why are sandbags only built by conscripts but grenadiers p grenadiers and pioneers. are able to build bunkers all the way.
penal battalions should be able to build sandbags. maybe even shock troops and guards. they are currently underused. and i wanted to propose them for the weekly challenge. "shovel harder" sandbag and bunker challenge.
sandbag.
5 Sep 2013, 17:31 PM
#1
Posts: 525
Disclaimer: any post made by this user should not be taken seriously, reader discretion is advised.
5 Sep 2013, 17:55 PM
#2
2 
Posts: 2181
I just wish we had the sandbags from coh1 back. easier to build and looks cooler. Plus engineers make them when the pak43 is done ....
5 Sep 2013, 18:00 PM
#3
Posts: 67
Me miss vcoh sandbags...and German mines.
"Look! I washed for supper!"
5 Sep 2013, 18:07 PM
#4
Posts: 604
Panzergrenadiers can't build anything, you got that wrong in the post. I think Osttruppen can't build anything either.
Their reasoning behind that is probably that they wanted to allow the basic infantry unit of each side to build some defensive position and because the Germans don't have sand bags, they can build a bunker.
I think letting Penal Battalions build them would be ok.
However, currently the Soviet sand bags mess up with the pathing of both infantry and vehicles and unfinished ("ghost") sand bags seem to be indestructible but units can not walk over them, allowing for complete lockdown of an area.
Because of this they should fix the sand bags first before doing anything else with them.
Their reasoning behind that is probably that they wanted to allow the basic infantry unit of each side to build some defensive position and because the Germans don't have sand bags, they can build a bunker.
I think letting Penal Battalions build them would be ok.
However, currently the Soviet sand bags mess up with the pathing of both infantry and vehicles and unfinished ("ghost") sand bags seem to be indestructible but units can not walk over them, allowing for complete lockdown of an area.
Because of this they should fix the sand bags first before doing anything else with them.
6 Sep 2013, 11:39 AM
#5
Posts: 688
Tank traps, please!
'There's honour in victory, honour in defeat and honour in just staying alive'.
[Quote from Wings Reel]
[Quote from Wings Reel]
8 Sep 2013, 05:01 AM
#6
Posts: 2561
Tank traps, please!
No thank you, we don't need a defensive piece that obviously favors one side.
I remember my experiences with them before. "Oh this area is well defended. Guess ill use my highly mobile tank force to flank them... Nope they had a single engineer!".
8 Sep 2013, 05:32 AM
#7
Posts: 525
It seems that Soviets where to retarded to build bunkers judging from someone's logic...
It would've been fun to let them build trenches though,at Kursk Soviets dug thousands of miles of trenches
It would've been fun to let them build trenches though,at Kursk Soviets dug thousands of miles of trenches
8 Sep 2013, 08:54 AM
#8
Posts: 219
bunkers for soviets! but only the mg nest, no need to mirror the bunkers to ostheer.
and yes, old sandbags and wire were great!
and yes, old sandbags and wire were great!
8 Sep 2013, 10:03 AM
#9
Posts: 688
No thank you, we don't need a defensive piece that obviously favors one side.
Which is?
I can't see why both sides wouldn't benefit - not from a game balance point of view, but for adding options and thus more playability.
'There's honour in victory, honour in defeat and honour in just staying alive'.
[Quote from Wings Reel]
[Quote from Wings Reel]
8 Sep 2013, 10:45 AM
#10
Posts: 90
even if every unit could build sandbags that wouldnt stop my mans going the other ways
8 Sep 2013, 16:05 PM
#11
4 Posts: 369
Which is?
I can't see why both sides wouldn't benefit - not from a game balance point of view, but for adding options and thus more playability.
Well for one the Germans could build tank traps, and then get some MG42s behind them to quite easily make something that's very hard to break through. The Russians can't do that. Second, Germans have heavy tanks that can crush tank traps (or least they could in vCoH) that they can build without having to choose a specific doctrine. The Russians only have the ISU-152 and the IS-2, which you need to choose a specific doctrine for.
8 Sep 2013, 16:39 PM
#12
Posts: 950 | Subs: 1
Well for one the Germans could build tank traps, and then get some MG42s behind them to quite easily make something that's very hard to break through. The Russians can't do that. Second, Germans have heavy tanks that can crush tank traps (or least they could in vCoH) that they can build without having to choose a specific doctrine. The Russians only have the ISU-152 and the IS-2, which you need to choose a specific doctrine for.
whaat? germans cant build tank traps... or are you talking about vcoh? its hard to tell
also germans have no heavy tanks that arent doctrinal. panthers are not heavy tanks. i guess brummbar is considered a heavy, but its an assault gun.
8 Sep 2013, 18:27 PM
#13
Posts: 688
Panthers had heavy crush in COH1 AFAIR. But that could just be changed.
I don't see the relevance of what the germans cant put behind tank traps. If there's a balance problem with some weapons, that should be looked into anyway.
Besides, you could also argue TTs would favour the SU because TTs would be an effective way to hinder the classic early game GER HT or SC.
Bottom line, it would hardly favour any particular side.
I don't see the relevance of what the germans cant put behind tank traps. If there's a balance problem with some weapons, that should be looked into anyway.
Besides, you could also argue TTs would favour the SU because TTs would be an effective way to hinder the classic early game GER HT or SC.
Bottom line, it would hardly favour any particular side.
'There's honour in victory, honour in defeat and honour in just staying alive'.
[Quote from Wings Reel]
[Quote from Wings Reel]
8 Sep 2013, 19:31 PM
#14
Posts: 950 | Subs: 1
Panthers had heavy crush in COH1 AFAIR. But that could just be changed.
I don't see the relevance of what the germans cant put behind tank traps. If there's a balance problem with some weapons, that should be looked into anyway.
Besides, you could also argue TTs would favour the SU because TTs would be an effective way to hinder the classic early game GER HT or SC.
Bottom line, it would hardly favour any particular side.
hm i guess youre right. just looked at the stats. default crush mode is heavy for panther, even though its a medium tank.
i agree tank traps would certainly be useful for both sides. i dont think its possible to claim which side would have better uses for it.
i think i read somewhere that they didnt add tank traps because the AI couldnt handle it. i forget where i read that, may not be true, so take it with a grain of salt. even so, i dont think tank traps are really needed. i think fights are more fun when armies are mobile, not when it turns into a camping artillery battle. just look at pripyat. i played a game vs 2 german joint op doctrines. over the course of the game they had 8 pak 43s and 4-5 howitzers. not a fun game.
10 Sep 2013, 14:45 PM
#15
Posts: 29
just look at pripyat.
God, that really is the worst map - the only one I've disabled. It's like Vire River Valley all over again.
14 Sep 2013, 06:02 AM
#16
Posts: 351
even if every unit could build sandbags that wouldnt stop my mans going the other ways
I lol'd
Also, please no tank traps. The game really doesn't need more things screwing with vehicle pathing right now.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
90 | ||
 |
|
|
31 | ||
 |
|
|
22 | ||
 |
|
|
14 | ||
 |
|
|
10 | ||
|
|
|
|
163 | ||
|
|
|
|
14 | ||
 |
|
|
9 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.839223.790+2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.592234.717-1
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.922406.694+1
- 9.1122623.643+3
- 10.265138.658+2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
10
Download
1245
Board Info
917 users are online:
917 guests
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49427
Welcome our newest member, Baqis73421
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Baqis73421
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM