Weapons Cache needs to go.

[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

[Spartan_Marine88]

Hey Cockhead, learn to fucking read

Wtf is with this reply, i gave a fucking EXAMPLE where the EIRRTEAM wiped the doctrines, which was was a horrible idea resulting in the lowest player pop.

your fucking key word "turn off" will result in the EXACTLY the same fucking situation that has been done before. you were given eyes to read, fucking use them

Actually no, there is a world of difference between the doctrine wipes and a temporary disabling of doctrines to ensure the core balance of things. Unfortunately you are too much of a fucking idiot to understand the basic concept of laying a proper foundation for a game.

[Demon767]

I Gave a EXAMPLE,

EXAMPLE

EXAMPLE

EXAMPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What do they both do

Ill use your term

TURN OFF THE DOCTRINES

What happened last time EIRR did that

EIRR POPULATION DROPPED


WHY CANT YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND

[tank130]

But neither can you make a general company that uses multiple types of upgrades either.

You will when the cache is balanced. You are basing your argument on the current numbers. Every Dev team member has said the numbers need to be tweaked.

[Spartan_Marine88]

Because it was not the same thing Demon.

I would argue further but you clearly are an idiot and looking for a fight. If you had any braincells or a clue what of what you were actually talking about you wouldn't have gone straight to insults.

Also, as turning off doctrines shouldn't involve wiping companies which was the problem then no problem would exist.

[Smokaz]

Another thing cache doesnt reflect, is the amount of upgrades carried on a single squad. ONE fully upgraded terror/pills/faust/vehicle mine volk/kch costs 12 cache. This is FAR too expensive. It can be crushed by a single tank in 1 second. A faust does NOT hinder allied tanks from running over them. A hellcat for a KCH squad? No problem man, I dont even have engine damage.

I buy this squad to contend with allied infantry, any supporting unit that negates the kch will have rendered my 12 cache kch unable to contend with a bunch of 5 cache bars.

Also cache prices need to differentiate for platform. KCH faust spam is less of a problem because of the overall cache and muni cost of the platform while volk faust spam perhaps need to be 1 point more.

[Demon767]

You are a fucking moron if you believe that wiping doctrines and turning off doctrines doesnt mean making eirr doctrineless.

[PonySlaystation]

You will when the cache is balanced. You are basing your argument on the current numbers. Every Dev team member has said the numbers need to be tweaked.

Yes and the way to fix the numbers is to decrease the cost for regular upgrades, so why not just remove the costs for regular upgrades and with that steamline most of problems with the WC?

The whole specialization idea makes no sense at all. It's like saying that Assault is overpowered with Panzerschrecks but instead of changing Assault we'll increase the cost for Panzerschrecks so that Assault spammers can't cover up their weaknesses in AT.

But balance doesn't work like that. Assault isn't overpowered because of Schrecks. Assault is overpowered because it can deal a lot of damage without requiring any real micromanagement or planning.

You could fix Assault by simply changing the ability or increasing the cost slightly until you reach a balanced level.

But why would you mess with Panzerschrecks if they are balanced and thus have nothing to do with this equation, wouldn't that just hurt all the players who use different upgrades?

The idea basically comes down to nerfing other upgrades so that the overpowered ones somehow get balanced?

Honestly, if you can't explain the idea better than EIRRMOD did then it should go away, because it's far from convincing, it's very contradictive. It does exactly the opposite of what it sets out to do and even if you change the numbers it's still a broken idea, it's where the WC falls apart.

Changing the cache numbers to save the WC will only reduce the severity of the problem, it won't actually fix anything.

[Unkn0wn]

I made this suggestion:
http://forums.europeinruins.com/index.php?topic=22292.0

Although truth be told, the more I think on it the more I believe a pool based approach for upgrades would be a better (and cleaner) alternative. (I.e RRs on AB increase AB pool to 8, bars increase riflemen pool to 1, etc. So upgraded units weigh a little heavier in their respective pools) I don't think much is needed to 'enable' this in the launcher.

Either that or the MP approach, which is much more comprehensive though.

[Smokaz]

Sorry unknown, but you can't do your idea with the current doctrines. It will heavily favor some doctrine paths while taking a dump on others.

Jonny Cache already does this right now (among other idiotic things), but your idea would further widen the gap between base spam w/cheap upgrades and upgraded people. Upgradespecializeguy wouldn't even be able to max out on his doctrine stuff, while basicunitbuff-hordespamguy could pick whatever upgrades he wanted depending on his defiency.

Example of this is commandos vs any of the axis inf spam T4s.

Who was it that mentioned Oak leaves spam as being such a powerful gimmick? I'm about to drop below 1-1 W/L ratio on the account I inherited from Two because it sucks so much. And he left me with eight fucking vet 3 oak leaves.

[Unkn0wn]

That's a fair problem, although it could be argued that the guy spamming upgraded elite infantry is running a far more powerful build than the guy who's just spamming BAR riflemen with stickies and nades. In addition, you can now run more unupgraded elite infantry, which still benefit from the doctrine bonuses as well. (Unlike before, you can actually build an entire army of them if you want)

Also, we could broaden the system and include non-elite infantry as well, so that even BARs will increase your riflemen pool by 1 or 2 points.


Essentially what you'd be doing is having Airbourne at the current pool, but with RRs they'd be back at the pool they were several patches ago. Those doctrines were viable then, so they'll surely be viable again now. (Although some upgrades may warrant a pool cost that is 1 or 2 higher, still no big deal)

[Smokaz]

Whats the argument behind eliteinfantryguy doing a more powerful build? One guy is concentrating his force and taking more risk for reward, the other guy plays the long game and also tries to get the most out of his "bet". You are referring to the mystical spam factor again.

What was the problem with being able to build a army the way you want if the units are well priced?

Units being priced wrong is one of the most inexcusable lackings of EIRR, because this is a launcher change which you can do very fast without a patch. All that should be needed for it is for BT to make a thread about it and get a majority vote. :/

[Unkn0wn]

What I'm suggesting is merely that we keep the elite unit pool costs at their current values, but raise those values again with upgrades, similar to the level where they were before the pool cost. This will in no way harm doctrine specialisation. It'd just be a much cleaner way to go about having unupgraded elite infantry 'weighing less' than upgraded ones. I don't see how you can possibly oppose it.

Then in a second stage we could experiment with (slightly) increasing the (normal) base unit value for some upgrades like for example mines. (So that pioneers with mines will weigh a little heavier than those without) All this does is it effectively allows us to better balance unit pool costs based on upgrades. (This is the prime reason we wanted a weapons cache in the first place)

I'm not getting into the argument of pricing being able to solve all our issues, which I know from 4 years of experience is simply not the case. We need some sort of mechanism to control SOME (not all in my opinion) powerful upgrades the same way we needed a mechanism to control powerful units. If you're arguing against this, then you should also be arguing against the unit pools.  (Since unit pricing alone should suffice in controlling the issue, no?) Currently unit pool costs are some sort of 'compromise' between unupgraded units and how powerful they get with upgrades. With differentiated pool costs based on upgrades we'd strike a MUCH better balance in regards to unit pool costs.

Also, you're more than welcome to assist the Balance team in their task. I'd like to see you draw up a list of all incorrectly priced units or upgrades. And I am willing to bet money on the fact that just making those price changes is not going to make the problem go away entirely. (Price is only one of several factors)

[Firesparks]

some of the unit and upgrades are inherently broken. That's why you change them to become less broken. It seems like the SDT have already given up on actually fixing balance and hope to force balance by implementing wc to further hard limit everything. Maybe Skaffa with his new position can actually do some good but at this point I think it's a long shot.

Given time and enough effort weapon cache can probably work but the team should be trying to directly balance the game instead. I'm sure the guy doing WC value is actually capable of helping with balance as well, or we are handing wc to someone you wouldn't trust with balance?

This whole "SDT" and "BT" deal has become an end to itself for you guys. Whether it's a team or an individual it's only a mean to bring a better game to us and making the community happy. There's nothing inherently sacred about "team" if it isn't working out. you're trying to force an option and keep preaching how much better it is.  

You can call the people on the forum the noisy minority but honestly how else do you gauge people's reaction.