What in the world happened to emplacements?

Emplacements are probably the hardest thing in the game to balance and at the moment it just so happens they are way underwhelming. It sucks for the British since a lot of their design is about playing around emplacements but I honestly prefer them being somewhat weak tbh, it makes for more interesting games

There are good threads and posts on how to balance emplacements. These are the suggestions that I like:

-Buff HP
-Tweak Brace by using target tables: Light artillery pieces (mortars, ISGs) should do minimal damage to Emplacements, even without brace (something like 50% damage reduction) and even more when using brace. Heavy artillery pieces should do decent damage, even when braced (100% without brace and about 50% with brace).
-Small arms should be able to damage mortar pits when not braced. Getting close to mortar pits should be encouraged.
-ATGs should do decent damage to Bofors and Mortar pits even when braced (50-60%) but not 17pndr.
-Nades should do decent damage even when braced.
-Incendiary weapons should do decent damage when NOT braced, but reduced damage when braced.
-Brace could be a Toggle ability with small cool down.

Still, as you said Emplacements are kinda hard to balance, but I think some of these suggestion (Which I've gathered from different posts) might be a step forward. Needs testing though.

There are good threads and posts on how to balance emplacements. These are the suggestions that I like:

-Buff HP
-Tweak Brace by using target tables: Light artillery pieces (mortars, ISGs) should do minimal damage to Emplacements, even without brace (something like 50% damage reduction) and even more when using brace. Heavy artillery pieces should do decent damage, even when braced (100% without brace and about 50% with brace).
-Small arms should be able to damage mortar pits when not braced. Getting close to mortar pits should be encouraged.
-ATGs should do decent damage to Bofors and Mortar pits even when braced (50-60%) but not 17pndr.
-Nades should do decent damage even when braced.
-Incendiary weapons should do decent damage when NOT braced, but reduced damage when braced.
-Brace could be a Toggle ability with small cool down.

Still, as you said Emplacements are kinda hard to balance, but I think some of these suggestion (Which I've gathered from different posts) might be a step forward. Needs testing though.

Yea I've seen the threads and don't disagree one or more of those could work, I'm just saying until Relic finds the sweet spot I rather have them underperforming than overperforming

They die a bit too easy to incendiary weapons, otherwise they're pretty well balanced.

Not only are emplacements very mediocre and fairly expensive they also require an additional manpower investment to run at full capacity, whether it be a garrison or a nearby forward position. Also the 17-pounder has 20 pop cap. Who would waste 1/5 of their army size on a static AT gun?

people don't build them anymore because people learned that any brit player who isn't a contrarian elitist rushes centaur then croc to take advantage of ukf armor as quickly as possible

If Relic was going to over nerf the emplacements, why even add them in the first place? I am pretty sure allot of players did not want a turtle faction for Brits form Coh1. Now we have half of the tech completely outclassed.

idk what the hell is wrong with half these people. but i love the hell out of emplacements, i mean sure i don't use them right off the bat, i wait untill later so i can hold down positions even harder.

the 17 pounder saved me so many times, and the mortar pit had done very well in half of the games i've used it.

the bofors is probably something i'd rarely used, its mostly dependant on the type of map i'm on, and i only really use it during a late game sequence.

They got a massive overnerf due to community over reaction.

So oneshoting squads without any retreat chance with bofors was a normal state. I see.

emplacements are pretty bad right now in terms of durability. The ISG nerf I dont belive will help keep these alive as they are often out ranged and out gunned (e.g: mortar pit).

The MP sinks we call emplacements lack the durability to keep them viable in 1v1's and even 4v4's. Relics Idea of the Brits was that they were supposed to be a "break out faction" where they fall back on their emplacements or go for a full out assault E.G hammer and anvil. currently the Brits are missing the anvil portion of this and I believe that emplacement are what's missing. Now I don't think making the Brits live off sim city is a good idea but we should at least make these emplacements viable and a separate play style.

Adjusting brace would be the best way to do this but only if its done right. In alpha the brace was a toggle but was missing a cool down, I figure adding this back would be a good idea but we should encourage using close range weapons and direct fire rather than using arty, call ins (stuka dive bomb while braced) , mortar half-track flame mortar.

Increase the damage of direct fire of infantry units such as AT guns, nades, and handheld/Flame half-track damage. This will allow for a fun counter play that lets even German early game a chance to dislodge these positions early game.

This is a small change but like always should be tested in a balance preview to ensure its fair and offers a big enough counter play.



*Edit* Updated with an idea to change brace, Also someone suggested a cost increase to emplacements and I say it needs to be tested.



Maybe making brace a individual ability per unit would work. Make the mortar pit take more damage (while braced) from small arms and direct fire and make 17pndr and bofors take more damage from indirect.

emplacements are pretty bad right now in terms of durability. The ISG nerf I dont belive will help keep these alive as they are often out ranged and out gunned (e.g: mortar pit).

The MP sinks we call emplacements lack the durability to keep them viable in 1v1's and even 4v4's. Relics Idea of the Brits was that they were supposed to be a "break out faction" where they fall back on their emplacements or go for a full out assault E.G hammer and anvil. currently the Brits are missing the anvil portion of this and I believe that emplacement are what's missing. Now I don't think making the Brits live off sim city is a good idea but we should at least make these emplacements viable and a separate play style.

maybe true but im finding ukf in a very strong position in all game modes right now. if u want emplacements to be better there needs to be nerfs too.

plus people keep forgetting that the reinforcment costs will go down to 28(!!!!!) thats less than grens (30) so you will have tons of manpower for every fucking mortar pit u want to place on the map. dont they realize what 28 reinforcement means for ukf?

maybe true but im finding ukf in a very strong position in all game modes right now. if u want emplacements to be better there needs to be nerfs too.

plus people keep forgetting that the reinforcment costs will go down to 28(!!!!!) thats less than grens (30) so you will have tons of manpower for every fucking mortar pit u want to place on the map. dont they realize what 28 reinforcement means for ukf?

You are forgetting about essential early-game upgrades such as squadsize and nades that brits couldn't afford before. UKF is strong because of no-brainer centaur rush, not because of their abundance of manpower. It's not like the difference in early-game MP will be huge anyway, it's 200 at most, and that's if you bleed hard.

All that aside, I agree that emplacements don't generally need buffs, although an adjustment to 17pdr popcap could be made.

You are forgetting about essential early-game upgrades such as squadsize and nades that brits couldn't afford before. UKF is strong because of no-brainer centaur rush, not because of their abundance of manpower. It's not like the difference in early-game MP will be huge anyway, it's 200 at most, and that's if you bleed hard.

All that aside, I agree that emplacements don't generally need buffs, although an adjustment to 17pdr popcap could be made.

if the early mp difference is not that much, can we lower gren and pzgren reinforcement cost too?

I don't want emplacements to go away since it is very thematic for Brits and it can be done right by the correct mix of pop cap usage plus cost/performance. High enough pop cap means you can't spam emplacements but they also need to be durable enough that it takes specialized attacks to destroy them (off map, incendiary barrage, on map heavy artillery/flame grenades, etc). Currently they are so weak I only build them if I go Royal Engineers as they get the stand fast ability which with Brace can survive a medium level assault.

Also, they need to be weak enough to not be able to be put at front lines and creep forward but not so weak that they fall to one incendiary grenade plus a couple schreck shots just because 1 volks got behind your lines for a few seconds.

this is hard to do but it can be done.

The use of emplacements should be optional but with additional advantages.
For example:
All British weapon teams (Vickers MG, 6 lb AT gun and a normal mortar team) have 85% health/durability of standard equivalent but have an option to "fortify" (build a static fortification that reduces damage taken from all projectiles and indirect artillery fire but not from direct attacks with flamethrowers or grenades).
This "fortify" option is free but takes a while to build or dismantle.

Anvil: Fortifications can be built or dismantled much quicker (60% of the normal time) and provide additional protection against indirect artillery fire.