[1.04] Fallschirmjager > Progaganda Strategy

Just got off a game, PE versus Soviet (me). Brother spammed assault grenadiers so I went propaganda for the MG bunker. Oh dear god was that a mistake.

The problem is the MG bunker can be killed by 1 Fallschirmjager or even a regular grenadier incendiary grenade. As low as 25 mun can make me waste 300mp/15 fuel due to no recrewing. He just put one squad behind me and BAM, no mg nest, insta rush of assault grenadiers. Not to mention 1-hit panzerfaust on the Katayusha (though this is ok with me).

IMO, the soviet MG bunker needs to have some major flame resistance due to soviets lack of ability to recrew

On a side note, I tried T-90's in the previous round, sniping marders tore them apart.

Soviets need to be nerfed, they're OP! :D
Ahah. Sorry, just being me. Ouch, though :(
1 incendiary grenade?? Really? :(

Russian Mg in british mortar will be great.

Advantage will be smaller structure and lower profile who make him hard to be hit by heavy weapons.

Also i think this Mg nest need to keep all crew alive,until the emplacement is destroyed.

How it sound ?

PSIHOPAT wrote:
Russian Mg in british mortar will be great.

Advantage will be smaller structure and lower profile who make him hard to be hit by heavy weapons.

Also i think this Mg nest need to keep all crew alive,until the emplacement is destroyed.

How it sound ?

That's actually an awesome idea. Soviet soldiers were known for holding out until the last man.

It is ?

Ha...

What is the answer from developers ?

Also is ok to be used mortar british emplacement as a trench for russian snipers and AT squad ?

The second official answer...about that...will come ?...

thebomb wrote:

PSIHOPAT wrote:
Also i think this Mg nest need to keep all crew alive,until the emplacement is destroyed.

That's actually an awesome idea. Soviet soldiers were known for holding out until the last man.

This is exactly what is needed

The Soviet bunker needs to be wa cheaper too. Come on, it's a doctrine unit!

Cost isnt too bad, its manageable, except that every time i put one up, one Panzer grenadier incendiary grenade kills the crew and makes it useless

MG nest costs too much for something you can't recrew or gets killed way too easy. It should be around 100 or 150 MP.

The soviet mg is the most expansive mg of the game :

PE : ok flakwierling
Wehr : 150 mp 50 mun
USA : 280 mp 15 fuel (don't remember exactly)
Brit : 280 mp

Soviet : 300 mp 15 fuel !!!

And it can't be recrewed ! LOWER THE PRICE !

nico97one wrote:
The soviet mg is the most expansive mg of the game :
And it can't be recrewed ! LOWER THE PRICE !

And it's a doctrine building/unit!

Last game I played a PE mortar halftrack was able to de-crew my MG bunkers before they even got past 75% of their health... so I agree, Soviets need a bunker that has doesn't have the crew die before the bunker dies... it's certainly a waste when you can't recrew AND it's a doctrine choice.

Just make it so that the crew only dies with the MG and it would be fine, similar to the wehrmact bunker

If any decision is made to make the MG dugout cost/mechanic similar to other factions' MG bunkers/nests, please remove the pop cost too.

The 2 starting MG dugouts (6 pop) plus any other we want to build will take up quite some pop cap.

Last edited February 19, 2010 at 4:20 PM by Josiah666

You can delete the mg's at your home base if you need the extra pop

Ah didn't know I can delete my own stuff, thanks.

Nonetheless, I like the idea of a doctrinal defensive structure, but if it is intended to be the other factions' equivalent, then the cost should at least be somewhere close; and the pop cost isn't justified anyway - USSR is a pop intensive faction, and other MG buildings don't cost pop at all (I only have the original CoH, not sure about the British). Besides, all USSR players (especially those aren't going Propaganda) will have 6 pop (the 2 starting MG dugout) occupied at all times, unless you delete them of course.

P.S. Since it is a doctrinal building, maybe a little more attention? For example some upgrades or attributes to make it unique? If that is the case the cost at this stage would be well justified.

British and PE both cost pop for their defensive structures (British is 3 and Flakveirling is 6????)

BurroDiablo wrote:
Last game I played a PE mortar halftrack was able to de-crew my MG bunkers before they even got past 75% of their health... so I agree, Soviets need a bunker that has doesn't have the crew die before the bunker dies... it's certainly a waste when you can't recrew AND it's a doctrine choice.

I am definitely in agreement with this. Propaganda Strategy deserves better! Let the crew stay alive until decimated please!

Yeah who ever suggested using the British mortar with an maxim or whatever in it , thats a good idea as well as fixing the re-crew problems

A Maxim in the mortar pit would be a good idea but to keep it unique and interesting I would suggest it have a narrower firing cone from other MG's, similar fire rate to US MG, more accurate and have the ability to turn in the pit like the CW 17 Pounder AT emplacement to prevent flanking

Wow, I did know they were powerful but that's good.

I guess Fallschirmjagers granades were made for 1 thing - to destroy emplacements.
They burn slower but much longer than standard PG nades so they are less usefull vs targets in the open.

A Maxim in the mortar pit is a good idea but it would have to cost at least 400MP. MG that cant be sniped, flanked and can withstand few direct mortar shells. Pionieers will be suppressed before being able to flame it.

Ive had no problem with the Soviets MG nest... well that's probally because i always go for the armor commander  ;D

I find myself almost always going for trenches first, and then only ever using  the MG nests when there's a trench in front of them.

A cost reduction, or something to make them more effective, or at the very least something to make them die slower would be nice.