Replacement of Trenches for OST
4 Jun 2015, 02:20 AM
#1
Posts: 95
I would really like to see trenches removed and replaced with constructable green cover in the doctrines that have this ability. I think it would add a good deal more strategic depth to the commanders that contain this ability as opposed to a campy molotov trap. Anyone else feel that this change could bring about a different play style or whether its an idiotic idea all together?
4 Jun 2015, 02:58 AM
#2
8 
Posts: 2470
i have two issues with trenches.
one, they're huge which makes them hard to place and fucks up the pathing on everything else.
two, they're super weak, tiny buildings and so have all the associated issues like being able to spawn falls (lol), dieing fast, and being a massive AoE trap.
i don't really want to see them removed but they're also not very good as they are now and sandbags are really useful for things other than cover (like path blocking).
one, they're huge which makes them hard to place and fucks up the pathing on everything else.
two, they're super weak, tiny buildings and so have all the associated issues like being able to spawn falls (lol), dieing fast, and being a massive AoE trap.
i don't really want to see them removed but they're also not very good as they are now and sandbags are really useful for things other than cover (like path blocking).
4 Jun 2015, 06:42 AM
#3
Posts: 484
I was surprised that the new trenches were so different to the ones in CoH1. Not least because vehicles could drive over them, so they didn't choke an area up.
Was there much unhappiness with the CoH1 trenches?
Was there much unhappiness with the CoH1 trenches?
“Disobedience, in the eyes of any one who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion.”
― Oscar Wilde
― Oscar Wilde
4 Jun 2015, 06:47 AM
#4
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
I don't want them removed. I just want them to mean something. Virtualy, placing your squad in a trench it's rather a bad idea because you will be super exposed to grenades, flames, etc not having a powerfull bonus to compensate for. They don't need replacement, they need re-thinking.
Maybe units inside gain a consistent accuracy bonus at far, health bonus, ROF bonus, anything will make you consider this option not ignore it as for now.
Maybe units inside gain a consistent accuracy bonus at far, health bonus, ROF bonus, anything will make you consider this option not ignore it as for now.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
4 Jun 2015, 07:56 AM
#5
Posts: 138
How about instead of making the trench a garrison, turning it into the same type of trenches that are found in some maps, (like the ones on rails and metal, that are on the north cp and south fuel point) these however would allow vehicles to move over them to prevent players from blocking sides of map with them
Right now they are pretty useless due to all the counters, flamers, nades or mortars both ally factions can get any of these, some trough doctrines (like US mortar halftrack with white phosphorus)
Would also like it if this type of trench building came with ambush camouflage on the same doctrine
Right now they are pretty useless due to all the counters, flamers, nades or mortars both ally factions can get any of these, some trough doctrines (like US mortar halftrack with white phosphorus)
Would also like it if this type of trench building came with ambush camouflage on the same doctrine
4 Jun 2015, 10:30 AM
#6
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
IMO:
1) shouldn't block vehicles passage
2) should give some protection against explosions
3) should be extremely vulnerable to flamers
4) shouldn't give any bonuses except non-directional green cover because it costs 0 to construct
1) shouldn't block vehicles passage
2) should give some protection against explosions
3) should be extremely vulnerable to flamers
4) shouldn't give any bonuses except non-directional green cover because it costs 0 to construct
4 Jun 2015, 11:22 AM
#7
Posts: 1217
I was surprised that the new trenches were so different to the ones in CoH1. Not least because vehicles could drive over them, so they didn't choke an area up.Coh1 trenches were quite annoying. You needed a Sniper or flamer to get rid of them. Grenades also did the job but were available in T2 only. The trenches were buildable right away though. Snipers always proofed risky, flamers were available after some minutes. This left you with literally one unit on the field (a flamer pio) that could fight a trench in the first 5 minutes.
Was there much unhappiness with the CoH1 trenches?
I´m kind of glad they moved away from borderline OP trenches.
Though I have to admit that the current trenches seem useless.
4 Jun 2015, 11:37 AM
#8
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
I was surprised that the new trenches were so different to the ones in CoH1. Not least because vehicles could drive over them, so they didn't choke an area up.
Was there much unhappiness with the CoH1 trenches?
They were a plague
4 Jun 2015, 11:47 AM
#9
Posts: 484
Sure, encountered that myself; once had the Brits pin me on Scheldt with a trench across the causeway; a little while later it was changed so that the recon squad couldn't make trenches, probably for that very reason.
And while it would seem a bit odd to put trenches behind a CP, it might also be solved by increasing the build time. That would make it risky to use early, because of the loss of capping time etc, but it could easily be used mid-game by pios etc. that otherwise might not have anything of consequence to do.
As for the 0 cost, I think that's OK because it can be garrisoned by the enemy and turned against you.
The current trenches seem both rather ineffectual and quite fragile.
And while it would seem a bit odd to put trenches behind a CP, it might also be solved by increasing the build time. That would make it risky to use early, because of the loss of capping time etc, but it could easily be used mid-game by pios etc. that otherwise might not have anything of consequence to do.
As for the 0 cost, I think that's OK because it can be garrisoned by the enemy and turned against you.
The current trenches seem both rather ineffectual and quite fragile.
“Disobedience, in the eyes of any one who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion.”
― Oscar Wilde
― Oscar Wilde
4 Jun 2015, 12:22 PM
#10
Posts: 476
Replace them with CP0 sandbags
4 Jun 2015, 12:59 PM
#11
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Them being replaced with Sandbags that are as durable as conscript sandbags would be nice. No idea what Relic was thinking when they made USF and OKW sandbags so fragile comparatively.
I would also be happy with them being made to cost manpower (Don't ask me were I got this idea), in exchange for them becoming much better in performance. That way they are actually useful but are not able to be spammed.
I would also be happy with them being made to cost manpower (Don't ask me were I got this idea), in exchange for them becoming much better in performance. That way they are actually useful but are not able to be spammed.
4 Jun 2015, 14:10 PM
#12
![avatar of 1[][]](/uploads/avatar/9394.png?updated=1397144681)
Posts: 172
Was there much unhappiness with the CoH1 trenches?
So much you wouldn't believe it. Brits were the hated faction for a long long time. PE didn't even come close.
4 Jun 2015, 14:20 PM
#13
Posts: 2742
So much so it's hard to tell if the trenches were the problem or if it was the association with the British that made them such a problem.
Ain't no trenches without brits.
Ain't no trenches without brits.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
4 Jun 2015, 17:37 PM
#14
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
I don't want them removed. I just want them to mean something. Virtualy, placing your squad in a trench it's rather a bad idea because you will be super exposed to grenades, flames, etc not having a powerfull bonus to compensate for. They don't need replacement, they need re-thinking.
Maybe units inside gain a consistent accuracy bonus at far, health bonus, ROF bonus, anything will make you consider this option not ignore it as for now.
Heavy suppression:0.1
Heavy penetration:1.0
Heavy accuracy:0.5
Heavy damage:0.5
Trench suppression:0.0
Trench penetration:1.0
Trench accuracy:0.2
Trench damage:0.3
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.
4 Jun 2015, 17:46 PM
#15
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
Trench suppression:0.0
Trench penetration:1.0
Trench accuracy:0.2
Trench damage:0.3
The main reason the bonuses don't help is because the trench itself explodes so easily and it generally arrives when the AT hits the field. Maybe it would help if its target size wasn't so large so all heavy weapons don't home onto it.
4 Jun 2015, 19:50 PM
#16
Posts: 1484
I always thought the net at the top would stop a grenade or Molotov.
 | Playercard of WingZero | |||||||||||||||
|
4 Jun 2015, 20:38 PM
#17
Posts: 67
How about instead of making the trench a garrison, turning it into the same type of trenches that are found in some maps, (like the ones on rails and metal, that are on the north cp and south fuel point) these however would allow vehicles to move over them to prevent players from blocking sides of map with them
Right now they are pretty useless due to all the counters, flamers, nades or mortars both ally factions can get any of these, some trough doctrines (like US mortar halftrack with white phosphorus)
Would also like it if this type of trench building came with ambush camouflage on the same doctrine
I like this idea the best so far. At least your units wouldn't be force to be static inside like they are in garrisons.
5 Jun 2015, 00:19 AM
#18
Posts: 2779
Ost and OKW trench are useless, making it worse than not using them.
On the other hand, Brit, well,
On the other hand, Brit, well,
5 Jun 2015, 00:23 AM
#19
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
Permanently BannedI love how AT guns will snipe the dirt mount and blow it up, absolutely retarded LOL.
1337 h4X0R, dank memes
axis
5 Jun 2015, 01:53 AM
#20
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
I love how AT guns will snipe the dirt mount and blow it up, absolutely retarded LOL.
If you can collapse a dirt mount, you can collapse a tank.
*Much ammo is then wasted*
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
68 | ||
|
|
|
|
33 | ||
 |
|
|
31 | ||
|
|
|
|
13 | ||
 |
|
|
12 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
653 | ||
|
|
|
|
14 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.838223.790+1
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.590233.717+6
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.922406.694+1
- 9.1118621.643-1
- 10.265138.658+2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
10
Download
1243
Board Info
467 users are online:
467 guests
0 post in the last 24h
2 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
2 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49388
Welcome our newest member, KETTA
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, KETTA
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM