Garrison mechanics. Which do you prefer?

This means the units have to evacuate the house as soon as an opposing squad with grenades approaches the house otherwise they are guaranteed to take damage or be wiped. There is no counterplay except supression since you cannot kill a full health squad that quickly.Penals would be batshit op, so would pgrens, assgrens, commandoes, infiltration nades etc etc.

What are you even talking about? You already have to evacuate a garrison upon seeing an anti-garrison capable unit approach. The difference is that now you can get away completely undamaged even against flamers. That isn't fair. That isn't tactical.

A garrison is a strong point that provides suppression immunity, damage reduction, increased sight range, etc.

It has all upsides and no downsides currently, as flamers and grenades NEVER hit ANYONE in a garrison, just literally never unless you're at like below 2000 rank or something.

That makes garrisons have only upsides and no downsides. That isn't proper design. If you garrison a squad, there needs to be risk involved.

Also, if you'll notice, I mentioned how models exit garrisons one at a time in DoWII. That means you aren't going to get wiped, but you WILL take some damage from grenades and flamers if the unit gets in range before you start leaving the garrison.

I don't understand how you can think that's unreasonable. Staying in a garrison until literally the last second is utter trash game design, completely non-tactical.

What are you even talking about? You already have to evacuate a garrison upon seeing an anti-garrison capable unit approach. The difference is that now you can get away completely undamaged even against flamers. That isn't fair. That isn't tactical.

You have to evacuate if there is a flamer, that is true but you have then forfeited the house and all its advantages to the enemy and thus you are now in a weaker position. You seem to ignoring that fact because you are obsessed with needing to do damage to the garrisoned squad, which by the way you want to achieve by simply walking into range of the building..

As to grenades, you do not need to exit currently until you see the animation, which is different to your suggestion because it involves counterplay and does not automatically guarantee damage.

It has all upsides and no downsides currently, as flamers and grenades NEVER hit ANYONE in a garrison, just literally never unless you're at like below 2000 rank or something.

Again, the objective is to take the house and gain the benefits off the garrison for yourself.

That makes garrisons have only upsides and no downsides. That isn't proper design. If you garrison a squad, there needs to be risk involved.

Houses are a cover mechanic, the downside is if you are outplayed you loose that cover to the opposition.
Also how is this different from building a trench or sandbags. Should unit behind sandbags be imobile so your grenades always hit...

Also, if you'll notice, I mentioned how models exit garrisons one at a time in DoWII. That means you aren't going to get wiped, but you WILL take some damage from grenades and flamers if the unit gets in range before you start leaving the garrison.

Again, your obsessed with doing damage and denying your opponent any counterplay. You also continue to ignore the effect high damage nades/satchels/bundle nades will have if you are guaranteed a hit.

I don't understand how you can think that's unreasonable. Staying in a garrison until literally the last second is utter trash game design, completely non-tactical.

I'm not sure what your definition of tactical is TBH. Staying in a house, or behind cover or even remaining in the fight to get a faust off when your low health is a tactical decision which also has risk.

Just because you decide to attack a garrison with the correct counter does not mean you are automatically entitled to a reward. Your opponent is allowed to respond. If he stays and fights he will take damage and he may or maynot win, if he leaves the house he gives up his advantage. It really is that simple....

...you don't forfeit anything if there's no door on the opposite side of the garrison, or if the opposing squad approaches from literally any angle other than the one with the door, and even then, there's no way to be closer to the same door as the enemy -- your entire argument doesn't make any sense and isn't related to the core issue of garrison hopping.

You jump out, dodge a grenade or flamer, then jump right back in, and repeat as many times as necessary.

This is cancer. It's always been cancer, and it continues to be cancer because the delays added are minuscule.

I don't know how anyone can argue that this is tactical in any way, so I'm not sure what other arguments to bring up, since the results of garrison jumping and the lack of improvement to this issue in DBP are evident.

I don't know how anyone can argue that this is tactical in any way, so I'm not sure what other arguments to bring up, since the results of garrison jumping and the lack of improvement to this issue in DBP are evident.

This was inspired by how garrisons worked in vcoh btw.

...you don't forfeit anything if there's no door on the opposite side of the garrison, or if the opposing squad approaches from literally any angle other than the one with the door, and even then, there's no way to be closer to the same door as the enemy -- your entire argument doesn't make any sense and isn't related to the core issue of garrison hopping.

You jump out, dodge a grenade or flamer, then jump right back in, and repeat as many times as necessary.

This is becoming pointless because you are simply incapable of articulating points I am putting forward or you are point blank ignoring them.

House hopping is most effective when there are two doors, preferably with the 2nd door at the back. The back door allows you to exit and avoid any incoming threat, eg grenade, indirect fire and to a lesser extent flamers.The benefit of exiting at the rear is you do not receive any damage and the opposition cannot see what you are doing. This is the part that some people see as abusive.

If there is only one door (and the attacking side should position in front of this door) then you are correct it is harder for the attacking side to enter but it is not impossible, rather it is a matter of positioning and timing, since the delay now prevents units exiting and re-entering as quickly. The other issue with single door houses, is you will take damage when you exit since you are exposed to units in front of the house. The more units present increases the damage you take while hopping in and out. Further more single door house cannot be held anywhere near as long as two door houses because when you finally exit the chance of you squad being wiped are far greater.

The new changes do not automatically guarantee that the units exiting the house cannot re enter the house, its just not as quick as it was before and therefore less abusive. So when attacking garrisoned squads you need to be in position to take the house when the occupants exit. This can be done with a sole squad but there are numerous variables involve. It is easier with two squads because one squad flames or nades the house while the other squad approaches the house to enter at the same time the other squad exits.

The changes are not intended to enable attacking units to just stroll up to the house and lob in a grenade and get a guaranteed return. That is never, ever, ever, going to happen so just forget it. Incase you didn't realize there is a little thing called trusight in coh2 that means certain houses have blind spots or very little warning to approaching squads. It is not competitive nor is it balanced if a garrisoned squad cannot see an opponent approaching or have sufficient time to respond.

Everything you say implies that you are viewing this issue with tunnel vision. You seem to believe that it is some tactical piece of genius on you behalf because threw a grenade at a house and if your opponent somehow evaded you, well the games broken. Every situation is different and you need to adapt and change and not expect the same tactic to work everytime.

The other thing you refuse to acknowledge is the effect that stronger explosives ( eg satchels/ gammon bombs/ bundle nades/ inffiltration nades etc) could have if house exit mechanics are increased.

Honestly if you think people are still abusing house hopping, it may well be time to consider your own tactics because it is nowhere near as effective as it used to be.

Pre-DBP coh2 opening moves: Rush the damn house.

Post-DBP coh2 opening moves: Rush the damn house.

DBP didn't change anything in regards to garrison power or nade dodging for me, so once the sqaud dancing issue is fixed, it's neutral.

I didn't find this feature as much cheese. I found it as skill. And honestly it just dumbed down the game, and is replaced with an annoying lagging out of control feeling.