[All] Reinforcement Rebalance

#1
4 months ago

Hi All
was thinkin about a takin a looksy at relationship of reinforcement costs and the units to which they belong

as of now reinforcement costs are based on the unit cost and the number of models in the squad and divided in half
for example grens costing 240mp and having 4 models have a reinforcement cost of 0.5(240/4)=30
this seems like a good formula, until you look at EFA squads and soviet elite squads, using grens as a baseline we can compare rifles, whom are unarguably superior having a reinforcement cost of 0.5(280/5)=28

now despite being more durable, and flexible, rifles are actually cheaper per head than grens

similarly we can compare penals at 0.5(300/6)=25
this means not only do penals hit harder and take more punishment, but they are easier to replace as well....

now volks, 0.5(250/5)=25, still cheaper than grens, and on par with penals (lel)

i feel like here is where we are running into so much imbalance in our infantry game...

my proposal is as such: treat all non conscript and ostroppen squads as a 4 man squad for the sake of reinforcement

so the new values would be as follows:
grens 0.5(240/4)=30
volks 0.5(250/4)=31.25
rifles 0.5(280/4=35
penals 0.5(300/4)=37.5

to ME this seems more in line with performance. more expensive to get, more expensive to maintain to go with superior performance
if we were to also apply this to soviet team weapons (whom are cheaper still, due to the weapons themselves "costing" and thus the crew being cheaper) we can help normalize bleed and most importantly- give conscripts a role

allowing merge to remain allows the soviet to stem the bleed with merge and using cons as bullet magnets while specialist squads do their jobs, i dont believe merge would be too strong simply because of cons slightly larger squad size- those models will bring the offensive capability to max, but weaken the durability of the squad (making it more vulnerable to focus fire)

anyways thats what im thinking, thoughts?

Comments

  • #2
    4 months ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 605
    I think more expensive to get more expensive to maintain is mostly in play already. It depends on max numbers to reinforce per squad. Wich is also important to take into account.

    Now penals with suggested formula 5x37.5=187.5mp to fully reinforce. That is more then double the amount that grens require 3x30=90. Penals are not twice as expensive in mp so imo this would be excesive.

    Basing it on 5 models would mean 30mp for a penal model. And 24 for a gren model, volks and rifles remain the same. Here penals ar still around double the mp for a full reinforce while not costing double mp.

    As for soviet weapons crews. They dont excel in any role when compared, they are only able to take a bit more punisment then other crews can. It would punish the big crews if the 6 men crew costed more to reinforce. The exception should be dushka ofc.

    I do agree with you 100% that cons merge will be more usefull even later in the game. But all in all i think the reinforment costs are in good shape as they are.
  • #3
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,728
    edited July 16

    Would this be literally for all squads besides cons and ostruppen? Cause shocks would cost 48.75mp per model, and that seems a bit much. The squad size should matter for reinforcement cost IMO, but maybe it just shouldn't be AS important?

    35 for Rifles is also a bit much I think, as I don't fully agree with how you compared them to grens. Rifles are better of course, but only if the distance is closed to some extent (Obers vs. Shock reinforcement is 50 vs 32.5 to give an extreme analogy). A full health vanilla gren squad will still out-dps a full-health vanilla rifle squad at max range while also being harder to hit (by bullets anyway), so individually the rifle models themselves are not all that superior. Then there's also how much more US relies on rifles than Ost does on Grens, etc.

    I still wanna see WFA infantry in a post-FRP world before we shake up things like their reinforcement cost. As for Penals, it would be interesting (but maybe too complicated) if their "To the last man!" ability somehow affected their reinforcement cost. Maybe a stacking reinforcement cost that aligns with the stacking bonuses? So the more models you lose the more you have to pay per model, not just overall.

  • #4
    4 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,724

    There's good theory here but I don't want to start dipping in to the economy this severely until it's clear we have no other option.

  • #5
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 4,937

    perhaps a template then depending on role?

    fodder troops/6
    mainline/5
    semi elite/4.5?
    really elite/4?
    as a basic template and adjust as needed?

    i personally find soviet a hard bag, their elite troops are so easy to replace (it takes time of course, but the MP cost isnt THAT high for performance)
    for example, i though the previous guards were FINALLY something the soviet could be proud of, but too easy to stem losses, same goes with current penals

    IMO (for the soviet) the elite troops should be... elite, harder to muster reinforcements BUT hit damn hard where they are (like old guards)
    perhaps have a sidegrade in t3/4 for the soviet that lesses the bleed by a models worth?

    IDK, it is a bit extreme but i think, much like WFA tanks repairing too fast, that some units really dont bleed enough...

    @TheLeveler83 my thinking about the weapon crews was mostly for the maxim, the previous maxim cost as much as a con squad to acquire but was cheaper to reinforce AND was actually able to fight, and kill AND suppress, making it a clearly better unit over cons in every way

  • #6
    4 months ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 605

    @thedarkarmadillo

    i know the maxim was in a weird spot before. it needed something to be done. for example the unpack time could have been made to be longer then setup to punish a moving and sprint changed to something else. also A-move could have been removed for weapon teams enterily.

    now the maxim is the conscript under the mg,s the price should go back to 240mp.

    now if they maxim would be returned to small arc and mobile, and A-move is somehow punished or fixed i am in favor for a cost increase for crew members.

  • #7
    4 months ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 608

    I love the idea of gren reinforcement being cost efficient however, penals that cost more than 30 to reinforce is probably a bad idea as you have to get to medium range, essentially like pgrens. They will bleed quite a bit later in the game esp vs OKW. I'd say penals should be 30 max. Plus getting T1 for SU is mp expensive already and you're sacrificing access to support weapons for quite a while. And pgrens reinforcement would go up according to your formula. So would sturms, and a bunch of other inf.

  • #8
    4 months ago
    newshatterhandnewshatte… Posts: 275
    edited July 17

    This would be quite a radical change. I see where you are coming from, however the current system already kinda works. This would break the game without other changes, ost sniper for example would bleed mp like hell.

    I think you should factor in the performance of each model (survivability, dps) as well as that of the squad (utility, survivability, weapon upgrades). Furthermore, you would need to look at use cases, for example, weapon crews can often avoid fire due to the team weapon having high range. And also the damage output of individual weapon crew members is less important for a crew weapon than for normal squads.

  • #9
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,728

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    IDK, it is a bit extreme but i think, much like WFA tanks repairing too fast, that some units really dont bleed enough...

    I am 100% behind this sentiment, but that's exactly why I wanna see how the reduction/removal of FRPs effects them. More than anything the quick return the front is what I notice from WFA infantry.

  • #10
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 4,937
    I too am excited to see how things go
  • #11
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,096
    edited July 19

    You're completely ignoring one extremely important thing.
    You're assuming the formula doesn't take into account something and that's utterly wrong assumption.

    Reinforcing grens from 1 man costs 90 mp.
    Reinforcing cons from 1 man costs 100 mp.
    Reinforcing volks from 1 man costs 100mp.
    Reinforcing rifles from 1 man costs 112 mp.
    Reinforcing penals from 1 man costs 125 mp.

    Not reinforcing to full cripples the squad in a noticeable way.

    Nothing is wrong here, more expensive squads take more to reinforce.

    You're also completely ignoring all other values, like durability, DPS, upgrades, veterancy.

    Your "improvement" would completely and utterly cripple everything that isn't ost.

    You see trees, but don't see forest.

    Your "idea" will never work, unless all factions will have exactly same squad sizes.

  • #12
    4 months ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 849
    edited July 20
    Hm... fist remove the STG upgrade of Volks, before we rebalance everything. May give them a normal M24 grenade and give the flame-nade to Sturmpioniere instead (remove the shock nade at Vet3).
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.