More requirement for cover?

New topic

New Reply

Posts: 1276

After thinking about how effective blobing is, Would it be more benefical to make cover more durbale/required for unit preservation?

Often times using cover only provides a minor boon, maybe adding more penalty for not using cover could fix the issue.

Doing so would nerf shocktroops as well as pnzer grens so in order to adjust this might be to return their armor back to the starting stats pre armor nerfs.

Let me know how you feel

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

I don't think so. Cover system is good as it is, and right now CQC units like shocks have a hard time closing the distance and Pgrens are a joke, they will become utterly useless that way. For fixing the blob meta there are other things that need to get fixed, I don't think there is any problem with cover.

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

3 Dec 2014, 18:24 PMRMMLz

I don't think so. Cover system is good as it is, and right now CQC units like shocks have a hard time closing the distance and Pgrens are a joke, they will become utterly useless that way. For fixing the blob meta there are other things that need to get fixed, I don't think there is any problem with cover.

Note: PG use assault rifles, not SMGs. You don't neccesarily need to close the gap with them.

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.

Multi Quote

Posts: 135

Sounds like an idea, especially considering how easily units hugging each other in cover die to aoe weapons these days.

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

3 Dec 2014, 19:08 PMelchino7

Note: PG use assault rifles, not SMGs. You don't neccesarily need to close the gap with them.

You are right, but that's not the point, even getting to mid range where they best is a challenge because they die like flies. Good damage though. I just wanted to make a point regarding OP saying they Pgrens need a nerf.

Posts: 135

Where did OP say he wanted to nerf pgrens?

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Theres no need for survivability buffs for Shocks and PGs.

You could make so certain weapon profiles ignores cover at different ranges instead of the universal 10 range.

Multi Quote

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

3 Dec 2014, 21:40 PMelchino7

Theres no need for survivability buffs for Shocks and PGs.

You could make so certain weapon profiles ignores cover at different ranges instead of the universal 10 range.

Do I need to remind you of old G43 and IR StGs for you to realize how bad idea is that?

Thread is about lack of cover importance and you want weapons that ignore it.

Really?

25 Nov 2015, 11:09 AM$nuffy

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.

Good Stuff here

Multi Quote

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

3 Dec 2014, 22:00 PMKatitof

Do I need to remind you of old G43 and IR StGs for you to realize how bad idea is that?

Thread is about lack of cover importance and you want weapons that ignore it.

Really?

It can work backwards. For example: reduce bolt action range to 3, carbines to 5, Assault rifles to 7 and SMG to 10.