Cheesy / Gamey play with upgrades / variants?
- Thread starter RupertTheBear
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yes, 100xp. But your tank would only have 40% reliability as opposed to 80% in the default model.
Seems to yeah. But keep in mind: It is in beta so it may be balanced out.
And every point in the three area's gives -8% reliability while a point in reliability only gives +8%
so if you use those 100 xps on your tank you would get:
80 (base) + 40 (reliability 5) - 120 ( 5 engines, 5 armor, 5 weapon) = 0% reliability
Check the vid @nastydisease posted on 31.00 and you wil see daniel adding 5 armor and 5 reliability wich returned it to default.
So yeah you could spend 100 xp to a new model but it wouldn't be able to drive off the assembly line without breaking down.
Atleast according to the info in the video. and only aslong as there isn't a minimum level of reliability
And these values might be changed.
- 2
That needs massively changed. In some manner. It means theirs no real need for upgrading during the war. Just upgrade at max every time you research a new unit. No need for loss of productivity or constant change. That's horribly set up and doesn't simulate the reality of the world war. Tanks...not one model came out as it was. Can you imagine a Sherman in 41 with 150mm of armor and a 76mm cannon or a Panzer IVH with its High Velocity and upgraded armor+skirts?
The upgrade system imo should be a natural progression of the military equipment. Not just a tag along for your tank. I've listed someways to help and fix it..I hope the devs are aware of this odd problem.n For years on end Daniel in WWW had 500 cap'd and The British well over 100 the entire time and towards now closer to 500.
In response to your edit. Not to be crass but that doesn't mean anything. It's a clear cut issue to me. I don't see a way of getting around it. Should be fixed. The reliability is not what I'm talking about. But the capability of full upgrading and seemingly hefty penalty of 25% which dismayed Daniel from ever once upgrading his fleet of tanks.
My problem with 25% isn't so much that its a big penalty. I ironically find it small. But to be taken every time a upgrade no matter how minor greatly keeps a player from doing so...at least it would with me. And incentives just saving up so you never loose production which is bullshit to me.
- 1
Maybe lowering the effiency penalty for switching variants could help.
This way it would be much more attractive to acutally switch to a new variant to keep your tanks competive in field ( even if it costs reliability ).
- 1
I already thought a could idea would just be to attach the efficiency due to the degree of the upgrade.
I'm pretty sure I'd know how to fix it and make it work. It's more a matter of are devs capable of doing what I mentioned easily within the game engine.
Another idea is simply that you can only upgrade so much each time. Someone else pointed out you could set it to delays too..that'd be a good idea. I prefer the idea of production. Meaning you need to produce a number of them before being able to upgrade to another variant. Maybe something like 250 before being able to upgrade each time. So a actual choice is made. That'd work great imo. A few limiters here and there could make it perfectly simulate world war 2 and make it have real choices real choices. Not gamey cheese stuff ones of saving up and going in one go.
Late versions of tanks, aircrafts and so on are probably better represented as new tech levels instead of variants of old techs.
- 1
Its compounded by the 25% being the last part of the S curve, meaning that last 25% from a maxed out efficiency line is the hardest part to reattain.
Actually now that I think about it, perhaps the devs were talking about variants such as tank destroyer, spaa and spart, not upgraded variants of the base tank design. Perhaps they can simply have a lower efficiency loss on an upgrade of an existing version.
Regardless I think there is a lot of balancing to go. Minors need to be able to retool their divisions and upgrade their tanks too, yet majors like Germany probably want to feel like they aren't wasting an advantage by leaving their xp in the pool.
Actually now that I think about it, perhaps the devs were talking about variants such as tank destroyer, spaa and spart, not upgraded variants of the base tank design. Perhaps they can simply have a lower efficiency loss on an upgrade of an existing version.
Regardless I think there is a lot of balancing to go. Minors need to be able to retool their divisions and upgrade their tanks too, yet majors like Germany probably want to feel like they aren't wasting an advantage by leaving their xp in the pool.
In Hoi3 I would do something similar if I was Allies, if I was Germany I would Rush Heavy Tanks for the war with the SU. And if I played as Spain I would do Lights with enough armor to defeat infantry penetration values but nothing else, they were usually like 10 kph divisions, Light Tank + AC + Mech or MOT whichever was faster. For stupid fast encirclement.
My real issue is they have everything in place to make it be realistic and correct and really cool to real life..they just need the numbers and limiters right.
Based on the values in the WWW where Daniel demonstrated upgrading the Pz III, optimal play will be to ensure you have at least 50 XP stored (or however many it is once beta testing is complete) when you finish researching a new tank, and immediately upgrade 5 points in gun/armour/engine and 5 points in reliability. If maintaining reliability isn't that important to you, you could spend more points on other aspects of the tank. Then you place the variant into production, meaning the production line never suffers a drop in productivity for changing to a variant later on, and every single tank produced is better than the base version. Its a very exploitable mechanic in its current form and a reason I'm not a big fan of the current variant mechanic.
I'd be much happier if variants required further research. For example you've just finished researching the base Pz III. Then you spend some accumulated experience points to design a better tank, but have to use a research slot to research it. The length of additional research could be tied to the number of changes you want to make to the base tank. For example, researching a fully upgraded (5 in all categories) variant could take as long as researching a brand new tank, but if you just want to add say 1 extra point of armour it could be ready in 5% of the time. If later on the player wanted to add a slightly better gun to the existing variant, that could again be researched in 5% of the time for the base tank, as it would only be a single change to the already existing variant.
I'd be much happier if variants required further research. For example you've just finished researching the base Pz III. Then you spend some accumulated experience points to design a better tank, but have to use a research slot to research it. The length of additional research could be tied to the number of changes you want to make to the base tank. For example, researching a fully upgraded (5 in all categories) variant could take as long as researching a brand new tank, but if you just want to add say 1 extra point of armour it could be ready in 5% of the time. If later on the player wanted to add a slightly better gun to the existing variant, that could again be researched in 5% of the time for the base tank, as it would only be a single change to the already existing variant.
- 2
- 1
Hey - thanks for the tip on the exploit. I'll definitely be taking advantage of it.
Your suggestion for tech research sounds a lot like the HOI3 system, plus experience points. I wonder if they will close the "loophole" before the game is released?
It should simulate. I agree and honestly researching makes sense to me. Minor upgrades should be added. Like you can only max plus one on everything the first go around. Then you have to research upgrades for each unit. So you'd have to raise the cap to highest. That'd work perfectly. Its better then my idea. And you could somehow tie in army experience...maybe it cost 60 army experience to half the time. Say its 60 days. Using 50 Army Xp you can cut it too 30. The experience should be used constantly imo and by the play through mostly sat around.
Given what the experience system is meant to simulate, I think it'd be a good gameplay mechanic to disallow upgrading vehicles you just "unlocked". Then once you'd used them for a while, preferrably in combat, you'd be able to start upgrading them as you were "applying the lessons from the battlefield", as it were.
- 1
That might be nice, but it's also going to be quite a lot harder to track unless built into the system. I'd personally prefer a minimum amount of base unit production before any variants are unlocked, but a combination with combat time/time after research would do nicely too.
Lets hope that each nation would have different kind of tanks, for example Germany maxing out everything at cost of build efficiency and reliability, and USA maybe only upgrading when they no longer can defeat enemy armor. Just examples.
If same set up is used for every nation, i am disappointed.
If same set up is used for every nation, i am disappointed.
- 1
IMO you should be able to invest 3-4 points initially, then slowly gain the ability to invest more as the chassis sees combat. That way, not everyone's "1940 tank" is the same, but they're also not bizarro world 1944 models being cranked out in '39. I don't think the game currently has support for this kind of limitation though.
Like a Sherman MK I would be "1940 tank" with 2 points in reliability and 1 in armour. The Panzer IV long barrelled version would be "1940 tank" with 2 points in gun and 1 in reliability. Stuff like that. Maybe in some future DLC, when you unlock the new tank design you can spend XP to customize it initially, prior to creating new variants in general.
When i first heard of modifiying your own vehicles in your own way, i was really happy. What a cool thing! But given the fact, that different upgrades in one aspect lower the other aspects in the same amount of percentages, u trade just a + with a - in stats ...and this is simply nonesense 
. Why would i upgrade my armor to safe me from losses when my reliability goes down the same way so i get my losses by wheather and bad infrastrukture xD? I do very much hope, this will be balanced now during the beta for it is such a key aspect of the game when u just got 3 models of a vehicle to research (for example a fighterplane)....And good god, if all the stats are same for all the 1939, 1940 and so on vehicles, the whole thing gets much worse cause the player with more IC just has to produce the same vehicle/ or variantvehicle in larger numbers than the other #notacticrequired.
. Why would i upgrade my armor to safe me from losses when my reliability goes down the same way so i get my losses by wheather and bad infrastrukture xD? I do very much hope, this will be balanced now during the beta for it is such a key aspect of the game when u just got 3 models of a vehicle to research (for example a fighterplane)....And good god, if all the stats are same for all the 1939, 1940 and so on vehicles, the whole thing gets much worse cause the player with more IC just has to produce the same vehicle/ or variantvehicle in larger numbers than the other #notacticrequired.- 3