Login

russian armor

What makes Bofors unpleasant to fight?

PAGES (8)down
26 May 2016, 21:18 PM
#101
avatar of whitesky00

Posts: 468

And I personally agree with Cookiez. ALL emplacements including Bofors and Schwerer suck. You can't just say Bofors suck without looking at the Scwerer. They do the same thing at effectively locking down or defending a position. The game would be better without them. The only buildings i agree with are bunkers which can be easily destroyed.
26 May 2016, 22:43 PM
#102
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

On this topic, I think we all should agree 17pdr is how emplacements should /not/ be 'fixed'
26 May 2016, 23:03 PM
#103
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269

Bofors and overpowered emplacements occurs when you have no lead game designer because it violates so many basic principles of fundamental balance and fun gameplay.

Tenet 1: Combined Arms should matter and always beat spam of any one unit.

Coh2 at its best at least pays some credence to this idea. But the design of Bofurs completely fails this idea because Bofors counters the units that counters them. It really ridiculous that bofors can counter artillery and paks.

Tenet 2: Balance should favor the player with better micro or better decision making. Emplacement spam design requires something like 4x the apm and much better decision-making from the other guy to stop. It is absurd. It breaks the game. It is cancer game design.

There are also other things to such as emplacements adding another layer on top of map balance that needs to be accounted for. Maps that came out before Brits such as "Road to Kharkov" heavily favor brits so much if they are able to get a bofors on top of your cutoff point. It is rather absurd.

But this is what happens when you don't have a consistent lead game designer in charge of things to make these high-level checks on gameplay and design. It's pretty obvious their strategy is to have a small crew randomly add units and tweaks with the mentality of it "we'll release it and fix it afterwards" which was pretty disastrous with the pathfinding change recently.
26 May 2016, 23:51 PM
#104
avatar of renvitros

Posts: 25

Bofors and overpowered emplacements occurs when you have no lead game designer because it violates so many basic principles of fundamental balance and fun gameplay.

Tenet 1: Combined Arms should matter and always beat spam of any one unit.

Coh2 at its best at least pays some credence to this idea. But the design of Bofurs completely fails this idea because Bofors counters the units that counters them. It really ridiculous that bofors can counter artillery and paks.

Tenet 2: Balance should favor the player with better micro or better decision making. Emplacement spam design requires something like 4x the apm and much better decision-making from the other guy to stop. It is absurd. It breaks the game. It is cancer game design.

There are also other things to such as emplacements adding another layer on top of map balance that needs to be accounted for. Maps that came out before Brits such as "Road to Kharkov" heavily favor brits so much if they are able to get a bofors on top of your cutoff point. It is rather absurd.

But this is what happens when you don't have a consistent lead game designer in charge of things to make these high-level checks on gameplay and design. It's pretty obvious their strategy is to have a small crew randomly add units and tweaks with the mentality of it "we'll release it and fix it afterwards" which was pretty disastrous with the pathfinding change recently.

You pretty much hit the jackpot in this thread. Emplacements are cancerous due to these reasons. I just recently played a 3v3 where there were 2 brits and both chose the the cancer doctrine. By the time we had 0 VPs left, we destroyed all their emplacements, most of their infantry are gone but it wasn't enough. They had map control because of their cancerous emplacement. It made the game tedious and the emplacements carried them to victory. If VP games had 700 VP, we would have swept that game with 1 VP left (when they would have potentially had 660 or so VP to burn after we annihilated them in a good push). But that's not the case, the game only has 500 VPs and emplacements PROLONGS the game in the British's favor.
27 May 2016, 06:09 AM
#105
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Bofors and overpowered emplacements occurs when you have no lead game designer because it violates so many basic principles of fundamental balance and fun gameplay.

Tenet 1: Combined Arms should matter and always beat spam of any one unit.

Coh2 at its best at least pays some credence to this idea. But the design of Bofurs completely fails this idea because Bofors counters the units that counters them. It really ridiculous that bofors can counter artillery and paks.

Tenet 2: Balance should favor the player with better micro or better decision making. Emplacement spam design requires something like 4x the apm and much better decision-making from the other guy to stop. It is absurd. It breaks the game. It is cancer game design.

There are also other things to such as emplacements adding another layer on top of map balance that needs to be accounted for. Maps that came out before Brits such as "Road to Kharkov" heavily favor brits so much if they are able to get a bofors on top of your cutoff point. It is rather absurd.

But this is what happens when you don't have a consistent lead game designer in charge of things to make these high-level checks on gameplay and design. It's pretty obvious their strategy is to have a small crew randomly add units and tweaks with the mentality of it "we'll release it and fix it afterwards" which was pretty disastrous with the pathfinding change recently.


Where were you when OKW was introduced with Schwerer HQ locking down sectors?
How Bofors counters Stug or Puma? Barrage should be removed and then even AT Gun will counter it without any problems.

Becasue figthing OKW blob protected by Schwerer, supported by ISGs with Med HQ does not require X times more micro to beat?
27 May 2016, 06:40 AM
#106
avatar of Khan

Posts: 578

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.


^
27 May 2016, 07:23 AM
#107
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1

lelic should simply lock each emplacement to a single one that is able to be built. seeing some sort of emplacement "blob" is the most retarded thing ever. and whats even worse, is the fact that you try to destroy that crap all game long, lose so much squads to the ridiculously OP mortar pit and then you get steamrolled by stupid comet spamers. videogame cancer has a new name
27 May 2016, 07:25 AM
#108
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Emplacements dealing huge amount of damage both AT as AI are cancerous since OKW flaktruck design released. I'm not sure you'll find someone saying differently.

Now too many cancerous forum warriors are using this argument to hide their own lack of skill to adapt to new situations, change their BO, use units they were not using before.

The Bofors is a cancer but it is counterable in its actual form from 1vs1 to 4vs4.
27 May 2016, 07:31 AM
#109
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1

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.



thats also something that annoys me so much. you usually see brit emplacement cancer players having horrible micro skills with infantry. but yet they still manage to win with that strat. thx lelic
27 May 2016, 16:31 PM
#110
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 956

And people say that I'm an OKW fanboi.....

A lone bofors is easily beaten by a barraging ISG, which fires well outside the Bofors barrage range. For more complex defenses (2 x mortar pits + bofors + fwd hq) these take time to pt up. For OKW ISGs with some micro can shut this down as long as you act early. Yes cancer commander will beat you, but after the May patch CB becomes much less of an issue. OST have mortars in T1 and flame half track in T2. The lattr will melt through your typical emplacement spammer as they will have spent all their resources on....emplacements and not on AT. If you can't work around the Bofors that's your own fault.

This whole thing is much ado about nothing once more.
27 May 2016, 17:05 PM
#111
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269



Where were you when OKW was introduced with Schwerer HQ locking down sectors?
How Bofors counters Stug or Puma? Barrage should be removed and then even AT Gun will counter it without any problems.

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


And trucks are already nerfed to the ground and schwerer HQ is literally the tier 4 truck. Boforus comes 15 minutes earlier. Exaggerate much?

And people say that I'm an OKW fanboi.....

A lone bofors is easily beaten by a barraging ISG, which fires well outside the Bofors barrage range. For more complex defenses (2 x mortar pits + bofors + fwd hq) these take time to pt up. For OKW ISGs with some micro can shut this down as long as you act early. Yes cancer commander will beat you, but after the May patch CB becomes much less of an issue. OST have mortars in T1 and flame half track in T2. The lattr will melt through your typical emplacement spammer as they will have spent all their resources on....emplacements and not on AT. If you can't work around the Bofors that's your own fault.

This whole thing is much ado about nothing once more.


Player card please. You sound like a patch Brit. Everything you said is 100% wrong. ISG and mortar teams do not counter emplacements effectively. And flame halftrack against a bofors? ROFLMAO.
27 May 2016, 17:49 PM
#112
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



And trucks are already nerfed to the ground and schwerer HQ is literally the tier 4 truck. Boforus comes 15 minutes earlier. Exaggerate much?



Didnt know that Bofors comes at -5:00 :luvDerp:
27 May 2016, 20:34 PM
#113
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 956



And trucks are already nerfed to the ground and schwerer HQ is literally the tier 4 truck. Boforus comes 15 minutes earlier. Exaggerate much?



Player card please. You sound like a patch Brit. Everything you said is 100% wrong. ISG and mortar teams do not counter emplacements effectively. And flame halftrack against a bofors? ROFLMAO.


Player card: https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198059170410
Oh dear! I play mostly as....OKW in 1v1. Oh the irony.

Clearly, you have never met an OKW player who uses 'tactics' and moves their ISGs around and barrage, move when fired upon, and barrage again.As for mortars, you get them in T1, and they are on the field long before an emplacement can be unless you're very slow in getting them. With a mortar or two you can stop an emplacement spam building up and work from there. Emplacements do not appear instantly, which people forget. The value of scouting and map awareness features here. The reward is a crushed UKF player who is unlikely to recover from having their empalcement overrun. 400MP per mortar pit is not a small amount.

I said ''If you can't work around the Bofors that's your own fault. '' Mortar pits OTOH are easy prey even with brace.
28 May 2016, 03:07 AM
#114
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269



Player card: https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198059170410
Oh dear! I play mostly as....OKW in 1v1. Oh the irony.

Clearly, you have never met an OKW player who uses 'tactics' and moves their ISGs around and barrage, move when fired upon, and barrage again.As for mortars, you get them in T1, and they are on the field long before an emplacement can be unless you're very slow in getting them. With a mortar or two you can stop an emplacement spam building up and work from there. Emplacements do not appear instantly, which people forget. The value of scouting and map awareness features here. The reward is a crushed UKF player who is unlikely to recover from having their empalcement overrun. 400MP per mortar pit is not a small amount.

I said ''If you can't work around the Bofors that's your own fault. '' Mortar pits OTOH are easy prey even with brace.


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.
28 May 2016, 03:13 AM
#115
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269

I literally played one of the worst games I've ever played and it was against a guy who camped a bofors on the center chokepoint on winter semois. I had 2 mortar halftracks, 2 paks and a stug firing away at it and it still wouldn't die. Brace literally makes the gardening thing invincible. It's unbelievable how bad Relic's team is for letting this sh*t ability into the game.

I had to attack back and forth before FINALLY killing it. I ended the game with 70 VP and 2000 manpower floating--something unthinkable in a normal game. I literally had like a 4000 manpower advantage in trading but couldn't close out the game due to cancer. I would've won the game within the first 15 minutes otherwise had he not been brit. His unit preservation and control were n00b level. But thanks to unkillable emplacements, the game dragged on forever.

Emplacements are cancer in every way.
28 May 2016, 05:17 AM
#116
avatar of renvitros

Posts: 25



Where were you when OKW was introduced with Schwerer HQ locking down sectors?
How Bofors counters Stug or Puma? Barrage should be removed and then even AT Gun will counter it without any problems.

Becasue figthing OKW blob protected by Schwerer, supported by ISGs with Med HQ does not require X times more micro to beat?
Yeah, except that the Schwerer has since been nerfed and it's fairly easy to destroy them now. It's also integral to OKW since you get to build Panthers and Obers from it.

You don't have to build emplacements to play as Brits.
28 May 2016, 07:21 AM
#117
avatar of Necrophagist

Posts: 125

I really don't understand why bofors has a barrage ability.
Even if you manage to bypass brace, the 1-2-3 mortar pits guarding it, and it's anti-infantry strength, you then have to deal with a powerful not only damaging, but pinning barrage? What the heck?
28 May 2016, 08:25 AM
#118
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Yeah, except that the Schwerer has since been nerfed and it's fairly easy to destroy them now. It's also integral to OKW since you get to build Panthers and Obers from it.

You don't have to build emplacements to play as Brits.


Tell me, how I can get indirect fire if I don't need to build emplacement?

Fairly easy? It has more HP than Bofors.
28 May 2016, 09:03 AM
#119
avatar of Strummingbird
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 952 | Subs: 1

Fairly easy? It has more HP than Bofors.


It's easier to kill a Schwerer, imo, because of the lack of ground target and inability to give attack orders. Cheese it with a tank and a couple zooks, piat attack-ground, smoke + demo bug abuse, etc. Add to that the fact that losing schwerer = losing game in the majority of games, I'd much rather go truck-hunting as Allies than emplacement-hunting as Axis.

In contrast, Bofors has less HP, but is made much more difficult to kill by Advanced Emplacements, and more annoyingly Stand Fast (which feels like it has no cooldown- Brace + Stand Fast is obnoxious in damage soak capacity). It's almost disposable with its small cost as well. Take, for example, this game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCYlKxaOtgI
Where Sage built- and lost- 4 Bofors and still pulled out a Comet + Cromwell.
28 May 2016, 09:26 AM
#120
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

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.
PAGES (8)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

705 users are online: 705 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM