Should Sov and Ost have Forward Retreat Points?

halftracks are stronger than fhqs imo, you can reinforce your blob on the move anywhere on the map.

Give it to all, or remove from USF and WFA.
Simple.
FRP is huge advtange on big maps.

This. And it's even a bigger advantage for USF because it's not a fixed position like OKW and UKF.

halftracks are stronger than fhqs imo, you can reinforce your blob on the move anywhere on the map.

The problem is "retreat" function. Walked into an HMG? No worries bro I just retreat my blob. Is that Katy firing? No worries bro I just retreat my blob. Is that Stuka? No worries... you get the idea.

Give it to all, or remove from USF and WFA.
Simple.
FRP is huge advtange on big maps.

I agree. I use this ability tactically when I play with USF, and it has a advantage when one or several infantry squads run into an ambush or became pinned. I know when I press a hotkey for the unit and the T-button, they retreat to the major, who is in a tactical position where I placed him.

Because I most often play 4vs4, I would wish to have one forward retreat point for both the Ostheer and Sovjets, for example the command bunker or the forward headquarters building. In 1vs1 this doesn't matter, but on large maps, this ability is an advantage, because you can make a tactical retreat, and then directly attack the enemy on an another position.

I know that in history in WW2, the troops had a point where to go, if the enemy break through the lines. Why not also in this game?

I do not agree, that a forward retreat point automatically encourages blobbing. Of course it can do it, but now you can always retreat to the headquarters if your blob runs into a MG. I see the forward retreat point as a tactical retreat, so that you can have maximum amount of troops near the front line and have an ability to launch a counter attack faster.

I hate this idea, and ideas like it.

Is this any different from "should OKW and USF be able to reinforce off their halftracks?" which is also a bad idea

If you believe (#believe)that they have a real disadvantage because of this then a different solution could be good, but simply replicating what the other factions do seems far too dull.

Before long we'll just have OST reskinned 5 times for the factions

Forward retreat points should be removed from the game completely.

If you believe (#believe)that they have a real disadvantage because of this then a different solution could be good, but simply replicating what the other factions do seems far too dull.

It can't be replicating, if the retreat point for
1) USF is the major
2) OKW is the battlegroup headquarters
3) UKF is the forward assembly

4) Ostheer should be the command bunker
5) Sovjets should be the forward headquarters

It can be similar and fair, but definitely not duplicating.

It can't be replicating, if the retreat point for
1) USF is the major
2) OKW is the battlegroup headquarters
3) UKF is the forward assembly

4) Ostheer should be the command bunker
5) Sovjets should be the forwards headquarters

well it kinda is, albeit with different structures. I mean altogether different from a forward retreat. A tactical advantage that isn't a retreat point, but something else that gives its own advantages comparable to the FRP.

lol although come to think of it a good solution would be a vehicle that you could reinforce at that has its offensive abilities reduced when doing so




Or just maybe make a mod and reskin OST 5times and finally be happy

lol although come to think of it a good solution would be a vehicle that you could reinforce at that has its offensive abilities reduced when doing so

I think that a vehicle as a forward retreat point is too big advantage for that faction who gets it. For if you could both retreat the troops to it and reinforce them, and at the same time defend that with the vehicle's MGs and also move the vehicle fast from a position to an another position, that could be a huge advantage.

Now you can reinforce from the halftrack, but then it must come very close to the front line, and the enemy can easily destroy it. Of course major can stay away from the front line, but he cannot reinforce the troops, and it is easier to kill a major than a halftrack. A Sovjet officer could also be a retreat point instead of the forward headquarters.

I think that a vehicle as a forward retreat point is too big advantage for that faction who gets it. For if you could both retreat the troops to it and reinforce them, and at the same time defend that with the vehicle's MGs and also move the vehicle fast from a position to an another position, that could be a huge advantage.

sorry you misunderstand, was'nt suggesting that the current halftracks should have a retreat point, was just pointing out they are great as they as and offer their own advantages different to the FRP. basically im saying its fine as it is and im against mirroring factions as a solution to a non problem

Absolutely not.

Command bunkers and Halftracks for OST, doctrinal retreatpoint and Halftrack for SOV is good enough. Not all factions need to have the same playstyle (imo).

halftracks are stronger than fhqs imo, you can reinforce your blob on the move anywhere on the map.

Not stronger, but different. Not weaker imo.

Is this any different from "should OKW and USF be able to reinforce off their halftracks?" which is also a bad idea.

USF can reinforce off their Half-Track, it's just shitty and doctrinal and needs buffed, but they can do it. OKW doesn't have any transport Half-Tracks to begin with, so that point is null.

Absolutely not.

Command bunkers and Halftracks for OST, doctrinal retreatpoint and Halftrack for SOV is good enough. Not all factions need to have the same playstyle (imo).

Soviets do not have retreat point on FHQ, you need to go back all the way to your base.

Soviets do not have retreat point on FHQ, you need to go back all the way to your base.

Really? Damn I really though they had that build in. It's been a while since I've played soviets cause of the 100% allies search rate.
Thanks for the info.

USF can reinforce off their Half-Track, it's just shitty and doctrinal and needs buffed, but they can do it. OKW doesn't have any transport Half-Tracks to begin with, so that point is null.

LOL Was just an example, kinda missing the point to bring it up TBH, and just said "half track" and kinda meant tech ones

Why only quote one example off my entire point? or why do i even ask

I do feel FRP give too much of an advantage, especially the USF and UKF versions of it...

Unlike OKW the USF can move theirs constantly, and the UKF can build multiple retreat points + gliders...

Seems abit unfair the factions with the most artillery (Allies) have the mobile/spammable FRP's while the faction with the least artillery (OKW) has a static one.

Id rather see them limited to 1 and more static. (Have the major set up a forward command bunker or something).

The issue isnt the FRP its the way the allied ones are superior to the OKW one... while having more access to artillery to further punish.

If Wehrmacht and soviets were given one, would have to be limited to one and static too...

The logical forward retreat point for Ostheer is the command bunker, and for the Sovjets the forward headquarters, which is a commander ability, but it is better than nothing.

I don't care wether or not these 2 factions have forward retreat points, to be honest.
But if they were to, these would indeed be the most befitting and logical solutions in my opinion.

I do feel FRP give too much of an advantage, especially the USF and UKF versions of it...

Unlike OKW the USF can move theirs constantly, and the UKF can build multiple retreat points + gliders...

Seems abit unfair the factions with the most artillery (Allies) have the mobile/spammable FRP's while the faction with the least artillery (OKW) has a static one.

Id rather see them limited to 1 and more static. (Have the major set up a forward command bunker or something).

The issue isnt the FRP its the way the allied ones are superior to the OKW one... while having more access to artillery to further punish.

If Wehrmacht and soviets were given one, would have to be limited to one and static too...

USF one isn't really hard to harass or destroy.

UKF one costs an arm and a leg and is completely useless if you don't rely your strat around emplacements, its also extremely fragile and you can destroy 450mp investment with small arms of any kind, it won't survive any arty strike and can't brace.

Actually, the most influencial FHQ is OKW one as its hardest one to dispatch, arrives extremely early and isn't as resource heavy as UKF one, yes you pay fuel for it, but its a tech and that fuel doesn't go to waste the moment infantry pushes you back from your position.

At the end of the day FRP are not going any were. That is just a fact, and if you need proof look at the British. Weather it is go or not doesn't matter the UKF have one. So at this point you need to ask yourself are FRP a style of play or a normal part of a faction design.

The answer is no. The fact is that none of the new factions USF, OKW, or UKF are anything like the sov and ost. There techs give free bonus. The USF and UKF each get weapon raks. They all have FRP, etc. In fact the 3 factions have much more income with each other then the old factions. This i fell comes for the fact that the old factions were just that old faction designs from CoH 1 given new units and skins. So this argument that FRP are a style of play is wrong, rather FRP are a necessary faction mechanic now. I will grant you that it was not always that way, and the game may of been better if relic did add them. But, that ship has sailed and made lade at FRP island. Just like hoe every army needs a indirect fire unit, suppression unit, and a AT gun now every army should and needs to have a FRP. If not for any other reason then to not allow the new factions the chess the older ones.

So if you are voting no just because you don't like the idea of FRP then i say you are being bias and not looking to balance. This again is more of a team game mechanic any way and would have little to no effect on 1v1 maps.

Ostheer should have a forward retreat point but not soviet, because of krupp steel