Fix for Blobbing / Rifle Terminators

thanks for hijacking the thread, australian magic. super cool of you. no one cares that you think FRPs are cancer. you've posted that in pretty much every other thread for the last month.

Australian magic is right about FRP.

On topic : I think you make a valid point in regard to vet3 more or less being equivalent to green cover but your suggestion to limit it to only applying whilest in cover will surely produce lopsided engagements.

Usf can only build cover in two doctrines or by re's building tank traps, so that is an instant disadvantage. Furthermore as the game goes on, the amount of green cover reduces as it is destroyed, which in turn will swing the balance of the engagement in favour of the defender.

Whoever gets to a position first, if time allows can build green cover, instantly giving them not only the advantage of cover but vet RA multipliers as well. The attacking side would be at a huge disadvantage and would probably resort to blobbing to regain the advantage.

Furthermore, usf for most of the game is the aggressor. They have to attack and they have to maintain constant pressure or it is gg. They're generally not stopping to build cover when they assult a position.

Consider the wild swings in a units survivability as it moves in and out of cover. For example, volks vs rifle, both units in green cover. Volk throws a flame nade, usf moves out of cover and looses all its vet RA bonus. If it cannot find cover immediately, then retreat is the only option as it is suddenly vastly weaker.

The idea is good in theory as it promotes tactics and positional play, but the reality is, once the game reaches that frenetic stage its too much to expect that units only get vet benefits by being positioned in cover.

thanks for hijacking the thread, australian magic. super cool of you. no one cares that you think FRPs are cancer. you've posted that in pretty much every other thread for the last month.

Wow!

I dare you to quote my posts from "pretty much every other thread for the last month" since I posted here and ONE post in other thread like 2 day ago. Plus I was abroad for almost 3 weeks and I haven't posted anything for that time.

The bias is real

Consider the wild swings in a units survivability as it moves in and out of cover. For example, volks vs rifle, both units in green cover. Volk throws a flame nade, usf moves out of cover and looses all its vet RA bonus. If it cannot find cover immediately, then retreat is the only option as it is suddenly vastly weaker.

The idea is good in theory as it promotes tactics and positional play, but the reality is, once the game reaches that frenetic stage its too much to expect that units only get vet benefits by being positioned in cover.

This is a great point and something I didn't think about. Otherwise, I'm ok with static units having an advantage. Late game there's usually a lot of yellow cover around from craters. I'd just prefer to see players punished for charging over open ground when bounding from cover to cover is possible but takes more micro.

I think the biggest thing preventing this from being effective is that it'd drastically change the infantry game and slow it down... And relic is pretty much done with big changes at this point.

This is a great point and something I didn't think about. Otherwise, I'm ok with static units having an advantage. Late game there's usually a lot of yellow cover around from craters. I'd just prefer to see players punished for charging over open ground when bounding from cover to cover is possible but takes more micro.

I think the biggest thing preventing this from being effective is that it'd drastically change the infantry game and slow it down... And relic is pretty much done with big changes at this point.

The more I think about this the more unworkable I see it being. The principle is fine, but the reality is not. You would have to rework all vet bonuses on every unit. Multiple maps would need reworking.

Indirect fire and lmg play would rise dramatically. Smoke would be imperative in every engagement and i dare say flanking would probably be too risky.

The objective should be to reward positional play not static play. I just finished watching Devm and Theodosis go at it and the most appealing aspect of the game was the flanking, the pace of the game and the continual pressure.

And not an lmg blob in sight....

Couple of post invis. Next time use PM.

fix for allied blobbing/terminators??? make german infantry historically 1.5x better RIP

LOL @ at the shitposting Aussies.
Mates, the rest of the world isnt as used to it as us, so ease up a bit eh?

Back on topic, blobs should be given a nerf, like the more squads you have, the quicker they all get supressed and the more losses they take.