US upgrade insanity

[Warhawks97]

I wanna talk about this matte as i think US has a lot of upgrades that are unecassary this is a continuation of this topics:

http://blitzkrieg-mod.de/board/topic/4895-the-us-spam/
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=203


Since US is supposed to fight with masses its absolutely idiotic to have so many upgrades which mostly give only stuff all other factions have by default. In vcoh US spend most res for straight forward unit production and axis in unit boost. Also PE upgrades instantly give advantages to others such as faster repairs, faster vet and less suppression etc while US needs them just to draw with opponents.

M6A3C missiles: After upgrade 2 zooks (and even 3) are worse than two schrecks. Here i would keep the upgrade but reduce at squad cost. In fact paying to be still inferior.

Sticky bombs: Its worst of all compared with molotov and at nades but still needs to be upgraded and each activation cost more then any other. Pay to be still worse and inferior.

AP rounds for P-47: makes this run unique but when compared to other airstrkes of that cost category it keeps worst. RAF cluster even damages and finishes heavy tanks.

smoke for tanks:: All most used axis tanks have it by default (Panther, Tiger, JP etc) whereas US pays for upgrade first and then it is only available for their cheapest tanks. Furthermore Tigers can shoot it in any direction for 35 amm and JP has screen for free. Again extra cost just to draw.

Sandbags: cost of it are also a factor that reduces the supposed quantity of us armor. For these cost two tanks could be fielded. Also i take into account that some axis have skirts by default (KT,Panther G, Tank IV H).

AT mines: basically the only upgrade that gives an advantage but still seldomly used.


supply yard which is now mainly regaring to US armor. That doc is supposed to play with quantity but quantity and supply yard kicks each others ass. When someone tells me there is a doc that spams tanks i would say its BK doc. small fuel point and medium one upgraded and 6 Tanks in 17 mins (4 Tank IV H/J and 2 ostwind). As armor i get sherman and Hellcat and upgrade is cut by half! Booth draw 9 fuel per min. 4 Tank IV draw 10 which should be mentioned.

First upgrade: Cost just to compete with other factions upkeep.

second: For its cost pretty pointless. 150 popcap army and just + 19 mp per min more. Cost 300 MP. Its a weird upgrade which neutralizes itself. Somewhow needed for quantity but not worth to get.

third upgrade: Its neccessary if someone wants to play US armor with masses but again neutralizes quantity for a long time of the game. Mate recently had after 1 H and 31 min 2 Hellcats, 6 or 8 e8 and one persh on the field and upgraded this one. Income increased by just 10 anc cost 65. here you either build tanks but cant replace them or you upgrade th supply yard and at times you field tanks you got already overruned and outnumbered by enemie tanks.



When i play US armor i feel like being the fool who plays the supposed quantity faction/doc and being unable to do that at the same time. Its like the game tells me: "Oh shit you really want to play the quanity faction with quantity style? Damn i need to trip you up by putting uneccessary barriers into your path to avoid any quantity as long as possible".


Also the two final supply yard upgrades are weird. The second is supposed to give MP boost and advantage but MP cost are so high that it neutralizes it. The one that should give fuel boost cost so much fuel that it also neutralizes this boost at the same time. Furthermore even after upgrade a sherman cost more as a Tank IV H. I would suggest some cost and efficnecy changes. As first the third upgrade should be independent from first two as it affects something different. Also maybe reduce MP cost of second upgrade by 100 and increase third by 100. Same kind of switch for fuel cost. Also the last one should reduce fuel upkeep by 50%. That way shermans would draw at least with Tank IV upkeep. That would simply make much more sense.


When i then see all the posts about "overused Pershs and Jumbos" i just can laugh. Playing amor with quanity requires good training, skills, experience, knowlegde about cost etc, mathematics and very very good ressource managment. Its not a surprise that most simply only use Jumbos and Pershings. They need unlock, Pershing to upgrades and ready to go.

[Jagdpanther]

i think these upgrades are a vcoh remnant and exist only for diversity so that the us gameplay is not similar with the axis one but i agree the cost/reward ratio is inacurate.

[Warhawks97]

upgrades can be supportive for quantity on long term. If stickies would be cheaper than molotov or nades then it would be like pay once more but the more you use them the bigger the advanatage. Sandbags working that way partly but cost are in a bad relation.

Or smoke for tanks as another sample. I would be OK if US would pay less in return. As their tanks are a bit cheaper (esp armor doc) the 50 ammo are less worth than 50 ammo that saves a panther live simply because the tank that survived due to that was more expensive. So here it might make sense to keep the upkeep but in return each activation much cheaper and thus player would be more willing to pay that cost. I am always willing to pay 50 ammo when it saves a panther but for a sherman i am often not sure if the 50 ammo would be worth it. So here it could make sense to support quantity use instead avoiding it.

[Pondera]

What about a different solution? Instead of reducing infantry costs or changing their upgrades, why not just increase the amount of manpower the allies get? I've read that Panthers had a 5-to-1 kill ration against US tanks, and if that was represented in the game, that was be a crippling loss. But it'd hurt less if one could recover with an infantry based defense, or making more tanks if they had the fuel for it. This method would make the Allies more viable as the quantity faction, without losing any emphasis on map control.

And you'd be able to afford that sexy sexy Jumbo Sherman more easily

[Warhawks97]

What about a different solution? Instead of reducing infantry costs or changing their upgrades, why not just increase the amount of manpower the allies get? I've read that Panthers had a 5-to-1 kill ration against US tanks, and if that was represented in the game, that was be a crippling loss. But it'd hurt less if one could recover with an infantry based defense, or making more tanks if they had the fuel for it. This method would make the Allies more viable as the quantity faction, without losing any emphasis on map control.

And you'd be able to afford that sexy sexy Jumbo Sherman more easily

In the old forum we had a huge discussion about it and unit cost. For example, going this way, the turretless TH´s (and stugs) would be very cheap and Panthers would cost just slightly more than Tank IV´s but US at the other side would have like 400-500 MP income almost by default. It would be incredible hard to balance. Having boosts right from the beginning would be game breaking. But what i would expect that US would have some usefull and cost effective upgrades that would boost their res income. Their boost currently is actually low and cost often more as they bring. I mean have a look at the fuel upgrades for armor doc. 2 in total which cost in total 75 fuel and boost + 10. The second also require Tank factory upgrade. So you have two options:

1. upgrade them as early as possible to have any advantage in late game but then you stay without any tank or vehicle during mid phase.
2. Build tanks and vehicles early and the fuel upkeep and build cost wont allow you to upgrade those in time to be effective. Most games last about 45 mins or something. Now just the time to get the 75 fuel back would take 7 mins after upgrade. With the tank factory upgrade even more than 10 mins. So most of the time these upgrade are made the game is almost over. And even if those 10 mins are over you can build one silly basic sherman more all three mins. But together with high basic upkeep of the tanks you will still hump behind axis fuel income when booth sides have some tanks.
Now compare to brits and axis:

Axis just unlock fuel trade and for some ammo BK doc can build all 3 mins a new tank IV or all 6 min a new Panther just with ammo. Ammo isnt hard to find as axis. As i kow that i dont need AP ammo for my Tanks i dont give special ammo to my tanks as axis and spare it for res trade. A Tank IV easily pens shermans and Panther later everything else. So i boost all three mins my fuel by 75. As US, with booth upgrades, i get one sherman more all three mins.

CW CW puts a truck on a medium fuel point and upgrade the the truck for 250 mp and 35 fuel. If they put it on a medium fuel point which gives 9 the truck will boost it to 14 and the upgrade to 21. So 35 fuel upgrade gives instantly+7 from right the beginning. Even on a low fuel point it would boost fuel by 3 or 4. And the CW tank doc boosts trucks furthermore via tect tree upgrade. So axis armor docs and CW armor docs get really massive boosts which really allow to throw out a lot more tanks without suffer fuel issues. ONLY us armor suffers so hard and has pointless upgrades which furthermore are first in mid or even late game available if you want tanks in mid game and also need other pointless upgrades first which other docs and factions dont need. So others boost fuel income by far better very early without any stupid other upgrades.

I also suggested to make supply yard independent from other buildings as it would make much more sense since it is a buidling that boosts on long term. It just doesnt make sense that such buildings and upgrades are coming so late with very little impact on normal games.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

Seems legit.

[MarKr]

M6A3C missiles: After upgrade 2 zooks (and even 3) are worse than two schrecks. Here i would keep the upgrade but reduce at squad cost. In fact paying to be still inferior.

Well...Upgrade doesn't necesarily mean you get something better than your opponent, you simply get an improved version of something. In this case your zooks get improved penetration so they are more dangerous than before the upgrade.

Sticky bombs: Its worst of all compared with molotov and at nades but still needs to be upgraded and each activation cost more then any other. Pay to be still worse and inferior.

This one is probably true. Maybe if it had 100% chance to make a vehicle immovable you would have something to work with...we'll see about this one.

AP rounds for P-47: makes this run unique but when compared to other airstrkes of that cost category it keeps worst. RAF cluster even damages and finishes heavy tanks.

Yeah...with the upgrade you can destroy light vehicles. However as US para you get AT weapons with each para squad which can deal with light vehicles easily. For the price of the strafing run I guess this AP upgrade should be included from the start...

smoke for tanks:: All most used axis tanks have it by default (Panther, Tiger, JP etc) whereas US pays for upgrade first and then it is only available for their cheapest tanks. Furthermore Tigers can shoot it in any direction for 35 amm and JP has screen for free. Again extra cost just to draw.

Well...maybe Armor doc could get it automatically for free and upgrade could stay for infantry and para docs. Don't know, hard to say...

Sandbags: cost of it are also a factor that reduces the supposed quantity of us armor. For these cost two tanks could be fielded. Also i take into account that some axis have skirts by default (KT,Panther G, Tank IV H).

What would you do with them? Lower price? Give them for free? It is true that some Axis tanks come with skirts, but skirts lower the possible penetration by 10% while these upgrades for US tanks provide more benefits.

First upgrade: Cost just to compete with other factions upkeep.

I think this is because US infantry is cheaper than Axis. If the upkeeps and everything was the same, US could outnumber Axis fast (or maybe that was the idea in the first place and later it started to make less sence with other aspects added).

second: For its cost pretty pointless. 150 popcap army and just + 19 mp per min more. Cost 300 MP. Its a weird upgrade which neutralizes itself. Somewhow needed for quantity but not worth to get.

This upgrade used to be stronger, but part of its effect was given to US from the start so overall this upgrade is now less effective...maybe the price could be dropped.

Also the last one should reduce fuel upkeep by 50%.

Let's wait how the planned upkeep rework plays out and then we'll see.

What about a different solution? Instead of reducing infantry costs or changing their upgrades, why not just increase the amount of manpower the allies get?

Basically what Warhawks said...

[Warhawks97]

I will answer to the points and i will give also some suggestions.

1. Sure, but why cost the at squad same as axis then? quality vs quantity not visible.

2. AT nades and molotov do crits 100% and at nade deals lot of damage and can finish every tank. Also note that when using stickies rifles get so close that the tank literally drives over them and kills them. To fit in a quantity faction that is using stuff by masses it should be very cheap like 10 or 15 ammo for massive use.

3. Might be so. In the game i uploaded where the bomber did nothing to anything the p-47 with AP did nothing to a mortar HT. AP rounds by default wouldnt be bad. US fighter used mostly API (Armor piercing incendiary) rounds anyway.

4. for smoke i would say, also to fit more in a quantity faction they should activate smoke cheaper (25-30 ammo). The tanks are cheaper and more and thus need to b used more often and for tanks that are less worth to activate 50 ammo for some smoke. Talking about this.... smoke cost too much in my opnion at all. I mean 50 ammo cost an entire arty barrage. Smoke for cheaper would again allow more tactical use as alternative to arty. Dont start to make such stuff doc specific. Find a common US way.

5. Well, at least cost reduction. I mean 600 MP and 60 fuel.... Its the only one that cost fuel -.- Think about PE inf veterancy officer upgrade. 25 % faster vet and 25% less suppression. Its a great boost and cost 240 and 40 ammo. Fuel is simply so essential to field units.

6. Nice that you write that.... Just look how often this "US is cheaper" is being used to justify stuff. Let me list some:

"US is cheaper " justifies:
-Worse performence of comparabale units (bsp Volks vs rifles. Ok rifles are better in close combat but early on mobile MG´s deny to use close range advantage and later grens have also close range weapins New grens vs ranger, E8 vs Tank IV where booth cost actually the same....
- Higher upkeep
- Higher reinforce cost.

So that single argument "US is cheaper" can actually justify one of these 3 things. Currently it is used to justify all three. Funnily often axis pay less for better performence (20 mm kwk vehicles vs M16, 57 mm vs 50 mm, sherman 75 vs stug III, Multirole long range quick firing Marder I vs pure M10 Wolverine Tankbuster, JP vs Jacks or even IV/70 vs jacks, Stormtooper vs Ranger infiltration, Fw-190 vs P-47 bomber, schwimmwagen and jeep, Scout vehicle and bren carrier, Pack Howitzer and Leig 18.... and probably i forgot more stuff.) So think about this sentence before writting and justify, pls.

7. Sure, migh be so but still, its a res trap. Also needed for the last one. That US cost less in early game upkeep was a balance issue, so its nonsence to "balance back" in the later step of the game.

8.idk what you are planning but i think its not so bad that US have fuel eater coz its simply the truth. The fuel boost instead should be adjusted. 50% wouldnt hurt if you ask me + make it independent. Maybe increase MP cost for this and decrease fuel cost to stop this "self-elimination" of upgrades.



For the supply yard, as partly suggested i would say it that it should be independent. Its nonsense that a building and upgrade that boosts over time comes so late. That way player can choose either to unlock only units or to go for long term res boost.

So supply yard independent. The first fuel boost, first MP upkeep reduction and the third upgrade to lower fuel upkeep should be independent so far and the fuel upkeep reduction should reduce by 50% and + 100 mp and - 20 fuel.

The first fuel boost reduced to 20 fuel and stay on + 5. The second for armor doc only available when tank factory is up with additional + 10 and cost 40 fuel.
The second upgrade to 180-200 MP. Actually 180 mp.



About supply yard in general the cost stayed untouched for long and now fuel dropped for more MP which makes them still usless and unatractive though somehow important for a quantity faction or should play a greater role. Many seem to forget that in vcoh supply yard came much earlier + it was much easier to create a larger army simply by the fact that there where less "insta kills" of units. In BK units are used to die much faster which results in genral smaller armies and thus supply yard by far less effective. But the devs did not change the supply yard accordingly to this new gameplay and game engine. Also they forgot that axis got by far and really by far less upgrades as in voch and all that got forgot in BK when it comes to supply yard cost where cost jst got swapped arround.