Auto-Reinforce?

So I thought of this while playing a game the other day because I always try to place my heavy weapons near outposts for fast reinforcement. Unfortunately the enemy can uncrew the gun while you are distracted by something else. So what if there was a way to set an automatic reinforcement ability active/inactive for heavy weapons so that as long as the given weapon is within range for reinforcement the reinforcements are order automaticly for you? I thought this could be useful for the Russians because of that pesky bug that makes the loss of an AT far more catastrophic than it is to any other faction.
I don't know if this is possible to code or not just an idea.

Well i think that could actually be a good ability for the Propaganda doctrine. I'm sure the Devs can do something like that because its just to code an auto-activation for the reinforcement ability  just like you can code the British Counter-Battery ability, auto-activation when a certain criteria is met. 

I don't think so. Having to know to reinforce is part of the macro skills you must know to play well, as well as having good map awareness. This can only detract from the skill required in the game which is a bad thing. I would like to be able to reinforce more than 5 men at a time though. Low strength conscripts squads are a bitch to reinforce.

having good micro skills would eliminate the need for this. good mirco is something any RTS player who calls himself good needs.

Versedhorison wrote:
having good micro skills would eliminate the need for this. good mirco is something any RTS player who calls himself good needs.

You have neglected to observe the fact that casual players play eastern front too. I am one of these casual players. Therefore, I often find 1-man squads back at base as a result. Some people do not have the best micro skills.

Regardless, casual players should not get a crutch to do what semi-good and up players can do anyway. You don't see a button ingame for "auto-flank" or "auto-find good place for mine and build". I respect the thought behind the idea but it is a bad one that is basically just getting the game to do things for you, something known as botting basically.

EDIT: It's really not that hard to queue up squad members anyway is it? Surely you look back to base every now and then. Also, control groups and the unassigned squads button are handy for finding squads. There's also a hotkey to find them which I don't use. I believe it's period (.).

Last edited June 18, 2010 at 11:58 AM by GodlikeDennis

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Regardless, casual players should not get a crutch to do what semi-good and up players can do anyway. You don't see a button ingame for "auto-flank" or "auto-find good place for mine and build". I respect the thought behind the idea but it is a bad one that is basically just getting the game to do things for you, something known as botting basically.

EDIT: It's really not that hard to queue up squad members anyway is it? Surely you look back to base every now and then. Also, control groups and the unassigned squads button are handy for finding squads. There's also a hotkey to find them which I don't use. I believe it's period (.).

The idea is not in referance to all units just heavy weapons which I think you missed because who is going to retreat an AT gun back to base as you mentioned.The point is to help lessen the chance of losing an AT that cannot be remanned.The thought behind this is that instead of having to sit and micro an AT gun to keep it alive while neglecting other parts of the war effort you could simply tell it to auto-reinforce when needed.I see this as being less of a "crutch" as you put it and more of an option to help lessen the impact of an unfortunate bug.

Let me give you an example: A Wehrmacht player has just lost his first AT gun. What does he do he runs up a Volks team or Pio etc... and recrews the weapons not really a big deal. Now a Russian player just loses his first AT gun what happens? The player needs to try and create another AT gun and get it to the front before all of his other forces get completely pushed back by a Puma or other light vehicle.

Now I am not saying you are wrong in the fact that it would detract from some of the micro/macro skills involved in playing. but a safety net for units that are so valuable/slow at least in my opinion could be a useful option because everyone makes mistakes and a small mistake such as not noticing a lucky mortar/grenade destroyed nearly all of the AT-team can lose you the game with the Russian where it is a minor set back with all of the other factions.

"Auto-flank" and "auto find spot for mine and build" are both absurd comparisons :P. Both are tactical decisions while reinforcing is an economic one.

Note: The ability would still require you to be in reinforcement range from an outpost/HQ so thought would still be required for positioning.

Hu, I remembered that you could just right click on the reinforce button and it would reinforce auto.


Maybe its warhammer I am remembering he, could swear its in coh.

userstupidname wrote:
Hu, I remembered that you could just right click on the reinforce button and it would reinforce auto.


Maybe its warhammer I am remembering he, could swear its in coh.

Auto cast? Dunno. Maybe it is. I'll check.

Edit: Nope. There is no autocast.

Last edited June 19, 2010 at 12:40 AM by Shadowmetroid

I would like to see a developers opinion on this. It might be possible , I think it is a good idea.

@ nomad52

Maybe I should have said "auto-build barracks and cap immediate local points". That's economical :P

That is an extremely well put argument but I present to you this: Why should a player who is able to manage the battle that is distracting you as well as send a ninja squad to attack you elsewhere be penalised for his strategic awareness by having his enemies simply reinforce in front of his eyes. If they haven't got the skill to watch both battles, he has no advantage from simply having better map awareness and his additional skill is brought on par with the lesser skilled player. Maybe a closer comparison to the "auto-buttons" would be an "auto-retreat when flanked" button for the heavy weapons of other factions.

Also a thing to consider, is the massive cost of reinforcing these things. On a use and forget ability, these could quickly drain your entire economy seeing as they cost about 90 or so MP per man. This power still penalises the noobs by destroying their reserves.

For the others: "auto-cast" on the reinforcement button is a feature from DoW, since those squads can reinforce anywhere. I believe that's the reason why it was not used in CoH.

Another thing that I think has been neglected from this discussion is the relevant point of backing up or properly placing your AT gun? The gun itself has a massive range and reinforces as fast Kangs squish a Gren blob. My point is, it should be way back with support and even if it does get attacked, it reinforces faster than it gets killed. There is no reason it should be easy to take down and on that, if it does get taken down I applaud you opponent. The weakness of the Russians is not being able to re-man heavy weapons, so its meant to be a struggle to balance your micro on them and your forces.

I Agree with Dennis on this that it takes away from the skill based aspect of the game and can potentially backfire with the drain on your economy. The gun is meant to be a target and meant to be weak, the solution I think here is a different game play style in-game not in-coding.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
@ nomad52
Also a thing to consider, is the massive cost of reinforcing these things. On a use and forget ability, these could quickly drain your entire economy seeing as they cost about 90 or so MP per man. This power still penalises the noobs by destroying their reserves.

      Well... There is not really a counter argument to your first point (at least that I can think of) so I will admit that it would detract from the micro/macro skills required as I admitted earlier. But as stated earlier a safety net for a squishy,vital and fairly expensive unit would be at least in my opinion a nice addition.
      However, your second point about the economic drain is somewhat moot because the drain would occur either way simply due to the fact that if you realized your team was low on men you would reinforce them manually causing the economic drain anyways so really it is a wash.

@ Kinkas
      The ways in which an AT gun or other heavy weapon can be taken down quickly even if well supported are many; as a lucky mortar strike may kill 4 out of the 5 men leaving it very very vulnerable, I have seen a good strafe with a puma kill most/all of an AT guns crew and the list of ways continues. The ability would help counteract somethings that really cannot be beaten through the use of superior tactics such as a lucky mortar shot and etc...
      Also as mentioned before this isn't a proposal for an ability that would let you reinforce from anywhere on the map you would still need to be within reinforcement range. An  ability like this would still require the same amount of thought be put into the positioning of the weapon as they do not reinforce quickly enough to where you could stick it alone on auto reinforce and expect it to survive very long. It may also increase the amount of thought placed into where you put your outposts because of the way in which heavy-weapons teams could utilize them.

      I really have no other points of argument (that I have thought of) my reasons as to why I think this could be useful have been stated so we have reached an impasse of opinion on the subject and can really only digress from here.

The economic drain can be immense. Remember that they take 96MP or so to reinforce, in about a second. Say you have a battle that diverts your attention for 20 seconds, whilst an enemy unit steadily kills your AT gun crew. Because you are too preoccupied with the battle, hence the use of the ability in the first place, you do not return to see that you are in fact losing manpower like crazy in a hopeless situation. When you finally do look back, the same unit will still be killing your stuff while you lost:
20s X 96mp/s = 1820mp
from that AT gun alone. Therefore, the economic strain on a subskilled player is immense.

*I am not totally sure what the reinforce time is, but it is very fast. 1 second is just the example I provide here.

I would still take the economic risk if it would help assure the longevity of the weapon. This is of course personal preferance.


Note:Reinforce time for pak 38's is 6 seconds and the Zis-2 is probably pretty close so the numbers are more than likely 3.3 X 96 = 316.8mp over 20 seconds which is still a lot but is a little more reasonable than than 1820mp  ;). Especially when you consider that you would probably make 100+mp over that time.

Source: http://planetcoh.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Units.Detail&id=3

Last edited June 19, 2010 at 1:22 PM by nomad52

We are off-topic.  This thread was about auto-reinforcement. Not about AT-Guns or "auto micromanagement".

Shadowmetroid wrote:
We are off-topic.  This thread was about auto-reinforcement. Not about AT-Guns or "auto micromanagement".

Off-topic:Actually we are far less off-topic then at first glance because this is a discussion about the auto-reinforcement of heavy weapons and AT-Guns just happens to be the example that has been adopted and auto-micromanagement is part of dennis's argument.

This is not off-topic at all. Try harder at comprehending the arguments and you'll realise what we're talking about. Also who are you to tell the topic creator, whom I am discussing with, what is off-topic or not.

nomad52 wrote:
I would still take the economic risk if it would help assure the longevity of the weapon. This is of course personal preferance.


Note:Reinforce time for pak 38's is 6 seconds and the Zis-2 is probably pretty close so the numbers are more than likely 3.3 X 96 = 316.8mp over 20 seconds which is still a lot but is a little more reasonable than than 1820mp  ;). Especially when you consider that you would probably make 100+mp over that time.

Source: http://planetcoh.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Units.Detail&id=3

Actually I believe the ZiS does reinforce much faster than the other weapons. Of this I have no proof though, since I haven't ever tried to use corsix, other than personal experience. Also, I believe it would certainly harm "noobs" even more than now.

Isn't debating wether or not its off topic, off topic?

TacticalNuke wrote:
Isn't debating wether or not its off topic, off topic?

Off-topic: Yes. But when it was mentioned we were not off-topic so we were not debating it we were simply stating that we were not off-topic.

-----------------------------------------------------------

QuoteActually I believe the ZiS does reinforce much faster than the other weapons. Of this I have no proof though, since I haven't ever tried to use corsix, other than personal experience. Also, I believe it would certainly harm "noobs" even more than now.

I haven't payed close enough attention to the reinforcement rate of the Zis to be able to say either, I assume it is the same or close to. (any verifying information on this would be nice to have.)

Ok, just tested this.

Zis unupgraded costs 110 to reinforce and reinforces near instantly, probably about half a second. I assume the upgraded one is similar in time but I think it costs 96 per man.

@Nomad52

All units have a counter and mortars happen to be particularly good against heavy weapons. But beyond that point, as I said, the AT gun has immense range so it should be fine and even if the mortar crew kills it instantaneously auto-reinforce can't save it. My point holds that used properly you can maximise its ability. Though it is not invincible, it does its job well, some argue to well. Giving it auto-reinforce would make it make no difference to instant kill situations and make the unit to overpowered/Kang-Like against small arms (Assuming unlimited resources).

I think if you feel there is a problem with the AT gun, yourself, Godlikedennis and I should have a game for testing sake to get to the bottom of it, as I think Auto-Reinforce is not a solution to your problem. And maybe a few games after just for fun =D, as there are so little ppl on these days.

Theres a simple explation for the cost alot thing.

Turn is off!

If you forget, well thats to bad. People forget in coh many times, you cant change that.

Seeme wrote:
Turn is off!

Wha...?

What a pointless reply Seeme. If you remembered to turn it off during a battle, what point would it serve anyway?

userstupidname wrote:
Hu, I remembered that you could just right click on the reinforce button and it would reinforce auto.


Maybe its warhammer I am remembering he, could swear its in coh.

You can indeed auto-reinforce in Warhammer40k. It doesn't seem to really have a huge effect on the game unless you have a ton of "squishy" units like the Imperial Guard. Anyway I don't really think it would make too much sense if the devs were to try to implement this in EF considering that you have to be near your HQ, half-track or forward base to reinforce. In Dawn of War you could reinforce anywhere on the map which made auto-reinforce a fairly logical thing to implement. I understand the whole AT gun reinforcement but doing the work to implement auto-reinforce would only realistically affect the crewed AT guns and mortars and not to mention it would really piss off people who rely on snipers.  :P

Your all complaining the it will cost alot, and crap. But really how hard is it if you notice you dont need it to turn it of.

Am shorta refering to the much earlier topic.