What makes Bofors unpleasant to fight?

He still pulled out a cromet and a cromwell while his opponent was able to have enough fuel to get 4 Stugs and a tiger of the course of the game.

If you look at the game, you will see that the only reason why losing 4 bofors didn't completely cripple Sage6, was because his opponent was floating 1000 manpower. I can play vs any faction, wipe out 4 of their squads and still not be ahead if I myself decide to float a thousand manpower for no reason. The opponent could have spend that 1000mp on a pair of MG42s and a PAK and that nice little counter attack Sage6 did at the end wouldn't even have allowed him to take his cut off back.

Fair enough- did notice the MP float while watching as well. Overlord had the fuel cache + double fuels for quite awhile though, I guess due to the bofors inability to cover much other than the centre.

This game should remain sticky for all the WM whiners... Stugs counter bofors/Mortar/Comets/Cromwell pretty efficiently, but yes you need to learn to use them.

I don't think it is too hard to counter Bofors or pits as OKW, double LEIG wrecks everything, but as Ostheer you are basically fucked until tanks arrive, Stugs work well yes, but good Brit players will easily have AT at that point as well, so you usually have to fight arty, AT and the Bofors at once making it really hard for Ost, especially since Ost units will get wiped constantly by the auto barrages.

-Bofors needs a cost adjustment, so it can't be spammed, 400 MP would be fine I guess, maybe they should remove auto repair during active status, means, emplacements can only be repaired while being in brace status.

-Mortar Pits need more pop cap, I think their current is 8 or 10, make it 12, even the Soviet call in mortar has a pop cap of 10 and it's not even that good.

In general, indirect arty should be less damaging if not operated manually, reward manual use of barrages.

He still pulled out a cromet and a cromwell while his opponent was able to have enough fuel to get 4 Stugs and a tiger of the course of the game.

If you look at the game, you will see that the only reason why losing 4 bofors didn't completely cripple Sage6, was because his opponent was floating 1000 manpower. I can play vs any faction, wipe out 4 of their squads and still not be ahead if I myself decide to float a thousand manpower for no reason. The opponent could have spend that 1000mp on a pair of MG42s and a PAK and that nice little counter attack Sage6 did at the end wouldn't even have allowed him to take his cut off back.

Only time I tend to float manpower unnecessarily is when I'm being heavily taxed micro-wise.

Spending MP just to spend MP tends to create even higher amount of micro. A thousand MP of MGs and PAKs, both of which are literal food for British emplacements, may have easily broken the camel's back, so to speak, as far as microing units was concerned.

Not to mention MGs and PAKs are going to do very little for actually taking out a Bofors and/or emplacements. I didn't watch the replay, and I'm not going to dispute that there's a benefit to having MGs and PAKs out, but it can be hard to spend resources on a unit that's completely hard countered by what's currently on the map.

LoL, you're not even ranked. Everything you said is LITERALLY WRONG. Please don't comment until you can do better than a comp stomp.

Personally, I find 1v1 either boring and highly predictable or extremely fast paced affairs, which is why I don't do them anymore.

The logic in your post is as follows: Read player card. Ignore the Hidden status (meaning no played in weeks in that mode) of the 1v1s, and say that means unranked and that the player only does comp stomp. Also ignores the clearly ranked games in 4v4 or 2v2 AT against players. Fails to attack my argument except to say 'you're wrong' or repeat unsubstantiated claims with no reasoning behind them. But I'm wasting my breath here, and should know better than to post in the 'Balance section' of any game's forum(s).

Back on topic: There is no position on a map where a Bofors can be, that cannot be simply avoided or flanked. If it is absolutely impossible to take out the emplacements for whatever reason.......attack everywhere but the emplacement section. Classic Art of War stuff for those who have heard of it. Screaming that a heavily entrenched defense is hard to beat is just as bad as players I've been with where we've pinned the enemy into 1/3 of the map and they keep rushing dual cancer commander + SU/US on Hamburg port. We gave up on using mortars and ISGs 5-6 mins into the match. In that match I managed to convince my team to slow down, and work methodically. Doesn't matter if they have 2 vps, we would slowly and surely breakthrough. Between the Jagdtiger, KT, mobile rocket artillery, artillery call-ins and superior late game units the pressure was too much even for dual cancer commanders. For the record, they had 6-8 mortar pits, 3+ bofors, Goddess knows how many fwd emplacements and 2-3 17 pounders. And then there was the SU/US forces making a forward attack suicidal. And yet we beat all of that.

Their mistake was going for 6-8 mortar pits and 3+ bofors.

One of each can easily take care of one VP and fuel on Port of Hamburg, allowing for the team to contest the Axis VP and fuel, or at least hold the 2nd VP. An Allied Start on the right side of that map and 2 VPs and one fuel point are locked down without serious bleed or team effort on the Axis part.

But remember, this isn't about Bofors and such being uncounterable or anything of that notion. It is that the design isn't conducive to CoH2's gameplay, or at the very least, its current map design.

Given the example of Port of Hamburg, (which is a pretty small map to begin with given the number of players), when you have Bofors locking down a chunk of that you end up with a very cramped battlefield.

Six to eight players slugging it out over one VP or fuel point gets old quick, and the Bofors does the opposite of break from that kind of monotony.

There's a lot of dynamic gameplay available at CoH's core, but there's just so many things in place, emplacements among them, that unravel that quite profoundly.

Their mistake was going for 6-8 mortar pits and 3+ bofors........

The UKF players separated for one top fuel and one bot fuel. They tried to lock/contest down both fuels, but were booted off the bottom fuel with extreme prejudice despite their emplacements and MGs. Rushing emplacements down south(the bottom UKF player had 2 mortar pits and nearly got a bofors up)just left them very vulnerable to an aggressive axis play. Their stand was made on the top fuel, and northern area of the map. The centre VP was covered with a bofors and AT/mortars/mortar pits + MGs. Basically they tried to drag it out on VPs or lure us to our deaths lol.

I'll admit that emplacements in the game need looking at, esp the disgrace that is the flak emplacement. But it's a fine line for the UKF emplacements. If you nerf them just a little too much then they become useless, give them a little too much power and they're far too integral to UKF play.

Well, isn't the May update meant to change the game dynamics to improve the game? I have not looked at it in practice, only the notes. It's gone a long way to fix the SU faction, as well as curb the worst of the bread and butter axis tactics. Don't get me started on the M1 57mm ATG.

He still pulled out a cromet and a cromwell while his opponent was able to have enough fuel to get 4 Stugs and a tiger of the course of the game.

If you look at the game, you will see that the only reason why losing 4 bofors didn't completely cripple Sage6, was because his opponent was floating 1000 manpower. I can play vs any faction, wipe out 4 of their squads and still not be ahead if I myself decide to float a thousand manpower for no reason. The opponent could have spend that 1000mp on a pair of MG42s and a PAK and that nice little counter attack Sage6 did at the end wouldn't even have allowed him to take his cut off back.

Not true at all. You float the manpower if any unit you build doesn't really counter what the other person is doing. It also cripples your mp income giving the other guy the advantage if he's on less pop than you. It's like giving your opponent a free sniper.

This game is not about using all your resources but using your resources well and managing manpower. MG42's don't do anything against emplacements and even if he takes a cutoff back it's irrelevant as long as you're winning manpower trades.

Emplacements are gamebreaking in that they cause so much manpower bleed while themselves being invulnerable to it. Overcommitting to killing it at a manpower loss loses you the game.

But this is a relatively high-level concept in the game. It was up to relic to understand this and not stick this sh*t game design into the game but they did it anyways and we've had months of this BS now.

Back on topic: There is no position on a map where a Bofors can be, that cannot be simply avoided or flanked.

Flanking a bofors Kappa

This is exactly why people jump on the playercards train


It doesn't matter what kind of well put together argument somebody brings up against yours, you're like the chicken that is going to stroll over the chess field and knock all the pieces over and pretend it won

Yes flank the position. Make a wide arc around it and attack softer targets behind the Bofors like a mortar pit for example. With them gone, the Bofors itself can be eliminated very easily. But hey, you aren't even listening to me. I'm just wrong whatever I say, according to some people here. I could claim that an orange is orange and someone here would dispute that.

I'm done with this discussion.

Yes flank the position. Make a wide arc around it and attack softer targets behind the Bofors like a mortar pit for example. With them gone, the Bofors itself can be eliminated very easily. But hey, you aren't even listening to me. I'm just wrong whatever I say, according to some people here. I could claim that an orange is orange and someone here would dispute that.

I'm done with this discussion.

Just beeing curious, what to do when you somehow lose models during that flank(mines,indirect fire etc)? You obviously cant advice to retreat since that would mean retreating through a bofors? And soft retreating a 2/4 models gren squad deep into enemy flanks ? Sounds waaay to risky for me

Yes flank the position. Make a wide arc around it and attack softer targets behind the Bofors like a mortar pit for example. With them gone, the Bofors itself can be eliminated very easily. But hey, you aren't even listening to me. I'm just wrong whatever I say, according to some people here. I could claim that an orange is orange and someone here would dispute that.

I'm done with this discussion.

Its not as simple as orange is orange. We mostly agree that the bofors is an effective unit, thats established. What we are discussing is if its too strong and why we think so. So to go back to your orange is orange analogy its more: one person says its the color or grenadine in orange juice and another thinks it looks more like a California sunset reflected off my scrotum. Both may be orange but you can assume that the color of orange is somewhat different, and hell the amount of grenadine you put in your OJ might differ from the amount I do, and the angle in which you see the sun reflecting off my junk would be different than mine so even though we would be saying the same thing we could mean something different. Perspective, thats what this thread is about

And your scrote, apparently.

The only people complaining here are those who are stupid enough to see a bofors and then send their units in to directly kill it.
Complaining about how it encourages static play? Go around it. Cut it off from its support with a flanking attack. It doesn't cover the whole map. The one VP it sits on isn't the only VP in the game. The bofors and emplacements actually promote dynamic play - they encourage the enemy to go aroud to other parts of the map and flank, which the Brits then have to counteract.
If you're dumb enough to go head on with it you deserve to lose your units.

Becasue figthing OKW blob protected by Schwerer, supported by ISGs with Med HQ does not require X times more micro to beat?

Since Matress appeared, never seen Schwerer + MED HQ + ISGS ever again, or when i see them it was easy win for Matress side

Since Matress appeared, never seen Schwerer + MED HQ + ISGS ever again, or when i see them it was easy win for Matress side

Honeslty, I ve seen Mattress like 2-3 times since release.

Maybe Im just unlucky

Since Matress appeared, never seen Schwerer + MED HQ + ISGS ever again, or when i see them it was easy win for Matress side

Obviously, all FOTMers are now playing brits

donno why most players struggle here in this thread,just look at right of page and see ladders top10 you will find out how this faction is,ukf is the only faction has the most win rate % about 900 and streak.

To answer the OP:

The main thing that triggers me about the boFors is the same thing that triggers me with the schewer,

These orbital death cannons that not only deny important ground, but also make ballsy flanks impossible are so cancerous for gameplay.

"ballsy flanks are bad play", guess what ballsy flanking is what wins games. It's how you beat Brits. You can't do a deep flank against 6pdrs, vickers and whatever with a bofors in their back/frontline or you'll get molested on retreat or something. It forces frontal assaults which plays into Brit favor.

Same shit with OKW and schewer, except aggressive shwerers can be deleted easily by many allied "things". Axis arty sucks in comparison.

I didn't read through the thread because it will probably give me AIDS/athletes foot on my eyeballs, but anyone here defending bofors or stuff like it is an idiot. Plain and simple

Your just not smoking and flanking enough even if it has a 360 arc that can spin and face you before you can fire anything off.

As an old ally player, I have been facing the most unpleasant combo in the game- free OKW T4 + ISG microless fortress for many years till now. And ally doesn't have any artillery weapon as effective as stuka to counter this brainless combo. Why don't axis player try to adapt it?