Which game mode are we talking about? (1v1... 4v4? ) Any, it's up to you guys. The more perspectives of the game here the better. |
|
Wanted to start a "Defensive Theory" thread for some time now for people to share their ideas on defensive gameplay may it be building up barriers, defense in depth strategies, proper bunker usage, etc. What do you guys think of defensive strategies and what strategies work for you? |
I have considered doing an 'Art of Defence" Guide because a lot of people use defences very badly
1) Not building them at all
2) Building too many of them and in the wrong places
3) Leaving and relying on them to stop an enemy cold by themselves
4) Camping behind them
Like going to the North VP on Steppes and camping the munitions whilst building a great wall of wire and sandbags.
You then 4v3 his teammates on the fuel, ignore him and kill him last
We do need a good Defensive Theory guide, if people knew how to use them properly games would be more interesting. |
neither the tiger nor the churchill had slopped armor.
That's why Panther and King Tiger frontal armor was better, it was thick but the slope is what did the trick. Tiger tank is just a rolling brick with thick armor. |
You should see one of Bears, Spiky, in 4v4. Half of map covered by sandbags, tanktraps, wires, demos, mines etc... Once you let him dig down, you wont take it back. Quickly becomes a WWI battle with men charging across no mans land.  |
A large part of it for me is just how easily destroyed defenses are and how long they take to set up, especially compared to the first game. A ratio of effort expended to fortify vs. destroy, if you will. Sandbags get one-shotted by tanks a lot of the time. Tank traps are only available for USF without doctrines, otherwise I'd tend to use them more.
The second big reason, as I already alluded to, is just that every faction doesn't have all the available defensive options. Ostheer have no sandbags or tank traps, Soviets have no tank traps (at least not in a good doctrine), OKW have sandbags but no tank traps, etc.
But your post does make me wonder. I may have to utilize defensive structures more. I don't tend to get creative with funneling units into kill zones. I think it would be a really interesting way to play. I'll have to experiment with this.
I'd love to see that. I bet it would be interesting; could you provide a link?
Yep here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neEO3NQAqTI |
Oh yeah ^^
If that is real, I would use that lol. |
Wires, Tank Traps, and to a lesser extent Teller/Riegel Mines are rarely seen (because you need a detector to see them kekek) when they were an integral part of WWII battlefields.
The obvious way to use Wires and Tank Traps is to shut off pathways and that does happen, but I have never seen anyone try and successfully fortrify an open area, or at least cleverly using these to greatly limit enemy movement. You know, using things like this to avoid getting MGs/AT guns flanked and stuff. They, at least in theory, have the power to turn open areas into closed areas with proper placement.
This thread aims to investigate why these free passive defenses are not used often, and it comes with a nifty poll. How you'd solve this if you consider this to be a problem, you can mention below. I remember seeing one of Dane's videos that highlighted a 2v2 where the one soviet player went defensive tactics and made great use of tank traps and barb wire. He essentially made a funnel and directed enemy units straight into his mgs, anti-tank guns etc. I think this was a vid from a month or two ago. Great game to watch. I think proper defensive networks just take too much time, and pull your attention away from the battle too much. |
There´s actually enough stuff for a new German faction that is up to date in 1944/45. No prototypes or early war junk needed.
Hetzer - partly better armored than a StuG and with a remote controlled MG on top.
Nashorn - Elefant gun on Panzer IV chassis.
Jagdpanther - Elefant gun on Panther chassis.
Nebelwerfer - a classic.
Panzer III Ausf. N - by 1944 this was used to fight off infantry with 80mm armor and a stubby 75mm gun.
Wirbelwind - Panzer IV chassis with quadruple flak.
88mm Flak 36 - a classic.
Hummel/ Wespe - An equivalent to the 152mm on tracks, 105mm Priest respectively.
Jagdpanzer IV/ L48 - Similar to the StuG. Worse gun and slightly less armor than the current L/70 variant.
Most of this stuff would still perform better than allied stuff. Don´t act like there´s nothing left.
How would you guys separate these between the Wehr and OKW? I would give the Jagdpanther, Nebelwerfer, and Hummel to the Wehr. OKW would get the Nashorn, Wirbelwind, and Flak 88. I think I remember seeing a while ago a picture of a commander with the Hetzer for the Wehr, I think it also had a ability that allowed Grenadiers to upgrade with Shrecks. |
OKW will be getting new doctrines to go alongside the British faction from what we can tell. The new content may be themed in some way to go alongside this, potentially something like Italian support if the British are supposed to be fighting in Italy. I'm not really expecting that, but it's possible. At any rate, they will likely include some new units for Axis.
New commanders for both US and OKW would be good, but Wehr should probably get some new commanders as well to be fair if allies get Brtis. |
United States
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
