Login

russian armor

OBK buildings in disadvantage

edo
29 May 2018, 09:20 AM
#1
avatar of edo

Posts: 13

I noticed that any faction has it's own buildings built inside the base when instead the OBK has to build them outside, this makes them much easier to loose and gives many troubles to the player, i would make some changes:
1) the trucks don't cost anymore fuel and have more HP;
2)if the truck gets destroyed buy building a outpost or the building is cancelled all resources are refounded;
3)if the truck gets destroyed you won't loose the capabilty to call troops unlocked from the building;
4)building back the structure won't cost anymore fuel but only manpower (maybe half) americans if loose officers don't loose the building they got and don't have to retroop them to have the specialized units;
5)bonuses researched with the trucks won't be lost;
6)doctors and geniiers from trucks should cost ammunition like for the british, reduce rally point for the truck from 300 to 200.

Other change should be bring the MG34 to the power of other mg's because now it's useless.
29 May 2018, 09:26 AM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13765 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post29 May 2018, 09:20 AMedo
I noticed that any faction has it's own buildings built inside the base when instead the OBK has to build them outside

Completely incorrect.
You can place trucks anywhere you want.

If you choose to put them outside, that's 100% your own independent decision.

Risk vs reward, you have complete control over it.
29 May 2018, 10:10 AM
#3
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post29 May 2018, 09:26 AMKatitof

Completely incorrect.
You can place trucks anywhere you want.

If you choose to put them outside, that's 100% your own independent decision.

Risk vs reward, you have complete control over it.


/thread
29 May 2018, 10:11 AM
#4
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2609 | Subs: 1

Too big, nobody will fail in that trap.


Oh wait.
29 May 2018, 11:11 AM
#5
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1954 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post29 May 2018, 09:26 AMKatitof

Risk vs reward, you have complete control over it.


I agree, but I do think the current system does not resemble this completely.
Putting the trucks in a very forward position can be very advantageous but gives a high risk of them being destroyed. In this case the vulnerability of the trucks is adequate. This is good.

However, the trucks remain exactly as vulnerable (HP wise) when they are set up far behind the front lines on purpose. Especially to artillery in team games. IMO, this is not good. Med and Mech truck can die to as few as two arty barrages and repairing them is extremely dangerous.


Therefore I would propose to at least get rid of the repairing penalties for Sturmpioneers when repairing trucks, so the 300MP squad doesn't instantly die to one artillery shell of the next volley.

Secondly I would propose to add a percentage of HP to the truck (to a max of regular base buildings) the closer it is to the main base area. This way choosing low risk actually means lower vulnerability.
29 May 2018, 19:06 PM
#6
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3218 | Subs: 1



I agree, but I do think the current system does not resemble this completely.
Putting the trucks in a very forward position can be very advantageous but gives a high risk of them being destroyed. In this case the vulnerability of the trucks is adequate. This is good.

However, the trucks remain exactly as vulnerable (HP wise) when they are set up far behind the front lines on purpose. Especially to artillery in team games. IMO, this is not good. Med and Mech truck can die to as few as two arty barrages and repairing them is extremely dangerous.


Therefore I would propose to at least get rid of the repairing penalties for Sturmpioneers when repairing trucks, so the 300MP squad doesn't instantly die to one artillery shell of the next volley.

Secondly I would propose to add a percentage of HP to the truck (to a max of regular base buildings) the closer it is to the main base area. This way choosing low risk actually means lower vulnerability.

why? why shouldnt the okw get punished for being under arty barrage? no other faction gets to repair their buildings under fire. if the enemy is bombarding you the counter is to do something about it. be aggressive, howitzers exact purpose is to beat up strong points. its working as intended
29 May 2018, 21:18 PM
#7
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1954 | Subs: 3

No other faction has seriously vulnerable HQs that can die two only two artillery barrages either. Not to mention off-maps. And I'm not talking about strong points, I'm talking about trucks deployed on the third line or even pretty much next to base.

They shouldn't be more vulnerable than other factions HQ buildings when deployed in such locations. And if that ain't getting fixed at least the repairing should be less dangerous because you have to use a 300MP squad and repairing under arty fire is absolutely necessary to keep it alive unlike normal HQs. They can be destroyed before a counter can be coordinated.
29 May 2018, 21:56 PM
#8
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 3968

No other faction has seriously vulnerable HQs that can die two only two artillery barrages either. Not to mention off-maps. And I'm not talking about strong points, I'm talking about trucks deployed on the third line or even pretty much next to base.

They shouldn't be more vulnerable than other factions HQ buildings when deployed in such locations. And if that ain't getting fixed at least the repairing should be less dangerous because you have to use a 300MP squad and repairing under arty fire is absolutely necessary to keep it alive unlike normal HQs. They can be destroyed before a counter can be coordinated.
u could just put them inside the base, the only problem is actually that they are too big and crop the base up in 2 vs 2+
maybe make them have less collision box or make them smaller
29 May 2018, 23:42 PM
#9
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2690

No other faction has seriously vulnerable HQs that can die two only two artillery barrages either. Not to mention off-maps. And I'm not talking about strong points, I'm talking about trucks deployed on the third line or even pretty much next to base.

They shouldn't be more vulnerable than other factions HQ buildings when deployed in such locations. And if that ain't getting fixed at least the repairing should be less dangerous because you have to use a 300MP squad and repairing under arty fire is absolutely necessary to keep it alive unlike normal HQs. They can be destroyed before a counter can be coordinated.

That’s a necessary extension of being able to put the buildings outside your base and having pretty decent benefits based on their placement.

You can’t have risk vs. reward without risk.
30 May 2018, 09:08 AM
#10
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

There currently is no reward that would warrant a player to place a truck outside the base. Allied arty can deal with it so easily that any benefits gained by placing it forward are wiped away as soon as the truck is destroyed. Losing a flak truck is currently a GG.
edo
30 May 2018, 10:45 AM
#11
avatar of edo

Posts: 13

No other faction has seriously vulnerable HQs that can die two only two artillery barrages either. Not to mention off-maps. And I'm not talking about strong points, I'm talking about trucks deployed on the third line or even pretty much next to base.

They shouldn't be more vulnerable than other factions HQ buildings when deployed in such locations. And if that ain't getting fixed at least the repairing should be less dangerous because you have to use a 300MP squad and repairing under arty fire is absolutely necessary to keep it alive unlike normal HQs. They can be destroyed before a counter can be coordinated.


i fully agree, the other factions don't have to deploy buildings on the field and at least if you stop the building you should get the resources back, also don't loose the ability to call units once the truck gets destroyed. americans don't have to retroop officers if they loose them to be able to call units
edo
30 May 2018, 10:47 AM
#12
avatar of edo

Posts: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post30 May 2018, 09:08 AMsinthe
There currently is no reward that would warrant a player to place a truck outside the base. Allied arty can deal with it so easily that any benefits gained by placing it forward are wiped away as soon as the truck is destroyed. Losing a flak truck is currently a GG.

i lost the falk truck near my base and actually had to surrend
30 May 2018, 10:49 AM
#13
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13765 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post30 May 2018, 10:47 AMedo

i lost the falk truck near my base and actually had to surrend

Near does not mean "in".

If you get pushed back, obviously you'll have it exposed.
30 May 2018, 15:43 PM
#14
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1954 | Subs: 3


That’s a necessary extension of being able to put the buildings outside your base and having pretty decent benefits based on their placement.

You can’t have risk vs. reward without risk.


did you even read a single word of what I said
30 May 2018, 16:22 PM
#15
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871



Holy shit did you even read a single word of what I said


It sounds like you want OKW trucks / bases to be stronger while still deployable outside of your base and retain all the benefits, instead of just placing it inside your base?

How about OKW trucks cannot be built outside of base sector, have durability to match that of other factions base building. Probably need to remove the unique stuff (Flak gun, repair upgrade etc). Would you be happy then?
30 May 2018, 16:54 PM
#16
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1954 | Subs: 3


It sounds like you want OKW trucks / bases to be stronger while still deployable outside of your base and retain all the benefits, instead of just placing it inside your base?


No I don't, I explicitly said that trucks deployed on the front lines are as vulnerable as they should be.
This is high risk, high reward. There's nothing wrong with this.

What I want is more durability added to the trucks the closer they are to the base sector, because I think it's unfair when the OKW player deliberately decides to build the trucks close to base (or in base) for safety they can still get destroyed in one or two arty barrages. This is high risk, low reward which doesn't make sense.
30 May 2018, 17:16 PM
#17
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2609 | Subs: 1



No I don't, I explicitly said that trucks deployed on the front lines are as vulnerable as they should be.
This is high risk, high reward. There's nothing wrong with this.

What I want is more durability added to the trucks the closer they are to the base sector, because I think it's unfair when the OKW player deliberately decides to build the trucks close to base (or in base) for safety they can still get destroyed in one or two arty barrages. This is high risk, low reward which doesn't make sense.


And less durability the farest they are. That's a interesting proposal, what would be the malus for a truck deployed close to a VP which are usualy at the middle of the map?
30 May 2018, 17:22 PM
#18
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3218 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post30 May 2018, 17:16 PMEsxile


And less durability the farest they are. That's a interesting proposal, what would be the malus for a truck deployed close to a VP which are usualy at the middle of the map?

And how is it measured? Sectors? Actual range? What are the intervals? Does it tell the player? Does 1 range too far end up bringing it down a whole AT shell sooner? What about angles?
We didn't even get to play test the last patch I doubt there would be this much work going into changing an unbroken feature
31 May 2018, 02:44 AM
#19
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414


And how is it measured? Sectors? Actual range? What are the intervals? Does it tell the player? Does 1 range too far end up bringing it down a whole AT shell sooner? What about angles?
We didn't even get to play test the last patch I doubt there would be this much work going into changing an unbroken feature


Durability ins't as much of an issue when you can't arty in the base sector.
31 May 2018, 08:34 AM
#20
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13765 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2018, 02:44 AMsinthe


Durability ins't as much of an issue when you can't arty in the base sector.

And on map arty barrages will be extremely inaccurate outside of a handful 1v1 maps.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
1v1 Map Unveil Event VonIvan vs Brosras

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag N1cko
  • Oberkommando West flag Scotch1
  • Soviets flag Frosty
  • Soviets flag Beatricks Swire
uploaded by Frost

Board Info

103 users are online: 5 members and 98 guests
cochosgo, IncendiaryRounds:), Serrith, The amazing Chandler, Doomlord52
200 posts in the last 24h
1111 posts in the last week
5528 posts in the last month
Registered members: 68319
Welcome our newest member, Kraetschaq30
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM