Login

russian armor

Mainline infantry sandbags change

19 Feb 2020, 03:19 AM
#21
avatar of Latch

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Feb 2020, 23:55 PMVipper

And there is little reason for IS to be able to built heavy cover in first place.

Part of the reason why IS are hard to balance is that every engagement vs IS was in a crucial area of the map vs heavy after which IS could simply heal up again. Without sandbags available to them they would have to use the cover available in the map as other mainline infatry.


UKF are already gimped by being unable to wire off until tech up, removing sandbags from them would render maps that have no cover especially on important areas an immediate veto for a faction that revolves around cover.

You want to solve this "issue", make it unable to have green cover created inside capture areas, instead being able to upgrade the capure area with defences for a cost, that way, you lose it, you give dences to the enemy.
19 Feb 2020, 03:25 AM
#22
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 794

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2020, 03:19 AMLatch
UKF are already gimped by being unable to wire off until tech up, removing sandbags from them would render maps that have no cover especially on important areas an immediate veto for a faction that revolves around cover.


As I suggested on the last page: what about moving UKF Engineers to T0, keeping emplacements behind T1/T2, and keeping the heavy engineer upgrade behind T1 as well? Then UKF IS' could lose sandbags and not be at a disadvantage (and allow for more diverse openings). This would also allow for the removal of UC self repair.
19 Feb 2020, 10:01 AM
#23
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 7640 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2020, 03:19 AMLatch

UKF are already gimped by being unable to wire off until tech up, removing sandbags from them would render maps that have no cover especially on important areas an immediate veto for a faction that revolves around cover.

You want to solve this "issue", make it unable to have green cover created inside capture areas, instead being able to upgrade the capure area with defences for a cost, that way, you lose it, you give dences to the enemy.

One will simply have to test and see but the majority of map provide all type of covers. Point here is that IS currently should be balanced around fight in green cover and full health and that is part of the reason they are difficult to get in the right spot.

One can more the sandbags to Ro.E. and make any adjustments needed to IS.
19 Feb 2020, 12:28 PM
#24
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 515

You have people that complain about blobbing and then they post complaining about infantry that can build cover and effectively use it...

I'm sorry but if bags gets removed or "timed" all you'll see is massed blobs roaming the map slamming into each other. Moving it to engies is not the answer because as it stands USF hardly use tank traps for green cover compared to other factions.

The only winners of this change will be blobbing USF players that have their infantry balanced around the fact they don't need cover like Tommy, cons, ostruppen or even volks do.
19 Feb 2020, 12:33 PM
#25
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 515

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Feb 2020, 23:55 PMVipper

And there is little reason for IS to be able to built heavy cover in first place.

Part of the reason why IS are hard to balance is that every engagement vs IS was in a crucial area of the map vs heavy after which IS could simply heal up again. Without sandbags available to them they would have to use the cover available in the map as other mainline infatry.


It's nice to see you changed your outlook and since the old Tommy pyro thread. So now I take it you agree with me that most players will keep med upgrades? And not every player will spam pyro like the doomsayers predicted.

19 Feb 2020, 13:44 PM
#26
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 7640 | Subs: 1



It's nice to see you changed your outlook and since the old Tommy pyro thread. So now I take it you agree with me that most players will keep med upgrades? And not every player will spam pyro like the doomsayers predicted.


I have not and pls stop making personal post.

I have post my point of view with clarity:
1) Sand bag on mainline infatry is bad because it promotes spamming a "single do it all unit". Player should be encouraged to use different units via utility and sandbags is such a utility. Imo the same should apply for all mainline infatry including IS.

2) IS have proven difficult to balance so far because of that utility. Up until recently they where able to create they own cover and self-heal for free meaning that they could defend until the enemy used multiple squad to dislodge them at which point they could simply retreat.

By removing their ability to built heavy cover that would be no longer the case and thus they could be adjusted if needed. That change would promote bigger use of Ro.E. which is a good thing.

Feel free to ask me for any clarification instead of trying to present your version of what I have posted. Thanks in advance.
19 Feb 2020, 18:31 PM
#27
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2040

You have people that complain about blobbing and then they post complaining about infantry that can build cover and effectively use it...

I'm sorry but if bags gets removed or "timed" all you'll see is massed blobs roaming the map slamming into each other. Moving it to engies is not the answer because as it stands USF hardly use tank traps for green cover compared to other factions.

The only winners of this change will be blobbing USF players that have their infantry balanced around the fact they don't need cover like Tommy, cons, ostruppen or even volks do.

How do you really back up your argument? I mean i can say anything unrelated and even picture a doom and what i just did was not even an aswer. There are always bad cases and the worst players often exploit it but by no means those players decide what balance actually is.

Sandbags being limited will force a more strategical perspective on the game. If you like to blob like a maniac someone waiting calmly in green cover should rape the crap out of that blob. This change brings another step into a more skill rewarding gameplay. Blobs will always exist and mostly on low skill players or on unbalanced cheese infantry.

I will repeat my suggestion, mainlines should not build GREEN cover but dig shallow trenches, that provide light cover. It shouldnt be too hard to code, its just a feature to the map, like a crater but with directional cover. A trench can be or can not be destroyed when trampled (it should be though) and infantry can past on top of it without vaulting. This gives green conver more value
19 Feb 2020, 20:57 PM
#28
avatar of DonnieChan

Posts: 1713 | Subs: 1

Since mainline infantries like Volks,cons, IS, riflemen (doctrinally) and grens (bunkers) are able to build their own cover the mechanic is kind of important to simply remove it.

Therefore instead of removing the ability i would like to prupose a change, into a more defensive theme.

Except for cons and grens, Instead of "building" sandbags (like engineers do) they now "spawn" a single, circular sandbag pile big enough to cover at least 3 or 4 models, like the ones in the capture points. This skill will have a big enough cooldown and will have a time to set up aswell.

Thoughs?


i'm sorry, no

this sounds like a Command and Conquer Solution or solution for any boring rts

luckily this isnt command and conquer
21 Feb 2020, 03:53 AM
#29
avatar of C3 TOOTH

Posts: 54

Remember that Cons was the only mainline infantry can build sandbag. Next to RM with doc.

Later IS is so relied on cover to play so IS gains sandbag so they may able to play in early game.

And for that, Volk gains sandbag to bad to fight RM (since they still had Shreck). Later Pion also able to build sandbag so Gren able to fight IS.
- - -
Now USF become the only faction that lack sandbag (requires a doc). And Cons sandbag is no more unique.
- - -
Sandbag move to Engineer units will only kill Brit early game. The other faction has almost no affected
21 Feb 2020, 05:26 AM
#30
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 515


How do you really back up your argument? I mean i can say anything unrelated and even picture a doom and what i just did was not even an aswer. There are always bad cases and the worst players often exploit it but by no means those players decide what balance actually is.

Sandbags being limited will force a more strategical perspective on the game. If you like to blob like a maniac someone waiting calmly in green cover should rape the crap out of that blob. This change brings another step into a more skill rewarding gameplay. Blobs will always exist and mostly on low skill players or on unbalanced cheese infantry.

I will repeat my suggestion, mainlines should not build GREEN cover but dig shallow trenches, that provide light cover. It shouldnt be too hard to code, its just a feature to the map, like a crater but with directional cover. A trench can be or can not be destroyed when trampled (it should be though) and infantry can past on top of it without vaulting. This gives green conver more value


Light cover can still be walked over by a captain S price tactical command blob. This is especially a big problem when you need to stick maxims or Vickers behind green cover so they don't die before they can suppress.

How do I back up this viewpoint? Oh you know just hundreds of hours watching pro gameplay from the likes of Luvnest or vonivan. But I guess the they don't know what they're talking about huh?
21 Feb 2020, 05:35 AM
#31
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 515

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2020, 13:44 PMVipper

I have not and pls stop making personal post.

I have post my point of view with clarity:
1) Sand bag on mainline infatry is bad because it promotes spamming a "single do it all unit". Player should be encouraged to use different units via utility and sandbags is such a utility. Imo the same should apply for all mainline infatry including IS.

2) IS have proven difficult to balance so far because of that utility. Up until recently they where able to create they own cover and self-heal for free meaning that they could defend until the enemy used multiple squad to dislodge them at which point they could simply retreat.

By removing their ability to built heavy cover that would be no longer the case and thus they could be adjusted if needed. That change would promote bigger use of Ro.E. which is a good thing.

Feel free to ask me for any clarification instead of trying to present your version of what I have posted. Thanks in advance.


If you claim one unit shouldn't do everything then why are you claiming RE should have more roles? Especially when you oppose new units like officer providing CQB role.


Your logic is flawed unless you want a return of RE spam. They are already the most overworked RE unit in utility, having to be the snare carrier shielding units from vehicles,building and repairing emplacement, only unit suitable for PIAT, as well as usual engie job of mine laying and sweeping, repairing vehicles, clearing wire etc. This is way more than other engies deal with and having your only snare carrier building sandbags while you have a luch on the field is just a bad idea and design.

But on top of this you want to make them a CQB assault specialist and have them building sandbags across the map.

It seems unreasonable to burden one unit with so many roles while Tommies don't even have the utility of snare like grens do.
21 Feb 2020, 08:36 AM
#32
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 7640 | Subs: 1


If you claim one unit shouldn't do everything then why are you claiming RE should have more roles?

What I am claiming it that army composition should be diverse and not a blob a single unit type.


Especially when you oppose new units like officer providing CQB role.

What I am opposing is the power level of the unit not, the unit itself, get your facts straight. The winter patch officer is buffed version of a unit that used to come at CP 3 with large manpower investment becoming available much earlier.


Your logic is flawed unless you want a return of RE spam. They are already the most overworked RE unit in utility, having to be the snare carrier shielding units from vehicles,building and repairing emplacement, only unit suitable for PIAT, as well as usual engie job of mine laying and sweeping, repairing vehicles, clearing wire etc. This is way more than other engies deal with and having your only snare carrier building sandbags while you have a luch on the field is just a bad idea and design.

But on top of this you want to make them a CQB assault specialist and have them building sandbags across the map.

It seems unreasonable to burden one unit with so many roles while Tommies don't even have the utility of snare like grens do.

If they they are "overworked" one should simply build more of them since they are cheap and without a high pop.
22 Feb 2020, 15:16 PM
#33
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2040

It seems to some people that 2 squads of pgren is a tactical command blob. I will simply address this as a detriment of a valid argument for a balanced and strategic wise gameplay.

Of course UKF will no longer have ez green cover but this game has 5 factions to balance, not 1.

Yellow cover is good enough in early game and not as necessary in late game because of craters. Green cover on the other side will be the most valuable and engagements will occur around it.

This also praises good map designers
23 Feb 2020, 02:30 AM
#34
avatar of Mazianni

Posts: 708

It seems to some people that 2 squads of pgren is a tactical command blob. I will simply address this as a detriment of a valid argument for a balanced and strategic wise gameplay.

Of course UKF will no longer have ez green cover but this game has 5 factions to balance, not 1.

Yellow cover is good enough in early game and not as necessary in late game because of craters. Green cover on the other side will be the most valuable and engagements will occur around it.

This also praises good map designers


All natural green cover basically vanishes from the game by the 15 minute mark though.

The current sandbag system works fine, and removing it from UKF of all factions seem silly considering their infantry are otherwise handicapped and their engineers don't even come out until t1.



Sandbag deployment isn't even a big deal, really. It gives the advantage to whoever set up defenses first, yeah, whoever took the time to do it, but that's how engagements should be won or lost in this game and not whoever can drag the largest group of firepower into an area at a time.
23 Feb 2020, 05:39 AM
#35
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1070

Yes that is right. ukf lacks unit prescene to cap.
Building sandbag is a plus and minus, more defence but less capping. It is all fair
Removing sandbag from IS is an unfair nerf. I vote no go!
24 Feb 2020, 20:49 PM
#36
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 2129 | Subs: 1



All natural green cover basically vanishes from the game by the 15 minute mark though.

The current sandbag system works fine, and removing it from UKF of all factions seem silly considering their infantry are otherwise handicapped and their engineers don't even come out until t1.


+1

IS probably need sandbags the most, although new patch seems to be making them less cover dependent if the changes go through
24 Feb 2020, 23:19 PM
#37
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2040


IS probably need sandbags the most, although new patch seems to be making them less cover dependent if the changes go through

RE exist for a reason, like pios for grens.

The map has plenty green cover at the start, no need for ultrafast RE sandbags.

As i said 100 times now, mainline sandbags are replaced by a shallow tren that provides directional yellow cover.

Its not hard to read rather repeat the same thing over and over again.

IS is not UP and does not need "that much love" having to protect their precious SB...
24 Feb 2020, 23:28 PM
#38
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 2129 | Subs: 1


RE exist for a reason, like pios for grens.


Pios are in the HQ, REs are not...


The map has plenty green cover at the start, no need for ultrafast RE sandbags.


Which map? That is dependent on the map and cannot be relied on for faction balance


IS is not UP and does not need "that much love" having to protect their precious SB...


Balance preview says otherwise, IS are receiving buffs
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Soviets flag T.R. TheSeekingGuy
  • Soviets flag T.R. Opportunity Cost
  • Oberkommando West flag VonAsten
  • Oberkommando West flag Jove
uploaded by Seeking

Board Info

141 users are online: 7 members and 134 guests
Crecer13, TheRestaurant, Sp33dSnake, A_E, Katitof, SneakEye, Sturmpanther
96 posts in the last 24h
1033 posts in the last week
4776 posts in the last month
Registered members: 18936
Welcome our newest member, Weiseles20t
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM