Removing limits on call in units

I wish weather was implemented in COH ;) Sigh.

I'm sad they want to make OstHeer more spam-capable
than Soviets, though.

(as Lord Rommel said that OstHeer will be capable to have
more tanks, better, and earlier thanks than soviets) on the field.

Loupblanc wrote:
(as Lord Rommel said that OstHeer will be capable to have
more tanks, better, and earlier thanks than soviets) on the field.

where did he say that? he just said that ostheer might have panzer III's on the battlefield before the red army has t-34 but never that panzer III > t-34, that's just what you keep spamming all day  ::)

btw:

Loupblanc wrote:
[...]I really wonder how he'll feel when 60 Hummel blow up
his base.

a single PE player can do that already destroying his own hummels and recovering them with a bergetiger. and nobody suggested removing the limit on hummels or kingtigers etc. it was just said that hummels should be back on 3 and some people discussed remoing the limit on airborne, fallschirmjaegers and hetzers (units which didn't have a limit in vcoh).

Last edited September 25, 2010 at 9:53 AM by Ghost

First of all, I fully agree with everything Ghost said in his last post.

Second: Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the DEVs implemented the limit to prevent AI spamming call-in-units.
However, every time I play a skirmish against CPU, the AI actually DOES spam call-in-units. For example, if I cut him off his resource-points and my tanks are nearly near his HQ, stupid AI calls in endless Stalinorgels, drive them towards my tanks, communist vehicle is blown up, but soon another one arrives.

Therefore I think the hard-cap isn't a valid solution to stop stupid AI building a useless vehicle one after another.
This leads me to the question: Why are the limits still in?
If it's for balancing-reasons, I see no problem in keeping them, however it shouldn't be a gamebreaker for certain (valid?) tactics.

I agree that the limit on Priests and Hummels should be brought back to 3. A pair of Hummels is not that useful - only a light dusting of mediocre artillery (and they're supposed to have 155mm shells, not so?). For the pop cap that they take up it's little more than an annoyance. I don't often play allies, but I don't think the Priests should be considered an equivalent to the Hummel. 105mm vs 155mm? You do the maths...

I think either the third allowed unit be brought back and/or the range of the Hummel extended somewhat. I also reckon Scorched Earth has been unfairly hamstrung by the this arbitrary measure to curb AI spamming, rather than addressing the problems with the AI itself.

don't forget that priests have overwatch, counter battery fire and creeping barrage.

Hummels are awesome and don't need a buff.

Creeping barrage is pretty expensive for what it does when you can fire a normal barrage for free. It's pretty good though.

Counter battery really isn't very useful most of the time. It was great when it thought people throwing nades were using artillery back in 2.301 and fired on them. :) Funny glitch, got accused of hacking a lot by nubs lol.

Overwatch, contrary to the general opinion that it just automates something you should be able to do already, is actually very good. The fact that it explodes instantly without warning is useful against good players who have the micro to retreat squads when they see the shells fly in. Instead, their troops simply explode. I normally fire one or two shots to great effect before he retreats and then cancel the overwatch and get pretty much the same cooldown as a regular blast for a better effect. It's also good in close VP games obviously and it's much cooler seeing the airbursts than normal shells.

Versedhorison wrote:
don't forget that priests have overwatch, counter battery fire and creeping barrage.

Dont forget that PE have booby traps, cheap shimm flame mines, sector arti and offensive vet.

Paciat wrote:

Versedhorison wrote:
don't forget that priests have overwatch, counter battery fire and creeping barrage.

Dont forget that PE have booby traps, cheap shimm flame mines, sector arti and offensive vet.

My statement was comparing hummels to priests, not doctrine to doctirne.

Versedhorison wrote:

Paciat wrote:

Versedhorison wrote:
don't forget that priests have overwatch, counter battery fire and creeping barrage.

Dont forget that PE have booby traps, cheap shimm flame mines, sector arti and offensive vet.

My statement was comparing hummels to priests, not doctrine to doctirne.

And my statement was that you shouldnt compare these 2 units becouse they mean nothing without an army that they support.

Loupblanc wrote:

- Yea, I just don't fear the flamethrower like I used to,
anymore.
- Sigh. I guess he wants all cap removed. Guess we got
to make King Tiger / Tiger / JagPanther call ins with no
cap, eh? :)

I really wonder how he'll feel when 60 Hummel blow up
his base.

/signed!

Done by Akaloner(You nOOb!)

GodlikeDennis wrote:
You shouldn't need that many airborne/AT guns anyway. They are there to support your normal riflemen in an AT role. Giant blobs of airborne aren't a skillful way to play the game.

Anyone should be able to play as it wants to, in my opinion, the more different tactics could be used the better.

Thanks for resurrecting this long dead thread  ::)

I guess if that's the case then I should be able to call as many Tigers as I want? That'll be real fun for my opponent. You need to realise it's a game and games are meant to be fun for ALL the players.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Thanks for resurrecting this long dead thread  ::)

I guess if that's the case then I should be able to call as many Tigers as I want? That'll be real fun for my opponent. You need to realise it's a game and games are meant to be fun for ALL the players.

If you have enough MP, gas & munition points, why not?  It means  that you have earned it by managing your resourses and strategies to bring on the hammer as soon as you can.  Why should a player be penalized for its effective startegies?

Effective strategies or super efective units? ::)

We're not talking about normal units, they are special units and are strong, hence they're limited.

Raydeen wrote:

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Thanks for resurrecting this long dead thread  ::)

I guess if that's the case then I should be able to call as many Tigers as I want? That'll be real fun for my opponent. You need to realise it's a game and games are meant to be fun for ALL the players.

If you have enough MP, gas & munition points, why not?  It means  that you have earned it by managing your resourses and strategies to bring on the hammer as soon as you can.  Why should a player be penalized for its effective startegies?

Because too much of anything is a bad thing

Raider217 wrote:

Raydeen wrote:

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Thanks for resurrecting this long dead thread  ::)

I guess if that's the case then I should be able to call as many Tigers as I want? That'll be real fun for my opponent. You need to realise it's a game and games are meant to be fun for ALL the players.

If you have enough MP, gas & munition points, why not?  It means  that you have earned it by managing your resourses and strategies to bring on the hammer as soon as you can.  Why should a player be penalized for its effective startegies?

Because too much of anything is a bad thing

So how much is too much?  Who gets to decide what is "too much" for everybody?

You say the more tactics the better, but having tons of tigers or gazillion rangers don't seem as a good prospect. Tactics involve how do you use what you are given. Because this:

Raydeen wrote:
If you have enough MP, gas & munition points, why not?  It means  that you have earned it by managing your resourses and strategies to bring on the hammer as soon as you can.  Why should a player be penalized for its effective startegies?

doesn't exists in CoH. If you have surplus of resources against a decent player the victory is already decided(either in your favor or against).

In either case, call-in units aren't supposed to be spammed. I proceed to lock this thread because this was already discussed and afaik limits for call-in units won't be removed; so there's no value in arguing for something like that.