Login

russian armor

Sniper Poll: American and OKW Doctrinal Snipers

Would you like to see a USF Sniper in a new commander or added to an existing commander?
Option Distribution Votes
20%
7%
73%
Would you like to see an OKW Sniper in a new commander or added to an existing commander?
Option Distribution Votes
20%
15%
66%
Total votes: 82
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
8 Sep 2019, 09:12 AM
#1
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1

This poll is to determine the interest of the community in adding a Sniper to OKW and USF.

Counter sniping an enemy sniper can be very rewarding and counter sniper play can be very exciting to watch, however not all players like the sniper mechanic. What cannot be argued however, is that a counter snipe is a very powerful way for a player to counter an enemy sniper and make a comeback, but not all factions have access to a sniper.

So, vote and leave a comment supporting your vote! If you want to add a suggestion on how to implement a USF or OKW sniper then comment as well. If you want to wax poetically about the virtues of asymmetric faction design or just rant about how you hate snipers then you can do that here as well, just be sure to be respectful of others opinions and stay at least a little on topic.

S/F.
8 Sep 2019, 09:23 AM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

"Patient has cancer, I think the only solution is to inject him with more cancer"
8 Sep 2019, 09:32 AM
#3
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 421 | Subs: 2

Since "snipers" were not a thing for Americans historically (they had designated marksmen in squads), I vote no. Instead, Pathfinders and Rangers (as they are both recon units in real life) could maybe have increased detection vs snipers, even potentially bonuses against snipers, to make it easier to flush them out. It would make more doctrines more viable against snipers play rather than just one this way while not introducing an ahistorical, single-doctrinal unit. The game is already ahistorical enough, and we really shouldn't make it any worse.

As for the OKW, I also vote no because they already have a highly effective anti sniper unit in two meta doctrines: JLI. The sniper in question need only be hit once before it is in danger range of the G43 crit, and a stealthed JLI waiting for a sniper to reveal itself is essentially a countersniper without the risk of being sniped itself. Adding a new OKW sniper for the purpose of countersniping in a doctrine that may or may not affect current OKW meta (depending on it's other abilities) is a waste of time.

Finally, from a modder's perspective, there are no suitable voice packages for snipers for either USF or OKW. Voices, being something that we can't edit, will unfortunately ruin th polish of the new unit as well. All in all, there is simply not enough merit for a two new gimmick doctrines in the name of countersniping.
ddd
8 Sep 2019, 09:33 AM
#4
avatar of ddd

Posts: 528 | Subs: 1

No, not snipers for okw and usf please. Better add countersnipe ability to pathfimders and new weapon upgrade for rifle company (scoped garands) similar to coh1 recon sections. 45 muni, 1 minute cooldown, can snipe one model.
8 Sep 2019, 10:11 AM
#5
avatar of waasdijki

Posts: 76

no thank you.
8 Sep 2019, 11:15 AM
#6
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1378

I though Pathfinders and Jagers are somewhat of alternative for snipers, which USF and OKW have. I am not sure they need more.
8 Sep 2019, 11:51 AM
#7
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13263 | Subs: 1

My suggestion would include:
Replace critical hits of sniper either with 40 damage regardless of cover or the critical kill under threshold damage

Add extra damage to 80 vs weapon teams

Lower price

Maybe make the scoped weapon an mu upgrade.

May trey delaying arrival similar to UKF sniper.
8 Sep 2019, 14:24 PM
#8
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1

Since "snipers" were not a thing for Americans historically (they had designated marksmen in squads), I vote no. Instead, Pathfinders and Rangers (as they are both recon units in real life.......


Your history is incorrect sir.

Each US infantry platoon was equipped with one sniper rifle, to be issued at the discretion of the platoon leader (a 1st or 2nd Lieutenant) so the US most certainly had snipers during WWII, in fact probably more than the Germans had when you consider that each US platoon had one sniper multiplied across the entire US Army.

Rangers were special assault troops, not recon troops. They were tasked with special assault missions and were organized accordingly with extra sub machine guns, light machine guns and other direct firing weapons while lacking in heavier weapons like AT guns, 81mm mortars, water cooled machine guns and artillery.

I’ll give you that Pathfinders were recon troops, but their equipment would’ve been the same as a regular Paratrooper, so an M1 Garand or M1 Carbine. Most paratroopers carried M1 Garand Rifles because that is what they were, Airborne Riflemen, and as such were so equipped. The special M1A1 folding stock Paratrooper Carbines were issued to troops that would normally have been issued M1 Carbines, like bazooka teams, machine gun crews, mortar team members and officers. The idea that regular parachute infantrymen carried Carbines is a myth.

On your point about USF and OKW not needing snipers due to their other counters is a totally valid opinion. I think USF and OKW getting snipers would be interesting, but it’s not necessary for balance. Your point about voice lines for them is a good point too. OKW could just copy WM sniper lines, but the USF one would probably just end up using Pathfinder dialogue and seem odd. (Too bad you can’t just import vCoH lines. I miss the old ‘boogeyman’. Lol)
8 Sep 2019, 15:23 PM
#9
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

Unfortunately, no new commander will be added to this game anymore

Relic abandoned coh2 and is not developing any additional content
The mod team has created a new commander but it will be difficult to make more
8 Sep 2019, 23:24 PM
#10
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 421 | Subs: 2



Your history is incorrect sir.

Each US infantry platoon was equipped with one sniper rifle, to be issued at the discretion of the platoon leader (a 1st or 2nd Lieutenant) so the US most certainly had snipers during WWII, in fact probably more than the Germans had when you consider that each US platoon had one sniper multiplied across the entire US Army.

Rangers were special assault troops, not recon troops. They were tasked with special assault missions and were organized accordingly with extra sub machine guns, light machine guns and other direct firing weapons while lacking in heavier weapons like AT guns, 81mm mortars, water cooled machine guns and artillery.

On your point about USF and OKW not needing snipers due to their other counters is a totally valid opinion. I think USF and OKW getting snipers would be interesting, but it’s not necessary for balance. Your point about voice lines for them is a good point too. OKW could just copy WM sniper lines, but the USF one would probably just end up using Pathfinder dialogue and seem odd. (Too bad you can’t just import vCoH lines. I miss the old ‘boogeyman’. Lol)


With all due respect, my history is mostly correct.

As for the US Rangers, I'm no expert, but I was under the impression they handled probing attacks and long distance recon patrols. I'll take your word for it.

However, for the US sniper discussion, I'll need to elaborate: just because they had a scoped Springfield rifle in a platoon does not mean the US army had snipers. They are still designated marksmen attached to the platoon (not squad, sorry - my bad). Neither the army nor the marines had sniper schools or sniper tactical doctrines. Designated marksmen just happened to be good shots, and did not undergo the intense specialist training that British, German, and Soviet snipers endured. You could call this a battle of semantics, but the fact was that US "snipers" were far less capable of performing sniper duties than their counterparts because they were not trained specifically to do so - they were instead expected to perform as an infantryman first; the "sniper" role came second, whereas proper snipers spent years in dedicated schools and were generally not expected the fill the role of a regular infantryman as they were far more valuable. I still stand by my point that there were no US snipers, only designated marksmen.

Also, to add to the practical modding problems, I should mention that there are no scoped Springfield models in game; the only scoped American rifle is the Pathfinder M4C, which I'm pretty sure was only in the TOC very late in the war and practically saw no use during WWII. The closest you can get is either a scoped Mosin or Enfield. As a side note, it is not currently possible to assign voices from one faction to another. The JLI are an exception that they are included in both faction voice packs, but unfortunately they are not the rule.
9 Sep 2019, 00:25 AM
#11
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1



With all due respect, my history is mostly correct.

As for the US Rangers, I'm no expert, but I was under the impression they handled probing attacks and long distance recon patrols. I'll take your word for it.

However, for the US sniper discussion, I'll need to elaborate: just because they had a scoped Springfield rifle in a platoon does not mean the US army had snipers. They are still designated marksmen attached to the platoon (not squad, sorry - my bad). Neither the army nor the marines had sniper schools or sniper tactical doctrines. Designated marksmen just happened to be good shots, and did not undergo the intense specialist training that British, German, and Soviet snipers endured. You could call this a battle of semantics, but the fact was that US "snipers" were far less capable of performing sniper duties than their counterparts because they were not trained specifically to do so - they were instead expected to perform as an infantryman first; the "sniper" role came second, whereas proper snipers spent years in dedicated schools and were generally not expected the fill the role of a regular infantryman as they were far more valuable. I still stand by my point that there were no US snipers, only designated marksmen.

Also, to add to the practical modding problems, I should mention that there are no scoped Springfield models in game; the only scoped American rifle is the Pathfinder M4C, which I'm pretty sure was only in the TOC very late in the war and practically saw no use during WWII. The closest you can get is either a scoped Mosin or Enfield. As a side note, it is not currently possible to assign voices from one faction to another. The JLI are an exception that they are included in both faction voice packs, but unfortunately they are not the rule.


I didn’t know about the inability to share voice line from faction to faction. That is very interesting.

As for sniper training in WWII, you are correct that the US Army did not have a formal service wide sniper program. Sniper programs however did exist within the Army and Marines during WWII, they just weren’t like they are today. They were divisional and regimental level schools out on by individual units that wanted to do it, so US snipers varied wildly in quality. Many divisions had no trained snipers like you said, and used their sniper rifles in what we today would call a designated marksman role. But that’s not always the case. An interesting note I found in a book called “US Infantry Weapons in WWII and Korea”, a soldier recalled being sent to sniper training where he was instructed by an FBI man who was also Olympic shooter. Crazy story that I didn’t totally believe until I found an article about this man in a magazine. The FBI man was undoubtably Walter Walsh, and this is a great example of how US sniper training did exist, but was also very different from unit to unit.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Walsh

https://www.amazon.com/Infantry-Weapons-Combat-Personal-Experiences/dp/1888722150

Buy the book, it’s great! It’s a bunch of interviews with US veterans focusing on the weapons they carried. It’s a great insight to what type of guns they actually had and what they liked and didn’t like from personal experience.

Also, I’m sorry if any of this came off as rude, I don’t intend to be rude to anyone here, but I do get very passionate about history sometimes. :)
9 Sep 2019, 01:59 AM
#12
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 421 | Subs: 2


As for sniper training in WWII, you are correct that the US Army did not have a formal service wide sniper program. Sniper programs however did exist within the Army and Marines during WWII, they just weren’t like they are today. They were divisional and regimental level schools out on by individual units that wanted to do it, so US snipers varied wildly in quality. Many divisions had no trained snipers like you said, and used their sniper rifles in what we today would call a designated marksman role. But that’s not always the case. An interesting note I found in a book called “US Infantry Weapons in WWII and Korea”, a soldier recalled being sent to sniper training where he was instructed by an FBI man who was also Olympic shooter. Crazy story that I didn’t totally believe until I found an article about this man in a magazine. The FBI man was undoubtably Walter Walsh, and this is a great example of how US sniper training did exist, but was also very different from unit to unit.

Also, I’m sorry if any of this came off as rude, I don’t intend to be rude to anyone here, but I do get very passionate about history sometimes. :)

Don't worry, not offended. I get passionate too about history :D and its actually really good to see other people on the forum that still care about it rather than the "iTs JusT a gAeM bRo, no nEEd foR hIsToRY" that is spoken here far too often.

Interesting, not aware of the ad-hoc sniper schools on various unit levels. Still though, since they weren't officially instated, and there are already existing candidates for reworking into potential anti-sniper units, I'd still say we shouldn't add a USF sniper. CoH2 has enough rarities and oddities, and it doesn't need more imo.
9 Sep 2019, 02:32 AM
#13
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 379 | Subs: 1

The last thing this game needs is more snipers.

9 Sep 2019, 03:17 AM
#14
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1

The last thing this game needs is more snipers.



It appears that the majority of people agree with you by a wide margin.

I myself have no deep love for sniper play, but I am surprised that the majority is so overwhelmingly anti sniper.
9 Sep 2019, 03:40 AM
#15
avatar of Gbpirate
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1065

Unfortunately, no new commander will be added to this game anymore

Relic abandoned coh2 and is not developing any additional content
The mod team has created a new commander but it will be difficult to make more



What's your basis for saying this? I thought this 18-24 months ago but after DoW3's flop it seems that Relic is reinvesting into coh2. Hence the balance patches & preview mods as well as the new or revamped commanders that we've got over the past two years.

on topic: I think snipers are fun but i understand why people don't like them. Adding snipers to the other two factions would reduce asymmetry which is an important aspect of the game that keeps it fun and interesting.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Diversity Cup
Event in Progress

Livestreams

Germany 26
unknown 12
Germany 198

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

253 users are online: 1 member and 252 guests
gunther09
13 posts in the last 24h
123 posts in the last week
603 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36227
Welcome our newest member, kinleympbishop
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM