missing some rilfes/SMG

[delems]

Allies seem to have 3 more rifles and SMGs in every INF flag?
 

Might we add 3 italy rifles and SMGs to even things up?
 

Edited August 4, 2018 by delems

[goreblimey]

Maybe we can add an lmg that's as effective as the mg34 to the allied list as well

[delems]

You really want to go there???

Bombers, fighters, ATGs, armored cars, armor, grease gun, garand .......  So we going to get new gear too?
 

Simple fact is axis is missing 12 units per division, key units, rifle and SMG.

 

[jwilly]

In the old-CRS days, it was explained many times to us that game numbers were based on overall-side statistical effectiveness, i.e. K/D. If a side's weapons were overall statistically less effective, they'd get more of one or more weapons to achieve overall statistical balance. Then differences in outcomes would be due to player choices and gameplay, not to how effective the weapons themselves were.

That approach made total sense to many of us. A few either never understood, or wanted their side to have numerical equality and more effective weapons. There were continued efforts to get those folks to understand, but that didn't change the correct game design.

My opinion is that new-CRS should continue to use that statistical-effectiveness-based approach, whether every player likes it or not. It's objectively correct, and makes the game dependent on player choices and gameplay only.

[Hardlead]

So the side that has more unskilled players should get more equipment?..

To me that is wrong.

[Chaoswzkd]

11 hours ago, Hardlead said:

So the side that has more unskilled players should get more equipment?..

To me that is wrong.

Not sure where you're going with that assessment. If by "unskilled" you mean "newbies", both sides have new blood, and which objectively has more is only an answer CRS can provide after some database polling.

If you mean to be genuinely insulting, please cut it out.

 

@jwilly Well said.

 

@delems My understanding is that any supply balances from here on out are intentional. As jwilly said, equipment is not equivalent, and the only acceptable method of balancing available to CRS is tweaking the supply lists since buffing/nerfing equipment from their historical values is detestable.

And yes, let me interrupt anyone before they say it: there is a lot of equipment in the game currently that is buffed/nerfed away from their historical values. Everyone knows this, and New CRS is fixing it as they are able. The end goal is to fix all of that.

There will be no new equipment introduced that will be buffed/nerfed from historical values unless CRS doesn't have a system in place to effectively deal with it, in which case the most appropriate historical record will be used: such as German concussion grenades in this game universally getting a frag sleeve that wasn't made until later in the war. That was to make grenades between each of the sides have rough parity, because the game at this point can't really handle swapping out bits of equipment. It could theoretically be done, but it would mean making duplicates of each of the infantry classes that have grenades, and switch which classes are used after a certain tier. That would destroy stats, among other things, so that's the concession until it can be fixed properly via Development resources.

 

Anyway, I personally disagree with any amount of total infantry imbalance, because infantry are used to cap. IMO, I'd like Axis to get only base rifles to make up the imbalance, and let the Allies trade in some of their rifles for SMGs or something so the total weapon effectiveness for both sides is roughly equal. Just my opinion.

Unless you spot something especially egregious, like 10 more medium tanks per flag (not per division), the difference is likely intentional to establish parity between total weapon effectiveness.

[ZEBBEEE]

You really made me spent 5 minutes reading this? For 3 rifles?

[delems]

Its actually 6 rifles and 6 SMGs per brit division and 6 rifles and 10 SMGs per french division.

Ya, not a lot, but it does matter now with supply and RDP.

I know sides aren't the same, the simple fact is german INF flags have less total infantry in them.

And everyone knows infantry is the key to battle.

 

Tell ya what, since it doesn't matter much; how about allies go with 3 less rifles and 3 less SMGs per INF flag....?
 

[delems]

Well, with axis RDP nearly 100% damaged (kudos lousy allied bombers), you'd think at least we could have an even number of rifles and SMGs in each INF flag?
 

[imded]

On ‎8‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 11:07 AM, delems said:

You really want to go there???

Bombers, fighters, ATGs, armored cars, armor, grease gun, garand .......  So we going to get new gear too?
 

Simple fact is axis is missing 12 units per division, key units, rifle and SMG.

 

The equipment is not equal. What does the allies have that matches the tiger? The axis LMG is laser guided , whereas all the auto weapons allies have cant hit anything past 100 meters,  And we cant compete with the Italian weapons. So, 6 lousy rifles, omg. Get a life. The game from the beginning has been axis biased. That has not changed.

 

[B2K]

[delems]

*** The equipment is not equal. What does the allies have that matches the tiger?

Funny, I haven't seen 1 tiger so far this map - but i've seen 100s of extra allied rifles and SMGs - not to mention DACs and Vikys now.

And don't even go down the gear not equal line, so axis going to have more ATGs, light AA, panzers, armored cars, fighters and bombers ????????

 

Least we can do is even up the infantry numbers.

(hmmm, fantasy grease gun with KD over 1.0 every map since inception....)

(Hmmm, best bolt in game with fastest cycle brit rifle)
(db7 doing 20 factory damage when it should only be 13.....)

 

Tell me again why you need more rifle and SMGs?
 

Edited August 16, 2018 by delems

[pbveteran]

Infantry combat is the most balance since you don't have armor thickness, slopped, angling, bad crew positions and different caliber of guns like you do with tanks.

A rifle shot to torso or head and from SMG or pistol will result in death [period]

So there is logic reason to nerf and being bias.. axis has always had better players in general especially more lone wolf or good communicators while allies had more organized and bigger sized squads.

If infantry combat used a health bar and your guns had a numeric damage value I could understand but in WW2ol.

[delems]

How come this still hasn't been fixed?
Allies get more rifles and SMGs in every infantry flag?

Not only that, now the French HQ and French ARM flag is loaded with supply having infantry supply numbers?

 

[vasduten1]

Player One:

"Hey, you have more infantry to spend per flag than I do. What gives?"

 

Player Two:

"Your grenadier is better and your LMG can be used more effectively FROM HIP-FIRING. We should get more units."

 

Player One:

"That seems subjective... The numbers are off and in a game of alleged 'attrition', it's unfair."

 

Player Two (now even MOAR triggered,):

"Tiger!!! Grenadier... LMG RAMBO!!! Six Yearrzzzzor!!!! The moon landing was a hoax!!!"

Player One:

"Well that's it; I'm out. Have fun playing against an empty side..."

 

 

[flong139]

Back to this in my opinion the grease gun should come in at a later tier and the FG42 should only be in para brigs and LW infantry.

[pbveteran]

On 8/19/2018 at 0:17 AM, pbveteran said:

Infantry combat is the most balance since you don't have armor thickness, slopped, angling, bad crew positions and different caliber of guns like you do with tanks.

A rifle shot to torso or head and from SMG or pistol will result in death [period]

So there is no logic reason to nerf and being bias.. axis has always had better players in general especially more lone wolf or good communicators while allies had more organized and bigger sized squads.

If infantry combat used a health bar and your guns had a numeric damage value I could understand but we don't have that in WW2ol.

 

[hateract]

This issue has just this morning come to my attention. For sake of time saving, I will copy my response to the thread I posted to in Axis forums. 

 

and others in this thread. I am sorry to see this situation with the supply imbalance. This has occurred for many campaigns to the Allies, thus far our solution has been and should be. To remember the TOE is ever changing to adjust for population and with other linked attributes to the campaign. Ensure you have a player or player able to conduct a proper audit of TOE for both sides for every tier as sometimes the supply will change upon tier change. Communicate openly with CRS and cooperate and they will see to fixing it as quickly as possible. 

This has been our experience with the issue so far, best of luck and lets hope the issue is resolved soon. 

 

 

 

P.S. I have contacted our CRS liaison via slack so it can be bumped higher and highly encourage your OKW to do the same. 

[Scking]

You need to @OHM or @XOOM for TOE issues.. 

[delems]

And allied navy flags still have 25 LMGs vrs 20 LMGs for axis navy.

Again, don't give me this not equal stuff - if that the case, how come we don't get twice as many ATGs, armored cars, panzers, bombers and fighters?

And we should have 33% more SMGs to make up for the over 1.0 KD every map the grease gun does to the 0.70 or so the mp34 does.

Why is ok for allied gear to get 'balanced' out, but not axis?
 

Infantry is the bread and butter of combat, numbers need to be equal.

I might go so far to say, sure give a few more LMGs to allied flag, but we should at least get an equal number of rifles so total infantry numbers are the same.

And actually, historically, axis did have more LMGS, again, deal with it; just like we have to deal with the mattie for the last 15 years.

(5 panzers and over 200 shots to mattie last night in Aarschot, mattie was still there.....)

 

You don't get to quote numbers when it is to your advantage and then disregard them when it comes to axis numbers.

 

[stankyus]

Sheesh.. I could possibly see a few more allied LMGs.. but I don't hang my hat on that as an arguement but at the very least the rest should have equal numbers.