Profile of Protos Angelus

I sympathize with your perspective that maybe I am struggling somehow versing sandbag spam. I often have people critique a map based on their feelings after losing instead of objective terchnical information. Happily that is not the case here.

To be clear, I've been playing COH since 2006, Ive been designing competitive maps in COH for 15 years now, im watching the fabric of the game being comprimised by subpar design approaches such as the sandbag spam that is being discussed here. Its relatively easy to test and confirm or deny the claim im making and either try an approach ive outlined in post 1. It would also be desirable to test one or a combination of ideas expressed here by others, there are many good ideas in this thread to mitigate the sandbag spam overall. Your completley ignoring the rest of the map if your happy with the current state of the sandbag spam.

Its a no brainer to experiment and possibly make the game better for everyone.

But pretending its a bad idea to experiment because of a preconceived, unverified notion that "it just wont work" or "its hard to know what will happen" doesnt even begin make sense.

Best map there is: Whiteball express
Worst map: Redball

Everything else is in between (not counting winter maps, those are FPS killers in team games)
Sandbags are fine, in every scenario on every map. If the enemy is spamming sandbags, that means they should not be having a lot of map control and that some key buildings can be manned by you. Furthermore, the biggest drawback of sandbags is the fact that this game utilizes direction. Almost every player I've played against (from rank top 10 to rank infinity and beyond, 3v3 only), just mindless places MGs behind them which can be exploited.
Truth be told, some maps, due to the design, can exploit sandbags beyond their usual usefulness. Normal sandbags, not those huge monstrosities on conscripts. Some maps do favor sandbag spam as there are no avenues of flank/alternate attack.

In 1v1, sandbags will never be the problem on normal maps. In 1v1 a map does not have to be superb and well designed to eliminate sandbag problem. Population and population density takes care of that.

In 2v2, some maps are sandbag prone... those lane-y ones.

3v3 is on the doorstep to the clusterfuck that is 4v4. Basically it's 1v1 on VP lanes. Sandbags do come in handy but usually take too long to place to be effective. There you will almost certainly fight first on the frontline. And if you do win engagements and force retreats you have 2 choices: Push deeper and deny resources or place sandbags and hope for no mortars/smoke. Again, it balances itself out.

4v4: Not gonna comment. Horrible mode for sadistic people hellbent on destroying planet Earth

This is exactly the point. That way rifles can't just brute force down every single axis squad. They will have to maneuver. They have the flexibility for this, and if you reread, officers will retain 2 slots, meaning as the enemy can't have thier high efficiency squads in every engagement, neither can usf.
USF tech has also been redesigned to allow for 50 cal support so rifles themselves no longer need to carry the entire game.


@Mrcarmine I agree with all you've said

But... rifles can't brute force down squads.
Early game vs OKW: Volks win long range, rifles win every other range. Hence the existence of spio to help tip engagements by careful positioning.
Early game vs OST: MG42 can lock down, force USF to tech nades for smoke. Grens can easily trade long range but lose every other range

In mid game you certainly won't have double bars. Maybe on one rifle squad. For everything else, PGrens and obers do the trick. Not to mention that once obers reach vet2, it's game over until double bars. And even then you need to be the first one to fire (eg. enemy running toward you).

I can't really see how a 280 MP mainline is so much more OP than 240 and 260. You're previewing scenarios like the USF player just techs racks and spends all muni on bars. Rifles are the strongest mainline, being strong in both close and medium range, whereas other mainlines are strong in only one range. Tommies, volks and grens long range, conscripts close range.

What game are you all playing? Saying things like "Rifles carry USF" is preposterous.

Sturms at vet 2 and with a sweeper repair at a rate of 13.75. Pioneers (And CE) at vet2 repair at 11.6, with pioneers having 14.5 with veteran Squad Leaders. Royal Engineers also have 13.125 repair rates at 6 pop each (Bolstered). This is nowhere near "Twice as good".

They are not an unit worth having multiple of in most games.

EDIT: Two Sturmpioneers cost one less population than three CEs, REs, Pioneers, and (unbolstered) RoyEs, and for that you get far less repairing, and much less versatility. You're even paying around the same cost in Manpower.

True, but spios can at early and mid stage of the game go toe to toe with any mainline. At later stages of the game, can go toe to toe with any mainline in close quarters. They can displace infantry, can swap zooks and sweepers. What more can you want?

So don't charge in tanks first? You can also build infantry or artillery to disperse penals before pushing with tanks. Furthermore, zooks and piats are not "kill or don't do much at all". They do consistent dmg to lights/mediums.

3x ptsr is still low dmg with no nuke potential like shrecks, so it's either a L2P issue which arose after a bad game vs soviets and this is nothing but a rant thread

What archetype is that, exactly? The one that disagrees with you? "Ur a wehraboo" is a pretty pathetic "counter-argument", katitof, don't be a child, and stop getting so flustered when people disagree with you.

Well, to be honest, post after post you push an Axis buff [and an Allies nerf]. Sometimes you mask it with quasi-buffs/nerfs but the general idea from your posts is "I have trouble with a lot of Axis stuff that needs looking into".... which just means "They need buffs".

Still, darkarmadillo made a valid and legit post, one of the few that is neither ally-, nor wheraboo.