[Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Talk about CoH1 or BKMOD1 in general.
Post Reply
Diablo
Posts: 304
Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 22:40

[Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Diablo »

I think doctrine unit availability and their CP-based tiering should be inherently balanced in a way that every doc has all the necessary tools for a fair fight with any other doc, as long as both don't use any CP unlocks.
E.g. A generalist tank, capturing inf/vehicle, some indirect solution etc.
Stronger differences in power and timing can and should appear as soon as the players go into the CP tree. A tank doctrine could pay less CP for the same tank as an infantry doc for example.

Consti255
Posts: 809
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Consti255 »

CPs and Basic tanks/units in docs in general should be looked at.

CPs are IMO not meant to lock basic units and basic counters behind it.
It drives me crazy when i have to sit on 3+ CP just to counter the enemy with what he fielding against me.
We are playing High res for a reason in the beginning. We dont wanna play Rock/Paper/Scissors why do CPs support that kind of gameplay the later stages of the game??
Wired, boring and colorless docs when it comes to CP.
Hands down, great work from all Devs so far to get the game balanced as much as possible, but units can be kept behind tiering, and Doc specific units/unlocks can stay in the CP tree.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4641
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

Consti255 wrote:
18 Nov 2021, 18:19
CPs are IMO not meant to lock basic units and basic counters behind it.
in my opinion, standardising this "rule" is invalid.. because it highly depends on what you would consider "basic units" Not to mention a 76 Sherman (for example) might be considered a basic unit for Armor doc but definitely not basic for RE/SE or the air doctrines.. as it would be more of a bonus for them.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 5111
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Warhawks97 »

Krieger Blitzer wrote:
19 Nov 2021, 15:25
Consti255 wrote:
18 Nov 2021, 18:19
CPs are IMO not meant to lock basic units and basic counters behind it.
in my opinion, standardising this "rule" is invalid.. because it highly depends on what you would consider "basic units" Not to mention a 76 Sherman (for example) might be considered a basic unit for Armor doc but definitely not basic for RE/SE or the air doctrines.. as it would be more of a bonus for them.

Well, what is basic stuff? Things that are available to all docs and are a factional thing rather than a doctrinal. Ofc a 76 sherman on Axis side or British side will remain relatively special (though currently available in 2 CW docs). Everything that is present in every doc within a faction. Its nonsense to waste CP´s and unlock slots for such things.

The other stuff that is basic in my opinion is stuff that doesnt bring you a real benefit or has a super big impact. Most Medium tanks in my opinion would belong to this basic stuff. A Tank that gets penetrated relatively easy by most weapons (inlcuding low tier, low cost, easily available once) for instance should not belong in any unlock tree and should be unlocked by tec and upgrades. This becomes in particular obvious when stuff like an simple F2 costs CP in only a few docs while others dont need to pay any CP.

vcoh and also other mods got this part much better than BK.
Build more AA Walderschmidt

Consti255
Posts: 809
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Consti255 »

i think, the biggest counter arguement to the change to the CP tree from Hawks, me (just a part of course.),Sukin and other players like archipamon and what ever, is the overall work that comes with it. And its an absolute valid one and i can understand it 100%.
The Devs are doing the mod work in their free time and without any paymeant.

Markr brings in often arguemnts that could work on paper, but arent appealing in terms of micro or ressource investment overall. He doesnt play the game these day. But hey, thats where Kwok comes in. In my opinion one of the best BK players overall and a great guy. But did I ever witnessed one strategie that Markr brought up used by Kwok for example ? No, i did not. There is the clue, BK is overall much more simple and raw stats/luck than overall strategie right now and i think we are overthinking on many things.
Nothing personal Markr, i wouldnt even dare to attack you personally, but your strategies are WAY to complicated and slow for a game like BK and they are overall i think an excuse to take action at the games core. They work briliant in SD2 for example, where you have plenty of time to think about stuff and react, but BK is too fast.
And thats why I (personally) think, basic units behind CP,(and yes a 76 is one, its available in 5 out of 6 Allied docs) turn the game more and more into a rock/paper/scissors paired with luck, instead of tactis and better micro/macro.
As some players said on the Discord, basic units in CP trees make the game overaller more balanced, but at a really high price. And what is it? Its color and uniqueness of docs. Which was/is still BKs biggest strenght with his damage overhaul and i think one of the biggest reasons why people enjoy this game/mod so much. People going crazy about this game comes for a reason. THEY LOVE IT.
You guys made a game from 2005 so appealing, that people play it nonestop today.


I am not sure if it brings you Devs to a overthinking maybe, but how about a poll over this idea and see how the community stays to it.
it would be cool to find out, if people want a change, or if they are happy as the game plays right now.

PS:
I am sure, people like warhawks or me are even willing to help out the team with such changes. Hawks got even enough experience to work on these as a standin Dev to take some work of your shoulders i think. I think the overall hierarchy from this mod isnt necessary and somewhat rare. I Come out of a lot mod teams and they are always glad if someone wants to help. Even the smallest changes are work for you, and people that are engaged in the mod, often wants to help.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3885
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by MarKr »

Nothing personal.

You say my stuff works on paper, not in game. I would say that most people don't even try it and say it doesn't work, or they try it once, it doesn't work as well or as easy as they thought and then say it doesn't work, but OK, I'll give you the benefit of doubt and let's go with "it works only on paper". You say kwok is one of the best players. You say he doesn't use the strategies I speak of. OK. He still says that AB doesn't need the stuff you guys say the AB doc absolutely NEEDS. He still says that Prop doc doesn't need the stuff you guys say it ABSOLUTELY NEEDS. He is one of the people who defends keeping the, what you call, "basic" units CP locked. So what are you saying? I don't play, so I don't understand and kwok plays but still doesn't understand?

Anyway, I can stop spitting here strategies that may work on paper and leave that to kwok, while I will coment on stuff that is technical but I doubt it will help anything because kwok has been telling to people for years what to do to play better and majority of people still keeps playing their own way and then complaining that their way doesn't work and request changes to make their way work and you cannot make changes that will make everyone's playstyle 100% effective.
Image

Consti255
Posts: 809
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Consti255 »

Alright, would it be possible than to hear a valid reason, why basic stuff should be behind CP and not dotrinal stuff?
Speaking about defending it, what is the overall benefit from it ? Balance?

And what do you think about the poll idea? Is it worth to bring up?
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3885
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by MarKr »

Didn't you say it yourself?
As some players said on the Discord, basic units in CP trees make the game overaller more balanced
Kwok explained it here several times in detail. I'm not gonna write it all over again. In short, it puts more emphasis on what to unlock based on the situation you're in rather than having a build/unlock order that is used every time exactly the same + it leaves more room for mid game units and medium tanks rather than skipping this stage and rushing for heavy tanks every time. However, I said I wouldn't talk game theory so either look up the details kwok has written before or wait for him to comment on that again in this topic (if he wants to repeat the stuff again).

You can poll whatever you want. But as we've been saying for a long time - poll results are not binding for us. We usually take the results in consideration when we want to do some change, have more ways to go about it and are not sure what would be most wanted by players. However, creating a poll to "push" us into changing that we don't want to change is not going to give you the change.
Image

Consti255
Posts: 809
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Consti255 »

mhh, i wouldnt agree here.
The 76/M10/P4 F2/P4 H costing not much CP in general, which doesnt hold back players still to rush them.
So it just forces you to pay CP for a unit the enemy rushes anyway, since it is that effective.
I mean 1 CP Stugs, why wouldnt you not unlock it ? I think overall CP unlocks overall (real CP unlocks in particular) just get left behind over the tanks.
Everyone goes for an M10 or Hetzer if you did not go for the 76/P4F2/P4 H. And pray to god if you didnt.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4641
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

I am against making these units CP free, and i also don't support any tweaks to AB, Luft or Propaganda docs.
They are all currently fine.

Weapon packages isn't a good idea either, imo.

Consti255
Posts: 809
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Consti255 »

No i didnt said it just myself btw.
People like archi, Boba, Sukin, Kommodore, Smith... Many Vet player and the list goes on.

Its arguebly, but i also think, that basic units make it more balanced when it comes to doc design. Since they get the doc more rounded in 1v1 for example. But i think is easy to see, this units block up for example possible doctrinal stuff in the CP tree, which now is purchaseable in the WSC and ISC. Its a wired mix out of it. RAF pays CP for shorter CD, Luft buys it in the WSC for fuel usage and this happens in MANY docs.

Luft cheaper weapons = CP Infantry and AB = WSC.


I thought we want a clear direction when it comes to doc design. We have this „basic“ units that needs CP which overall dont add something special to a doctrine, while powerful upgrades are locked behind cheap upgrades in the WSC and ISC.
I think a swap arround and a tiering system (especially for infantry focused docs) is much more sensefull when it comes to doc design.
So AB and inf doc needs for example 1 extended production for the M10 and the 2. for the 76,Hellcat(AB) and Jacksons/Jumbo (Inf), while Armor doc can get the 76 right after the supply yard and a jacksons after the 1. and pershings after the 2.
Thats how it could be made. Just an idea, i mean units like the Hellcat could still stay in the CP tree if people think its to powerfull by reaching it via tiering.

Tiering for units that are in every doc (basic units) and Dotrinal stuff in the CP tree.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 5111
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Warhawks97 »

Consti, you got my support and probably those of most players.
Build more AA Walderschmidt

Consti255
Posts: 809
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: [Opinion] Balanced docs formula

Post by Consti255 »

Hence, you get punished for unlocking doc specific unlocks (WHAT YOU SHOULD DO WHEN YOU WANT TO PLAY THIS X OR Y DOC) instead of basic tanks or TDs.

This could be tweaked actually quite fast, with fuel price increase by 20-30% per medium tank and MP decrease, while making them CP free.
Tiering (especially the advanced production once) can be also increased, while Heavy prices should be untouched. This will prevent players from rushing right into heavy armor, instead of medium one and docs with tank price reduction for light and medium have enough time to steamroll or play out their fuel advantage.
Its not a full request of Doc reworks, we have enough placeholder abilitys/unlocks that were already in the game, or abilitys that are worth putting behind CP *cough* WSC *cough*

Its obvious when you look at the current US meta. AB is played as M4 and Strafe doc with Hellcat spam. (Most valuable CP unlocks), Armor is played with cheap Combat Engineers with M4,76 and M10s in the early stages, supported by pershings late (CP less M10s, 1CP 76shermans and 2 CP cheaper shermans).

INF doc is in my eyes the only US doc that actually beeing fun and versitle, since you got other options than this UnLoCk ThE M10/76 Or DiE method.


And as i already said in my other post, i think many players would be glad helping you out with small changes to relieve from work...
Nerf Mencius

Post Reply