1) Generally fixed positions like Bunkers are full of fail. But yes, why shouldnt Sov be able to fail with them too, like Ost?
2) S-Mine should be single place for like 20 munis. The field is retarded, and the signs are just laughable.
3) Agreed. Retreat should be a true instant. Models mill around like complete retards in CoH2. Sometimes its so bad, that frankly its better to simply move normally first, to estabkish cohesion and direction, rather than retreating right off the bat.
1. I agree with you there, I prefer mobile warfare. I think I've only built an MG bunker once, it was in a game when we were extremely low on VPs, just used it as a last resort on the more distant VP to delay sneaking squads. However, I think they are too common in team games (what I prefer to play). What would be best, making Engies able to build them or introduce them to an existing doctrine, perhaps replacing "Armored Detection" in the Urban Defense doctrine with bunker instead?
2. I think this is a good idea, however, it is already possible. It requires 80 munition just to start building the minefield but if you stop the pioneer after it has built the first square it will only charge you 20 munition. It is a lot more annoying than just being able to build single squares with the cost of 20 munition.
3. You're right about that. I also find it annoying that sometimes one or two squad members stay behind just a little longer and sometimes get killed just because of that. Especially when you retreat from Assault Grenadiers or Shocktroopers.
Bonus question (don't know if this belongs to balance but anyway): Why doesn't retreating squads vault over fences/obstacles on retreat but rather taking the long way around?