What makes Bofors unpleasant to fight?

Why is the pak40 being brought up again? Cuz you see those often rignt? Wrong

I see them pretty often in 2v2+ games. Much more then i see a 16pd which is pretty much never.

Sure, as long as we drop MP to 400, we can increase fuel. But remember, it's doc vs. non-doc, so the Pak needs to be a bit better

I agree, it would have to have something awesome, maybe the ability to shoot through everything 100% of the time? Or what about changing its vet ability into a shot that stuns rendering even the mightiest armour into official "boned" status oh wait... Both of those pale in comparison to flares...

I'm more afraid of mortar pit than bofors.

+1

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

The Lead Strategist has spoken.

its simple. relic is part of a 5 year plan right?

now imagine yourself as being an employee for the coh2 department

knowing you got a job for the next 5 years, would you balance the game out in 3? cutting yourself out of 2 years of work? probably not...

let relic receive their money, let the 5 years past, and we will magically have a balanced game in June of 2018...

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

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

Lol +1

The Lead Strategist has spoken.

+1

its simple. relic is part of a 5 year plan right?
now imagine yourself as being an employee for the coh2 department

knowing you got a job for the next 5 years, would you balance the game out in 3? cutting yourself out of 2 years of work? probably not...

let relic receive their money, let the 5 years past, and we will magically have a balanced game in June of 2018...

Sounds about right - same shit with Micro$0ft coders. They got paid by line, so they put a few thousand "Screw Flanders" lines in there.

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

+1000 pretty much cancer design, #justlelicthings

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

+1

i like bofors. but its cancer. need a mid point between bofors and okw doctrinal flak.

Rate of fire, barrage. That is what.


Fix;

- Accuracy against retreating units to 0
- Remove the barrage ability
- Reduce rate of fire

- Accuracy against retreating units to 0

Technically, I think that's the best idea to date to reduce the extreme-lockdown effects of Bofors/Schwerer.

What the defender is paying for is a 360 area denial tool for a specific area, which is only counterable by smoke (Schewer only), AT guns or tanks. The fact that those emplacements also double as killing machines for retreating units means that they also lockdown access to entire swathes of map that lie behind them. On the "right" type of maps, the return in investment is massive.

Before you say "learn to flank" and "retreating through enemy units should be suicide", consider that:
- No other MG/suppression platform can murder entire retreating squads, even if it happened to be set up the right way.
- Even designated murder machines (e.g., King Tiger) on the retreat path don't have that degree of lethality. That is even though they can't suppress, and that they cost a fuckton more resources/fuel to field.

If you want to decimate a retreating enemy, make sure you place your units at the retreat path the right time to do that. You should invest some micro into that, just like the poor guy that invested micro/risk and lost the flank.

The lockdown-emplacements-must-murder mechanic invalidates a large number of maps from being considered "valid" or "fair" for the game. That's not a problem that the mapmakers should be forced to endure (e.g., make all 1v1 maps a copy-paste of Langreskaya, or all 4v4 maps a copy-paste of Steppes). This is a design issue that limits mapmaking choices, which limits map diversity. If we don't address that, we will end up playing Steppes well into the 2020, since it will remain the only choice that's fair for 4v4, and everything else is a cheap rip-off. Hamlet used to be a good map before WFA. Post-WFA, I can't think of a way to make this map feel balanced for all factions.

The other option is to fix certain problematic game mechanics (e.g., lockdown emplacements, FRPs), which will make game dynamics more even and thus, balance a bit more robust to different environments.

In the case of Bofors vs Schewer it's all about who is the king of artillery. When Leigs were dominating Mortar Pits (leigfest), everyone was raging against OKW, and the lockdown of Schewer. The only thing that changed now is that Brits have access to more cost-efficient artillery, and that the system of counters vs Mortar Pits is flawed. Thus, Brits are now the new kings of campiness.

PS: Lead Strategist RTN Cook Ez ftw

Very well thought out and written post.

I see for too often arguments about OH vs the brits, the the counter argument is "well okw has..."

The problem is mostly OH vs Brits

The game becoming a camp/arty feSt due to 1 player (brit) making it that way

The brit causes OH to command pick, as well as cheesy none micro squad wipes etc emplacements insta wiping grens

With actual click to win buttons and abilities
-Simple click to counter buttons (brace/standfast)

How fast a bofer can be rushed and how long it takes for OH to have a reliable counter...

How most 2v2 maps are, sim city is far too benifital and easy to do. Covering 2 VPS with motor pits bofers AT guns (not emplacrments) and the teammate.

As stated above. If you defend Bofers and such your an idiot. Personally I think your the ones who do use sim city and enjoy static game play.

Don't get me wrong, it should be a strategy, bUT not the go 2 strategy. The EVERY GAME strategy...

And in the larger sense, it's a slap in the face to the tradition of COH, which was originally about maneuvering, flanking, and cunning micro and tactics. All you can do is bomb it, or waste a lot of manpower assaulting it.

It lowers the skill cap of the game by its very existence.

It makes skilled players mad because their skill means nothing since any noob can throw up a Bofors and it will take only slightly less time for a top 10 player to get rid of it then another noob.

@theguyiquoted Yep exactly the same for okw flak truck and there fwd retreat truck that has a million hit points (sarcasm) but seriously. Just as cancerous but some how its ok because its tied to teching, bad design. Laugh at people who can't deal with bofors.


@whatothersposted You can't compare the brits and ost situation then ignore usf problems dealing with okw flak truck. Every faction has there achilles heals some more then others to certain factions. I disagree with it anyway pak gun, mortar ht, reg mortar, etc its not like they are useless after you kill the bofors you were probably going to build them anyways. I realize some are doctrinal but thats why you choose doctrines. if you kill the bofors your going to hurt the brit player really bad because his whole sim city is about to crash. Its not really that cheap to build either it cost fuel and mp to unlock and fuel and mp to build.

no faction should be forced to pick a doctrine in order to have a chance vs another factions core. all factions should have equal chance vs each other without the aid of doctrines, this isnt the case with ost and emplacements due to emplacements countering ost.. everything..

I have no problems with Bofors/emplacements in 1v1 games but on team games, it's a totally different story. They need to nerf emplacements so that they don't ruin team games. CoH in general will never achieve great popularity in esports or the rts audience if you don't achieve balance ***in TEAM games***. Emplacements are ruining that balance. I don't think CoH will learn from this mistake. They will put emplacements in CoH3 just to milk the franchise and make noobs happy.

Right, so I expect to see brace on the Pak 43 and OKW Flak next patch, along with both no longer being possible to decrew.



What's that? That would be horrible?

Huh. Who would have thought.



Look, I can understand why brace is there, but it's horribly implemented; and also unneeded. However, emplacements should be used ONLY when you know you can defend them well. If you get pushed out of the area of your emplacement, well, you lost that emplacement. It was like that in CoH1, it was like that in CoH2 (until UKF). Brace is just a 'padding' mechanic added to make emplacement use more forgiving - something that they REALLY don't need, considering their damage (especially against smaller OST squads).

How can I say that they don't need brace? Well, look at the Pak43 and OKW Flak - neither has ever had brace, and in fact, BOTH are decrewable. However, did anyone ever complain that they were incredibly OP? No, not really. Maybe one thread every few months back when the Pak43 could shoot through objects EVERY shot (but that was nerfed), but that's about it. The OKW Flak also never really gets talked about (although the 1-shot decrew should be looked at). Why is this? Because they are very high risk/reward units. If you place a Pak43 down in a good area, and defend it well, your AT 'power' goes up by an insane amount. However, if you get pushed back, even a little bit, that thing is getting decrewed if not destroyed pretty much immediately.

It works well. No idea why it's so impossible for other emplacements to work this way.

Sure DO IT! Make the pak43 cost 20 pop cap, 75 fuel, and a HUGE target that anything can hit. Also, remove it's ability to fire through walls and shotblockers and require to use munitions to do that just like the 17 pounder. I don't mind.

Sure add embrace to the okw flak emplacement (I'm assuming it's not the Flak HQ).

Other emplacements don't work this way because they're not reliant on it as UKF is. Does OKW units cost an arm and a leg to build? Does UKF have a mobile sniper arty unit called ISG to replace it's mortar pit? Does it have starting out 5 man mainline infantry with laser rockets? Does UKF have a mobile rocket unit (only if you include it's soon to be 8 cp landmattress)? Does UKF have a super heavy late game called KT? OKW does not need it's emplacements (which are doctrinal) to win. That's why it's not as big of an issue.

Now tell me, if you removed all of UKF's emplacements, how would they counter a fortified position with MGs and ATs? They have no indirect fire now. They also have no rocket artillery. Base howitzers require close range, muni, and is timed. The enemy simply has to relocate a bit.

The Schwerer was a hindrance to flanking and movement I take your point there. But it was also given to a faction with no non-doctrinal MG.

In any case you could build only one and not brace it or surround it with counters to its counters. So yes, it shouldn't be in the game but no, it didn't put flanking and movement out of the question.

I'm surprised anyone likes sitting still and slowly pushing forward. It's so dull for me.


In real life defending never won a war. Only in CoH2 with Brits.

OKW now has a non-doc mg. So does that justify removing the Schwerer now?

It does put flanking and movement out of the question. Put it defensively and now units cannot capture points to cutoff supply. It's free AA, suppresses squads, and penetrates tanks as well as kills light vehicles with ease. So much for manueverability and capping undefended points.

It wasn't long ago when all OKW did was medic hq, 2 ISGs, and Flak HQ to defend a huge portion of the map. It still happens but not as often. So this playstyle was out since WFA

Sure DO IT! Make the pak43 cost 20 pop cap, 75 fuel, and a HUGE target that anything can hit. Also, remove it's ability to fire through walls and shotblockers and require to use munitions to do that just like the 17 pounder. I don't mind.

Sure add embrace to the okw flak emplacement (I'm assuming it's not the Flak HQ).

Other emplacements don't work this way because they're not reliant on it as UKF is. Does OKW units cost an arm and a leg to build? Does UKF have a mobile sniper arty unit called ISG to replace it's mortar pit? Does it have starting out 5 man mainline infantry with laser rockets? Does UKF have a mobile rocket unit (only if you include it's soon to be 8 cp landmattress)? Does UKF have a super heavy late game called KT? OKW does not need it's emplacements (which are doctrinal) to win. That's why it's not as big of an issue.

Now tell me, if you removed all of UKF's emplacements, how would they counter a fortified position with MGs and ATs? They have no indirect fire now. They also have no rocket artillery. Base howitzers require close range, muni, and is timed. The enemy simply has to relocate a bit.

make it non doc too

make it non doc too

Sure, I'm sure I won't see many OKW nor OST field it with the new requirements.