Profile of blvckdream

We all know Charkov north is terrible.

In the north you have two houses with plenty of windows right next to the fuel. So southern player can rush it and camp there very easily. (UKF and OKW mainly). In the south there are two irrelevant houses almost midway between fuel and base and then one useless (due to lack of windows) house next to the fuel. That means that if northern player decides to rush the southern fuel he can´t use a garrison to camp and wait for more units to arrive.

Even though this house is useless for north the southern player can put an MG in there to cover both fuel and cut off. It can be flanked but it still is a decent position. Northern spawn doesn´t have this luxury because the trees block vision from fuel house to cut off.

That means that if northern player decides to rush the southern fuel he can´t use a garrison to camp and wait for more units to arrive but the southern player can.


This is what I mean:






So my proposal:

1. Remove the sight blocker in the north so the MG can cover the fuel cut off.

2. Move the big house that is situated between muni and fuel point in the north away towards base. Basically mirroring southern fuel point garrisons in a way.

WW1 wouldn´t be that bad... People act like it was only trench warfare but it wasn´t. Also no one would really bat an eyelid if Relic portrayed WW1 a bit more dynamic than it really was.

I´d prefer WW1 over any modern scenario. Maybe even over the boring, overdone western front France 1944 WW2 scenario.

I barely read it at all since I know that Bofors and mortar pits have nothing to do with the design of MG nests and are therefore irrelevant to the discussion of the effectiveness and MG bunkers.

Well at least you are honest enough to admit not even reading what people reply to you. Will make refraining from discussing things with you so much easier in the future.

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.

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.