Further Adjust Tier3+ Equipment Numbers Next Campaign

[dfire]

Title says it all. The new supply adjustments have worked good for tier0-tier2. You can usually attrit an enemy town in a reasonable amount of time before both sides get bored and the battle stalls out. You feel like you're making a meaningful impact when you kill multiple ets or ei smgs. You have to fight harder and think smarter, forcing you to be more engaged in the game. Player numbers also seem to be higher in those times.

Tier 3 and beyond supply numbers are still WAY too high though. It needs AT LEAST another 10% reduction across the board (I'd argue 20%, personally). When it takes on average probably 6 hours to attrit just a 1ab garrison, that's just beyond excessive, nevermind the 12 brigade flags on the map, 2ab garrisons, and backline fms's. That's one of the strongest reasons the map doesn't move much in mid-high pop tier3+, assuming sides are somewhat balanced.

Also, when you get to the end of the map/near enemy factories, the fronts get largely condensed/smaller, so you have the 12 brigade flags to rotate in an out and stack together, giving an ungodly/virtually unlimited amount of supply, which again creates stalls in the map and people losing interest because they don't think they're having an effect on the battlefield. 

IMO, starting tier4, 1 of the 3 divisions on each side should be removed from the map so it doesn't serve to keep prolonging the map. 

This much supply also negates the effects of RDP bombing. Allies had our RDP at least 70% slower for weeks on end, but we never seemed to have any issues. In the rare event we did, we were always able to move in supply with so many flags available at any given time, or were able make backline fms's with full giant spawnlists. This goes both ways; same thing whether I play axis or allied. 

If tier3 total supply numbers could be worked out to be roughly equal to the overall supply numbers in tier2, I think it would benefit the game a lot and make campaigns more reasonably finishable.

Currently, the game relies on highly lopsided population imbalance to finish off the ends of the maps. I believe this oversupply issue has a ripple effect and partially contributes to lopsided pop inbalance over time. 

Make [tier3+] Supply Numbers Reasonable Again!

 

Edited April 28, 2022 by dfire

[kazee]

personally i like more stuff to kill, my motto is...

less capping & more camping 

but on a serious note, i agree with ya

 

 

[kareca]

Maybe a pre fight in Area 51
to see who will get a tank or an lmg...

 

lol

 

[TMAN]

@dfireIt is something we will be looking at.  There is a 40-50% increase in supply between Tier 0 and Tier 4 as more and newer equipment becomes available.  

 

[delems]

*** Allies had our RDP at least 70% slower for weeks on end, but we never seemed to have any issues.

Because they changed how RDP works.

[dfire]

6 hours ago, delems said:

*** Allies had our RDP at least 70% slower for weeks on end, but we never seemed to have any issues.

Because they changed how RDP works.

Been like that in most previous maps too.

 

Though I'd argue allies have an advantage when it gets to their factories when they change the towns to British. It makes it so when you're attacking that town or probing it for days on end, the resupply isn't affected by the factory captures and factory bombing of those towns because they're supplied via the UK factories. It's an obvious loophole, but it seems to be okay with game management since allies do it every map just about. And the side changing resupply penalty is meaningless too because they change them weeks in advance when the Frontline is still 15+ towns away or more. I was against it even when I was playing allied and losing the map. But that's a whole different discussion in and of itself. This was previously addressed and allied HC at the time admitted it shouldn't be done and would tell other HC to not do that, but unfortunately it didn't last.

It's like if hypothetically axis had a full Italian army kit and separate Italian factories, then once allies started pushing the north (east of Eindhoven for example) Axis changed Dusseldorf/Essen/Koln to Italian so if/when the action the action reached there, the constant capture and damaging to the factories didn't mean anything to the town's supply, since they're supplied by offsite Italian factories. It's smart in theory, but not sportsmanlike.

Before I get accused of being biased with the previous 2 paragraphs, here's an example I thought of when Axis HC were doing something many might consider unsportsmanlike. Remember like a dozen or so maps ago (plus/minus a few maybe), went Axis went on that brief stint where they'd wait for allies capture the city cp, or other non-spawnable cp- in a perfectly defended or otherwise well stocked town - and immediately enter a .overrun and do a .fallback for an easy ao kick? Same type of concept in that it's not illegal, but it's a d1ck move and shouldn't be done as to maintain sportsmanship.

/endrant

 

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by dfire

[vongters]

I do not agree indeed, I would like to see more divisions on the map. But in addition to reducing the spawnlist by a good 30/40%, I would change it in this way as well;

1) Inf flags: focus on infantry and no tanks such as ffs, s76, tiger and so on. Only light tanks and some medium ones. Or maybe only light and CS tanks.
2) Armored flags: focus on tanks and therefore less inf available. Possibility to move this flag even for 2 towns at a time. This is to give greater autonomy and depth of action.
3) Garrison: totally remove the medium and heavy tanks and also medium / heavy atg and aa (maybe except big town like Brux, Antwerp and so on). Drastically reduce the number of infs, I'd say 50% less than an inf flag. After each tier, the garrison will receive some good equipments.

My idea would be to better reproduce the conditions of war. There has never been a garrison with tigers etc. It is necessary to favor the movement of the flags on the map and return to see the players resupply from the backline. Do you want the Tiger or FFs in that battlefield? You can get it but only from the armored flags. Otherwise, use other less performing vehicles.

Edited April 29, 2022 by vongters

[jester]

This is one of those things that's a never ending battle. Since almost everything is done manually with this game, it will never be 100%. Ideally supply would be a sliding scale tied to population at least hourly if not more frequently, automatically adjusted by the server.

[TEX64]

Good conversations here . . I like it!!

[dfire]

6 hours ago, vongters said:

I do not agree indeed, I would like to see more divisions on the map. But in addition to reducing the spawnlist by a good 30/40%, I would change it in this way as well;

1) Inf flags: focus on infantry and no tanks such as ffs, s76, tiger and so on. Only light tanks and some medium ones. Or maybe only light and CS tanks.
2) Armored flags: focus on tanks and therefore less inf available. Possibility to move this flag even for 2 towns at a time. This is to give greater autonomy and depth of action.
3) Garrison: totally remove the medium and heavy tanks and also medium / heavy atg and aa (maybe except big town like Brux, Antwerp and so on). Drastically reduce the number of infs, I'd say 50% less than an inf flag. After each tier, the garrison will receive some good equipments.

My idea would be to better reproduce the conditions of war. There has never been a garrison with tigers etc. It is necessary to favor the movement of the flags on the map and return to see the players resupply from the backline. Do you want the Tiger or FFs in that battlefield? You can get it but only from the armored flags. Otherwise, use other less performing vehicles.

That would be cool, but it's playing with fire imo. Last time they tried historically geared spawnlists it turned into a complete and utter [censored] show. Forums were flooded by unhappy players in both sides constantly posting about why their side or the other side has or doesn't have this or that in whichever tier, plus the numbers. And in infantry flags people were so upset that they couldnt spawn tanks and threatened unsub. It got so bad that it had to go back to what it is now. Some people say they don't want red vs blue, but then they complain when a historical approach is taken. There has to be some elements of both.

None of the equipment is red vs blue anyways imo, sure both sides have smgs and rifles, but both are better or worse at certain distances, rate of fire, accuracy, etc. Same with tanks and everything else, to an extent. 

Back to the topic though, tier 0-4 has a 40-50 percent supply increase, so I think reducing tier 3 and 4 by 20-30% would be ideal so there's still a little extra to play with, but not excessive. This doesn't necessarily mean all units would be scaled back that percentage. Reduce the high end toys just a little and focus more on phasing out more of the early tier stuff, or just stuff that there's just plain way too much of.

[vongters]

I did not know that the CRS had tried to do it, maybe it was one of those periods that I did not play ... But I would try again to put limitations, to give more operational autonomy to the armored divisions and I certainly support your idea to regarding the gradual reduction of the spawnlist. There is too much and easily everything available. If you want to have the top of the armaments it is right that you sacrifice yourself a little with resuplly from the backline or from other towns.

I would also be in favor of a variable rank depending on the player's performance. This would reward those players who play better like if will be the real life and encourage others to do the same in order to have or continue to have the best possible equipment.

[delems]

The 'Hardest Campaign' ever, had the right idea imo.
just the wrong implementation.

Agree with other players who have said:

Garrisons all infantry, light ags and company (or 2) of basic tanks.

So, maybe 22(44) IIIF, 22(44) cru XX, and 22(44) French XX?

Late tier maybe up the tanks a bit,  22 IIIH?  or 22 IIIL?  and very matching allied tanks. (maybe even IVG if makes sense)

Might be tricky with USA, but again, find the most even set of tanks from all 4 nations and give a company or 2.

Of course some armored cars and other gear for free players / DLC as needed.

Idea being, garrison on garrison should be very even fight, infantry and armor wise.

 

Then, infantry flags mostly infantry, CS - but absolutely give a platoon or maybe 1 company of better tanks.

Never top gear of course.

And of course, that platoon or company of tanks has to be very evenly matched between all 4 nations.

 

Finally, armored flags should always have the top tier gear.  And this is where differentiation could happen more.

 

Idea is most fights will have very even gear matched; unless an ARM flag is involved.

As for size, if garrison is 1; inf flag should be like 1.5 maybe and arm flag 1 or 0.75

 

Hope this all makes sense, still need to try and put in a variation of tanks for variety.

But main battles be against each other with mostly even gear.

Edited April 29, 2022 by delems

[david060]

Did something change in recent months? Because last time I checked the RDP war is most efficiently played by a handful of players multiboxing bombers and making scattered one-way bombing runs at 02:00 a.m.

 

People talking about it like it's some kind of core gameplay. The solution to a map stalemate is to increase the "burn rate" of units, which means easier and more frequent battles.

[choad]

On 4/29/2022 at 11:43 AM, dfire said:

Last time they tried historically geared spawnlists it turned into a complete and utter [censored] show. Forums were flooded by unhappy players in both sides constantly posting about why their side or the other side has or doesn't have this or that in whichever tier, plus the numbers. And in infantry flags people were so upset that they couldnt spawn tanks and threatened unsub. It got so bad that it had to go back to what it is now. 

Yes I remember this - it was a [censored] show. I think that was called by CRS the "hardest campaign ever" if I recall correctly. Playing mostly infantry, I hated it because SMG's in early tiers were at a premium and it felt like bringing a knife to a gun fight. Not a huge fan of that approach. I acknowledge this is a game and not a WWII reenactment. I guess others have differing opinions.

[choad]

On 4/29/2022 at 5:50 PM, delems said:

The 'Hardest Campaign' ever, had the right idea imo.
just the wrong implementation.

Agree with other players who have said:

Garrisons all infantry, light ags and company (or 2) of basic tanks.

So, maybe 22(44) IIIF, 22(44) cru XX, and 22(44) French XX?

Late tier maybe up the tanks a bit,  22 IIIH?  or 22 IIIL?  and very matching allied tanks. (maybe even IVG if makes sense)

Might be tricky with USA, but again, find the most even set of tanks from all 4 nations and give a company or 2.

Of course some armored cars and other gear for free players / DLC as needed.

Idea being, garrison on garrison should be very even fight, infantry and armor wise.

 

Then, infantry flags mostly infantry, CS - but absolutely give a platoon or maybe 1 company of better tanks.

Never top gear of course.

And of course, that platoon or company of tanks has to be very evenly matched between all 4 nations.

 

Finally, armored flags should always have the top tier gear.  And this is where differentiation could happen more.

 

Idea is most fights will have very even gear matched; unless an ARM flag is involved.

As for size, if garrison is 1; inf flag should be like 1.5 maybe and arm flag 1 or 0.75

 

Hope this all makes sense, still need to try and put in a variation of tanks for variety.

But main battles be against each other with mostly even gear.

I generally do agree in the concept of having garrison supply be a little lighter - and not the top end kit. Have the "hammer" stuff in the moveable flags. I'm not exactly sure how it would play out and how the players would receive it though. Would be a lot more movement on the map (a.k.a getting your arses rolled). 1 garrison vs. another 1 garrison plus a armored flag would be a good wipeout at even population. Can only imagine at moderate overpop. Anyways - I think it would be interesting to try. Definately would make the HC game more interesting and there are quite a few who may come back for just that alone.

[melagius2]

On 4/30/2022 at 8:50 AM, delems said:

The 'Hardest Campaign' ever, had the right idea imo.
just the wrong implementation.

Agree with other players who have said:

Garrisons all infantry, light ags and company (or 2) of basic tanks.

So, maybe 22(44) IIIF, 22(44) cru XX, and 22(44) French XX?

Late tier maybe up the tanks a bit,  22 IIIH?  or 22 IIIL?  and very matching allied tanks. (maybe even IVG if makes sense)

Might be tricky with USA, but again, find the most even set of tanks from all 4 nations and give a company or 2.

Of course some armored cars and other gear for free players / DLC as needed.

Idea being, garrison on garrison should be very even fight, infantry and armor wise.

 

Then, infantry flags mostly infantry, CS - but absolutely give a platoon or maybe 1 company of better tanks.

Never top gear of course.

And of course, that platoon or company of tanks has to be very evenly matched between all 4 nations.

 

Finally, armored flags should always have the top tier gear.  And this is where differentiation could happen more.

 

Idea is most fights will have very even gear matched; unless an ARM flag is involved.

As for size, if garrison is 1; inf flag should be like 1.5 maybe and arm flag 1 or 0.75

 

Hope this all makes sense, still need to try and put in a variation of tanks for variety.

But main battles be against each other with mostly even gear.

Right on delems, would make the map strategy and tactics much more interesting. Have garrisons be really light, and double the amount of divisions on the map so we can make engaging and realistic manoeuvres.

[goreblimey]

you do that , and your low pop rolls will concentrate on bouncing flags even more , then when you log in to no supply the howls will be LOUD. 

[foe2]

6 hours ago, goreblimey said:

you do that , and your low pop rolls will concentrate on bouncing flags even more , then when you log in to no supply the howls will be LOUD. 

well then you could look at the bring back of the old rules that you can't attack a town without a flag if you only have 1 AO. 

[delems]

Not sure that would work.

Under pop side would just pull all flags off the front line going into TZ3.

 

What might work, is can only place AO on 1 AB towns if there is only 1 AO limit.

 

Or, can place AO on any town, but bunker won't go hot if 2 or more ABs.

(so can just attrit and take all the rest of the town)

Edited May 1, 2022 by delems

[foe2]

9 minutes ago, delems said:

Not sure that would work.

Under pop side would just pull all flags off the front line going into TZ3.

 

What might work, is can only place AO on 1 AB towns if there is only 1 AO limit.

 

Or, can place AO on any town, but bunker won't go hot if 2 or more ABs.

(so can just attrit and take all the rest of the town)

No body ever used to that before so why should they do that now.