Profile of GWilliam445

I think that brace should be removed and instead emplacements should just be tougher to compensate. It feels so gamey to have an 'Oh no you don't' button. It's also really annoying to have to always attack an emplacement with a disproportionately large force because the opponent might be paying attention and therefore one seriously hard alpha-strike (enough to destroy say an IS2 in a matter of moments) just isn't enough. Was that intentional on Relic's part? Because losing an emplacement hurts so much to have a hope the enemy must be willing to risk an army to destroy it.

Frankly considering how reliable indirect fire is in CoH 2 compared to the supremely devastating, on direct hit, but ultimately unreliable performance of CoH 1 artillery why re-create a faction with expensive emplacements in the first place? Brace structure just simply isn't a good enough way to reconcile this problem. Without it a defensive UKF play is untenable and with it emplacements have demi-god mode on standby. This only really pertains to 1v1s however.

In 2v2 and above there is the issue that one way to easily OHK an allied team containing a UKF is to double/triple/quadruple an emplacement/simcity suddenly which knocks them well out of the running for a long time. Do this to one turtle shell after the other with overwhelming force or indirect fire saturation and knock each Brit out of the running early. Demi-god mode or not 4+ mortars/ISGs focus firing an emplacement or over 10+ squads (or some combination of both). Because losing an emplacement is so punishing the axis can exploit that inherent design flaw of a defensively played Brit without much skill or inherent risk. As they are not pressuring you (because the emplacement ate their income and they have to defend it in force or lose) preparing this kind of Omega-strike (because unlike an Alpha-strike it's the end instead of the beginning) in secret is easy. And of course if they don't defend it properly then just rock up and blow it up with whatever you have to spare.

I don't know how to fix the second problem if I'm going to be honest. Make them much worse but a lot cheaper to compensate? Or go the CoH 1 route and completely neuter the UKFs offensive options so that turtling is the only effective strategy remaining and make their emplacements really really tough to destroy?

As for OKW trucks... They could just bring back the one per-sector limit that they had before which prevented Sim City strategies at the game mechanics level. After all OKW is technically supposed to be the most aggressive faction based around the Battle of Bulge, break through then bite, hold and hopefully do enough damage for the win and not a Call of Duty Proskillzzzz playa (aka. pitch up tent and camp to victory). Besides, it's rather easy to take out a far forward Flaktrack with an early T-34/76. The main reason for shoving the T-34 up to Soviet T4 and locking it behind T3 was to stop Soviets from rolling over OKW players who were either somehow allergic to or just awful with (i.e. inexplicably expecting it to perform on par with the Pak 40 and moaning on the forums when it doesn't) the Raketenwerfer. Not to mention the fact the Schwerer Panzer HQ is not cheap and requires a truck which spawns if and when it feels like it to build *i.e. never when you need it to*.