The OP utility of engineers.

this thread is not about my skill or about any strategies involving spamming of engineer type of units.

This thread is about having 2 distinguished roles for engineer type units:
battle oriented with limited utility
utility oriented with less fighting power

I would be happy to debate this proposal but the other issued razed so far seem to me out of topic...

I don't see how this is a distinction that needs to be made.

Sov and Ost engineers already have extremely limited fighting power and already can't upgrade both flamethrower and hazard removal package. If you make flamethrower nerf their other building utilities then you're forcing these factions to waste MP on multiple Engineer units just for the sake of artificial specialization.

REs had their cost efficiency heavily nerfed last past with their 5th man vet changed and their reinforced changed to (lol) 25 (barely cheaper than Rifles). This makes RE spam highly unfavorable.

SPs - Probably the unit that best reflects your argument but they are also much more expensive than other engineer units and that is reflected with their performance. The fact that they are so expensive further emphasizes the reason why you can't force a player to build several just to have a "combat SP" and "repairing SPs".

Sappers - Now require significant munitions + Anvil investment to be truly combat effective.


Even if you take into account their Vet bonuses they will never ever replace mainline infantry (nor do most players ever build more than 3 barring certain circumstances). Again, if you nerf Engineers you are just limiting the tactical options that they provide as a support unit.

I don't see how this is a distinction that needs to be made.

Sov and Ost engineers already have extremely limited fighting power and already can't upgrade both flamethrower and hazard removal package. If you make flamethrower nerf their other building utilities then you're forcing these factions to waste MP on multiple Engineer units just for the sake of artificial specialization.
...

Exactly WFA engineer have far less utility than other armies, I you actually read my suggestion I did not suggest any "nerf" to them (I did not actually suggest "nerfs" for most of the units..)...

Asymmetrical balance dude. As you can see it's working like a charm.

Oh wait

Only one i find OP, even with anvil now costing 70muni, is UKF RE.

Even without anvil they have good life and dmg.

I once had a guy (on a 4v4) only spamming RE that fought and beast volks and sturms, going into mass churchs so he could repair them really really fast.

But once only, and in 4v4.

There is large number of unities that can repair vehicles by default:

Royal engineers (can be armed with LMG/HAT* and minesweepers, built emplacements, destroy cover, built mines, wire)

Royal Sappers (has minesweepers, can be equipped with LMG/piats destroy cover, salvage)

Rear Echelon (can be armed with LMG/HAT* and minesweepers, built fighting position, wire, tank traps, cashes)

Assault engineers (can be armed with flamers and LMG/HAT, built fighting position, wire, mines, cashes, cut wire, repair critical, demo charges)

Vehicle crews (repair critical)

Sturmpioneers (can be equipped with minesweapers, mines, R. wire, salvage)

Pioneer (can be armed with flamers or minesweepers, built building, bunkers, mines, wire, cashes)

Combat engineers (can be armed with flamers or minesweepers, built building, mines, wire, cashes, demolition chargers)

(I left out some doctrinal abilities)

The majority of these units (apart from crews, C.E. and pioneers)are good at fighting and can substitute (or even perform better than) standard infantry in fighting. Furthermore they can vet too fast further improving their repair speed.

Imo most of these units offer too much utility (fighting, repairing, creating obstacles, clearing obstacles and all that in a cost efficient price) and with the increased repair speed via vet they can increase the performance of vehicle with allot of HP, by reducing their time out of the field.

The utility of these units is also very different.

Suggestions:

1) Balance out utility, some of these units can carry minesweeper and buy extra weapons other can not, and that affect the performance of weapons like mines, demo chancres, goliaths since some blob can counter them with little loss of firepower while other lose more firepower.

Minesweepers and other weapon should be mutually exclusive so that one units can have one or the other but not both (similar to pioneer and C.E.). All sweepers should be able to be removed similarly to S.P. so that units with them don't lose DPS and can still gain veterancy (remember they can no longer buy weapons).

2) Reduce repair speed of all units to "doctrinal conscript" repair speed, replace the repair speed vet bonuses with a remove repair damage penalty bonus. Reduce built time for emplacements/obstacles.

Make minesweepers increase repair speed and built speed and add repair speed vet bonus, maybe even gain veterancy via repairing.

This changes aim at creating 2 clear path for engineers the combat oriented ones equipped with weapons that can still have utility but be slower, and the utility engineers providing more utility less fighting abilities.

Specific unit changes:

Royal sapper they could spawn with 1-2 piats being an exception in the minesweeper or weapon rule. (the luck utility)

Assault engineers add a 5 member as a vet bonus

Vehicle crews replace the repair critical ability with the following ability, at vet 1 the have a chance to survive vehicle destruction with around 50%HP, then the can merge with a another crew losing 25% of XP.

Repair critical made seance when USF vehicles where UP compared to axis. Currently Sherman and Eays8 are more cost efficient than PZ4 and there is no need for this ability on crews. It can remain on assault engineers making more attractive. This change also helps player remove from the map unwanted crews.

Pioneers and C.E. could become able to benefit from doctrinal weapon upgrades and get G43 and PPsh respectively.



(*) Hand held AT

How about we nerf engi's by replacing the bombs in their Piats with rocks?

I bet a lot of people have tried RE spam, failed, and then went back to what they were doing before. Before the price increase, RE's were something like 20 mp to reinforce so if you could keep 6-8 of them going while not losing any then it would work out.

REs are 25 to reinforce.

3 less then rifles, incomparably worse in combat and scaling.

There isn't much of a reason to go for REs unless you need dedicated capper.

Asymmetrical balance dude. As you can see it's working like a charm.

Oh wait

Has little to do with Asymmetrical balance or Faction bias, EFA engineers in both factions are quite less efficient in combat (and repair speed) making them less cost efficient and that is why one sees less of them...

If utility is OP, Conscripts are the most broken units ingame.

really? engineers op?

Shit am I in the coh1 forums? Kappa

If utility is OP, Conscripts are the most broken units ingame.

Yes in my opinion they do have too much utility and some of their utility could be given to other infantries like penals to make them more attractive but there is also another difference most of their utility comes from doctrinal abilities...

Further more too much utility does not make units broken it simply makes them spamable (as your conscript example).

Why should a UKF player make have only 1 to 2 Ro. Eng. on the field as many EFA players do, when Ro. Eng. are extremely cost efficient?

REs are 25 to reinforce.

3 less then rifles, incomparably worse in combat and scaling.

There isn't much of a reason to go for REs unless you need dedicated capper.

Riffles are 12% more expensive to reinforce than RE and that is not trivial, and you are also forgetting the the upkeep cost and pop limit where rifle have 40% more.

The are actually a good option for carrying Bazookas and (doctrinal)flamers.

RE see allot more action than Pioneer or C.E.

Riffles are 12% more expensive to reinforce than RE and that is not trivial, and you are also forgetting the the upkeep cost and pop limit where rifle have 40% more.

4 men RETs are incomparably inferior to rifles by more then 12% performance difference.
And while we're at forgetting stuff, RET 5th man doesn't cost 0 pop. At vet3, where RETs actually matter, the pop difference is a whooping ONE.
That 12% of reinforce difference is still only THREE compared to previous eight menpower, not really that cost effective any longer.

The are actually a good option for carrying Bazookas and (doctrinal)flamers.

RE see allot more action than Pioneer or C.E.

They USED to be a good option for carrying zookas, because where really cheap and easy to maintain, atm its not a no brainer any longer and zook rifles are just as valid option for standard equipping, if you need additional squads, then yes, RETs are better, but until vet3 will perform and survive much, much worse.

Flamers aren't really an argument at all, because no other squad can use it.

RE see a lot more action then pios or CEs, because they don't need to spend half of their time base building , mining or repairing armor.

At vet3, where RETs actually matter, the pop difference is a whooping ONE.

Since it seems that you are not aware the pop of 5 men RE is 6 which is still less than a full Riflemen, which translate to 16%

...but until vet3 will perform and survive much, much worse.

No they do not perform much worse. Against Vehicles the the benefits that of more small arm DPS and received accuracy matter little and the extra man is counter weighted by the extra cost to buy, maintain and reinforce...

Flamers aren't really an argument at all, because no other squad can use it.

The same way that OKW screcks don't matter because only V.G. can carry them, (this argument really makes sense). And actually you seem to forget Assault Engineers that can be upgraded with flamers....

RE see a lot more action then pios or CEs, because they don't need to spend half of their time base building , mining or repairing armor.

No, EFA engineers simply have less utility making them less cost efficient and that is why they have a limited presence on the field (usually 1 or 2 present on the field)..

I think that Engineers are OK. They are not OP in my opinion.

Since it seems that you are not aware the pop of 5 men RE is 6 which is still less than a full Riflemen...

7-6=1
Now reread what I said.
Show Spoiler

No they do not perform much worse. Against Vehicles the the benefits that of more small arm DPS and received accuracy matter little and the extra man is counter weighted by the extra cost to buy, maintain and reinforce...

Again, reinforce difference is way to low to be meaningful here, it used to, but not anymore.
Its rifle AT nade that makes the performance difference real here.
Rets are cheaper to buy, costs of use and maintaining them isn't lower in any meaningful way, unless you compare impossible stuff like 10 rets vs 10 rifles.

The same way that OKW screcks don't matter because only V.G. can carry them, (this argument really makes sense). And actually you seem to forget Assault Engineers that can be upgraded with flamers....

Apples to oranges here.
Shrecks aren't doctrinal and belong to currently most cost effective squad in game.
I haven't forgotten about AEs, but AEs aren't a god example of cost effective unit and hardly one that is easy to preserve or maintain.

No EFA engineers simply have less utility making them less cost efficient and that is why they have a limited presence on the field..

EFA engies don't perform clost to T2 infantry while being first unit on the field, nor have access to weapon racks or good scaling.
EFA engies are almost exclusively repair/build/mine/cap bots while WFA and UKF engies are designed as actual combat support with actual combat scaling due to both, vet and weapon racks, therefore faction own mechanics support them heavily.

Where are these popular strats then?

I hear a whole lot about them, but haven't seen ANYONE do any kind of engi spam, maybe except Romeo who tried to RET spam, sprice who is sprice and does weird shit that somehow works but exclusively for him and Redxwings, who usually fails if he tries stuff like that.

I hear a lot about how heavy REs were OP, but not once faced heavy RE spam-the apparently most powerful "engies are core" strat out there, at least according to forums.

So, if these engi centric strats are so strong, why no one plays them?

I take no Opinion on this matter, but I've won games with Royal Engineers, and you can put 3 vickers machine guns on them if you use the vickers weapon drop and upgrade to heavy engie, put it in the doctrinal half-track and chase down retreating squads, granted though you can't probably do that until 9+ min in

lol so obvious this kids come from the main forums

7-6=1
Now reread what I said.

Now fully quote me...The value of pop was clearly demonstrate when V.G. went from 7 (same as rifleman) to 5 (same as R.E.). The difference might not be as big because RE are weaker the riflemen but it is neither trivial as you claim...

Again, reinforce difference is way to low to be meaningful here, it used to, but not anymore.

Its 12% and according to Relic that is considerable...yes it used to be more and that is why it was nerfed...

Its rifle AT nade that makes the performance difference real here.

And the question is if one has a Riflemen and RE fighting a vehicle is it better for rifles to have bazzoka or for RE?

Apples to oranges here.

What you wrote and I had to respond makes little sense:
"Flamers aren't really an argument at all, because no other squad can use it."

What you write is that the fact that flamers are exclusive to R.E. make flamer irrelevant. But by that logic if exclusiveness make things irrelevant same goes for shreck. If you meant something else pls explain but if you can express yourself correctly it is not the other people fault if they do not understand your argument...And as i pointed out flamer are not exclusive to R.E as you clearly write.

I haven't forgotten about AEs, but AEs aren't a god example of cost effective unit and hardly one that is easy to preserve or maintain.

Exactly my point engineer type of units have way too much difference in cost efficiency and utility...

EFA engies don't perform clost to T2 infantry while being first unit on the field, nor have access to weapon racks or good scaling.
EFA engies are almost exclusively repair/build/mine/cap bots while WFA and UKF engies are designed as actual combat support with actual combat scaling due to both, vet and weapon racks, therefore faction own mechanics support them heavily.

Again exactly my point engineer type of units have way too much difference in cost efficiency and utility...Glad to see that you agree.

Finally I don't really see why you fixated in R.E., this thread is not about them but all engineer type units.

lol so obvious this kids come from the main forums

If you don't have anything useful to contribute pls don't post in this thread...

If utility is OP, Conscripts are the most broken units ingame.

Nullist, is that you ?

ON: engineers are fine.
I think the point of the thread was lost with the title and a lack of better formatting on the first post.