Remove FRP? yay or nay.

FRP should stay. Closer the enemy FRP is the easier it is to arty with whatever you have at your disposal. People need to learn to time on-map arty with retreats tbh.

Hans, can't you just cancel the retreat point so that they continue retreating past it? I do that with my Major if they try to call artillery on it.

Plus as USF I don't have P2W CalliOP.

Hans, can't you just cancel the retreat point so that they continue retreating past it? I do that with my Major if they try to call artillery on it.

Plus as USF I don't have P2W CalliOP.

Sure they can cancel the retreat point, but then they run back to the HQ and therefore you nullify the point of a FRP.

FRP should stay. Closer the enemy FRP is the easier it is to arty with whatever you have at your disposal. People need to learn to time on-map arty with retreats tbh.

Just saw the other day in a reply how Ciez and Mom4sho lost again a team who constantly bombarded the OKW FRP with CalliOP. There was nothing to do against it. People who complain about FRPs just don't know how to fight against such strategies that involve FRPs but there are people who appear to know.

So I need to pick calliope to counter building? I need to choose a doctrine to do this? Insane.

Porr Brits and theirs arty options like mortart or sexton

It gives you advantage 8/10 times.
It's your coffin 2/10.

Sure they can cancel the retreat point, but then they run back to the HQ and therefore you nullify the point of a FRP.

And they just "countered" a 150-200 ammo investment? For the price of having the army back on the field 20s later? Sounds fair.

FRP were one of the worst things ever to get introduced imho.

(Sorry if i dont quote your whole text, dont take it as a cherrypicking i just want to refer to something)
I fail to see how you can get your MP back, what is spend is lost. At equal ressource generation, youll have 1 less squad than your opponent. I find that huge. Makes you bleed and use that FRP more than you want to. The very few times i make the upgrade on a okw truck, i dont want to use it, it is a security net. I prefer retreat-walking and have an additional volkgrenadier.

To be fair, i d'ilke to see at least five replays where there was a FRP, it was uncounterable, uncoutered and was the obvious reason of the unevitable victory (no stuka army-whipe involved equal tactics and talent).


Kozo.

Lower pop cap means higher resource generation which is why they had to hotfix volks from 5 pop to 7 because more can be maintained and higher resource generation to replace those lost.

Building a squad takes up pop cap and makes you bleed. Think long term. I have 1 less squad so i will take a defensive stance and send units to "test the waters" to see where are the strong and weak points in opponent's defense. I can immediately assault that point after a nearby retreat. Causing that unit to retreat is good enough because he now has to go all the way back to base before coming back to the front in which I have gained a strategic advantage if I choose to stay in that area.

Risk versus reward side. If I am SOV/UKF and I want to assault the FRP, I have to take a huge risk. Send in my MGs and a anti-tank gun. If I lose those in the assault, they now transfer to the OKW army which lacks a doctrinal MG and long range AT platform. When OKW loses in an assault, they just need to retreat unscathed unless you left it to the point you would get squad wiped. The risk of an Allied assault is higher than the reward that's unlikely to be achieved. The risk that OKW takes when he pushes is very low but the reward can be very high. As SOV, you'd have to retreat at least one squad to continue base building. UKF simply doesn't have the capability early game to push a FHQ and destroy it.

I'm sorry but I don't have any replays for you because I don't watch them and I rarely if ever save mine.

Anyways, the point of this thread is FRP and I would rather NOT see any FRPs.
If what you say is true that you would rather soft retreat to a forward REINFORCE point, then you should be all in on removal of forward retreat points. Forward reinforce points will still be there.

Just saw the other day in a reply how Ciez and Mom4sho lost again a team who constantly bombarded the OKW FRP with CalliOP. There was nothing to do against it. People who complain about FRPs just don't know how to fight against such strategies that involve FRPs but there are people who appear to know.

YOU AGAIN!?
and Hans... I don't see your counter argument... 150-200 munitions for a delayed retreat? nice tradeoff 150-200 munitions doesn't nullify an FRP. He just toggles it back on.

You're talking about late game counters. What is the early game counter? Sorry, I don't hear one. What about other faction early FRPs? Oh wait... SOV, USF, OST don't get early FRPs and SOV and OST don't get FRPs altogether. USF doesn't come until T3 and UKF can't spare the manpower unless they want to get overrun/skip out on bofors/skip out on mortar pit/AT gun/sniper until they can recover that 500 or so manpower.

Put Major in T1 and let's see how much Axis cries then. Make the Major a buildable statue with the HP of a OKW FHQ. I'm sure there will be a lot of unhappy Axis players. As many other players/posters have stated, there's little punishment for retreating and there's no reward for a good play who forced that retreat.

Lower pop cap means higher resource generation which is why they had to hotfix volks from 5 pop to 7 because more can be maintained and higher resource generation to replace those lost.

Building a squad takes up pop cap and makes you bleed. Think long term. I have 1 less squad so i will take a defensive stance and send units to "test the waters" to see where are the strong and weak points in opponent's defense. I can immediately assault that point after a nearby retreat. Causing that unit to retreat is good enough because he now has to go all the way back to base before coming back to the front in which I have gained a strategic advantage if I choose to stay in that area.

Risk versus reward side. If I am SOV/UKF and I want to assault the FRP, I have to take a huge risk. Send in my MGs and a anti-tank gun. If I lose those in the assault, they now transfer to the OKW army which lacks a doctrinal MG and long range AT platform. When OKW loses in an assault, they just need to retreat unscathed unless you left it to the point you would get squad wiped. The risk of an Allied assault is higher than the reward that's unlikely to be achieved. The risk that OKW takes when he pushes is very low but the reward can be very high. As SOV, you'd have to retreat at least one squad to continue base building. UKF simply doesn't have the capability early game to push a FHQ and destroy it.

I'm sorry but I don't have any replays for you because I don't watch them and I rarely if ever save mine.

Anyways, the point of this thread is FRP and I would rather NOT see any FRPs.
If what you say is true that you would rather soft retreat to a forward REINFORCE point, then you should be all in on removal of forward retreat points. Forward reinforce points will still be there.

You dont need a FRP to skip that risk/reward situation. As SOV/OST you can build a certain Halftrack that authorise you to reinforce in the very heat of battle, even skipping that need of retreat. On the countrary, i can find you a lot of replays that show that HT reinforcing Ostruppen at lightspeed was clearly a winnning factor. But i fint it honest as it is a very fragile thing that need to stick your forces.
Kozo.

Forward retreat points should be removed. Getting arty or insane amounts of indirect fire to keep countering it doesn't really justify the investment. Retreat points are probably bigger cancer in team games then in 1v1. On larger maps you don't really have to position them offensively to have your blob come back extremely quickly after a senseless mass retreat.

On the other hand, forward reinforce points are great and every faction has them in some form or another. In case of stationary ones, it promotes soft retreats rather then senseless blob retreat. The mobile reinforce units are pretty easy to counter if used offensively to support a push hence require more skill to be effective.

Half tracks don't make infantry unsupressed, so a full retreat is required all the way back to base. Half tracks require a micro, not a retreat and forget and units are ready to be back on the field in a short time. I support the removal of a FRP. As for OKW. A simple removal of the upgrade would be enough from the battle group.

Please please please please please remove all kinds of forward retreat points for everything.

Blobs should be punished. Now instead of just risking their entire army dying to explosives, they also will risk loss of map control. The reason why you can't blob in 1v1s is because usually no one makes a forward retreat point and therefore retreating all the way to HQ is time consuming

It wouldn't be difficult to remove forward retreat points from the game and would be a huge improvement in 2v2+ game modes. Just remove the upgrade from the Med truck/Brit Forward HQ and drop the forward retreat point ability from the USF Major. As an added bonus there would be actual incentive to use the USF major offensively for once.

Perhaps changing the units that have issues when being blobbed, over outright removing FRP is a better idea. Surely you can't believe volks with shrecks and riflemen vet 3 are flawless and perfect can you? If we are vocal about that, we can possibly see these areas changed instead.

Also finally adding in comissars with FRP and giving FRP to artillery officer for wehr would be an option right?

You dont need a FRP to skip that risk/reward situation. As SOV/OST you can build a certain Halftrack that authorise you to reinforce in the very heat of battle, even skipping that need of retreat. On the countrary, i can find you a lot of replays that show that HT reinforcing Ostruppen at lightspeed was clearly a winnning factor. But i fint it honest as it is a very fragile thing that need to stick your forces.
Kozo.

Uhh... the halftrack costs fuel and it has to be on the frontline. It does not remove suppression and it takes up pop cap. What are you talking about?

I would take an FRP over a soft reinforce point ANYDAY. The ability to run into suppression, retreat, approach or divide your forces for the next engagement 20 seconds later is way more powerful than... run my units into suppression and keep reinforcing them under suppression? sure............. lol.

If a mg pins down your 2-3 infantry squads, what would you do? stay, do no damage, and continue to reinforce or retreat? good mg placement rewards players but the reward is mitigated with an FRP.

Uhh... the halftrack costs fuel and it has to be on the frontline. It does not remove suppression and it takes up pop cap. What are you talking about?

I would take an FRP over a soft reinforce point ANYDAY. The ability to run into suppression, retreat, approach or divide your forces for the next engagement 20 seconds later is way more powerful than... run my units into suppression and keep reinforcing them under suppression? sure............. lol.

If a mg pins down your 2-3 infantry squads, what would you do? stay, do no damage, and continue to reinforce or retreat? good mg placement rewards players but the reward is mitigated with an FRP.

I dont know for you but for me HT removes suppression... if you take the time to embark your units inside (a very unused but very efficient talent).
As for my part i prefer to have an ambulance(reinforce) than a colonel (FRP) because i never really need a FRP. However i need to lick my wounds on the battlefield.
Most of the time my units are suprpessed one by one. If two of them got suppresed by a single MG....Then i played very poorly and deserved to get one week at the bootcamp (i admit, it happens sometimes to my greatest shame).

Kozo.

I dont know for you but for me HT removes suppression... if you take the time to embark your units inside (a very unused but very efficient talent).
As for my part i prefer to have an ambulance(reinforce) than a colonel (FRP) because i never really need a FRP. However i need to lick my wounds on the battlefield.
Most of the time my units are suprpessed one by one. If two of them got suppresed by a single MG....Then i played very poorly and deserved to get one week at the bootcamp (i admit, it happens sometimes to my greatest shame).

Kozo.

HT DOES NOT REMOVE SUPPRESSION. You only embarked on it when it was under yellow. NOT PINNED (RED) SUPPRESSION.

YOU ARE NOT comparing the cost benefits of FRP at all. You're just stating your play style. When do you ever see a major without ambulance anyways?

The point of this thread is that FRPs increase blobbing, mitigates punishments for poor play, gives you an advantage especially on larger maps.

If what you say is "true", why don't you just agree to remove FRPs? If you don't use them, then you're pointless right? If you don't care about them, why even have them? It should not affect gameplay. However, I can guarantee you that there will be very clear results and differences in win/loss rates with FRPs removed. So keep arguing if you believe the removal of FRPs won't make a difference.

HT DOES NOT REMOVE SUPPRESSION. You only embarked on it when it was under yellow. NOT PINNED (RED) SUPPRESSION.

If you let things go in the red, you act far too late :/

YOU ARE NOT comparing the cost benefits of FRP at all. You're just stating your play style. When do you ever see a major without ambulance anyways?

Never. You where the one comparing reinforcing on the fiend and FRP. I just gave you my opinion.

The point of this thread is that FRPs increase blobbing, mitigates punishments for poor play, gives you an advantage especially on larger maps.

There is no problem with blobbing, unless you learn the game. And OF COURSE it does give you an advantage on larger maps, you just paid through the nose to have that opportunity. it-has-a-cost. Who the hell want a FRP on Arnhem Checkpoint?

If what you say is "true", why don't you just agree to remove FRPs? If you don't use them, then you're pointless right? If you don't care about them, why even have them? It should not affect gameplay. However, I can guarantee you that there will be very clear results and differences in win/loss rates with FRPs removed. So keep arguing if you believe the removal of FRPs won't make a difference.

FRP is a cool feat in my opinion. Never to be seen in 1v1 and very amusing in 4v4 where team-members co-operate to create strongholds and safepoints in cityfight. My heart litteraly beat for thoses moment when i launch a 4v4.
I just dont see the point to remove/nerf/buff it. I defy you to show me 3 replay 1v1 where FRP where the wincondition of a match. It never was a problem before and it was here like forever.

Kozo.

1. I dont know for you but for me HT removes suppression... if you take the time to embark your units inside (a very unused but very efficient talent).

...

...

Kozo.

1. great, your halftrack will be stationary for at least 2 (amount of time one member of your squad to get to the rear entry) + 3 (the amount of time your halftrack becomes immobile while on-loading) seconds. bye bye halftrack against good/prepared (seen you do it once) players.

I wonder if FRPs automatically disabled themselves in enemy/neutral/contested territory if that would change anything.

Putting pressure on the point the FRP is in would be a reliable method for punishing one placed too forward without resorting to arti and squad wipe-fests. It'd be nice to have less 'all-or-nothing' type strategies in CoH2.

1. great, your halftrack will be stationary for at least 2 (amount of time one member of your squad to get to the rear entry) + 3 (the amount of time your halftrack becomes immobile while on-loading) seconds. bye bye halftrack against good/prepared (seen you do it once) players.

I admit it, any decent player will catch you and you ll loose everything.

Kozo.