British Emplacements

Umm, sim city isn't spamming emplacements on every single spot on the sector that allows you to build, its putting up entrenched position where you will support yourself with buildings and concentrate your forces for soft/hard retreats.

It doesn't matter if you have single gun or 10 of them, if they provide you a safe space that your opponent needs much bigger investment and force to dispose off and chase you off the position, that is a sim city.

There is little difference to bofors+mortar with 17-pounder and schwerer+ISG and PaK43 around duo with retreat and reinforcement point right behind them. Both of these are sim cities which function exactly the same, provide you a sturdy line of defense your opponent can't just attack and allowing you quick reinforcement without the need to retreat back to the base.

Sorry then you don't know what sim city is...

This is coh2. Not coh1. Different game, different time, different fourms. Don't know why you brought that one up. But if you say so, I remember coh1. British being a fail.

As I stated. Only one truck has a weapon on it. So you trying to compare all the british emplacements to the OKW trucks are irrelevant. It's silly at best. And yes of course it's going to create an economy strain. Otherwise you'll have a better sim city then the actual sim city game itself

"simcity"
look i dont want to say it but OKW has a building that counters everything but heavy tanks AND also have buildings that repair/heal alone they also need alot of shells to be killed and you defend it?

but when it comes to emplacements of the British we have simcity problems??

look simcity or what ever is this thing you talk about has a clear weakness HEAVY ARTILLERY or for OKW OFF-MAP CALLINS,and dont worry emplacements cant avoid any of the those counters cause they are immobile AND have a large hitbox so you get to hit them with more accuracy.

Emplacements are dumb. They should not have been part of the design of the Brits at all.
Making emplacements easier to decrew is stupid.
If I fire a smoke barrage on a Bofors, send up a flamer pio to decrew the bofors, then recrew it with my pio, I get a bofors and retain my pio squad.

GG wp

"simcity" is just a term. If you want a definition go to urban dictionary.
proper terminology would be something like a "defensive line" or "defensive position". Realistically, any faction can create such a thing, although they look different because of the tools and resources each faction has at their disposal in order to create such a defensive line.

"sim city" is basically a straw man thrown out to cover simply not wanting brit emplacements to perform as they're meant to. Like it or not, emplacements are a significant part of british gameplay and will not be removed or replaced.

The OKW emplacements got special treatment due to the resource penalty. I wonder if that will change when the penalty is gone? The flak HQ has a bigger effect on most games than any other emplacement.

Would definitely support the 17pdr getting a pop cap reduction. It's good, but 20 pop cap is quite a lot.

Emplacements are dumb. They should not have been part of the design of the Brits at all.
Making emplacements easier to decrew is stupid.
If I fire a smoke barrage on a Bofors, send up a flamer pio to decrew the bofors, then recrew it with my pio, I get a bofors and retain my pio squad.

GG wp

"simcity" is just a term. If you want a definition go to urban dictionary.
proper terminology would be something like a "defensive line" or "defensive position". Realistically, any faction can create such a thing, although they look different because of the tools and resources each faction has at their disposal in order to create such a defensive line.

if you managed to decrew te thing then you deserve to use it.

also maybe the brit player said "i will booby trap the thing"

there are many things you can do,ofc this doesnt mean emplacements will be decrewable so easily.

Umm, sim city isn't spamming emplacements on every single spot on the sector that allows you to build, its putting up entrenched position where you will support yourself with buildings and concentrate your forces for soft/hard retreats.

It doesn't matter if you have single gun or 10 of them, if they provide you a safe space that your opponent needs much bigger investment and force to dispose off and chase you off the position, that is a sim city.

There is little difference to bofors+mortar with 17-pounder and schwerer+ISG and PaK43 around duo with retreat and reinforcement point right behind them. Both of these are sim cities which function exactly the same, provide you a sturdy line of defense your opponent can't just attack and allowing you quick reinforcement without the need to retreat back to the base.

No no no, simcity IS spamming emplacements. Jesus dude. Players use the sim city term when a brit player decides to put multiple emplacements up in an area relative to each other.and 1 gun is way different then 10 guns.


Don't get strategic defensive lines mixed up with sim city. I wont call a single bofer simcity even if it's in front of the brits foward retreat point. And yea I'll agree with you with the Flak truck, pak38, and leigs to be sim city. But you know the difference between the two. None of those units heal themselves, non have brace, and the allies have so many different ways to deal with them. Try again...

So bofors, 17pounder and mortar with forward assembly is sim city and med truck, shwerer, pak43 and ISG is stratregic line of defense mmmmmkay, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, you have some double standards issues.

So bofors, 17pounder and mortar with forward assembly is sim city and med truck, shwerer, pak43 and ISG is stratregic line of defense mmmmmkay, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, you have some double standards issues.

Reread it I CLEARLY TELL YOU THAT I AGREE THAT THEY ARE SIM CITY. try again... next time slow it down and actually read before you respond. It's a life lesson tought in the early ages of school

Alright then.

Still, have fun spamming emplacements given how they are in coh2.

You might just as well write with barb wire "I suicide my eco".

Alright then.

Still, have fun spamming emplacements given how they are in coh2.

You might just as well write with barb wire "I suicide my eco".

A lost child. It's sad to see. Like the late night commercials asking to donate money. Like them, you won't get help.

Thanks for the laugh tho. You know, telling me to have fun spamming emplacements when all my post are counter to spamming emplacements. Just do yourself a solid and Cut along the tracks not against it with that barb wire

How can you compare emplacements to okw trucks? If okw places his expensive T3 building near the front he runs the risk to lose it (and canceling every unit which is in Production at that moment) and wont be able to rebuild it for 2mins (?)(not calculating the time to drive the Truck to a place and set it up again) It has a clear drawback and to lose a T3 as okw can cost you easily the game. Meanwhile if you lose your emplacement as brit it's not a harsh Set back, more like a unit wipe. Thats a HUGE difference in my opinion.

How can you compare emplacements to okw trucks? If okw places his expensive T3 building near the front he runs the risk to lose it (and canceling every unit which is in Production at that moment) and wont be able to rebuild it for 2mins (?)(not calculating the time to drive the Truck to a place and set it up again) It has a clear drawback and to lose a T3 as okw can cost you easily the game. Meanwhile if you lose your emplacement as brit it's not a harsh Set back, more like a unit wipe. Thats a HUGE difference in my opinion.

didnt you read what i said?? emplacements COST you the game,emplacements arent CHEAP so please next time try to read what i said

didnt you read what i said?? emplacements COST you the game,emplacements arent CHEAP so please next time try to read what i said

K so your post is about brits emplacement beeing equal or more expensive than okw trucks and cost you easily the game as soon as you loose it. ( Keep in mind, I started my post with "if you compare") or maybe you didnt read my post carefully?

Oh and btw I dont think heavy artillery or off maps counters brit emplacement, to be honest i think it's the other way around (200muns for stuka Diva? Let me brace it and completly deny your artillery)

17lber could use a range adjustment(and less population cap, jesus christ), and the FHQ disappears like a fart in the wind to anything pointed at it with more firepower than a spud gun.

Other than that, I reckon they're quite alright currently.

K so your post is about brits emplacement beeing equal or more expensive than okw trucks and cost you easily the game as soon as you loose it. ( Keep in mind, I started my post with "if you compare") or maybe you didnt read my post carefully?

Oh and btw I dont think heavy artillery or off maps counters brit emplacement, to be honest i think it's the other way around (200muns for stuka Diva? Let me brace it and completly deny your artillery)

look at the front page what i typed and tell me what this thread is about.

yes emplacements are like OKW base trucks use them more often and tell me when you lose the emplacement how it affacted you in the long run

also Brace exists as you said to counter those i wipe abilitys ofc this doesnt make them immune to damage so you can charge there with your troops OR maybe fire at them again since brace has a cooldown

I think that brace should be removed and instead emplacements should just be tougher to compensate. It feels so gamey to have an 'Oh no you don't' button. It's also really annoying to have to always attack an emplacement with a disproportionately large force because the opponent might be paying attention and therefore one seriously hard alpha-strike (enough to destroy say an IS2 in a matter of moments) just isn't enough. Was that intentional on Relic's part? Because losing an emplacement hurts so much to have a hope the enemy must be willing to risk an army to destroy it.

Frankly considering how reliable indirect fire is in CoH 2 compared to the supremely devastating, on direct hit, but ultimately unreliable performance of CoH 1 artillery why re-create a faction with expensive emplacements in the first place? Brace structure just simply isn't a good enough way to reconcile this problem. Without it a defensive UKF play is untenable and with it emplacements have demi-god mode on standby. This only really pertains to 1v1s however.

In 2v2 and above there is the issue that one way to easily OHK an allied team containing a UKF is to double/triple/quadruple an emplacement/simcity suddenly which knocks them well out of the running for a long time. Do this to one turtle shell after the other with overwhelming force or indirect fire saturation and knock each Brit out of the running early. Demi-god mode or not 4+ mortars/ISGs focus firing an emplacement or over 10+ squads (or some combination of both). Because losing an emplacement is so punishing the axis can exploit that inherent design flaw of a defensively played Brit without much skill or inherent risk. As they are not pressuring you (because the emplacement ate their income and they have to defend it in force or lose) preparing this kind of Omega-strike (because unlike an Alpha-strike it's the end instead of the beginning) in secret is easy. And of course if they don't defend it properly then just rock up and blow it up with whatever you have to spare.

I don't know how to fix the second problem if I'm going to be honest. Make them much worse but a lot cheaper to compensate? Or go the CoH 1 route and completely neuter the UKFs offensive options so that turtling is the only effective strategy remaining and make their emplacements really really tough to destroy?

As for OKW trucks... They could just bring back the one per-sector limit that they had before which prevented Sim City strategies at the game mechanics level. After all OKW is technically supposed to be the most aggressive faction based around the Battle of Bulge, break through then bite, hold and hopefully do enough damage for the win and not a Call of Duty Proskillzzzz playa (aka. pitch up tent and camp to victory). Besides, it's rather easy to take out a far forward Flaktrack with an early T-34/76. The main reason for shoving the T-34 up to Soviet T4 and locking it behind T3 was to stop Soviets from rolling over OKW players who were either somehow allergic to or just awful with (i.e. inexplicably expecting it to perform on par with the Pak 40 and moaning on the forums when it doesn't) the Raketenwerfer. Not to mention the fact the Schwerer Panzer HQ is not cheap and requires a truck which spawns if and when it feels like it to build *i.e. never when you need it to*.

U guys complain about sim city when OKW medic and flak trucks are the ultimate sim city!!!

They are not expensive.I dunno why you feel they are expensive but you know the price of them right?The mortar pit costs 400mp/8pop,has 2 mortars which both have 115 range.The OST/SU regular mortars cost 240mp/6pop and 80 range.The bofors only costs 280mp/30fuel which is cheaper than USF/OKW AA halftracks but has 1000 hp. The 17 pounder costs 400mp/75 fuel which is only 60 more mp than the OKW puma, but has 900 hp and can lockdown half of the map when being used porperly. Actually the price is not expensive at all.

Also, they are designed as defensive but not offensive, read the faction designed roles worte by Relic.The flame/artilley is designed as main counters. The DOT of flame has been heavily nerfed already. If you play the OST without doctrinal flame/artilley options you can hardly counter the emplacements then GG. Even the Walking Stuka/50kg Stuka bombs can hardly do damage to them when the brace is actived. The godlike Churchill spam + 17 pounder ruins late team games unless the Axis players know how to deal with.

They are not UP or OP. TBH nothing needs to be changed. They are part of design by relic, powerful but immobile. For me I just don't like them because I always prefer to mobile units.

I think that brace should be removed and instead emplacements should just be tougher to compensate. It feels so gamey to have an 'Oh no you don't' button. It's also really annoying to have to always attack an emplacement with a disproportionately large force because the opponent might be paying attention and therefore one seriously hard alpha-strike (enough to destroy say an IS2 in a matter of moments) just isn't enough. Was that intentional on Relic's part? Because losing an emplacement hurts so much to have a hope the enemy must be willing to risk an army to destroy it.

Frankly considering how reliable indirect fire is in CoH 2 compared to the supremely devastating, on direct hit, but ultimately unreliable performance of CoH 1 artillery why re-create a faction with expensive emplacements in the first place? Brace structure just simply isn't a good enough way to reconcile this problem. Without it a defensive UKF play is untenable and with it emplacements have demi-god mode on standby. This only really pertains to 1v1s however.

In 2v2 and above there is the issue that one way to easily OHK an allied team containing a UKF is to double/triple/quadruple an emplacement/simcity suddenly which knocks them well out of the running for a long time. Do this to one turtle shell after the other with overwhelming force or indirect fire saturation and knock each Brit out of the running early. Demi-god mode or not 4+ mortars/ISGs focus firing an emplacement or over 10+ squads (or some combination of both). Because losing an emplacement is so punishing the axis can exploit that inherent design flaw of a defensively played Brit without much skill or inherent risk. As they are not pressuring you (because the emplacement ate their income and they have to defend it in force or lose) preparing this kind of Omega-strike (because unlike an Alpha-strike it's the end instead of the beginning) in secret is easy. And of course if they don't defend it properly then just rock up and blow it up with whatever you have to spare.

I don't know how to fix the second problem if I'm going to be honest. Make them much worse but a lot cheaper to compensate? Or go the CoH 1 route and completely neuter the UKFs offensive options so that turtling is the only effective strategy remaining and make their emplacements really really tough to destroy?

As for OKW trucks... They could just bring back the one per-sector limit that they had before which prevented Sim City strategies at the game mechanics level. After all OKW is technically supposed to be the most aggressive faction based around the Battle of Bulge, break through then bite, hold and hopefully do enough damage for the win and not a Call of Duty Proskillzzzz playa (aka. pitch up tent and camp to victory). Besides, it's rather easy to take out a far forward Flaktrack with an early T-34/76. The main reason for shoving the T-34 up to Soviet T4 and locking it behind T3 was to stop Soviets from rolling over OKW players who were either somehow allergic to or just awful with (i.e. inexplicably expecting it to perform on par with the Pak 40 and moaning on the forums when it doesn't) the Raketenwerfer. Not to mention the fact the Schwerer Panzer HQ is not cheap and requires a truck which spawns if and when it feels like it to build *i.e. never when you need it to*.

+1

They are not expensive.I dunno why you feel they are expensive but you know the price of them right?The mortar pit costs 400mp/8pop,has 2 mortars which both have 115 range.The OST/SU regular mortars cost 240mp/6pop and 80 range.The bofors only costs 280mp/30fuel which is cheaper than USF/OKW AA halftracks but has 1000 hp. The 17 pounder costs 400mp/75 fuel which is only 60 more mp than the OKW puma, but has 900 hp and can lockdown half of the map when being used porperly. Actually the price is not expensive at all.

Also, they are designed as defensive but not offensive, read the faction designed roles worte by Relic.The flame/artilley is designed as main counters. The DOT of flame has been heavily nerfed already. If you play the OST without doctrinal flame/artilley options you can hardly counter the emplacements then GG. Even the Walking Stuka/50kg Stuka bombs can hardly do damage to them when the brace is actived. The godlike Churchill spam + 17 pounder ruins late team games unless the Axis players know how to deal with.

They are not UP or OP. TBH nothing needs to be changed. They are part of design by relic, powerful but immobile. For me I just don't like them because I always prefer to mobile units.

400mp is cheap for a manpower hungry faction??
400mp 75 fuel and 20 pop is cheap for a manpower hungry faction??

also Brace got nerfed so we dont have permabrace and for that i didnt post any revert brace nerf suggestions and not only that but without brace emplacements get wiped

so try to damage an emplacement without brace and tell me how durable it was