Economies of scale on Muni Upgrades

[vewt]

I understand what was meant to be achieved with having free abilities global unlocks payed for with munitions, but the break even point for Russians' abilities and upgrades getting cheaper compared to other faction's ones is just way too low.


The best example:
Compare the Sniper's FOO to the Brit Lt's. For 100 munitions you get an non-doc FOO that you use from a spammable and independantly useful 250 MP unit for no cost only constrained by a cooldown. Compared to a doctrinal, 150 munitions ability on a unit 250 MP 15 Fuel unit.

In this case, the economy of scale begins with the first use. You just got an FOO for 100 munitions rather than 150. Most of these abilities should clearly cost more so that they only become as or more cost efficient as their counterparts when used a lot on a lot of units.

Very poorly thought out.

[CommissarGears]

Maybe the cooldown only Soviet special abilities should cost some Manpower instead of munitions?  When i play Soviets i always have an excess of maybe 4,000 manpower by the end of the game, with maybe 3,000 fuel, but my munitions is always 300 or below.

[vewt]

How do you manage that? Surely you could win in those situations by forcing attrition that benefits you (as the party who is much wealthier).

If both sides lose a unit on a attack, or even if you lose two for his one, as long as he runs out first you win, right?
Post Merge: January 23, 2010, 10:28:32 AMErm, also, I don't like that idea.

The Manpower war needs to be preserved largely as it is in all other matchups, but needs to punish the USSR less (because, well, they didn't really do much to win the manpower war irl, but still ended up with the advantage).