Should CQC troops have Hold Fire option?

Howdy!

For many Close Quarters Combat (CQC) unit connoisseurs (or OPW Spio users) the following scenario is very familiar:

Due to the map or unexpected unit positioning you don’t manage to get a good Smoke&Flank™ maneuver done and your CQC (shocks, PPSH dankscripts, assault officer etc) units are not in their optimal fighting range. (melee)

As a master tactician you decide to do a calculated decision to close in to actually get some use out of the CQC unit instead of it roleplaying in the long range doing 0 damage.

When closing in on the enemy the unit goes full ratatatata mode and the moment they come to hugging distance when CQC unit is supposed to shine it happens: a union mandated reload cycle. During that your DPS once again drops to 0 – an issue you worked so hard to fix by closing in on the enemy. During the reload cycle you drop a model or two making the fight a lot more of an uphill battle than you anticipated resulting in more manpower bleed and in the worst scenario a full retreat.

Hold fire is not a new thing on infantry units so I think players should have the freedom to decide when to brrrr their CQC units’ clip instead of being punished due to unavoidable reload cycles.

Do you agree or am I oppressive for wanting to limit squads’ ability to brrrrrrr whenever they want ?

(I know balance team has stated that radical changes at this state of the game’s dev cycle are totally off the table but in this case this revolutionary suggestion would increase player choice and possibly be a quality of life improvement for those that are willing to micro their units a bit more. )

(Ps I also recognize that Allies have a lot more CQC units than Axis making this a very biased topic Despite this I hope you keep the discussion clean and make comments fit for a person with a big wrinkly brain )

There is not a single logical argument that would hold any value you could make for it without using "camo" in the same sentence.

There is not a single logical argument that would hold any value you could make for it without using "camo" in the same sentence.

That’s a very complicated sounding sentence to imply hold fire should be tied to camo and not to players choice of when and what unit they want to engage

I guess non-camoing AT guns among other things have accidentally been given the Hold Fire option

(The potential follow-up contribution to this discussion better be more wrinkly brained with the best words or I’m going to be disappointed )

Why else a unit with no ambush capability, no AT capability and range much shorter then sight would need it?

Why else a unit with no ambush capability, no AT capability and range much shorter then sight would need it?

So you didn’t even read the first post where it is clearly explained after the clickbait poll

Now I very much feel like you’re just using this to boost your post count

So you didn’t even read the first post where it is clearly explained after the clickbait poll

Now I very much feel like you’re just using this to boost your post count

One could reduce the ROF at long range so they do not run out of munition and reduce the reload time.

One could reduce the ROF at long range so they do not run out of munition and reduce the reload time.

Reload is based purely on number of bursts, not bullets fired. That is why for example a Thompson needs to reload after as few as 12 bullets at far range and up to 126 bullets at close range.

What could help is varying reload frequency more, so models would reload more in turns rather than all at once. But tbh it's too late now to go mess around with this kind of stuff.

So you didn’t even read the first post where it is clearly explained after the clickbait poll

Now I very much feel like you’re just using this to boost your post count

I did, but I also have literally nothing better to do at the moment

Edit:
Be proud! Replay to you marks the 17000th post

snip

Technically I think there is nothing to lose with that (other than potentially bugs). It would increase the skill curve a bit, but overall probably not by much. Then there is also the question why not give it to every squad. PGrens? Good short range fighters too. PGrens with G43? They're not short range but why should I not optimize if I wanted to? I've had it more than once that I ran into the enemies retreat path just to find my squad reloading when the enemy was passing right through them. Maybe I'd rather start shooting later to get more close range shots.

But then again you can't fully control what happens. Your suggestion works with a "fresh" squad that just reloaded, but you can't control this. In a second engagement, your squad might start with 1 burst left, reload while closing in and start blasting in melee, so basically perfectly what you want. The only solution is to add a reload button as well, but I don't think that is really necessary.

Does anyone know if retreating resets the reload?

Why else a unit with no ambush capability, no AT capability and range much shorter then sight would need it?

Just read the OP I guess? And how is 35 sight much shorter than 35 weapon range?

Reload is based purely on number of bursts, not bullets fired. That is why for example a Thompson needs to reload after as few as 12 bullets at far range and up to 126 bullets at close range.

What could help is varying reload frequency more, so models would reload more in turns rather than all at once. But tbh it's too late now to go mess around with this kind of stuff.

One could increase the CD between burst so that there more burst left in the weapon when in close range.

Just read the OP I guess? And how is 35 sight much shorter than 35 weapon range?

All SMGs have a range of 30.
If it doesn't use SMG as primary weapon, its not CQC unit.

All SMGs have a range of 30.
If it doesn't use SMG as primary weapon, its not CQC unit.

Then update the game because that is wrong. Unless you count pistols as CQC weapons.

Also there's no need to post a pic of you to show your confusion mate

I'd like this to be a thing, however, there isn't any room on the grid keys for spios to even recieve hold fire

Reload is based purely on number of bursts, not bullets fired. That is why for example a Thompson needs to reload after as few as 12 bullets at far range and up to 126 bullets at close range.

What could help is varying reload frequency more, so models would reload more in turns rather than all at once. But tbh it's too late now to go mess around with this kind of stuff.

Would the more liberal addition of Hold Fire still be a potential option to increase player choice and to make CQC combat more predictable for both sides?

I think Tightrope’s recent Con PPSH package demonstration showed how much of an impact the reload cycle can have when Cons Oorahed (while being unable to fire) to close range and then started blasting. The cons were able to drop nearly every model of the opposing axis squad before going into reload cycle.

Compare that to the Assault Guard Thompsons in the same video where the Guards can’t hold fire on approach. This resulted in the Thompson reload cycle starting just around when the guards reached the opponent and stopped moving dropping the DPS at a critical moment.

I think the Hold Fire would make especially some of the squishier CQC squads more appealing to use if they didn’t suffer such punishing DPS drops at crucial moments. However, I understand if such a change is considered too radical and instead efforts should be focused on reforming 50% of the commander roster.

I'd like this to be a thing, however, there isn't any room on the grid keys for spios to even recieve hold fire

'

New DLC: For a low cost of 4,99€ you get 3 extra grid slots for Spios

....

One has to keep in mind that Thompson in not a "pure" SMG since it retains high DPS at mid Range.

Assault guards have little reason to move very close range and can fight mid especial since the have SVTs.

For instance the Thompson is has around X2 DPS at range 10 over conscripts PPsh and X5 at range 15 going to x8 at range 20.

Would the more liberal addition of Hold Fire still be a potential option to increase player choice and to make CQC combat more predictable for both sides?

I think its implementation by itself wouldn't be bad, but it would directly and indirectly cause some issues. Firstly of course, it would probably considerably increase the power level of these units and they'd have to be rebalanced afterwards.

Secondly, it kind of opens up a can of worms. Shouldn't assault rifles also get this? Why not every unit? Shouldn't LMG troops get a manual reload? Etc. It has the danger of tipping the game too much into micro over macro, when the franchise is clearly meant to be more arcadey. Now I realise this contradicts a bit with adding manual reload for HMGs and vehicles, but I think that since their reloads are longer and concentrated (only 1 primary weapon instead of 3-6 SMGs) and thus significantly more impactful, it was justified.

I voted 'no' cause of the brrrrr

xD

serious note; iirc all camo-units already have the hold-fire ability.