Profile of general_gawain

We learned nine years ago that emplacement-based factions/doctrines ruined any chance of mobile, lively, competitive gameplay.

It's just a pity "we" didn't include Relic.

Back in these days emplacements were even better. Yes, it would be nice if they would have learned something. I think most brit players wouldn't be unhappy with a moveable mortar instead. If they don't want to mirror SU/Ost mortar there are other possibilities. They could have make all british support weapons slow moving and with a setup time (better protected as long as they are in setup stance with some sandbags as visual effect) but standard range. This would have fitted their concept of british army: good at defence but slow to react.

The second thing they should have learned form CoH1 Brits is that moveable trucks are killing game balance, but hey we are giving it to OKW instead.

They should remove any form of Forward Retreat Point (OKW/USF/UKF) and only allow reinforcing/healing on the field. The FRP mechanic is even worse than emplacements because it gives such a huge advantage in infantry combat on the big 3vs3/4vs4 maps and really encourages blobbing.

Its sad that Relic doesn't dare to make a deep cut and redesign OKW/Brits.

1. "Counters exist"
This is a non-argument. It is a unit that is not invulnerable. Therefore it can be destroyed. Therefore counters exist. I want a 90 manpower MG42 with 20% increased range, instant pin, and 4x the damage. Since molotovs, smoke, grenades and mortars exist I guess this would be balanced in your book, since existence of counters apparently immediately invalidates any discussions of a unit's effectiveness and gameplay impact.

2. "Just cap the rest of the map"
1v1 maps can be very small and some 2v2+ maps have an insane amount of chokepoints and good mortar pit spots. Try capping the rest of the map on Kharkov or Rails. This is more of a map design issue but ultimately since the game is played on these maps, and since it's unrealistic they will drastically change all the maps, then the units and abilities should be designed around the current map design, not for some hypothetical vacuum.

3. "Emplacements mean less map presence"
Absolute myth. Let that mortar kill 12 Grenadier models during its lifetime and it more or less paid off for itself through reinforcement costs. Everything after that is a NET POSITIVE, it means your mortar pit allows for MORE British squads on the field than German ones.

When you have an infantry squad that inflicted 20 casualties you must ask yourself how much reinforcement cost went into it to get there. Not so for the emplacements. There is some opportunity cost of having to dedicate engineer to repair ( a very cheap squad to create and reinforce. ) except the sim city commander now allows you to go without that as well. Whoops.

In fact, I would argue that emplacements can translate into more map presence having locked down a part of the map, the Brit player can afford to send their mobile elements farther out. If the Axis attacks the emplacements they can't do it piecemeal, they need to invest constant pressure involving significantly more micro and more units in well-timed combined arms attack. which means it is Axis whose map presence is impaired.

4. Emplacements are balanced.
Who gives a crap if they are or aren't? That is besides the point. The point is that a game that is ostensibly about positioning, maneuver, combined arms and flanking ends up being about two people lobbing shells in a parabolic curve at each other from across half the map, watching hit point bars slowly go up or down for minutes at a time.

Oh except you can't do that either because counterbattery. Whoops.

1. LeiG is a very good counter, you need 2-3 if he goes heavy for emplacements. You still have the upper hand manpower wise because emplacements cost more than LeiG and his infantry and AT is more expensive too. The one thing that is ruining it all atm is the counterbattery ability, this surely needs to be changed because it totally counters the counter of emplacements on smaller maps.


2. Some maps are just awful and giving an advantage to a certain type of unit. They really should work on this problem. Atm maps with a lot of important points in a small area favor emplacement play.


3. You can't just count the casualties (12 grenadiers) to calculate if a unit is worth it. Capping power is a valid aspect too for example. Furthermore if your mortar pit constantly keeps a sapper squad busy with repairing, this are another 210mp that could do other things like capping, fighting, laying down mines. To unlock the double fire of mortar pit you either have to spend manpower on a unit maning it (with the risk getting killed by counterfire) or build the Forward Assembly for more manpower (which is like a tent of paper). If you constantly use doctrinal repair ability, this are another 75 munition per use that you could have used for mines and brens or offmap attacks. And even if you use the new Forward Assembly and buy the repair upgrade, so what? FA is so vulnerable and has no brace, make it your primary target it goes down real fast.

So I don't want to say that you are totally wrong, but that calculating the efficience and presence of a unit is not that simple.


4. Artillery is a part of this game and I doubt the game will be better without it. Even in a game with many emplacements you'll need combined arms to win. It is not true that it comes down to only shelling at each other.

As I said Imo counterbattery ability has to be reworked.

We've haven't had time to say whether Improved Fortifications are OP or not, but I've seen enough to know that they're working well. Today I started assaulting one with a P4 and Tiger, a pair of paks and assorted infantry. The Bofors was supported by a 17lber and mortar pits, but I focused on the Bofors expecting to allow my infantry in. By the time the Bofors took ten percent damage I had to back my tanks out under smoke. It braced as we dropped a Stuka bomb directly on it. It appeared to sustain no damage at all. I then moved in my infantry and despite having some shreks and reclaimed bazookas wasn't able to do any significant damage. It came out of brace and forced my infantry away. Anyone developed any good methods for dealing with fortification and braced sim cities? This occured in a 4v4 and ignoring the city was not an option due to the fact that it straddled a VP and fuel.

If you are Ostheer: As Kermitjames wrote Mortar HT flame attack is incredible useful versus any kind of emplacement and can withdraw fast in case he has the new counter-fire ability.

If you are OKW: LeiG is best way to go with constantly shelling it with the barrage ability instead of normal attack. We'll see how counter-fire changes this meta depending on map. The incendiary grenade is great too if there is a way to sneak up to a emplacement.

Btw. depending on the map you should have just ignored the strong point for a while, the 17pdr costs 20 population alone + bofors and multiple mortar pits as you said. An armored attack elsewhere with Tiger/P4 and support could have wrecked his massively inferior numbers there.

Never use a walking stuka (stuka damage is pretty low versus emplacements even without brace), panzerwerfer or any kind of non flaming offmap attack versus it, especially if brace is available. Its just a waste of abilities/munitions. Did you still fired at the braced emplacement while a 17pdr was firing at you? Hope you did not. One more: Improved Fortifictaion gives 20% more health but doesn't protects versus tank firing at it (only small arms).

Yes, I can appreciate how things can get hectic. To save a little more time, you can do the shift click move on the mini map rather than scrolling in the main view. Click all the way back near your base on the mini map if you like. With cool down times over a minute, you'll have lots of time to move it to a better position closer to the front before it's able to fire again.

You might still lose it to a fast rocket counter fire, but having it start its move order instantly after it fires is way better than trying to move it after the enemy's rockets are already raining down, and you'll never lose it to off map or mortar fire.

Yeah, thanks thats a nice one. I shift-click queue capturing of ressource points and some move/attack orders at minimap already but somehow I always shift-click on the main screen when using artillery units. Will try to accustom this too :-)

A clever opponent would never click at your current position when counterfiring but behind it so that the actual firing position is on the lower outer radius of the attack (respectively one end of stuka attack). So you have move quite a bit to escape. I think it depends on the position of enemy stuka/panzerwerfer. When its already in firing position it has a decent chance to get your matress, if he has to move before firing you will get away most probably.

We're you using -shift- to queue commands when using it? Barrage, then shift-click a move command back to safety is a really good habit to have to reduce counter fire damage, and to hide its location. Good rules for all rocket arty actually.

Thanks for the advice. Yes, I try to use shift-klick-queues as often as possible, but fail sometimes when there is too much to do in the heat of the battle. But even if you do so it takes quite a time to fire, dismount and slowly moving away. Of all rocket launcher units it is the one with the biggest chance to get caught and killed by counterfire or an area-effect offmap attack.