It is IMO the most annoying design flaws, which has killed the game on its own. It is tiresome, it kills the concept of unit preservation and veteran and this powerful support structure supports the strongest and most versatile baseline infetnrie.
So am I the only one frustrated with this?
Mortar Pits Hiding behind buildings
20 Jun 2017, 05:31 AM
#1
Posts: 62
20 Jun 2017, 05:54 AM
#2
Posts: 3053
Infantry sections are definitely the least versatile baseline infantry lmao. Powerful, yes. Versatile? Hell no.
 | Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
20 Jun 2017, 07:44 AM
#3
Posts: 212
It is pretty frustrating I will admit.
Maybe it can be refined out of the game by shrinking the size of buildings in maps with known abusive spots.
Half the reason it's so hard to shoot them back is because they get protected by some monster building.
Maybe it can be refined out of the game by shrinking the size of buildings in maps with known abusive spots.
Half the reason it's so hard to shoot them back is because they get protected by some monster building.
20 Jun 2017, 11:55 AM
#4
Posts: 2243
Infantry sections are definitely the least versatile baseline infantry lmao. Powerful, yes. Versatile? Hell no.
its one of the most powerfull infantery ingame....its get to godlike with light vickers...than the schredd all axis infantery in secounds...absolute BS
20 Jun 2017, 12:00 PM
#5
10 
Posts: 871
I find biased posters more infuriating
20 Jun 2017, 12:01 PM
#6
1 
Posts: 2885
I find placing a pit behind a building a bad idea usually. If your opponent manages to put an AT squad inside the garrison, your pit is basically dead. You can't supress them inside the building and they can wait for your brace to finish with a little backup.
20 Jun 2017, 12:12 PM
#7
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
The most stupid unit in this game. I already stated this in the Beta 2015:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/39312/about-the-comeback-of-the-mortar-pit
Still, there are some guys who keep defending it...
https://www.coh2.org/topic/39312/about-the-comeback-of-the-mortar-pit
Still, there are some guys who keep defending it...
20 Jun 2017, 12:23 PM
#8
Posts: 1217
I find placing a pit behind a building a bad idea usually. If your opponent manages to put an AT squad inside the garrison, your pit is basically dead. You can't supress them inside the building and they can wait for your brace to finish with a little backup.The point still stands as you can also place the mortar pit behind indestructible world objects such as "thick" woods or ruins.
20 Jun 2017, 13:46 PM
#9
Posts: 393
Adding a minimum range to the Mortar Pit will solve a lot of problems, I'm telling you.
20 Jun 2017, 14:29 PM
#10
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
Adding a minimum range to the Mortar Pit will solve a lot of problems, I'm telling you.
And I'm telling you all that replacing the mortar pit with a mobile mortar and making the pit into a garrisonable emplacement will solve all of the issues the current pit has.
Don't believe me? Go play with Planet Smasher's artillery pit mod from the Workshop and try the same tactic.
20 Jun 2017, 15:02 PM
#11
Posts: 393
Look, I did nothing to deserve your constant hostility. Knock it off.
20 Jun 2017, 16:49 PM
#12
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
Look, I did nothing to deserve your constant hostility. Knock it off.
And I did nothing to deserve DonnieChan's constant trolling but the moderators ain't doing anything about it so...
Plus I don't ever remember being hostile to you but whatever.
20 Jun 2017, 18:34 PM
#13
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
And I did nothing to deserve DonnieChan's constant trolling but the moderators ain't doing anything about it so...
There's a button called report right below everyone's comment. Also i don't see DonnieChan talking about you here. Chill.
Ontopic:
Any non micro-passive unit which grants huge benefits opposed to the amount of effort required to use is bad design. Specially if it requires more effort on the attacker to kill rather than on the defender to rip profit out of it.
I leave it open to interpretation as most will realise i'm not just talking about mortar pits.
PD: IB4 brace. Brace is not the problem per se, standfast/engineers repairing while doing so is.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
20 Jun 2017, 19:43 PM
#14
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
There's a button called report right below everyone's comment. Also i don't see DonnieChan talking about you here. Chill.
Ontopic:
Any non micro-passive unit which grants huge benefits opposed to the amount of effort required to use is bad design. Specially if it requires more effort on the attacker to kill rather than on the defender to rip profit out of it.
I leave it open to interpretation as most will realise i'm not just talking about mortar pits.
PD: IB4 brace. Brace is not the problem per se, standfast/engineers repairing while doing so is.
That's the problem, I did report the second time he did it and nothing evident, and someone else said this has been going on for a while now, which just leads me to think that nothing is being done on the matter.
I personally don't give a fuck honestly, it's just that the majority of people on here seemingly go on by these stats which he is using to degrade a person's opinion.
While I think I have the necessary skills with modding and experience in the game to make my feedback valuable and not just some gibberish I made up to look cool on the internet because I'm some self-absorbed asshole.
20 Jun 2017, 19:49 PM
#15
Posts: 2742
Aren't there PMS for this?
But quite frankly, the mortar pit debate has been ongoing since coh1 opposing fronts. The fact that relic remade them for coh2 and doubled the mortars per pit should indicate how much weight community debate on the matter has with relic.
I mean, the old CAS skill planes was considered working as intended, mind you.
But quite frankly, the mortar pit debate has been ongoing since coh1 opposing fronts. The fact that relic remade them for coh2 and doubled the mortars per pit should indicate how much weight community debate on the matter has with relic.
I mean, the old CAS skill planes was considered working as intended, mind you.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
20 Jun 2017, 20:12 PM
#16
Posts: 315
FWIW, all mortars can do the same thing (hide behind a building). Why is it that it can shoot out and through the building in a trajectory and not get shot blocked, but an incoming mortar ON THE SAME TRAJECTORY gets shot blocked?
I don't like that some projectiles are shot blocked, and others are not. FFS, make shot blockers shot blockers. Why do the laws of physics not apply to some units? To me, that's more annoying. If the building blocks the incoming round, it should block the outgoing round, too. Therefore, mortar (in general), couldn't hide behind buildings to shoot all things equally.
I don't like that some projectiles are shot blocked, and others are not. FFS, make shot blockers shot blockers. Why do the laws of physics not apply to some units? To me, that's more annoying. If the building blocks the incoming round, it should block the outgoing round, too. Therefore, mortar (in general), couldn't hide behind buildings to shoot all things equally.
21 Jun 2017, 23:04 PM
#17
Posts: 987
I find biased posters more infuriating
How is it biased? He's hardly the only player who dislikes facing up against mortar pits behind shotblockers.
Anyone who plays both allies and axis can probably agree that emplacements affect gameplay hugely. It forces counter artillery and camping. it's boring. They take almost no micro and with shotblockers, they can last for absolutely ages.
I don't see the bias.
Let's keep it constructive
22 Jun 2017, 07:27 AM
#18
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
.
IMO the the only thing that could be considered bias is the comment about IS, they aren't versatile but they are damn good at what they do.
bg /l
22 Jun 2017, 11:41 AM
#19
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
How is it biased? He's hardly the only player who dislikes facing up against mortar pits behind shotblockers.
Anyone who plays both allies and axis can probably agree that emplacements affect gameplay hugely. It forces counter artillery and camping. it's boring. They take almost no micro and with shotblockers, they can last for absolutely ages.
I don't see the bias.
But dude... Double leig near FRP protected by Schwer... Isn't it the same?
22 Jun 2017, 12:22 PM
#20
Posts: 1124
But dude... Double leig near FRP protected by Schwer... Isn't it the same?
A forward Schwer is always a gamble due to how many artillery options allies have,
Also, every shot counts towards the schwer as well as the double leigs.
They don't have a magical push button forcefield or a auto rep button or an increase in health doctorin.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
25 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.615222.735-2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
846 users are online:
846 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49140
Welcome our newest member, Drummer
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Drummer
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM