Login

russian armor

Remove yellow cover bonuses from MOVING infantry

Removed yellow cover RA bonuses from moving infantry
Option Distribution Votes
39%
61%
Total votes: 33
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
14 Sep 2016, 20:18 PM
#1
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

Removing the RA bonuses from infantry that are moving would I think help solve some issues regarding the late game battle field.

The Problem:
In the late game there are yellow craters all over the map providing all infantry with a 25% RA bonus. What this does is make infantry that already have high RA bonuses even harder to hit, especially for vet 0 infantry and hmgs. For the axis most of their infantry excel at long range while the allied infantry excel at close range. This means most infantry engagements are determined by how soon the hmgs can suppress or how many models the axis player can take out before the allied player gets close.

The solution:
Make it easier for long range units to drop models on the move and hmgs to suppress by making their enemy easier to hit by removing the RA bonuses of yellow cover from moving infantry.

Who benefits:
-hmgs since they will be able to suppress their enemies sooner than later.
-long range infantry


How it will change gameplay:
It will encourage more flanking, use of smoke, and sprint abilities for units that excel at close range.

Tell me what you guys think.
14 Sep 2016, 20:20 PM
#2
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

Bad idea, That would make infantry combat even more static and buff LMG's even more since close combat infantry have a harder time charging up close.
14 Sep 2016, 20:31 PM
#3
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

Bad idea, That would make infantry combat even more static and buff LMG's even more since close combat infantry have a harder time charging up close.


This only applies to yellow cover which becomes a problem in the late game for hmgs.
This would encourage more use of smoke sprinting and flanking instead.

Also I'm Wondering which lmgs are a problem?
16 Sep 2016, 18:43 PM
#4
avatar of adamírcz

Posts: 955

Sure, because it isnt already an insane disadvantage past the three minutes to use a close range infantry, r-right?
16 Sep 2016, 20:02 PM
#5
avatar of Wygrif

Posts: 278

I like this idea. Buffed HMGs = easier, more reliable blob counter.
16 Sep 2016, 20:05 PM
#6
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

This would ruin close range infantry in 1v1. Please no. Clever/good use of cover is the sign of a good player and close quarters infantry are already at a major disadvantage, most especially in the late game.
16 Sep 2016, 20:36 PM
#7
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

People won't stop complaining until a single MG can stop an entire army.
16 Sep 2016, 21:10 PM
#8
avatar of ruzen
Patrion 15

Posts: 243

Removing more fun ideas(in this case changeable environment) will not solve random model drop frustration.

I think much of the flanking, HMG, smoke or encouraging more thought to play is an issue for map designers.

If maps were designed better people wouldn't frustrate about unfair model drops. Take a look on Arhem Checkpoint. Having a good number of red covers and punishable crossing points forces players, thinking before move If they want to do better in the game ofc. Not that I think Archem Checkpoint is balanced I think north side has more disadvantages but overall maps do force players use all in this game.
17 Sep 2016, 00:59 AM
#9
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2016, 21:10 PMruzen
Removing more fun ideas(in this case changeable environment) will not solve random model drop frustration.

I think much of the flanking, HMG, smoke or encouraging more thought to play is an issue for map designers.

If maps were designed better people wouldn't frustrate about unfair model drops. Take a look on Arhem Checkpoint. Having a good number of red covers and punishable crossing points forces players, thinking before move If they want to do better in the game ofc. Not that I think Archem Checkpoint is balanced I think north side has more disadvantages but overall maps do force players use all in this game.
this, more red cover and I mean a lot and no yellow cover can be build on red cover only sand bag and tank trap)
17 Sep 2016, 01:31 AM
#10
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2016, 20:05 PMCieZ
This would ruin close range infantry in 1v1. Please no. Clever/good use of cover is the sign of a good player and close quarters infantry are already at a major disadvantage, most especially in the late game.


What about the state of player generated yellow cover during the late game?

I would like seeing player generated yellow cover (most sources being indirect fire) getting a different category (not light) which doesn't grant suppression buff but retains the accuracy values from yellow cover. This way, MG suppression performance doesn't change as much during early game in comparison to late game.
17 Sep 2016, 01:43 AM
#11
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072



What about the state of player generated yellow cover during the late game?

I would like seeing player generated yellow cover (most sources being indirect fire) getting a different category (not light) which doesn't grant suppression buff but retains the accuracy values from yellow cover. This way, MG suppression performance doesn't change as much during early game in comparison to late game.


This is what I'm trying to get at. The craters...
17 Sep 2016, 01:49 AM
#12
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2016, 20:05 PMCieZ
This would ruin close range infantry in 1v1. Please no. Clever/good use of cover is the sign of a good player and close quarters infantry are already at a major disadvantage, most especially in the late game.

You call walking up to an mg and gunning it down through a sea of player made yellow cover crates "clever"? I find the late game craters just makes long range infantry and hmgs fair less useful since the CQs infantry basically have a shield when walking up to them.

Think about how much easier it would be to chase down that sniper since it no longer takes less RA while walking through all the craters?
17 Sep 2016, 03:03 AM
#13
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4


You call walking up to an mg and gunning it down through a sea of player made yellow cover crates "clever"? I find the late game craters just makes long range infantry and hmgs fair less useful since the CQs infantry basically have a shield when walking up to them.

Think about how much easier it would be to chase down that sniper since it no longer takes less RA while walking through all the craters?


You're exaggerating quite a bit, it is rarely feasible (let alone advisable) to charge through yellow cover at an HMG... you'll still get suppressed despite the player-made (or any) yellow cover.

Not to mention that generally late game, buildings and environmental green cover has been destroyed. If you took away the advantage of crater/player created cover late game infantry would bleed even more heavily than they do now.

Short range troops already suffer late game because they're always forced to close in to do any damage. On one or two maps this is fine, but on most it becomes increasingly difficult with the late game power of LMGs, tanks and in general large armies running around.

It also doesn't make sense within the context of the game. My squad is inside a crater, which the game displays as yellow cover but I don't get the bonuses if I'm moving? It's awkward and counter intuitive.

A change like this would be an indirect buff to LMGs, which are already disgusting in many late game situations while directly nerfing a handful of units that aren't at all problematic.
17 Sep 2016, 05:38 AM
#14
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Sep 2016, 03:03 AMCieZ


You're exaggerating quite a bit, it is rarely feasible (let alone advisable) to charge through yellow cover at an HMG... you'll still get suppressed despite the player-made (or any) yellow cover.

Not to mention that generally late game, buildings and environmental green cover has been destroyed. If you took away the advantage of crater/player created cover late game infantry would bleed even more heavily than they do now.

Short range troops already suffer late game because they're always forced to close in to do any damage. On one or two maps this is fine, but on most it becomes increasingly difficult with the late game power of LMGs, tanks and in general large armies running around.

It also doesn't make sense within the context of the game. My squad is inside a crater, which the game displays as yellow cover but I don't get the bonuses if I'm moving? It's awkward and counter intuitive.

A change like this would be an indirect buff to LMGs, which are already disgusting in many late game situations while directly nerfing a handful of units that aren't at all problematic.


The HMG gets killed by infantry even if it does suppress them. I agree it would make lmgs more potent but thats a different issue that can be solved by limiting lmgs from racks to 1 per squad.

17 Sep 2016, 09:44 AM
#15
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

Most of the frontal yolo-rush-type HMG takedowns in the late-game occur when an LMG blob a-moves through a bunch of craters.

The LMG blob will, conveniently, stop moving the moment it reaches max distance (that's where LMG power peaks) and, with the benefit of yellow cover, will vaporise the LMG crew.

I don't think the proposal will really fix that part, sadly. This is because LMG blobs are already stationary enough, and they will continue to benefit from yellow cover.

All LMGs are disgusting vs close-range infantry; not just double LMGs. Removing yellow cover from craters will only make LMG troops even more of a no-brainer than they aready are :(

The best way to address this is, probably, reducing the penalties to suppression that crater cover provides.

However, it's not all HMGs that suffer the same from it.
- The Maxpin seems to pin troops just fine, no matter the distance/yellow cover.
- MG42 has respectable suppression, it's just double LMGs that are killing it.
- It's the other HMGs that completely suck when yellow cover hits the field (hint: they are the ones that don't get suppression bonuses from their veterancy)

Sadly, only relic is able to add new cover types to the game. Otherwise, a mod could:
- Recycle an unused cover type
- Change every single explosive weapon in the game to generate the new cover type instead of light cover
- Change every single weapon/ability in the game that causes damage to set the dmg/suppression modifiers for the new kind of cover

All-in-all, it doesn't sound like a great deal of fun, and I doubt we are going to see this very soon.

1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

361 users are online: 361 guests
0 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48957
Welcome our newest member, nightlife4u
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM