Russian preservation concerns/Ostheer Vet suggestion

[Joshua9]

Very impressed with this mod from what I read and saw in the video, but I have some questions/concerns about the impact of certain choices, not as they affect balance, but as they affect overall game-play/battlefield decision-making.  Of course, once I’ve played the mod, I may find my concerns invalid, and I do definitely plan on playing it on the 21st.  Until then though, I figured I’d ask.

I also had a veterancy idea(not so much for the Russians but  possibly for the Ostheer), down towards the bottom, just for the sake of contributing to the idea pool.

I really like the no retreat idea for conscripts-----I think it should apply to conscripts only though, or at least not for every troop type.  One thing I think we’ll miss here is the capping gamble(when do I retreat? Is it worth trading unit for point? Is it worth that extra second?)  With Russian units, there’s never a reason to make a decision.

I don’t mind the no reman(especially because I understand the roadblock here)---but again, if it could be changed, I certainly think it should be changed, at least for some unit types.  This is more important than my first concern, because it reflects the number of choices that can be made on the battlefield.  It waters them down(at least as far as I can tell), and I’m not sure there is something viable to replace that action and its consequences with. 

Granted, because they can’t recrew their own weapons, the soviets need to be extra cautious, but in ideal play, people are cautious anyway.

I appreciate the unique approach to veterancy, global weapon upgrades(how veterancy is really just represented in better unit options)----but I wonder if this also, is so hard-line that it reduces the coh experience, especially when joined with the other two reductions in COH functionality.

All other factions seem to have a clear incentive to keep certain units alive.  American and PE vetted units are more valuable than non-vetted.  Brit squads are extremely expensive to buy(but cheaper to reinforce), their lt’s and captains gain veterancy, and they have individual upgrades, which are expensive to replace in munitions.  Wehrmacht heavily relies on those same personal upgrades, and takes a big hit when it loses an upgraded gren or storm team.
 
If all Russian upgrades are global, and if there is no individual veterancy, or weapon buys, the Russian player seems absolved of any need to focus on unit preservation, which might be fine as a means of encouraging a certain Russian play-style, I only worry that that play-style might feel less personal, or more to the point, less nuanced, or choice-laden on the tactical level, if not on the strategic level.

One option would be slightly more expensive unit-buys and dirt cheap/free reinforcement costs, which would make it important to keep unit integrity, even if most of a squad is obliterated.  This may be how things work already, I’m not sure.

……………….
Veterancy Suggestion:  Note, this is thinking while I type- it’s not well thought out, but might generate some ideas.
On the note of veterancy, this doesn’t really fit the Russian play-style, but a somewhat unique idea for veterancy occurred to me.  It would be a hybrid of American/wehrmacht upgrades in a way, though the only wehrmacht comparison would be that this idea involves a special upgrade building(elite equipment/training facility). 

The general idea behind this would be veterancy earned by action in the field, which would have similar if lesser affects to American veterancy, though, perhaps attained easier.
The significant difference would be the training(or just equipping/reassigning) facility, that would allow you to trade in remaining squad members(which have attained varying levels of veterancy) for higher level troops with better load-outs.  It would work kind of like a medic bunker, tallying up trade-in’s until it had enough to generate a new, better armed, more elite squad.  (actually, for simplicity, I think that unit types could only attain one level of veterancy, and that different facilities might be needed to trade different soldier types-this might not be necessary)

I see this idea necessarily coupled with a no reinforcement disadvantage for this faction though. 

This might be a unique disadvantage/advantage of some Ostheer units.  No reinforcement but full heal for remaining members at base(for free, or else with a cheap base upgrade) though I suspect something better has already been decided on.

Alternatively, if the no reinforcement idea is not so hot, the veterancy would still work the same way, but the building/buildings for different unit types would instead, be a necessary visit for vetted squads to gain improvements at no munitions cost.  Of course, the player should not have to rely on earned veterancy to counter threats, so perhaps these would be alternative ways to get equipment and upgrades, as a cheaper(munitions light) means of equipping, rather than buying via munitions upgrades, the same way you can buy a PE squad that already has shreks, or you can purchase the shreks separately.

[Loupblanc]

 : Hmm, I also like the idea of veterancy, and or British-style
 Officer vet. I was thinking actually, of making it so that you
 can only EVER just about buy Conscripts - But that Stresky
 /Guards are the VETERANCY result of Conscripts surviving.

 Guards *ARE* (historically) a Stresky unit with an extra
 medal on their chest and the nominal title : 'Guards'. Want
 Stresky/Guards? Well EARN them!. Perhaps make it possible
 to buy Stresky/Guards but only once you've managed to
 at least unlock AND vet to that level. This would also
 encourage the conscript upgrades, etc, as the cheaper
 way to make Stresky/Guards via veterancy.

 - Was thinking of being able to upgrade a T34 to 'leader'
 status. Makes an officer pop out, and makes it a sort of
 Leader Cromwell, xcept with only a +1 (Needs to vet)
 level (not 3 like Crom), xcept it keeps it's gun. Can only
 have 1 leader at a time. When it dies, can upgrade
 another. Or. More complex : T34's must upgrade to that
 level (squad leader) via veterancy. Once one is upgraded,
 all others reset?
 
 - Once upon a time, I also described a T34 call-in
 that would work a little similar to PE Panther Battlegroup.
 It improves when # of buildings in play + Global upgrade?
 Tank building + 100 muni : Can call-in 1 x T34. 4 buildings
 + 200 muni : Can call-in 2x T34?

 - Something similar to american supply depot. Make
 Russians able to OP points (via Outpost/Bunker/Truck?)
 Instead of having less upkeep, russians would get some
 ressources back for units lost or destroyed? Already have
 this ability in (name?) COH game mod survive...
 4 players vs 1 locked AI. Forgot name
 (Just checked : It's somewall).  Tiger Ace campaign
 has it too. Get ressources by killing stuff. Why not do
 same with russians? Except not shared with allies, and
 get ressources back for lost units/killed units.
 (Maybe just lost units).

 Similar mechanics is medics getting wounded back.
 Would work fine xcept people think it'll make zombie
 armies too easy. I don't mind that, really. I even think
 it'd make fine new troops. Ah well, would need to be
 tested, regardless

[Joshua9]

Commisars with vet(and equivolencies for vehicles)would work for me, but vet 1 probably shouldn't be too hard to come by.


I just realized that my suggestion about no reinforcements would be pretty severe against a faction that most people are suggesting should have a mobile hq.  The only thing that keeps brits from getting nuked at their own hq early is their constant ability to reinforce on the spot---so I guess there would have to be a reinforce upgrade option, perhaps in a differnt tier than the veterancy building option- so that people chouldn't easily reinforce vetted squads and then turn them into full elite units)...other option though, would be for standard sqauds to have less men anyway(4), and for elite squads to have 6 men like commandos.  this would cost a squad and a half of vetted units to get a better squad type.
.................

Another poorly explored suggestion I have is in regard to the Ostheer start...

a polar opposite of Russia might be intersting, where the Ostheer get 2 effective soldier units and one engineer equivolent right from the start.  What they don't get though is the HQ.  That would not be not available for the first 3 minutes of play?(number is flexible), and when it is placed, there must be a supply line from the spawnpoint to the lockdown point.

Now, 1v1 this seems reasonbly easy to balance for me...2v2 I can see potential problems when factoring in other allies ...but it would be differnt, and would give the Ostheer an immediate presence/capping advantage, which would taper off to a presence/capping disadvantage, while still in the early game.


edit--- just thought of a problem with this idea...with critical mass, it would prably be pretty easy for an enemy to wait until it has the right amount of units...then rush to the spawnpoint, and cut supply..and there would be nothing the ostheer could do about it.  A better idea might be that a supply line must reach a certain sector, at which point, a type of OP or lockdown on that point can be built for very cheap(without an hq for that matter).  any point that has said op, can be parked on by the truck, out of suplly or no.


 EDIT---to expand on the no-opening-HQ concept, it would be possible to make the truck wait about 5 minutes, and have a second round of possible call-ins(some flexibility in choices  here) at about the  3 1/2 to 4 minute mark before that.  the faction could start with like 20 to 30 fuel, but any of the tiered(t-1, (and t-2 if non-linear) call-ins would cost fuel. (this would account for all options in this second wave---so as to limit the total callins from like 2 or 3 units tops-but with a bren or scout-car level option in the mix).  Only manpower would stockpile while the truck was not locked down, same as brit, so this would be the only fuel Ostheer has for the first 5 minutes...same as whatver the starting munitions would be.

This would create a sense of the Ostheer needing to establish a foothold in Russian Territory before being able to set up an actual HQ...it would also Give them an ebbing advantage/disadvantage/advantage/disadvantage in map presence, which would provide a lot of early swings in position(in theory...who knows how this could affect multiplayer---would hate for it to make mg lockdowns too easy...but then, you'd be dealing with 2 factions, and they would have manpower advantages off and on, and locking in 2 opponents isn't so easy.)

Also, if say, you had about 40 fuel to play with on the second round of call-ins, you would have to choose between having some of that fuel for your buildings once you finally did have an hq so that you could start producing a steady troop build-up, or the extra unit in that second call-in phase for map control.

Since you won't be getting fuel until the HQ locks down, this will be a slow process(5 minutes might be too slow though, not sure about how many units can be produced in that time)

It goes without saying that the call-ins would dissapear after the HQ was available.


And oh..Heh, I guess if you start with no hq and no other buildings, you lose the game...hmmm, if that can't be adjusted for the first four minutes, then the starting sector has to have some sort of emplacement

[Loupblanc]

 Yea, it's hard to make something interestingly different for
 flavor, yet having something that won't be underpowered/
 overpowered in certain situations :p