Weapons Cache Rework Proposal #2

[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

[Unkn0wn]

The problem is that when a unit or upgrade was performing over it's price it was never properly balanced. It was increased in cost by way too much. The weapon cache is kind of like a cheap fix to all these problems. But they could be fixed by just setting correct prices.

I can attest to the fact that this is simply untrue, I've witnessed the pricing of some units and abilities since 2007 and sometimes pricing alone simply can not solve a given issue.This is because the total amount of resources is much greater than the individual unit or upgrade price, and is technically not designed around a player getting a very limited number of low cost units or upgrades.

If we accept the premiss that unit pricing alone doesn't stop spam, why can't the same be said for upgrade pricing? I don't see anyone bitching about us having a unit pool system, which is essentially the same thing as this system but for units. We're applying the same philosophy to upgrades that has been in place for units for over a year now. (And well before in albeit different forms)

Anyway, let's stick to input on the idea itself, rather than on the fundamental principles behind it. (Since these are principles that the development team has committed to, and generally receive a lot of support from most of the playerbase)

[TheIcelandicManiac]

I stopped playing since cache was implemented and since smokaz put me on 'The list' ...

You should be happy to be on "the list", now you dont have to worry about his trolololol tactics ( that work quite well but fuck over his team mates from time to time.

[VanOwen]

Not being a developer on this project and not knowing the real reasons of why the mod was implemented in this way is limiting my ability to say anything useful, besides the usual brain issues...

However, it seems that the general goal is to 'encourage' users to make mixed builds while 'discouraging' spam builds.  I suppose the goal was the use both the carrot and the stick to encourage this but perhaps that just isn't working as intended so far.

Anyhow, any steps that makes a reasonable push to do that seems like a fine idea.  I am curious are there coding limitations to simply making some or all units more expensive as you buy more of them?  I.e., buying 1 M10 might cost 100 widgets but, the next would be higher cost and the following even higher.  So like, 100 for the first, 150 for the second, 200 for the 3rd, etc... 

I understand the use of the various pools (manpower, fuel, and munitions) to help spread out what people can spend their 'cash' on.  I am just curious if a sliding cost scale could be done, and might do the job better?

[PartyJaeger]

my nr.1 request would be:

make it simple, stupid (ppl dont want to solve 3 dimensional puzzle of pools to build coy, they want play!

it directly mirrors how new players are acquired. not watching tutor/too complicated registering (why not single sign on?) 10-20 percent of new lost, OK somebody go through this but then time to figure out what to do build coy just to be stomped anyway - that would be imho final nail cofin

[Poppi]

make it simple, stupid (ppl dont want to solve 3 dimensional puzzle of pools to build coy, they want play!

my problem isnt noobs learning to build (since it gives them set parameters) but rather developers achieving balance and progress. One more thing to add to their plate and one more cost to balance.

I do admit i do see less spams. Thank god.
But then again with all the new players i am not forced to play with asshole players who do spam.

[Unkn0wn]

The idea behind this is that it would be simpler, since it builds on something that is already in place.

As for new players having trouble building companies, pre-made template companies they can load at the click of a button is something that is very high on our to do list, since it would go a long way in allowing new players to grasp the basic mechanics before having to commit to building their own company.

[Groundfire]

Anyhow, any steps that makes a reasonable push to do that seems like a fine idea.  I am curious are there coding limitations to simply making some or all units more expensive as you buy more of them?  I.e., buying 1 M10 might cost 100 widgets but, the next would be higher cost and the following even higher.  So like, 100 for the first, 150 for the second, 200 for the 3rd, etc... 

I understand the use of the various pools (manpower, fuel, and munitions) to help spread out what people can spend their 'cash' on.  I am just curious if a sliding cost scale could be done, and might do the job better?

I have talked to Eirrmod extensively about incremental price increases and the math that it takes to put into code for the launcher is simply too time consuming and complex.

This is actually the obvious choice to fix this issue but it is simply too hard to do atm.

[NightRain]

Why, the hell do we want to LIMIT things in a mod that is meant to offer UNLIMITED choices. It just breaks the gameplay and originality of EIRR to leave muniton to the pool that you can't use because- because you can't buy anything 'cause of some pool. The same thing with availability system, it is understandable on certain occasions but not on everything.

I'm pretty sure quite a lot of people think this way. The only thing that caused this 'weapon limitation' was this thing called 'Assault Grenades' and 'BAR spam'. Well that's how I see it.

[smurfORnot]

Everyone should take a cup of L2P!

[Tymathee]

Why, the hell do we want to LIMIT things in a mod that is meant to offer UNLIMITED choices. It just breaks the gameplay and originality of EIRR to leave muniton to the pool that you can't use because- because you can't buy anything 'cause of some pool. The same thing with availability system, it is understandable on certain occasions but not on everything.

I'm pretty sure quite a lot of people think this way. The only thing that caused this 'weapon limitation' was this thing called 'Assault Grenades' and 'BAR spam'. Well that's how I see it.

and fausts, and grease guns and mines, and goliaths and other upgrades that get spammed. it doesn't just affect inf upgrades u know...but support teams, tank & vehicle upgrades, etc

[Spartan_Marine88]

and fausts, and grease guns and mines, and goliaths and other upgrades that get spammed. it doesn't just affect inf upgrades u know...but support teams, tank & vehicle upgrades, etc

fausts, grease guns, goliaths and mines weren't a problem and will never be a problem.

Im sorry you didn't bring a cheap as shit minesweeper, so i should suffer because i brought mines? Oh your running around not paying attention and you lost a squad to a goliath, then you continue to run around senselessly and lose four more squads to goliaths, the goliath user should pay? why because you didn't back things up?

Its like people whining about contentrated minefield spam when a single mortar would destroy an entire minefield, yet people complain because they refuse to bring a single mortar.

[NightRain]

Each and everything of those are limited one way or another. IF someone runs 100 mine company he probably doesn't have much other stuff in his company.

If someone spams goliaths he also invested on pios TO GET them.

It doesn't really even matter. If he spams a lot of one thing he loses something on another department. If I spam Grease guns I dont have that many ATGs for example. If they are TOO MUCH of a problem INCREASE the cost. You have costs you can tinker with why add something as dumb as some form of super limiter.

[Firesparks]

I can attest to the fact that this is simply untrue, I've witnessed the pricing of some units and abilities since 2007 and sometimes pricing alone simply can not solve a given issue.This is because the total amount of resources is much greater than the individual unit or upgrade price, and is technically not designed around a player getting a very limited number of low cost units or upgrades.

maybe it's because the units or upgrade itself are broken. Why do you guys have a distinct reluctance to fix broken units, upgrade, and abilities. There are a things broken in the game, stuff that could be fix directly instead of trying to "fix" everything by fixing a hard limit on everything.

Take Assault grenade for example. For months you guys know there are a number of thing wrong with assault grenades,like the insane defensive bonus or the practically unlimited grenade.  Instead you chose to keep the ability broken as it is and decide to break the game by putting in this "wc". If you guys don't fix the broken stuff no matter of hammering will fix the game.

[Unkn0wn]

Each and everything of those are limited one way or another. IF someone runs 100 mine company he probably doesn't have much other stuff in his company.

It's more to do with the fact that if someone brings goliath & mine spam on A/D, you'll be fucked. The game will literally be over by the time you've attritioned out his mines. Some gimmicks do exactly that, fuck you over before you get a chance to take advantage of whatever weakness that accompanies the gimmick. The only true counter is usually to build a counter-gimmick. But once we're down that alley, gameplay just deteriorates into the kind of experience that no one really enjoys, at all.

The only people who enjoy gimmicks are the ones not facing them.

maybe it's because the units or upgrade itself are broken.

This is not always the case, mines for example are fine at their current price but problematic when spammed. We even gave pioneers just 1 mine for 2 pop, because at 2 mines at 2 pop they were very prone to being spammed. (If we implement a system like this, we could actually technically increase pio mines to two again) Another good example of this is the flamethrower spam strategy that came to thrive in 1vs1 vCOH. When someone built an entire strategy around them, they proved to be unbeatable, and as a result Relic had to intervene and nerf the pio vet. Pricing doesn't solve spam, and sometimes it's not desirable to solve an issue by changing stats. The panzerfaust stopgap change, from 2 to 3 uses at 50 mun for example was hardly a good solution.

[PonySlaystation]

If we accept the premiss that unit pricing alone doesn't stop spam, why can't the same be said for upgrade pricing? I don't see anyone bitching about us having a unit pool system, which is essentially the same thing as this system but for units. We're applying the same philosophy to upgrades that has been in place for units for over a year now. (And well before in albeit different forms)

Because pool value costs already include upgrades. Why else would engineers have such a high pool value? are they any good without any upgrades?

Anyway, let's stick to input on the idea itself, rather than on the fundamental principles behind it. (Since these are principles that the development team has committed to, and generally receive a lot of support from most of the playerbase)

Receive a lot of support from most of the playerbase? Where have you been for the last few weeks? There are like 10 threads about people wanting WC removed because it's so inherently broken.

I can attest to the fact that this is simply untrue, I've witnessed the pricing of some units and abilities since 2007 and sometimes pricing alone simply can not solve a given issue.This is because the total amount of resources is much greater than the individual unit or upgrade price, and is technically not designed around a player getting a very limited number of low cost units or upgrades.

No, proper price balancing has never been done. Schrecks were too expensive so they decreased the price by too much. Fausts were too cheap so they increased the price by too much. Basically EVERY upgrade that you want the WC to include has gone through the same treatment.

The idea behind this is that it would be simpler, since it builds on something that is already in place.

It's not simpler. If you have an incremental pool cost for upgrades then that means you're gonna have to rework pool values for all the doctrines and units. Whereas simply fixing the price for these few affected units would be MUCH simpler.

[Unkn0wn]

Because pool value costs already include upgrades. Why else would engineers have such a high pool value? are they any good without any upgrades?

Which is a flaw in the system, since it punishes people that are getting just unupgraded engineers (or riflemen, or whatever). It's actually HURTING company variety. Giving upgrades a seperate pool cost allows us to finetune pool costs much better.

Receive a lot of support from most of the playerbase? Where have you been for the last few weeks? There are like 10 threads about people wanting WC removed because it's so inherently broken.

The WC is inherently broken but not because of the underlying principles. It's broken because it essentially achieves the exact same thing as a munitions increase. (Due to 100% overlap with munitions) This system would not.

No, proper price balancing has never been done. Schrecks were too expensive so they decreased the price by too much. Fausts were too cheap so they increased the price by too much. Basically EVERY upgrade that you want the WC to include has gone through the same treatment.

Yea because a price increase by 5 or 10 was too much? You clearly don't know much about the history of pricing, so I will not go into further discussion with you on this subject. I'll repeat it again, if you don't complain about the unit pool, then there's absolutely no justification for you to be upset about the unit pool being 'fixed' to better weigh upgrades. (Rather than the purchase of upgrades being automatically accounted for in the base unit price)

Anyway, this thread is about a specific proposal, if you're not going to discuss that then you should make a seperate thread about how you oppose our unit availability system and our attempts to have it also account for upgrades.

[Spartan_Marine88]

Receive a lot of support from most of the playerbase? Where have you been for the last few weeks? There are like 10 threads about people wanting WC removed because it's so inherently broken.

This unfortunately just gets ignored. It like how tank keeps referencing the pool system and going on about how we were all against it in the beginning and then came to accept it. Except the truth is more, we were against it, it got shoved down our throats with talks of further balance, eventually we shut up because we weren't being listened to.

[aeroblade56]

I have talked to Eirrmod extensively about incremental price increases and the math that it takes to put into code for the launcher is simply too time consuming and complex.

This is actually the obvious choice to fix this issue but it is simply too hard to do atm.

might as well be a permanent fix the way EIRR updates.

[PonySlaystation]

Which is a flaw in the system, since it punishes people that are getting just unupgraded engineers (or riflemen, or whatever). It's actually HURTING company variety. Giving upgrades a seperate pool cost allows us to finetune pool costs much better.

Because there is no point in getting unupgraded units. It's like running an army of minesweeper engineers, it's not exactly fun. Talk about gimmick.

The WC is inherently broken but not because of the underlying principles. It's broken because it essentially achieves the exact same thing as a munitions increase. (Due to 100% overlap with munitions) This system would not.

How is that in any way equal to a munition increase? an increase in munitions would mean more upgrades whereas WC limits ALL upgrades.

Basically it's broken because it includes every upgrade. So players who just want to run a few LMGs can't do that because LMGs are like 7 WC cost and even if the cost was to be decreased LMGs was never a problem in the first place.

Yea because a price increase by 5 or 10 was too much?

Aside from the flamethrower 5 or 10 is not even close to the numbers they change when trying to "balance" these units.

[Firesparks]

This unfortunately just gets ignored. It like how tank keeps referencing the pool system and going on about how we were all against it in the beginning and then came to accept it. Except the truth is more, we were against it, it got shoved down our throats with talks of further balance, eventually we shut up because we weren't being listened to.

the dev just seems to live in their isolated world and any opinion that get brought up is turned down as vocal minority.