Most of this is pretty good; I'm a bit wary of changing LMGs, simply due to how it may further promote camping, but the rest is pretty much right.
That said, I still think negative zeal/increased AoE suppression (no increase vs. single target, but scaling vs. multiple) is the easiest and possibly best solution. I just don't see why or how blobbing should stay in the game, it goes against the core design (micro, maneuvering, mobility, etc.) to such a degree that it just shouldn't be viable.
I don't like the idea of negative zeal because it seems so artificial and visually unintuitive, but increased AoE suppression is something I'll perhaps play around with. |
|
So I'm working on a mod and blobbing is one of the core issues that I want to address. Here is some of the causes and solutions that I have in mind.
Blobbing will always be a part of Company of Heroes, but it’s currently far more ubiquitous than it should be and in comparison to Coh1. Some players propose changes to artificially punish blobbing such as negative group zeal, but that doesn’t create any more decision making and strategy, that just prevents players for blobbing because of arbitrary modifier. Blobbing should have pros and cons like all other decisions in Coh2 but currently, the downsides to blobbing are vastly overshadowed by the pros due to a number of mechanics which prevent players from getting punished when they blob, combined with other aspects of Coh2 which discourage players from being active with individual squads.
These are what I think can be attributed to the prevalence of blobbing:
Forward Retreat Points drastically reduce the time it takes for squads to get back on the field after being forced to retreat. So if you are forced to retreat your entire blob by getting suppressed by a machine gun, you’re not as punished as you should be. Without forward retreat points, mass retreats would be more punishing and players would be encouraged to use individual squads more instead of blindly blobbing around the map.
Light Machine Guns require no micro or effort to use; instead of taking cover, distancing and positioning tactically, LMG’s are ideally used by just attack moving. Why bother with intricate control of your squads when you get almost the same result from effortlessly attack moving. Furthermore, the long range combined with the high single target burst of LMG’s often allows infantry blobs to decrew HMG Gunners before the blob can be suppressed, even despite waking into the firing arc. Replacing LMG’s with more dynamic weapons would punish players that just blob and attack move instead of tactically controlling their squads as well as making HMG teams more reliable.
Demolition Charges ironically encourage blobbing; the constant threat of instantly losing a full squad means it’s never safe to send a lone squad out to cap against Soviets without the safety of being escorted by a minesweeper. Instead, players can be forced to blob cap only around their minesweeper, especially in the late game when the loss of vetted squads is so punishing. Demo Charges only counter blobs if your opponent is foolish enough to neglect sweepers. If Demos are only plantable on buildings and bridges then they would still serve a tactical purpose, but without discouraging players from lone capping.
Light Vehicles encourage blobbing for mostly the same reasons as Demos. The insane potency of Light Vehicles creates such a squad wipe potential which makes it too risky to send lone squads out to cap, especially aggressively after cutoffs or to neutralise high value points in enemy territory. The risk/reward element of aggressive capping is an inherent part of Company of Heroes, but Light Vehicles skew that to a completely different level. With the anti infantry capacity on light vehicles toned down, players would be able to cap out more actively with lone squads instead of only doing so with the support of AT.
Support Weapons and AT Guns being able to capture points results in infantry blobs being free to roam around forcing retreats instead of splitting up to capture resource points. Due to their long range, support weapons and AT guns are often able to support the infantry blobs in combat even whilst capturing points. If Support Weapons and AT guns are unable to capture or capture at a slower speed than infantry, it will force players to manage their map presence more efficiently and split up blobs to capture points.
The Inaccessibility of Support Weapons resulting from Non-Linear Teching leaves players without access to the tools they need to tactically respond to a given situation or army composition. The investment required to side tech for a specific unit is often too much, leaving players with no choice but to blob their way out of trouble. Non-linear teching can be a marketing buzzword thrown around in RTS design to give the illusion of strategic flexibility when it is often detrimental and causes players to lose access to crucial units and abilities. Some RTS games such as StarCraft implement non-linear teching fantastically, but in my opinion, Coh2 does not. Making support units more accessible not only gives players alternatives to blobbing, but also ensures blob counters are readily available.
Grenades allow infantry squads to wipe support teams very easily due to their pinpoint accuracy. If heavy machine gun teams take cover they clump up and are left vulnerable to being instantly wiped by a single grenade, this makes relying on HMG teams against blobs of infantry incredibly dangerous which goes against their intended role.
Grenades in Coh2 also don’t perform a blob counter role due to their small AOE leaving them easy to dodge and not powerful since infantry typically don’t clump whilst moving out in the open. I’m not sure what my ideal implementation of grenades in Coh2 would be, I could give them scatter in exchange for a much bigger AOE to make them devastating against infantry hordes but less consistent against machine gun teams. This is a difficult issue because it’s a symptom of the bigger problem, squad clumping, and it still leaves HMG too vulnerable to other types of explosives. Perhaps I could make light cover grant a received damage bonus in exchange for less received accuracy, so that it offers the same performance against small arms fire but more of a protection against explosives.
If anyone has anything to add or possible solutions than please mention them.
Cheers.
|
|
Raketen is a gimicky flawed design from the start. It's retreat allows it to survive infantry flanks yet it's weak crew gets it one shot by tanks really easy, such a silly design for an AT gun. Raketen just needs to turn into a normal AT gun, lose it's cloak and retreat in exchange for more health and better stats. Which would then make it too strong in garrisons... so it would probably need to lose the garrison ability too. Raketen is the perfect example of unnecessary asymmetric design gone absolutely bonkers. |
1
GGTheMachine
RtN.momo4sho
GGTheMachine
RtN.momo4sho
크리스텔 예쁘다 ㅠㅠ
Relic Entertainment
