Login

russian armor

Combat Engineers and its current state

9 Jan 2019, 19:39 PM
#1
avatar of cochosgo

Posts: 208

There is general consensus that soviet combat engineers are the worst starting unit of the game in a meta that revolves around early agression and infantry heavy builds.


Combat engies are not designed to be combat effective units:
- 4 men squads.
- They still use the old conscripts mosins: Low accuracy/high damage.
- Really hard time vetting.
- They don't get RA (recieved accuracy) with vet.

They compensate this with a lot of utility:
- Standard wire.
- Generalist mines.
- Sweeper and Flamer upgrades.
- Flares and Demos for cheeky tactics.

Of course, soviets builds have bigger problems with conscript limited scaling (without docs) and the worst mg of the game. But I think something could be made to bring CEs on par with the other engineer units, taking the precedent of pios geting buffed to improve their lethality (which was needed specialy against usf rifles)
9 Jan 2019, 19:46 PM
#2
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4553 | Subs: 1

There is general consensus that soviet combat engineers are the worst starting unit of the game in a meta that revolves around early agression and infantry heavy builds.
.... But I think something could be made to bring CEs on par with the other engineer units, taking the precedent of pios geting buffed to improve their lethality (which was needed specialy against usf rifles)

They are also the cheapest engineer unit.
I wouldn't say it is hard to vet them get them flamer and merge during combat, pios are probably harder to vet.
What could be changed would be keep DPS the same but lower damage for more accuracy.
9 Jan 2019, 19:53 PM
#3
avatar of A. Soldier
Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 2300 | Subs: 2

I suggest using Kasarov's idea of actual real "Combat" Engineers which use the Shock Troops' body armor and helmets and perhaps the Cons' rifles together with Conscript PPSh package.
9 Jan 2019, 20:07 PM
#4
avatar of murky depths

Posts: 403

Huh, I always thought they were pretty good tbh. They're no sturmpioneers or ass-engineers, but otherwise are ok. I wouldn't mind if their rifles were changed to be more accurate/less damaging, but oh well.

Other than the counter-intuitive nature of them costing more to reinforce than conscripts, but then I get why making them a 6man squad would be a bad idea.
9 Jan 2019, 20:11 PM
#5
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 1135 | Subs: 2

If you look historically - the name of the "combat engineers" is incorrect. More accurate name: 1st echelon engineers (engineers were divided into 3 echelons). The 1st echelon engineers performed everything that the “combat engineers” perform, but they are armed with submachine guns and self-loading rifles in large quantities because they have to help the main infantry in the assault. Can give them an improvement on the PPSh-41 or SVT-40 compatible with the purchase of a flame thrower.
9 Jan 2019, 20:11 PM
#6
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 4

They're the cheapest squad in the game, they are fine. If you want them to fight well put a flamer on them and use merge. A common opening is getting another CE as your second unit, it's not because they are bad.

All the different engineers are good in their own unique way now, they're all pretty balanced. I would have said Royal Engineers were the worst before they added the snare to them in the last patch. You need to factor in more than just raw combat performance.
9 Jan 2019, 21:27 PM
#7
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1247

170 MP is great for a minesweeper unit and repair engineer.
9 Jan 2019, 21:32 PM
#8
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 12149 | Subs: 6

170 MP is great for a minesweeper unit and repair engineer.

Well, they aren't really great repair unit unless vetted.
Vet2 sweeper will just not happen.

CEs do not need much, weapon changes repeating the ones of cons could be sufficient.
9 Jan 2019, 21:47 PM
#9
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1209

IMO minesweeper upgrade (same for other factions) should enable shared veterancy, so they can still get some veterancy for the repairs even with their own combat power reduced by doing their job escorting other units. At least for Ostheer and Soviets.
9 Jan 2019, 21:49 PM
#10
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4553 | Subs: 1

IMO minesweeper upgrade (same for other factions) should enable shared veterancy.

I would prefer XP awarded for building things that cost like mines, bunker, fighting, positions...
9 Jan 2019, 21:49 PM
#11
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 12149 | Subs: 6

IMO minesweeper upgrade (for all factions) should enable shared veterancy.

That's not half bad idea, however I would limit it to EFA only.
WFA and brits do not really struggle with vetting their engies and spios can just put sweeper away.
9 Jan 2019, 21:53 PM
#12
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1209

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jan 2019, 21:49 PMVipper
I would prefer XP awarded for building things that cost like mines, bunker, fighting, positions...


That doesn't really work well for team games though, as bunkers and mines and the like become essentially useless to build late game with tons of (rocket) arty flying around blowing everything up. It could come as a bonus on top of shared vet though.
10 Jan 2019, 02:00 AM
#13
avatar of gbem

Posts: 706

Bunkers arent rendered useless in 4v4s due to rocket arty... theyre rendered useless by howitzers...
10 Jan 2019, 02:04 AM
#14
avatar of Baba

Posts: 216

today ive seen the defensive doctrines concrete bunker for the first time. it did really well vs katyusha.
"theyre rendered useless by howitzers" - for those this does apply
10 Jan 2019, 06:29 AM
#15
avatar of mortiferum

Posts: 532

I suggest using Kasarov's idea of actual real "Combat" Engineers which use the Shock Troops' body armor and helmets and perhaps the Cons' rifles together with Conscript PPSh package.


The PPSHes must be time locked though, otherwise a psuedo shock-troop with flamer driving around in a M3 would be disgustingly broken.
10 Jan 2019, 07:28 AM
#16
avatar of MoBo111

Posts: 150

Don't think it's neccessary, they balance well with Ostheer Pioneers, they are cheap, do their job. No reason to change anything (aside maybe in a new commander). If it aint broke, don't fix it.
10 Jan 2019, 08:46 AM
#17
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 1554

they are fine. when u wanna fight with them: merge them into group and give them flamer. They do their job then.
10 Jan 2019, 10:00 AM
#18
avatar of A. Soldier
Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 2300 | Subs: 2



The PPSHes must be time locked though, otherwise a psuedo shock-troop with flamer driving around in a M3 would be disgustingly broken.


No I mean the Conscript PPSh package which gives the PPSh upgrade to Conscripts can also give combat engineers an upgrade to shock trooper body armor because I also do believe that they'd be OP with a flamethrower and PPShs altho they could be made into exclusive upgrades or something.
10 Jan 2019, 10:14 AM
#19
avatar of |GB| The Lnt.599

Posts: 223

Don't u all love it when the Combat Engineer makes his name true and snags of the last model of an enemy squad Kreygasm.

He ain't called combat engineer for nothing MVGame
10 Jan 2019, 11:24 AM
#20
avatar of |GB| The Hooligan486
Senior Referee Badge

Posts: 3584 | Subs: 1

3CE (flamer) + 3 cons + maximmaximratata = quite a good opening
Ce is fine, i would like to see 100 Man CE squad bug tho, that would be hilarious :)
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
SMC Spring Signups

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Seeking
  • U.S. Forces flag d0ggY^
  • Ostheer flag KimbO
  • Oberkommando West flag ProDigyIgi
uploaded by d0ggY

Board Info

270 posts in the last 24h
1755 posts in the last week
8747 posts in the last month
Registered members: 32320
Welcome our newest member, 4andrewe3391fg2
Most online: 805 users on 28 Oct 2018, 01:04 AM