Late game mg bunker spam

I noticed that axis factions can often spam multiple mg bunkers in late game, allowing them to effectively hold one side of the map or vp, while sparing extra squads to attack or defend elsewhere. Therefore, I would like to know if there is potential balancing issue in regard to bunker spam or am i just being salty.

All you have to do is using smokes. 1 smoke = useless bunker and 150mp/60MU

one AT gun or
one mortar or
one tank
can easily destroy many bunkers.

you are the enemy...which allowed the axis player to build bunkers one side...because you forget this side and didnt attack there...till you realize your focused side ist heavily defended by 2 players...and realize you will lose and try to attack the other side after 35min in late game.

you deserved to lose... when attack a bunker without a AT gun, tank or mortar

I noticed that axis factions can often spam multiple mg bunkers in late game, allowing them to effectively hold one side of the map or vp, while sparing extra squads to attack or defend elsewhere. Therefore, I would like to know if there is potential balancing issue in regard to bunker spam or am i just being salty.

Yeah...Bunkers should cost pop cap and not have full range self spotting. They should probably also cost 200MP. Not saying they are OP and can´t be countered but people need to get discouraged from turtle gamestyles and encouraged to actually do something instead of just camping. Having 100/100 pop cap and spamming bunkers is just stupid.

Yeah...Bunkers should cost pop cap and not have full range self spotting. They should probably also cost 200MP. Not saying they are OP and can´t be countered but people need to get discouraged from turtle gamestyles and encouraged to actually do something instead of just camping. Having 100/100 pop cap and spamming bunkers is just stupid.

mines should have pop, right? and sandbags, right?

its a 150mp and 50muni unit. easily counterable by many options. try harder

What kind of balance? There's no need to discuss a balance about mg bunker spam. You just don't let Ostheer build them. It's so simple. And in case that they do, just bombard or flank them. Riflemen can use their rifle grenades on the bunkers (so i guess USSR's Conscripts can do the same). A stuart itself can take down a lot of bunkers without support.

While it is simple to prevent axis from doing it, it is still simple to destroy that bunker with any high caliber gun (AT gun, medium tanks, tank destroyers, mortars).
Maybe you just suffering in late game by micro-controlling or not using AT gun.

How about you remove ALL current emplacements and replace them with weapon teams that you need to actually train from your base, walk up to a position and then setup and "dig in" (spawning their emplacement around them).

That way there would be no more turtling, camping or spamming of emplacements.

Why you ask?

Well, instead of 150 manpower and 60 munitions you would be paying 260 or more man power per weapon team.

Combined that with the time needing to train the squad, get it to a position, setting it up, then digging in and people will think carefully where they can defend because a lone engineer squad won't be able to build you a small Sigfried line in less than 2 minutes.

Plus you will also need to account for the population cost of these weapon teams, no more ghosts manning MG positions that cost no pop cap.

Which will in turn also solve the issue with you not being able to get rid of emplacements once their job is done and the action is far from them, just un dig the weapon, pack up and move, heavier guns can be towed or slowly pushed, and yes you can tow heavy guns I've even done it myself and I can provide picture proof if needed, there are just no animations, it's just the team weapon is garrisoned inside the vehicle like a normal infantry squad.

Yeah...Bunkers should cost pop cap and not have full range self spotting. They should probably also cost 200MP. Not saying they are OP and can´t be countered but people need to get discouraged from turtle gamestyles and encouraged to actually do something instead of just camping. Having 100/100 pop cap and spamming bunkers is just stupid.

LOL 200MP? the USF fighting position is only 125 and the RE get free grenades. Yes it does have a smaller arc hence why its cheaper. Do fighting position cost pop cap? Ost is supposed to be a defensive faction. Yet Brits are far better at defending. And now u want to take away the supposedly op bunkers (which are defenseless against anything remotely explosive)

OKW flak emplacements are a good example of how an emplacement should be designed. They cost fuel + pop cap and thus aren´t spammed. That being said they can still be useful if used right. They are actually decent after the changes to them in DBP. Much better way to design a static emplacement.

Again, I did not say that bunkers can´t be countered or even that they are OP. Just that they are annoying and poorly designed. Why should you be allowed to spam an unlimited of MG positions while having no pop cap? Makes no sense.

How about you remove ALL current emplacements and replace them with weapon teams that you need to actually train from your base, walk up to a position and then setup and "dig in" (spawning their emplacement around them).

That'd be a flat out improvement in my view but we're not going to see that level of extra animation work done at this point in the game's lifetime.

OKW flak emplacements are a good example of how an emplacement should be designed. They cost fuel + pop cap and thus aren´t spammed. That being said they can still be useful if used right. They are actually decent after the changes to them in DBP. Much better way to design a static emplacement.

Again, I did not say that bunkers can´t be countered or even that they are OP. Just that they are annoying and poorly designed. Why should you be allowed to spam an unlimited of MG positions while having no pop cap? Makes no sense.

Of course it makes sense. Almost every RTS has static defense - Starcraft, Warfcraft 3, Age of Empires series, Age of Mythology, etc.

The whole idea with emplacements is that they are immobile, strong against one unit type, do not contribute to army or population, and require additional attention for the opponent to deal with correctly. That being said, countering a bunker just requires one flank. A penal squad can throw a satchel, an engineer can lay a demo, riflemen can smoke and capture anyway, rear echelons can smoke and run past with bazookas and kill it ... etc etc etc.

Talk about removing MG nests because you guys don't counter them properly is just non-sense. They have existed in since the dawn of RTS and will continue to fill a role as a strong immobile option for denying access to an area against a small number of basic units.

The whole idea with emplacements is that they are immobile, strong against one unit type, do not contribute to army or population, and require additional attention for the opponent to deal with correctly.

So why don´t we make Bofors and Mortar pits pop cap free. Same for OKW emplacements. There are plenty of reasons why this isn´t a good idea but they also apply to Ost bunker and USF fighting positions. Or do you think it´d be fun to fight vs 10 bofors every game just because late game bofors cost means next to nothing? Or OKW players spamming flak emplacements everywhere because they have nothing else to spend their ressources on?

Just give all emplacements a pop cap cost. It would actually improve gameplay because people would not be encouraged to camp and actually have to micro their units instead of just AFKing and waiting for opponent to do something.

They SHOULD be in the game and serve the role that they do right now. But they should have some drawback instead of being a brainless way to spend ressources when you are pop capped.

I've said it for ages, bunkers should not self spot (just like MGs dont spot for themselves)

Check visual range of MG42 bunker vs Fighting pit and that should set an example for both.

So why don´t we make Bofors and Mortar pits pop cap free.

Because, many others said it before, it only takes a single unit and 15 seconds to destroy a bunker, but U need your half army to destroy a bofors.

So why don´t we make Bofors and Mortar pits pop cap free. Same for OKW emplacements. There are plenty of reasons why this isn´t a good idea but they also apply to Ost bunker and USF fighting positions. Or do you think it´d be fun to fight vs 10 bofors every game just because late game bofors cost means next to nothing? Or OKW players spamming flak emplacements everywhere because they have nothing else to spend their ressources on?

Just give all emplacements a pop cap cost. It would actually improve gameplay because people would not be encouraged to camp and actually have to micro their units instead of just AFKing and waiting for opponent to do something.

They SHOULD be in the game and serve the role that they do right now. But they should have some drawback instead of being a brainless way to spend ressources when you are pop capped.

The problem with Bofors and Mortar pit is that even though they are emplacements, they are way too effective for their cost. Mortar pits range makes it effective when positioned behind forests, buildings, etc (MG nest obviously doesn't have the range or indirect capabilities of the motor pit). Bofors counters all light vehicles and infantry in a 360 degree radius, obviously way more effective than an MG.

Therefore your proposition to make bofors and mortars pop cap free is stupid. The problem with bofors and mortars as an emplacement is that they're too effective. MG's shoot only at infantry and in a cone, and die to single flanks, have no brace, etc.

Don't compare apples to oranges to try to prove a point man.

Because, many others said it before, it only takes a single unit and 15 seconds to destroy a bunker, but U need your half army to destroy a bofors.

Can you just read what I wrote before answering maybe?

The problem with Bofors and Mortar pit is that even though they are emplacements, they are way too effective for their cost. Mortar pits range makes it effective when positioned behind forests, buildings, etc (MG nest obviously doesn't have the range or indirect capabilities of the motor pit). Bofors counters all light vehicles and infantry in a 360 degree radius, obviously way more effective than an MG.

Therefore your proposition to make bofors and mortars pop cap free is stupid. The problem with bofors and mortars as an emplacement is that they're too effective. MG's shoot only at infantry and in a cone, and die to single flanks, have no brace, etc.

Don't compare apples to oranges to try to prove a point man.

Reading comprehension 0/10. I said there are good reasons why Bofors and mortar pits have a pop cap.

Reading comprehension 0/10. I said there are good reasons why Bofors and mortar pits have a pop cap.

Nice ad hominem, man. A pleasure discussing things with you as always.

Nice ad hominem, man. A pleasure discussing things with you as always.

So on a scale of 0-10 how good do you think you read what I wrote.

I literally said there is a good reason Mortar Pits and Bofors have a pop cap attached to them.

You answer: "Your proposal to make Bofors and Mortar Pit pop cap free is stupid".