers I'm sure.
That being said, to say that certain 'gimmicks' wouldn't exist in a A/D scenario is of course naive. Mine spam and goliath spam for instance thrive in a defensive set-up. Thus while the gamemode is one of many factors that is contributing to the problem, it's certainly not the biggest culprit.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

I just want the random Feature back, what was more fun that playing as allies and then fucking over the axis triple 88 start on axis attack, shit was so cash.