UKF
Reduce section cost to 260, increase sappers cost to 220, move sandbags to sappers. Tommies can still build trenches in friendly territory.
USF
All sandbags and mines are given to Rear Echelons with doctrine picks (heavy cav and infantry)
SOV
Allow conscripts to build sandbags but halve their construction speed and increase target size of these sandbags.
OKW
Move sandbags from Volks to Spios. Decrease Spio build cost from 300 to 250-260 and increase their reinforce cost by 3-4 per model.
Ost performance in 3v3/4v4 will not be affected whatsoever and I have the Ostheer rank to prove I know what I'm talking about.
Nerf/remove sandbags from mainlines
16 May 2020, 12:18 PM
#1
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
16 May 2020, 12:54 PM
#2
Posts: 1487
no
 | Playercard of eqdw | |||||||||||||||||||
|
SteamId is set to private for user id aaa. Set it to public if you want to link to your playercard via your user id.
16 May 2020, 13:16 PM
#3
Posts: 177
You should just add a simple yes/no poll to the starting post.
I vote yes.
In addison to the obvius advantages of being able to spam sandbags everywhere with mainline: Being able to build defences with mainline instead of support units is too strong and unbalanced towards factions that require the investment in resources or time of using a support unit. This unbalance comes especially clear with the OST pioneer: In the early game where in addison to the normal capping and fighting role the pioneer has to scout for the MG and is the sole source of cover building.
I vote yes.
In addison to the obvius advantages of being able to spam sandbags everywhere with mainline: Being able to build defences with mainline instead of support units is too strong and unbalanced towards factions that require the investment in resources or time of using a support unit. This unbalance comes especially clear with the OST pioneer: In the early game where in addison to the normal capping and fighting role the pioneer has to scout for the MG and is the sole source of cover building.
16 May 2020, 13:29 PM
#4
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
no
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
16 May 2020, 15:16 PM
#5
Posts: 320
No because making sandbags building less convenient = less sandbags = more run&gun blobs.
If anything, trenches are OP and should take longer to build or be only buildable by engineer unit.
If anything, trenches are OP and should take longer to build or be only buildable by engineer unit.
16 May 2020, 15:56 PM
#6
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
UKF
Reduce section cost to 260, increase sappers cost to 220, move sandbags to sappers. Tommies can still build trenches in friendly territory.
Increase section cost to 280, moving acc to 0,35/0,4 and give them Heat grenade with tech to be done with it. Then sandbags and trench can be moved to sapper.
16 May 2020, 16:02 PM
#7
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Increase section cost to 280, moving acc to 0,35/0,4 and give them Heat grenade with tech to be done with it. Then sandbags and trench can be moved to sapper.
Moving accuracy is fine as it is.
HEAT grenade wouldn't be a bad idea tbh. I'd like to see a snare that doesn't damage the engine.
16 May 2020, 16:11 PM
#8
Posts: 1515
UKF
Ost performance in 3v3/4v4 will not be affected whatsoever and I have the Ostheer rank to prove I know what I'm talking about.
This is the single most elitist BS I've seen in a while. You have the rank but that doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. The post is OK but please don't think that ranks give you power. I know a PhD chemist that tried to debunk me when I said that water is the liquid with the highest specific heat capacity (they were having a deep "philosophical/phenomenological" discussion on heat and other BS and were throwing some high-tech molecules around as potential candidates) and laughed in my face as to what a physicist is trying to lecture a PhD chemist on the chemistry. Of course, a quick google search revealed I was right. The point is, never throw your "titles" around. Most of the time, it's just dic* measurement that leads to no valid arguments or discussions.
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
https://coh2stats.com/players/76561198031032150
https://coh2stats.com/players/76561198031032150
16 May 2020, 16:50 PM
#9
Posts: 1289
Imo for usf ost and soviets the sandbags are fine as is.
For ukf i agree move the sandbags to sappers. Same with okw to sturms. The mp cost changes seem good but may need some tweaking. 260 mp for sturms seems a bit to low imo.
For ukf i agree move the sandbags to sappers. Same with okw to sturms. The mp cost changes seem good but may need some tweaking. 260 mp for sturms seems a bit to low imo.
16 May 2020, 16:53 PM
#10
Posts: 570 | Subs: 1
Get rid of sandbags and put them on engineers.
16 May 2020, 17:00 PM
#11
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I agree and have made this suggestions year ago.
In addition tank trap should be changed to yellow cover.
In addition tank trap should be changed to yellow cover.
16 May 2020, 19:35 PM
#12
Posts: 268
I agree and have made this suggestions year ago.
In addition tank trap should be changed to yellow cover.
In that case, RE should get sandbags on top. Would be unfair otherwise
16 May 2020, 20:08 PM
#13
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
I voted yes, but i would not remove them.
Increase build time on sandbag on all problematic units by 50%. Reduce this penalty once they get vet 2.
If someone wants to sandbag cap, it should waste more time in order to do so.
Increase build time on sandbag on all problematic units by 50%. Reduce this penalty once they get vet 2.
If someone wants to sandbag cap, it should waste more time in order to do so.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
16 May 2020, 21:16 PM
#14
Posts: 2358
Voted Yes almost blindly. The game desperately need a sandbag overhaul.
Sandbags are for defensive strategies, i agree with elchino7 about the time required to build sandbags is too low and IMO promotes push/stall tactics.
IMO engineer units shouldnt have to build sbags, OST can be an exception that enforces the pio supportive roll for TW. But for the rest of the mainlines i would say that conscripts are fine with it, volks are something in the middle and tommies are simply abusing the ability beyond a reasonable logic. To remove the ability is cool for volks and tommies. Tommies can still build trenches and volks should be focused more on mobility. In my personal opinion.
Sandbags are for defensive strategies, i agree with elchino7 about the time required to build sandbags is too low and IMO promotes push/stall tactics.
IMO engineer units shouldnt have to build sbags, OST can be an exception that enforces the pio supportive roll for TW. But for the rest of the mainlines i would say that conscripts are fine with it, volks are something in the middle and tommies are simply abusing the ability beyond a reasonable logic. To remove the ability is cool for volks and tommies. Tommies can still build trenches and volks should be focused more on mobility. In my personal opinion.
16 May 2020, 21:23 PM
#15
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
snip
Last time orangepest made a suggestion for Grens he was told it would break teamgames.
Now I’m backing up my suggestion with a rank to support my claim that this would not break teamgames.
16 May 2020, 21:35 PM
#16
Posts: 732
Maybe could change sandbag to trench,at least you can not capture point and garrison at the same time，and sandbag for all engineer will be good but not for OKW，StormPioneer already cost 8 pop,most time can not have second squad
16 May 2020, 21:40 PM
#17
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Make sandbag cost 30 manpower.
It is easy to spam them so with a fair cost people will start thinking where they really need them.
Increasing building time is interesting also, or isn't possible to simply disable capping while building sandbag or tank traps?
It is easy to spam them so with a fair cost people will start thinking where they really need them.
Increasing building time is interesting also, or isn't possible to simply disable capping while building sandbag or tank traps?
16 May 2020, 21:45 PM
#18
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Make sandbag cost 30 manpower.
It is easy to spam them so with a fair cost people will start thinking where they really need them.
Increasing building time is interesting also, or isn't possible to simply disable capping while building sandbag or tank traps?
You might just as well remove them from the game if you were to slap any kind of cost that isn't time.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
16 May 2020, 22:00 PM
#19
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
StormPioneer already cost 8 pop,most time can not have second squad
The point is to allow OKW to have 2 sweepers on the field. If that also required a decrease to 7 or 6 pop, so be it.
16 May 2020, 22:02 PM
#20
Posts: 960
I'm not sure about the stat/cost changes, but I absolutely agree that no mainline should be able to build sandbags. Voted yes.
Opinions reflect all team modes (not 1v1)
I often edit my posts several times after posting
I often edit my posts several times after posting
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
29 | ||
 |
|
|
22 | ||
|
|
|
|
1214 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.943411.696-1
- 4.715.934+12
- 5.35659.858+2
- 6.274144.656+1
- 7.278108.720+29
- 8.307114.729+3
- 9.601237.717-2
- 10.10629.785+7
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
12
Download
1267
Board Info
427 users are online:
427 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
32 posts in the last month
9 posts in the last week
32 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50136
Welcome our newest member, severalxc19
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, severalxc19
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM