Battle Escalation

[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

[31stPzGren]

I just thought of a solution for some units.

Instead of limiting units with Popcap and Manpower/Munition/Fuel, I propose that a "battle escalation" sort of system be used similar to vCoH.

You can only deploy certain units after a period of time or even use certain abilities after a certain period of time from start of battle. This could help to "even" the field against "gimmick" companies but this has to be done right and properly or it will give defenders too much advantage.

[salan]

that reminds me of something ucross had wanted to implement a year ago... 

[Tymathee]

that could be interesting. Maybe have it so certain units aren't allowed until a certain condition is met?

[Jebus]

Having a condition met would most likely favor people who play a lot meaning newer players/players who don't play as often would be at even more of a disadvantage.

[31stPzGren]

Having a condition met would most likely favor people who play a lot meaning newer players/players who don't play as often would be at even more of a disadvantage.

I'm thinking more of a very simple condition.

FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY - This means do not flame this idea, it is JUST a suggestion and not indicative of absolute balance
You have to wait for 10:00 to be up from battle start before you can call in "rare" units like; King Tiger, Tiger, Calliope, Pershing.

Before 10:00 is up, you can only have one normal tank (Pz IV, Panther, Sherman, Crocodile) on the field (at most) per player.

Before 10:00 is up, you can only have at most 2 vehicles at most.

Edit: Any other territorial conditions are too subjective. I don't think people should lose a game by the 10:00 mark... even then, only games after the 10:00 mark is recorded.

[Tymathee]

Having a condition met would most likely favor people who play a lot meaning newer players/players who don't play as often would be at even more of a disadvantage.

conditions met in game. maybe like this...

Attacking. Can't bring out heavy armor unless you lost such n such amount of maps territory.

defending. no off maps unless you lose sucn n such amount of territory

this would go by percentage.

it can possibly be expanded to support weapons, snipers, light/med/heavy vehicles, on map artillery, etc. You could have epic infantry only battles with maybe only rifles and hmgs and mortars, or other stuff. dunno if this is even codable.

[Snarks]

Seems like a pointless restriction that would do more harm than good. Alot of starts involve deploying a tank right off the bat and none of them have provened to be unbeatable. There's a risk deploying high popcap units right off the bat.

[31stPzGren]

Seems like a pointless restriction that would do more harm than good. Alot of starts involve deploying a tank right off the bat and none of them have provened to be unbeatable. There's a risk deploying high popcap units right off the bat.

You need to troll and grieve people more. Try starts like dual shermans with OBM or Air Sup, Arty etc etc etc etc

Its a suggestion only anyway, if it works it works. Otherwise, forget it.

[Snarks]

You need to troll and grieve people more. Try starts like dual shermans with OBM or Air Sup, Arty etc etc etc etc

Its a suggestion only anyway, if it works it works. Otherwise, forget it.

Dual Shermans with OBM doesn't always work. Tiger start doesn't always work. But it's certainly to see those start once in a while.

There just doesn't need to be anykind of additional escalation. Popcap seems to have that down snugly.

Also, bloody websites is driving me insane. Whenever click on anything it takes me back to the top. Had to click on modify for 5 times before it registered.

[nugnugx]

very nice Pzgren ,I hope something like this will get implemented. but maybe it should be doctrine related?  like  blitz can start with 2 tanks but not tiger ,  armor with 2 tanks but not persh calli , inf with 2 smth but not tanks  ab terr and so on...

[CrazyAxis]

I tend to agree with Snarks...like someone said in Pauli's thread on doctrines...more freedom, not less...

[31stPzGren]

Dual Shermans with OBM doesn't always work. Tiger start doesn't always work. But it's certainly to see those start once in a while.

There just doesn't need to be anykind of additional escalation. Popcap seems to have that down snugly.

By having this style of limiting, you can reduce popcap on units like M8s, Shermans, tanks etc. This makes it easier to field combined arms rather than fielding the most effective cost to popcap to units killed ratios.

I think dual calliopes with DUAL ROCKET barrage in the right hands makes a very flat map.

And as said before... you need to troll and grieve people more with gimmick companies to understand how devastating they can be :p

[Snarks]

By having this style of limiting, you can reduce popcap on units like M8s, Shermans, tanks etc. This makes it easier to field combined arms rather than fielding the most effective cost to popcap to units killed ratios.

I think dual calliopes with DUAL ROCKET barrage in the right hands makes a very flat map.

And as said before... you need to troll and grieve people more with gimmick companies to understand how devastating they can be :p

Reducing pop means you have essentially given vehicle command to all players late game. The reason why certain units cost certain pop is based on their effectiveness. If you reduce pop on tanks, then it would defeat the purpose of the unit pop to full pop ratio. Typically, early game, this unit pop to full pop ratio means it'll be difficult to effectively cap and fight. There's a reason why veteran players always bring at least two piece of AT and a reason why good teams coordinate in order to compensate for the lack of capping.

I've been with the community for almost 2 years now. I've played hundreds of games and been through more spam/gimmick companies than it would so seem.

[nugnugx]

Dual Shermans with OBM doesn't always work. Tiger start doesn't always work. But it's certainly to see those start once in a while.

There just doesn't need to be anykind of additional escalation. Popcap seems to have that down snugly.

By having this style of limiting, you can reduce popcap on units like M8s, Shermans, tanks etc. This makes it easier to field combined arms rather than fielding the most effective cost to popcap to units killed ratios.

I think dual calliopes with DUAL ROCKET barrage in the right hands makes a very flat map.

And as said before... you need to troll and grieve people more with gimmick companies to understand how devastating they can be :p

true ,3 callies is hell unleashed in 2v2

[31stPzGren]

Typically, early game, this unit pop to full pop ratio means it'll be difficult to effectively cap and fight. There's a reason why veteran players always bring at least two piece of AT and a reason why good teams coordinate in order to compensate for the lack of capping.

In the first 10 mins, there is NO NEED AT ALL to cap. I can win half my games without trying to cap at all for the first 10 mins by virtue of the fact that I can annihilate my enemy with the most effective call in.

Arguably even up to the 20 min mark you can still survive without capping. Balanced call ins will always lose out to a well thought out specialised call in where as in theory they are supposed to be more versatile and adaptable.

Up to 10 mins, you only contest for 1 Popcap total. Assuming I only hold 30% territory, I would gain like, 3 popcap to 28 popcap where as my enemy gains 32 popcap. Whats 4 popcap difference if I kill a lot more of his units?

At up to the 20 mins mark, assuming u manage to push up to around the front line, typically that puts you at 40%. Adding on to the previous ratio that gives you about 40 popcap and the enemy 44 popcap. However, because once you reach 40 popcap, you will make the enemy lose popcap, this will be perhaps more like, you having 34 or 35 popcap and the enemy having 40 popcap.

If I get to out attrition my enemy, that extra "squad" isn't going to help him at all.

[Snarks]

Gah, I've had it. Screw it, just not worth clicking on quote. If it doesn't work the first 15 times, then I might just use reply.

And if you fail to defeat your enemy with that initial call in, then they can advance further up and they'll be gaining the pop advantage.

Shock platoons aren't undefeatable. I've defeated double Sherman starts several times, and I've dealt with a King Tiger start. Yes, they will probably push you back a bit, but unless your opponent really outmanuever you, it's very possible to regain the territory lost. Second, you need to consider shock platoons cost more overall.

Let's take a scenario, a Sherman and Croc rush attempts to destroy my start. The Croc runs into a mine and my dual Pak Guns finishes it off. The Sherman tries to flank but can only decrew one gun before the secondary Pak finishes it off. Now I've lost a Pak crew and a mine versus 2 Shermans.

The basic truth is, there is no start that guarantees initial victory. It comes down to platoon composition and micro in the end. Sometimes your opponent outmanuevers you, and sometimes you outmanuever them.

[31stPzGren]

And if you fail to defeat your enemy with that initial call in, then they can advance further up and they'll be gaining the pop advantage.

Shock platoons aren't undefeatable. I've defeated double Sherman starts several times, and I've dealt with a King Tiger start. Yes, they will probably push you back a bit, but unless your opponent really outmanuever you, it's very possible to regain the territory lost. Second, you need to consider shock platoons cost more overall.

Hmm, not when you get doctrine benefits. I think a dual sherman + obm + crab flail + .50cal + repairs is quite worth it. It has commonly killed more than its cost of units.

Its true that if you get to beat off a gimmicky call in, you gain the advantage but what I meant is that, the amount of advantage they have is potentially more than the common call-in.

Let's take a scenario, a Sherman and Croc rush attempts to destroy my start. The Croc runs into a mine and my dual Pak Guns finishes it off. The Sherman tries to flank but can only decrew one gun before the secondary Pak finishes it off. Now I've lost a Pak crew and a mine versus 2 Shermans.

The basic truth is, there is no start that guarantees initial victory. It comes down to platoon composition and micro in the end. Sometimes your opponent outmanuevers you, and sometimes you outmanuever them.

What you said is not false, but only if you happen to have 2 paks or competency in using it. It takes more micro and correct placement to use a pak than to use a single sherman.

If two players went for 4 shermans... it can be quite bad.

[MannfredvonRitter]

Gimmicks have always challenged the fun of EiR when certain unscrupulous people knowingly exploit the system created for the enjoyment of all.

These people are selfish and prefer to optimize their own fun and enjoyment ahead of all others.

I could spam Shermans against two new players right? That means I get to win and winning is more fun than losing. Therefore I will continue to spam Shermans.

tl;dr you can do a lot of things that win and are gamey, but perhaps think about how the person receiving it feels about your cheap tactics and how you would feel if it were done to you.

This will solve a large degree of griefing that occurs.

I think that the best approach is to limit amounts of units on the ground for certain doctrines.

For example:
Armour - No limit on tanks
Infantry - No limit on infantry units
Airborne - Limit on units outside of Airborne

That's just my opinion on Allies, as the gimmicks are more common on the American side than the Wehrmacht side.

When I say limit, what do I mean?
As Panzergren said, 1 tank within 6-10 minutes say for all non armour.
One sniper for non infantry companies at start.

etc

This will ensure that certain companies actually represent their doctrines more accurately and that gameplay becomes more tactical and less gimmicky.

Part of the reason the gimmicks work is that axis forces generally are aligned more commonly along a set type for obvious reasons. Allied companies can be built to exploit this by over usage of a certain unit or tactic exhausting quickly a certain resource available to the axis.

For example: Sherman spam early on, uses up sources of AT equipment rapidly and specifically targets a small portion of the enemies army. This tactic is a result of exploiting the environment of Europe in Ruins and does go both ways but is more common on one side than the other. Some unscrupulous characters deliberatly stack this with Air Superiority and Sherman spam starts to quickly and easily overwhelm the anti tank capability of the enemy. If two players do this simultaneously the result is almost always a given.

Basically, the proposal as outlined, acts to stop exploits of the unique environment of EiR and forces armies to play in a more realistic and fairer manner, which is drastically more conducive to newer players and their enjoyment of the game. After all, the emphasis should be placed upon tactics and smart play, not on gimmicks and cheap tactics.

[Tymathee]

my sugggestion isn't only limited to tanks. I think it could be fun to have a total infantry battle no tanks maybe. Anyone up for that?

[MannfredvonRitter]

my sugggestion isn't only limited to tanks. I think it could be fun to have a total infantry battle no tanks maybe. Anyone up for that?

I would be, tried to get one going the last few times and no one was up for it.