Login

russian armor

Sandbags for all all factions main infantry by default

28 Jul 2014, 02:39 AM
#1
avatar of astro_zombie

Posts: 123

I think this is one of my biggest problems with COH2.

Why in the hell do you need a doctrine to build sandbags? Why is every factions engineer or rifleman not capable of constructing a sandbag? Every basic infantry of all factions and all engineers need this ability.

It just makes no sense. Why waste a slot in a commander for things like this and tank traps?

Relic, seriously.
28 Jul 2014, 02:46 AM
#2
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Well in fact I agree about the sandbags.
I think its a good thing tanktraps are doctrinal cause otherwise it would be spammed every game

But about the sandbags, I agree.
28 Jul 2014, 02:50 AM
#3
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

And real sandbags if possible, not the thing that conscripts build that is a pain to orient in the correct direction and takes years to build.
28 Jul 2014, 10:13 AM
#4
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692

I'd be happy if riflemen defensive fortifications was Cp0 instead of Cp2

Pretty stupid you need 2 cps just to build sandbags
28 Jul 2014, 10:20 AM
#5
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Id have preferred if all builder units could build sandbags and tank traps, rather than them being Commander related.
28 Jul 2014, 10:42 AM
#6
avatar of warfiction

Posts: 46

tank traps is a bad idea!! better as it is.. but sandbag i see np
28 Jul 2014, 10:46 AM
#7
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

I actually don't really mind. The only thing I'm missing is some sort of anti-personnel mine for the USF.
28 Jul 2014, 10:47 AM
#8
avatar of GustavGans

Posts: 747

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2014, 10:13 AMArclyte
I'd be happy if riflemen defensive fortifications was Cp0 instead of Cp2

Pretty stupid you need 2 cps just to build sandbags


Rifles being able to build greencover wherever they want to, right from the start would make US early game way too powerful.
28 Jul 2014, 14:31 PM
#9
avatar of astro_zombie

Posts: 123



Rifles being able to build greencover wherever they want to, right from the start would make US early game way too powerful.


This is not about US riflemen per say, they were just an easily demonstrable example. I used the word rifleman in original post, but I meant "infantry" or rifleman in a generic way.


Rifleman are better when they use close range anyway with garands or move in to throw a grenade, so I disagree, but that's not really relevant if EVERY faction could build them.


Sandbags are not overpowered, they were not in COH1 and won't be here either. They certainly won't be when every faction has equal opportunity to build them either.

So much of this game is built around cover. Maps become desolate when everything blows up and there's no cover anywhere anymore.

More cover may also equate to less blobbing as well.


28 Jul 2014, 15:01 PM
#10
avatar of GustavGans

Posts: 747



This is not about US riflemen per say, they were just an easily demonstrable example. I used the word rifleman in original post, but I meant "infantry" or rifleman in a generic way.


Rifleman are better when they use close range anyway with garands or move in to throw a grenade, so I disagree, but that's not really relevant if EVERY faction could build them.


Sandbags are not overpowered, they were not in COH1 and won't be here either. They certainly won't be when every faction has equal opportunity to build them either.

So much of this game is built around cover. Maps become desolate when everything blows up and there's no cover anywhere anymore.

More cover may also equate to less blobbing as well.


I was referring to Arclyte's post, explaining why US defensive fortifications ability is and should be at 2cp.

About your suggestion;
I think it's definitely something worth a closer look. For me it's very hard to estimate what the actual effect on balance would be.


28 Jul 2014, 15:37 PM
#11
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

I think astro makes a very good point, and one that is the first time Ive seen it and never rrally considered it myself.

That yes, especially in team-games, the field gets fucking flattened.

I think he has a very good point about how cool it would be to properly re-create cover in the luls (as in pause, not lols), between engagements for a small but crucial edge in infantry survival.

I like this way of thinking. I like it a lot.
29 Jul 2014, 00:11 AM
#12
avatar of astro_zombie

Posts: 123

Admin, or anyone, how can I change the topic name? I realized I added an extra "and"

I don't see a reason to have any concerns over balance. This game is just as if not more lethal in infantry combat as COH1 and has the same rules. I would say that building destruction is quicker in this.

And yes, lulls in battle, like blizzards especially, could be used to fortify your position and use all that time for something useful.
29 Jul 2014, 00:48 AM
#13
avatar of Bibiki

Posts: 4

Maybe those infantry squads were rich and could afford to go to sandbag school before the war?

No but seriously, I completely agree.
29 Jul 2014, 06:22 AM
#14
avatar of varunax

Posts: 210

Relic wants to promote run and gun blobbing infantry play that's why. Why do you think the cover system was absolute shit when the game was first released till players complained and forced Relic to change the design?

They have no idea what they're doing.
29 Jul 2014, 06:37 AM
#15
avatar of WhySooSerious

Posts: 1248

wouldnt sandbags also be spammable and used to blockade paths? If you retreat a squad it wont hop over the bag on retreat. It may go a path you may not desire.
29 Jul 2014, 06:44 AM
#16
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

wouldnt sandbags also be spammable and used to blockade paths? If you retreat a squad it wont hop over the bag on retreat. It may go a path you may not desire.


Volks' sandbags take a decent amount of time to build, but still crumble easily. I cant imagine being allowed the time and comfort to use sandbags offensively and block paths.

You can use sandbags to set up a defensive point to your liking, but the enemy will always retreat the same way they came.
29 Jul 2014, 08:26 AM
#17
avatar of varunax

Posts: 210

wouldnt sandbags also be spammable and used to blockade paths? If you retreat a squad it wont hop over the bag on retreat. It may go a path you may not desire.


That's called barbwire which is already in the game.
29 Jul 2014, 08:45 AM
#18
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1



Volks' sandbags take a decent amount of time to build, but still crumble easily. I cant imagine being allowed the time and comfort to use sandbags offensively and block paths.

You can use sandbags to set up a defensive point to your liking, but the enemy will always retreat the same way they came.
Epic situation: Sees enemy full company coming. Prepare VolksGrenadier at their path while hiding with TrueSight system. As soon as the enemy gets past a certain point, get behind them and build sandbags while your comrades are fighting for survival. Repels attack and the enemy must retreat somewhere else.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

858 users are online: 858 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49072
Welcome our newest member, Durddcdy23
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM