Hard Caps

[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

[tank130]

The reason why hardcaps are bad for (high-level) balance is because they hide the issue, rather than solving it. If a unit is so effective for cost that it can be fielded in such great numbers to the point of impossibility to be handled - then it's a problem with the unit's price or statistics, and this problem needs to be dealt with. Implementing a hard-cap might make the numbers of the unit more manageable - but at the end of the day the unit remains over-powered for it's cost. The issue is simply "hidden" rather than being solved. It is one of the reasons greyhounds remained at a fuel cost of 30 for absolutely ages - the "soft cap" of the unit pool hid the fact that you could get a unit that is great for very little actual resources (yes, I still absolutely despise the existence of even the unit pool).

Another issue with hard-caps is coordinated companies. Assume a world where goliaths are for some stupid reason 40 munitions. Let's say you limit goliaths to 6 per company, rather than increasing the price. I see that and get Shab + rolscika together, and we still send 18 goliaths your way, while each of us retaining high-power units in the rest of our companies - because the goli is just too cheap in this world. I gave an imaginary example in this case, but I think you get the picture.

I think you make a fair argument, but how would you solve the problem with your example?

I guess we should use a hard capped unit  as an example though. Let's use the KT.

IMO the KT is relatively balanced and priced accordingly. Some may even argue it needs a buff, not a nerf. However, more then 1 KT in a company caused game imbalance, so it was hard capped.

If we priced the KT higher or nerfed it's stats, it would become UP for it's cost.

How would you suggest balancing this without a cap?

[tank130]

If you can't like a hardcap limit introduce a threshold limit instead of a hardcap limit. When you buy units in a amout higher then this value the pool value
of this unit begins to raise. You want spam? I will fuck your pool. (The problem is that each doctrine pool values needs to be adjusted and each unit needs to be associated with such values which result in a shitload of work..)

[Tymathee]

que?

[aeroblade56]

just increase price on it to 1500 fuel

[Mysthalin]

I'd do it in several steps.

First off - i'd make the KTs accuracy vs infantry 0.75, like all the other tanks have, instead of it's retarded 0.4 modifier that it really should simply not have.
Secondly, I'd remove the hard-cap making the price 1000 MP, 800 FU. That way, you could potentially field two, or have one with significant armour support, but you'd need to be on a fuel sector to make use of either.
Third, I'd increase the repair kit's price to 250 MU, but make it work like the Tank Destroyers T4 repair kit (split into 3, smaller parts), minus the movement while repair.

End result - a King tiger that can finally hold it's own against infantry, but actually has to pay noticeable munitions to be truly effective and has an actual choice between getting either a second KT or chosing to get some vehicle support.

[hans]

well, my suggestion:

why do we have the kt anyway as an unlock? i thought about this:

panther gets unlock t3 instead of the tiger in the blitz doctgrine, coz panther as a fast and mobile tank fits the blitzkrieg role much better than the tiger. Therefore panther has to get more unique and better. But therefore u also have to raise price so its just possible to field 2 at the same time. Move the tiger to the terror t3 unlock and remove the kingtiger, + tiger can be only once on the field (higher price). Tiger fits much better in the role of the kt tbh. Well and yeah tiger also has to get better and stroonger for this role. Once u did that, u have 2 more unique and doctrine role fitting units. Remove panther from PE too.

oh and if u do so, u have to make the stug better so it can replace the tank hunter role of the panther.

PS: well maybe we can exchange the pe panther with something different...

[BaleWolf]

I believe that the Allies have too many added units. With things like the Arty halftrack, and Stuh sherman, plus jumbos and mg rangers they now have specialty units to fill every single gap that they once lacked, changing not only the whole role of the army, but also giving them a significant advantage. And yes, stuhs are too cheap.

[Smokaz]

hardcaps are lame

how many ranger "buyouts" is 1 kt worth? that get fuck all buffs from its doctrine and is a t3 unlocked?

[Demon767]

I believe that the Allies have too many added units. With things like the Arty halftrack, and Stuh sherman, plus jumbos and mg rangers they now have specialty units to fill every single gap that they once lacked, changing not only the whole role of the army, but also giving them a significant advantage. And yes, stuhs are too cheap.

 

interesting..

[TheVolskinator]

I believe that the Allies have too many added units. With things like the Arty halftrack, and Stuh sherman, plus jumbos and mg rangers they now have specialty units to fill every single gap that they once lacked, changing not only the whole role of the army, but also giving them a significant advantage. And yes, stuhs are too cheap.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LYD0Fzf1LU

Axis fanboi spotted.

[smurfORnot]

well, my suggestion:

why do we have the kt anyway as an unlock? i thought about this:

panther gets unlock t3 instead of the tiger in the blitz doctgrine, coz panther as a fast and mobile tank fits the blitzkrieg role much better than the tiger. Therefore panther has to get more unique and better. But therefore u also have to raise price so its just possible to field 2 at the same time. Move the tiger to the terror t3 unlock and remove the kingtiger, + tiger can be only once on the field (higher price). Tiger fits much better in the role of the kt tbh. Well and yeah tiger also has to get better and stroonger for this role. Once u did that, u have 2 more unique and doctrine role fitting units. Remove panther from PE too.

oh and if u do so, u have to make the stug better so it can replace the tank hunter role of the panther.

PS: well maybe we can exchange the pe panther with something different...

yea,lets fight pershing/churchils/firefly's with p4's! Idea is simply genius! Unless you spent T3 unlock,why not just shoot yourself in the knee before fight even starts 

[Hicks58]

Except a PIV is more than capable of taking on either a Churchill or a Firefly.

As for the Pershing... Yeah. I'm pretty sure Pak 38's and Shrecks to back them up handle that without even bringing a Panther into the equation.

Then again, going by Fuel costs you can just go ahead and put out a pair of PIV's, which will take down a Pershing when used correctly.

But hey. Most Axis players lean on their Panthers to a degree that most forget the slightly more complicated but otherwise effective counters.

[aeroblade56]

2 blitzkrieged p4. Say GG pershing.

[tank130]

Did you guys want to discuss Hard Caps, or should I just lock the thread?

[Mysthalin]

2 blitzkrieged p4. Say GG pershing.

Only half-true. Depends entirely on how lucky you are with the persh.