Proposal: CE/Pio changes for a better meta

Con/Gren spam is too ubiquitous. Imo this is due to CE/Pio being lackluster.
Primary purpose is to diversify early game builds.

I propose making 2xCE/Pio builds more attractive somehow.

Towards that end, I propose:

-Naturalising CE/Pio cost to Pios cost.
---Ive never understood this difference in price. I considered naturalising to cE cost, but at 240, that is no incentive to build a CE instead of a Con. Considering CE/Pios weaker weapons, I decided for the cheaper Pio cost, which imo is more representstive of these units reduced AI efficacy as compared to Con/Grens and especially their lack of AT, which is exactly one of the reasons Cons/Grens are so crucial. You will always need Cons/Grens. My proposal is designed to shave atleast one Con/Gren off that as a CE/Pio instead.)
-Increasing CE to 6 man.
-Applying 1.5 armor to Pios.
-Reducing Minesweeper to 15-20 Muni.
-Adding Tank Traps as native to both builders.
---Change Defensive Commanders to have something else instead of that.
-Make Ost AI mine a single field for 20 Muni.
-Remove warning sign from Ost AI mine.
-Remove Bunker from Grens.
-Remove Sandbags from Cons.
-Add Sandbags to CE.
---Increase Sandbags cover modifiers somehow.
---Make Sandbags directional.
---Drastically reduce Sandbag buildtime, even by 50%.Its way too long currently.
(This is an attempt to asymmetrically align Sandbags with Bunker. Bunkers are still "better", but they cost MP/Muni. At least if Sandbags are better cover, faster, directional (to avoid Ost using them against you) and free that is somewhat compensatory).(Im tempted to move Trenches to CE, instead of Sandbags, but that would require too much redesign).
-Equalise CE/Pio close/far dmg to be the inverse of current Con/Gren close/far dmg in proportion to their inferior weapons. Basically so that CE perform at range, proportionately to Pios, as well as Grens do in comparison to Cons. And that Pios perform as well in close, proportionately, as Cons do in comparison to Grens. Meaning CE/Pios become the mini version, reversed, of how Cons and Grens due against each other with superior weapons.
---Some might say that puts CE at a disadvantage when equipped with flamers, due to range, but imo that is equalised by the Flamer bypassing the Pio armor, and reducing it to 4 CE, equivalency whereas the Pio flamer hits the CE as 6 CE.
-Im ok with CEs keeping Demo. This helps offset Pios ability to build Bunkers, asymmetrically, with its diversity.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Added comments:
- Ost AI mine may need a small aoe nerf to account for earlier deployment per my single field change.
Or, inversely, a wide AoE with less dmg, so as to generally dmg the larger Sov infantry unit across more models, rather than outright nuking a small number of them.

Honestly, I havent seen enougb of these score a hit due to their current rarity to be able to judge how hard they hit.
In any case, the guideline should be that they hit significantly less hard than Sov AT/AI mine. This because the multitargetting of the Sov mine carries the indirect penalty of going off on infantry, when its actually been placed for AT purposes. Ost carries the privilidge of specific mines, whereas Sov has just the one. Sounds counterintuitive, but the advantage of knowing your mines will go off only on intended targets is not to be discounted. Also, since the Ost AI mine is 10 Muni cheaper, it should have reduced effect. There is a small problem there though that with reduced AoE, it is not ass effective vs larger Sov units, but Imo, the 10 cheaper muni cost is sufficient to offset that.

I still would be interested to see engineers reduced to two men per squad, and pioneers three men, for 100mp and 150mp respectively. There'd be reason to build them, especially for the Soviet side, to provide additional capping power to be annoying in garrisons.

Considering the Soviets get the individual mine for 7 munitions, I'm not sure if the Germans should get it for 20 munis.

I see what you mean Strum.

But such a low model count would mean almost certain instadeath later when faced with vetted infantry, general AoE indirect fire effects and also when attempting to repair units in or near a conflict.

Such a low model count provides little incentive to build them instead of Grens/Cons.
Theyd also be completely useless for capping purposes.
Add to that also that a snaller CE/Pio squad would be instanuked by a Flamer explosion critical.

Towards later game, my 6man vs 1.5 armor proposal favors Sov, because the Pio armor would be largely negated by AoE effects and vehicle shells, whereas the CEs can better soak it with 6man. Im ok with that though, since at that point in the game, Ost carries a significant tank advantage. And even at that late point, Grens still carry RNades which can be deployed at range to splash repairing CEs hard, whereas Cons cannot bring Molotovs to bear on a repairing Pio unit.

I largely ignore Commanders in balance discussion. Imo baseline takes priority, Commanders should be, and must be, balanced individually against that universal baseline, not vice versa.

Those are mostly cool ideas actually.
This could have an side-effect though, namely making Penals even more lackluster.

With flamers being really good in the game atm, a lot of penals' (limited) usefulness comes from being a bit more stable platform than CEs for it. With this change their only benefit (though significant) would be the SVDs. Otherwise, the ability to build sandbags, tanktraps and demos would all in all be more useful than satchels, so we could see even less Penals eventually.

I generally like these ideas, my concern is that Relic is not interested in changing CE's or Pio's. It still annoys me that both of these units, which were extremely useful in vCOH, are now so hamstrung as to be base builders/repairers/flamers only.

Where is the carefully constructed sandbag and barbed wire? The well placed mines? The use of these units in close battles to swing engagements with great micro?

I used to have to plan how to remove them from the front line to repair tanks. Now I rarely bring them up since I am hesitant to risk losing 60 munitions when I could get an lmg instead.

I still would be interested to see engineers reduced to two men per squad, and pioneers three men, for 100mp and 150mp respectively. There'd be reason to build them, especially for the Soviet side, to provide additional capping power to be annoying in garrisons.

Considering the Soviets get the individual mine for 7 munitions, I'm not sure if the Germans should get it for 20 munis.

germans should get AI mine for 20 munitions. and russians should not get AI mine for 7 munitions

Mostly agree with your ideas. Instead of just altering sandbag modifiers I think all green cover modifiers need to be upped. A gren/script in green cover should practically never lose to a gren/script in red cover. However either unit can just waltz up and drop a nade/molotov and still win. This shouldn't happen in my mind.

I think the ostheer bunker could use a slight decrease in health and a reduction to 100mp maybe. That is if soviet sandbag build time is decreased like it should be.

Green cover being better won't change the fact that you die from sitting in a molotov, nor does better cover allow the gren squad to cut down the charger faster. The way you defeat a molotov is to just move back when its thrown

Currently yes. But if modifiers are changed there is no reason why a squad shouldn't be almost dead by the time they are within range and try to wind up and throw/shoot a rifle nade. If you assault green cover head on you should be punished. Currently that isn't what happens but hopefully it is in the works.

Charging at a LMG42 squad over red cover will get your squad killed before you can ever throw a molotov.

Try to keep convo related to CEs/Pios primarily, dudes.

Thanks!

There just isn't enough incentive to build them, otherwise people would. Why would soviets build an unnecessary 2nd engineer when they can get a real fighting unit for the same price?

Even if the structures they build become more effective they still wouldn't get built. Early game is about sprinting across the map and capping as many points as possible. If they stop to build structures or wire locations they aren't capping and you are at a disadvantage. There are only a couple maps where wiring might be somewhat effective but the wired location can usually just be run around - and will get ripped down 5 minutes into the game anyways.

CE's and pios are pretty much just a liability. They are good for mine laying, occasional flamethrowers and repairing vehicles. If Relic really wants to see more pio and CE play they will start us with two squads of them or give them both a price decrease from where they currently stand (with the current meta, not including suggested changes).

At least some pio strats exist in the form of fast T2 for Ostheer.

Well, MetaStable14, thats why I made this thread and this proposal!

nullist on this one i agree on al your pionts but doesnt mean 6 man CE also means faster repair for tanks they do? maby a minor thing.

i do like the sandbag suggestion alot maby build it with wire in the front idd and i also feel indeed that green cover sould be wat beter so its more vital to move from cover to cover. its stupid that a bush provides yellow cover wile it actualy sould be none if you ever seen the type of bullet they shoot out of them guns hehe

i realy think that that will make ce and pio a good player choice for what they are ment to do.

in my games they die 1st and i only build them if i realy need sumting build and thats lost potential on this unit

Pretty solid suggestions. I'd add to completely remove flamer detonation chance (such a stupid RNG-driven mechanic) too, currently it seems investing 60 ammo into a bit of a gamble.

why do you even propose anything nullist relic devs are so full of themselves they wont listen to anyone , i doubt anyone of them even watched SNF . I think that if i was a developer that kind of gameplay would make me ashamed of my work

why do you even propose anything nullist relic devs are so full of themselves they wont listen to anyone , i doubt anyone of them even watched SNF . I think that if i was a developer that kind of gameplay would make me ashamed of my work

Ashamed? They are very proud of the abilities/commanders they are coming up with.

they should reduce the explosion chance. or i should go to a shaman to get better luck.

i should go to a shaman to get better luck.

HAX

I really like your suggestions Nullist.
These changes would add a ton of gameplay depth.