bonus units

Developers is it possible so that the infantry was replaceable (like tanks) ?
I mean that in the latest patch you create units to replace
King Tiger, Sherman Firefly, Sherman crocodile, etc.

well, such as the Luftwaffe detachment replaces the detachment troops who landed on the parachute (they can get mp 40 but they are unable to build anti-aircraft guns)

ParkerWarrior wrote:
Developers is it possible so that the infantry was replaceable (like tanks) ?
I mean that in the latest patch you create units to replace
King Tiger, Sherman Firefly, Sherman crocodile, etc.

Yes Its possible.
The problem is there is allmost no infantry that should be replaced.
Only IMO Knight Cross Holders, Guards and Partisants can be changed.

Quote
well, such as the Luftwaffe detachment replaces the detachment troops who landed on the parachute (they can get mp 40 but they are unable to build anti-aircraft guns).

You have Fallschirmjäger. They are not Airborne becouse of allied air supremacy. Also replacing luftwaffe infantry in a luftwaffe doctrine would be wierd.

Any unit can be replaced with any other. Infantry can replace vechicles too.

Make a new Brit squad to replace infantry sections. Basically give them riflemen lol.

I like the idea of mp40 luftwaffe. Someone made a mod where you could get this and I liked it. Or you could make a reward unit Luftwaffe assault infantry etc.

Also, the PE infantry can be replaced. Those assault/tankbuster squads are usually quite useless unless you're starved for munis. Overall though, infantry balance is a fragile thing. The entire game depends on it, moreso than with tanks. That's why CoH:O is so fucked up.

Relic introduced replacement so they could give people who bought ToV something new and still claim their game was balanced because you would have to give another unit up. (didn't work.)

I never got why the mod introduced replacement units. I would much rather make the decide what unit to buy in the game than before it.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Also, the PE infantry can be replaced. Those assault/tankbuster squads are usually quite useless unless you're starved for munis. Overall though, infantry balance is a fragile thing. The entire game depends on it, moreso than with tanks. That's why CoH:O is so fucked up.

On topic: This quote says it all, yes it can be done, but you will have to be very careful if you do so.

Paciat wrote:

ParkerWarrior wrote:
Developers is it possible so that the infantry was replaceable (like tanks) ?
I mean that in the latest patch you create units to replace
King Tiger, Sherman Firefly, Sherman crocodile, etc.

Yes Its possible.
The problem is there is allmost no infantry that should be replaced.
Only IMO Knight Cross Holders, Guards and Partisants can be changed.

Quote
well, such as the Luftwaffe detachment replaces the detachment troops who landed on the parachute (they can get mp 40 but they are unable to build anti-aircraft guns).

You have Fallschirmjäger. They are not Airborne becouse of allied air supremacy. Also replacing luftwaffe infantry in a luftwaffe doctrine would be wierd.

Any unit can be replaced with any other. Infantry can replace vechicles too.

But what about rangers ,commadnos or airborn infantry

Last edited October 22, 2010 at 10:15 AM by ParkerWarrior

ParkerWarrior wrote:
But what about rangers ,commadnos or airborn infantry

You mean Airborne from Airborne company, Rangers Heavy Infantry from Infantry company and Commandos from Commando support tree?

Yes

ParkerWarrior wrote:
But what about rangers ,commadnos or airborn infantry

You mean Airborne from Airborne company, Rangers Heavy Infantry from Infantry company and Commandos from Commando support tree?

ParkerWarrior wrote:
Yes

What infantry do you want then? It needs to fit the company/support tree.
Airborne2 and Commando2?  ;D

Would be nice to see some Marines.... ;)

Shadowmetroid wrote:
Would be nice to see some Marines.... ;)

Marines werent used in Europe.

What about France partisans to replace british commandos (spawning like Fallschirmjäger ) or sniper to replace bren carrier or captain
3 man sapers with boys at rifle (at rifle upgade will cost 35 munition)

Airborn 57mm gun replace with sniper

It's just examples

Commandos are the core of the doctrine and can't be replaced. Captain can't be replaced because he is the vet for British and you gimp them by removing him. The command tank replacement only kinda worked because stags WERE very OP with their MGs and most people who used them used kangs as well so didn't need it. Changing sappers COULD work but they'd be pretty much the same unit anyway because they would have to retain the ability to build and repair things.

I really don't think infantry should ever be replaced unless something is deemed to be completely broken beyond repair.  Better to balance the existing units than just essentially 'give up' on a unit by offering a better replacement.  The 'reward system' was just Relic being too cheap/lazy to add new units to the factions without giving them to owners of vCoH/OF for free (even though they did exactly this with DoW2); even though the dismal British unit roster desperately needed additions, not replacements.

Replacing units mainly for looks/coolness factor is fine, but if the replacement has an entirely different role (ie the Hotchkiss) it should have been added to the permanent roster.  Giving up a critical unit for another than MAY be useful in a given matchup just doesn't make sense.

lbg wrote:
I really don't think infantry should ever be replaced unless something is deemed to be completely broken beyond repair.  Better to balance the existing units than just essentially 'give up' on a unit by offering a better replacement.  The 'reward system' was just Relic being too cheap/lazy to add new units to the factions without giving them to owners of vCoH/OF for free (even though they did exactly this with DoW2); even though the dismal British unit roster desperately needed additions, not replacements.

Replacing units mainly for looks/coolness factor is fine, but if the replacement has an entirely different role (ie the Hotchkiss) it should have been added to the permanent roster.  Giving up a critical unit for another than MAY be useful in a given matchup just doesn't make sense.

But I supouse that it will be more interesting to have "unique" army .
I mean to have such units that other player don't have or don't want to take.
For example i prefer to buy infantry instead of tanks but my ally likes tanks, that's why i'd like to replace tanks with infantry

---

Post Merge: [time]1287804565[/time]

---

lbg wrote:
The 'reward system' was just Relic being too cheap/lazy to add new units to the factions without giving them to owners of vCoH/OF for free (even though they did exactly this with DoW2); even though the dismal British unit roster desperately needed additions, not replacements.

Have you played dow2 ? You need Chaos rising just to play chaos but bonus units they give you in any case (i had my dow2 before i bought expansion) but it's not our topic.
The only thing i hate in britains is their value american riflemans cost 270 mp and british section 450 mp.

Last edited October 23, 2010 at 7:36 PM by ParkerWarrior

ParkerWarrior wrote:
For example i prefer to buy infantry instead of tanks but my ally likes tanks, that's why i'd like to replace tanks with infantry

Then youre oponent will build anti infantry vechicles and arti and youll loose every time.

Paciat wrote:

ParkerWarrior wrote:
For example i prefer to buy infantry instead of tanks but my ally likes tanks, that's why i'd like to replace tanks with infantry

Then youre oponent will build anti infantry vechicles and arti and youll loose every time.

BUT my ally has tanks and i have for example rangers
(i can destroy 2 king tigers with 5-6 squads of rangers)
wimberlind can't kill 2 squads but ostwind ... i hate ostwind (oly when it has lvlup)
aa guns emplasemants i can clear with sniper
when enemy use arty ... well infanty has button to retread  ;D

Last edited October 23, 2010 at 7:58 PM by ParkerWarrior

You clearly play at a low level. Not that there's anything wrong with that but these kinds of things don't work in higher levels of play. A KT should never be lost to rangers. Also, the game can't be balanced based on 2v2s because there are far too many variables. High level 1v1 competitive play is the best mode to balance for so it carries over to other modes.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
You clearly play at a low level. Not that there's anything wrong with that but these kinds of things don't work in higher levels of play. A KT should never be lost to rangers. Also, the game can't be balanced based on 2v2s because there are far too many variables. High level 1v1 competitive play is the best mode to balance for so it carries over to other modes.

I'm playing ONLINE
And killing KT is much easyer than killing tiger
(to kill KT you just need 3 paratroopers or rangers squads)

Last edited October 24, 2010 at 2:09 PM by ParkerWarrior

No, rangers never penetrate either tiger from the front and if a tiger gets shot in the ass by them it's being used wrong.

ParkerWarrior wrote:
I'm playing ONLINE
And killing KT is much easyer than killing tiger
(to kill KT you just need 3 paratroopers or rangers squads)

You know that RR paratroopers or rangers are anti-tank infantry, right?
Their elite, compared to PIAT sappers/commandos and Soviet Tank Hunters too.

lbg wrote:
The 'reward system' was just Relic being too cheap/lazy to add new units to the factions without giving them to owners of vCoH/OF for free (even though they did exactly this with DoW2); even though the dismal British unit roster desperately needed additions, not replacements.

QuoteHave you played dow2 ? You need Chaos rising just to play chaos but bonus units they give you in any case (i had my dow2 before i bought expansion) but it's not our topic.
The only thing i hate in britains is their value american riflemans cost 270 mp and british section 450 mp.

Did you read my post?  I was saying exactly that - that Relic gave the new units to DoW2 players without needing the expansion.  All Tales of Valor did was screw up the game and give an advantage to people willing to pay.  A theme that seems to be recurring in the 'new' CoH:O.

And enough talk of random team skill levels where apparently people leave KTs unsupported and lose them to ranger blobbers.

Last edited October 25, 2010 at 4:01 PM by lbg

Paciat wrote:

ParkerWarrior wrote:
I'm playing ONLINE
And killing KT is much easyer than killing tiger
(to kill KT you just need 3 paratroopers or rangers squads)

You know that RR paratroopers or rangers are anti-tank infantry, right?
Their elite, compared to PIAT sappers/commandos and Soviet Tank Hunters too.

Yep but Soviets good vs light armory and to deal with tanks you need to youse your at granates
Aren't commandos elites ???

Ahh .... we got away from our topic
Ok i suppose it could be close thanks for answers

Last edited October 25, 2010 at 4:03 PM by ParkerWarrior

ParkerWarrior wrote:

Paciat wrote:

ParkerWarrior wrote:
I'm playing ONLINE
And killing KT is much easyer than killing tiger
(to kill KT you just need 3 paratroopers or rangers squads)

You know that RR paratroopers or rangers are anti-tank infantry, right?
Their elite, compared to PIAT sappers/commandos and Soviet Tank Hunters too.

Yep but Soviets good vs light armory and to deal with tanks you need to youse your at granates
Aren't commandos elites ???

Yes, Commandos "are", but IMO PIAT Commandos aren't(I haven't checked the stats but looks like have the same stats than or close to PIAT Sappers). What Paciat said is you shouldn't think that Paratroopers and Tank Hunters belong to the same "class". The former are elites, the latter aren't, so is wrong to expect the same results.

ParkerWarrior wrote:
Ahh .... we got away from our topic
Ok i suppose it could be close thanks for answers

Granted. Topic Locked.

Last edited October 25, 2010 at 4:39 PM by blackbishop