Punish blobs with received accuracy penalty

Hi guys


Game after game in 2v2+ I encounter a big issue in this game; the presence and efficiency of blobbing mainline infantry. Mainline infantry can in many instances walk straight up to MGs, especially the lesser effective supression platforms such as vickers, 50 cal, MG-34 (and also in cases of MG42 and Maxim) and just focus fire the entire platform down within seconds. I find it unreasonable that the very hard counter to blobs gets countered by mainline infantry amassed. Sure you could argue that you should have tanks or artillery to support your MGs, but with zook/PIAT blobs those tanks also gets annihilated within moments.

I have a simple suggestion to minimize the blobbing of Rifle/Penals/Infantry Sections/Volks that seem to be plagueing 2v2+; Let squads get a received accuracy penalty when amassed. This was the solution used to minimize Pioneer spam in CoH 1 and should be used in CoH 2 as well with ALL infantry to reduce the usage of brainless tactics such as mainline infantry spam.

What do you guys think?

Yeah but pio spam in CoH1 was only an issue for Wehr v brits in 1v1. It was a sort if stopgap measure for a singular matchup situation. And even so it had to do with British armor on infantry pretty much negating rifle damage until grent got vet 2 so they themselves became too hard for brit infantry to hurt.

Point is, it was a fix for pio spam because the brit 1v1 (and brit design in general) was broken.

I don't think I see the same case here in coh2.

less effective surpression: 50 cal

GabeN ?


and on topic: i dont think lelic is capable to add such a "function"

less effective surpression: 50 cal

GabeN ?


and on topic: i dont think lelic is capable to add such a "function"

agreed. Lelic doesn't have the brainpower to program such a game mechanic. They can't even fix a bunch of glaring bugs.

This was the solution used to minimize Pioneer spam in CoH 1 and should be used in CoH 2 as well with ALL infantry to reduce the usage of brainless tactics such as mainline infantry spam.

What do you guys think?

I think it's fascinating to see such a basic and reliable military principle as concentration of force being dismissed as "brainless tactics". Apparently, C21st gamers understand the military sciences far better than any historical general... or claim to, at any rate.

I think a better solution to this is just increasing suppression ong the mg platforms you listed. Infantry squad can often get hit with a burst and just walk through or away from the arc. Also decreasing dps while suppressed might be a good idea.

That seems like a more natural solution as opposed to a received accuracy penalty. That kind of thing begs a lot of questions like, how big does a blob have to be? How close do units have to get to be considered a blob? Does this penalty increase with more units? Does it stack?

I think a suppression increase is a more effective and clear cut solution.

Remove Forward Retreat Points and suddenly blobbing will be way more punishing.

Remove Forward Retreat Points and suddenly blobbing will be way more punishing.

Aaand /thread.

Noticed how only factions that blob hard are the ones with FHQs and FRPs?

Make models of large blob have their unit models move even closer together, to improve the effectiveness of hmgs and AoE weapons. Don't add any hidden game mechanism, it's just silly.

I think it's fascinating to see such a basic and reliable military principle as concentration of force being dismissed as "brainless tactics". Apparently, C21st gamers understand the military sciences far better than any historical general... or claim to, at any rate.

hehe, WW1. yep, concentration of force against MGs was really powerfull there. the generals clearly did know it better then us

btt:
i think most mgs need a higher supression AOE and a tad more supression itself. furthermore, my mg42 for example sometimes need ages to switch to another squad, giving them the chance to nade me. fixing that would help, too

I think it's fascinating to see such a basic and reliable military principle as concentration of force being dismissed as "brainless tactics". Apparently, C21st gamers understand the military sciences far better than any historical general... or claim to, at any rate.

Yeah, then explain why we don't all fight in lines anymore.

You know you're supposed to micro your mgs

Guess what happenes if you increase suppression on MG42s and Maxims?

The solution of anti-blob aura would be excelent, problem is that it doesnt actually pay-off to Lelic, even if they would be competent enough to do it.

What happenes when a player loses a game against blobber, in spite of significantly better micro? A while of rage and frustration, before launching next match where he- due to far better luck and micro than the blobber- blasts them clean-off with a sturmtiger and puts a video on youtube about that. Then some random wiever notices that and buys the game for wow-moments like that

Yeah, then explain why we don't all fight in lines anymore.

No problem.

As the quantity of firepower available to the basic combatant increases, formations become more dispersed.
(This is the principle behind Heinlein's Starship Troopers, btw. The book, of course, not the movie.)

However, this is irrelevant to the topic, because more dispersed formations changed nothing strategically; all armies today still use concentrations of force, its just that those concentrations now take place over tens or hundreds of miles rather than yards.

No problem.

As the quantity of firepower available to the basic combatant increases, formations become more dispersed.
(This is the principle behind Heinlein's Starship Troopers, btw. The book, of course, not the movie.)

However, this is irrelevant to the topic, because more dispersed formations changed nothing strategically; all armies today still use concentrations of force, its just that those concentrations now take place over tens or hundreds of miles rather than yards.

There is a massive difference between concentration of force and the "blob" in game. As you said, the formations become dispersed as firepower increase.

The "blobs" we see are literally out of the Napoleonic wars.

hehe, WW1. yep, concentration of force against MGs was really powerfull there. the generals clearly did know it better then us

I'm not sure that particular case is really a concentration of force issue. Even so, I've yet to see a convincing argument that another strategy would have worked better. After all, in WW1, innovations like tanks, aircraft and gas, were all employed to solve this problem. But that's another discussion.

There is one salient feature from this scenario which I think is actually relevant to this topic, and that is sight range. In WW1, star shells were used to extend the sight ranges for machine gunners. And they can be used in CoH2 in exactly the same way, if you happen to have a unit/commander/army that has the ability. But even if you don't, you can still extend the sight range of an MG by having a friendly unit out in front.

Which I mention because the scenario described sounds very much like the expectation that an MG will/should be able to suppress anything that wanders into its own native sight range, which I don't think is a design intention. I think a better way of looking at it is that an MG that is, in effect, surprised by having a hostile unit appear at the perimeter of its own sight range is by definition out of position.

There is a massive difference between concentration of force and the "blob" in game. As you said, the formations become dispersed as firepower increase.

The "blobs" we see are literally out of the Napoleonic wars.

In the game, a rifle can only shoot about 40 feet; thus of necessity, rifle units are going to be a lot more clumped up than they are in real life.

But it is not apparent to me that "we" really do see such "blobs" at all, given that some people seem to treat moving two units together as a "blob". It seems to be taken as a given by many, but I suspect there's quite a wide range of opinion as to what constitutes "blobbing". And explanation for why it is to be considered a Bad Thing is also pretty thin.

If you gave me some example of what you're specifically talking about, a replay or a vid or something, I might have a better idea. But to me, it looks like a position for which there is a great deal more peer-group support than actual evidence.

Accuracy penalty and maybe some sort of friendly fire penalty?

In the game, a rifle can only shoot about 40 feet; thus of necessity, rifle units are going to be a lot more clumped up than they are in real life.

But it is not apparent to me that "we" really do see such "blobs" at all, given that some people seem to treat moving two units together as a "blob". It seems to be taken as a given by many, but I suspect there's quite a wide range of opinion as to what constitutes "blobbing". And explanation for why it is to be considered a Bad Thing is also pretty thin.

If you gave me some example of what you're specifically talking about, a replay or a vid or something, I might have a better idea. But to me, it looks like a position for which there is a great deal more peer-group support than actual evidence.

7 units, guards, dense enough for the unit cards to stack on top of each other. Roughly less than 2 person's space between the 42 men. While suppressed, the guard blob still has sufficient damage output to force me to pull an Ostwind back from full health. (Around 1 quarter or more health gone I think)

2 MG failed to hold them back, despite what IRL would have turned into the grinder.

Quoting a movie, but it makes sense " I wanna see plenty of beach between men. Five men is a juicy opportunity, one man's a waste of ammo".

At that rate of fire, you arent "sniping" individuals, you are shooting bullets into a beaten zone where a dense blob should perish. I am not saying 2, 3 squads together is a blob. I am saying when the entire USF clumps together in an ultra dense space and MGs failed to pin more than 1 squad, there is a problem.

2 MG failed to hold them back, despite what IRL would have turned into the grinder.

It...really shouldn't. I can only see maybe double Vickers screwing that up with its bursts stopping and preventing full suppression when it gets (un)lucky and kills its target.