Ostheer Update 4: Schutzen War Camp

Snug wrote:

Lord wrote:
Well. Out of my view the historical aspect is one of the most important point for a game which had decided to chose an real historical setting.

And out of my view trenches dont destroy the gameplay.
When a brit dig in he loses a big offensive capacity and when
german faction had their big tanks brits will regret their dug in xD

Historical aspekts should not be a slave book to be followed, but an powerfull inspiration source, espeacially when dealing with a hardcore RTS as Company of Heroes.

The British faction has really no reliable counters against trenches, they can't do  anything allmost. Imagine a squard of stormpios with 2x flamethrowes and mp40's inside a trench cookin them poor tommies up, dooms day i say.

Yeah, the US and Wehr factions were freash and original, it was fun to play, and historycally accurate (for an RTS game). But with the Brit and PE faction they're gone too far, look the popularity that factions. Even that is angers me, if I don't watch out, I can't buld all of the buildings on Wrecked train, for example. I think trenches wouldn't be so popular, if it don't allow the player to base rush, or do the Ostheer faction for light assault  force at the beginning, so you can't sit youre units in trenches, then you weaken youre forces. I think the less used building is the trench when youre a Brit. It's comical, how it gone to ToV and CoH:$ it's not fun to play with, especially in 1v1. hope the new patch will balance my favourite RTS game. :)

Yeah, Roadblocks provide heavy cover. Which makes sense. What doesn't make sense, though, is Hedgehogs and Dragons Teeth not providing any cover...

Also, i think Killar has a good idea; Maybe trenches with mounted weapons? That might be alright...

quit complaining trenches are fine. The ostheer isn't gonna become a new british faction ffs.

Quit complaining that we are complaining. We are discussing.

Versedhorison wrote:
quit complaining trenches are fine. The ostheer isn't gonna become a new british faction ffs.

WTF?
I thought, it was, like, a discussion, FFS?  ;D

Its kinda off topic though.

No, it's not,- we're discussing, what actually is a part of this particular update. So it's all quite valid here.

IJoe wrote:

Versedhorison wrote:
quit complaining trenches are fine. The ostheer isn't gonna become a new british faction ffs.

WTF?
I thought, it was, like, a discussion, FFS?  ;D

yep a discussion :) which value shouldnt be underestimated.

The past and relic have shown, that historical accurancy isnt the keypoint of the game. Actually its the basic idea of which a game like that is buildup. No less and no more. The best game is still the one which is liked by the most people.


Regards

Sorry If I haven't made much of a point but I dont feel that trenches are gonna make the ostheer anything nearly as defensive as brits. Soviets have trenches (as a doctrine choice) but that hardly makes them anything nearly as defensive as British. I therefore think that people should not take such a harsh stance towards trenches.

I think also Soviets has trenches because they're infantries (except Guards) aren't good like other faction's troops.

It's a way to have a balanced game. :)

Besides, their trenches are doctrinal, and they don't have any anti-trench tools right away as well.
Back to the topic: I think that some trenches are more than appropriate and would really suit the Ostheer. But these just have to be unique ones. Un-occupiable and passable by infantry and vehicles buildable heavy cover lines would be somewhat new, interesting, historically accurate, providing the necessary game dinamics, hell,- these would be flawless!  ;D ;D ;D

IJoe wrote:
Besides, their trenches are doctrinal, and they don't have any anti-trench tools right away as well.
Back to the topic: I think that some trenches are more than appropriate and would really suit the Ostheer. But these just have to be unique ones. Un-occupiable and passable by infantry and vehicles buildable heavy cover lines would be somewhat new, interesting, historically accurate, providing the necessary game dinamics, hell,- these would be flawless!  ;D ;D ;D

+1.
This is right what i think as well.


Regards

Vehicles driving over cover without crushing it? I'm not sure that could be implemented...

pariah wrote:
Vehicles driving over cover without crushing it? I'm not sure that could be implemented...

Believe me, it can.

Well it's just that the current map trenches can't be driven over by vehicles, so i just assumed...

It's also annoying that infantry can't climb over walls, so if you guys could implement that as well, that would be fucking sweet!

pariah wrote:
Well it's just that the current map trenches can't be driven over by vehicles, so i just assumed...

It's also annoying that infantry can't climb over walls, so if you guys could implement that as well, that would be fucking sweet!

I'm not sure what you mean, but I know that tanks are able to drive over trenches (granted, these need to be empty)
Cheers

pariah wrote:
Well it's just that the current map trenches can't be driven over by vehicles, so i just assumed...

It's also annoying that infantry can't climb over walls, so if you guys could implement that as well, that would be fucking sweet!

The devs have stated that they are not making core gameplay changes, just balance changes. Infantry 'jumping' over walls is one of them.

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 10:53 PM by Versedhorison

IJoe wrote:
Besides, their trenches are doctrinal, and they don't have any anti-trench tools right away as well.

Molotovs do come quicker then then OH trenches.

Rizz wrote:

IJoe wrote:
Besides, their trenches are doctrinal, and they don't have any anti-trench tools right away as well.

Molotovs do come quicker then then OH trenches.

Comparing molotovs, which are actually an upgrade to a flamethrower which is not, taken as trench-clearing tools, is by all means inadequate in every aspect there is.

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 7:36 AM by IJoe

IJoe wrote:

Rizz wrote:

IJoe wrote:
Besides, their trenches are doctrinal, and they don't have any anti-trench tools right away as well.

Molotovs do come quicker then then OH trenches.

Comparing molotovs, which are actually an upgrade to a flamethrower which is not, taken as trench-clearing tools, is by all means inadequate in every aspect there is.

PE uses their incendiary nades for Trench Clearing. So it's pretty similar.

Rizz wrote:

IJoe wrote:

Rizz wrote:

IJoe wrote:
Besides, their trenches are doctrinal, and they don't have any anti-trench tools right away as well.

Molotovs do come quicker then then OH trenches.

Comparing molotovs, which are actually an upgrade to a flamethrower which is not, taken as trench-clearing tools, is by all means inadequate in every aspect there is.

PE uses their incendiary nades for Trench Clearing. So it's pretty similar.

Well, of course it is. Every sane person would agree on that. But that, however, doesn't make it nearly as strong a flamethrowers, you wouldn't even have to bother buying first, for they just come by default. Moreover, the same troopers, that wield them, can also build trenches (by default as well).  ::)

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 9:18 AM by IJoe

Wait what? PE needs to upgrade to Incendiary nades first, and can't build trenches?

Rizz wrote:
Wait what? PE needs to upgrade to Incendiary nades first, and can't build trenches?

I meant the Ostheer. It's their branch, right?

I agree with all the trench-opposed people here. Imho trenches completely screw CoHs gameplay mechanics and I think everyone clearly sees that. No clever use of cover, no maneuvering,no flanking, no real micro(just delete it when they come with flamers). Just pop a trench and hop in and you're done. It isn't even the model, it's the mechanic.

And even if it comes relatively late with the Ostheer, why even bother?
Does it really need them?
Or are you just giving it to them for the sake of historical accuracy? Because that argument just doesn't cut it. Like, at all. I don't think I even have to name any examples for historical inaccuracies in CoH because everyone in the know clearly sees that. What made CoH such a hit is balance>>>realism, and you should stick to that. Just think of what playstyle you're promoting with trenches and then weigh that vs what you think you gain with a little more historical correctness.

Furthermore, do you think it is public perception that the Eastern Front was more static than the Western Front? Will it matter to people? Can you picture someone at GR.org saying: "Well, EF also has trenches for the OH and the Soviets which is important because, while not many people might know about it, warfare on the Eastern Front was a lot more static than you might think"

My plea is: if you're adding a unit or a feature, then do it for the gameplays sake, not for historical accuracy.

Analpirat wrote:
I agree with all the trench-opposed people here. Imho trenches completely screw CoHs gameplay mechanics and I think everyone clearly sees that. No clever use of cover, no maneuvering,no flanking, no real micro(just delete it when they come with flamers). Just pop a trench and hop in and you're done. It isn't even the model, it's the mechanic.

And even if it comes relatively late with the Ostheer, why even bother?
Does it really need them?
Or are you just giving it to them for the sake of historical accuracy? Because that argument just doesn't cut it. Like, at all. I don't think I even have to name any examples for historical inaccuracies in CoH because everyone in the know clearly sees that. What made CoH such a hit is balance>>>realism, and you should stick to that. Just think of what playstyle you're promoting with trenches and then weigh that vs what you think you gain with a little more historical correctness.

Furthermore, do you think it is public perception that the Eastern Front was more static than the Western Front? Will it matter to people? Can you picture someone at GR.org saying: "Well, EF also has trenches for the OH and the Soviets which is important because, while not many people might know about it, warfare on the Eastern Front was a lot more static than you might think"

My plea is: if you're adding a unit or a feature, then do it for the gameplays sake, not for historical accuracy.

+1 couldn't agree more

I said it 5 pages back and I'll say it again. Axis cannot be allowed to build Brit style trenches ever because Brits cannot counter said trenches. I'm in favour of either Cephalos' roadblock style battlement or of a buildable heavy cover style trench, which would be similar to some of the heavy cover available on some maps (Rails and Metal etc.). I'm not sure if you can actually build that type of thing and still be able to move through it though.

I don't like your avatar  :-X >:(

neither do i, image deleted

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 3:33 PM by Jimbosmith

I couldn't see anything wrong with it...

What is really annoying, though, is the comment! Why do people keep asking how to get the Ostheer!?

IJoe wrote:Moreover, the same troopers, that wield them, can also build trenches (by default as well).   ::)

QuoteSturmpioneers
Role: Assault Engineers
Weapons: 2xFlammenwerfer + 2xMP40
Abilities: Detect Mines(passive), Barbed Wire, Sandbags, Czech Hedgehogs, Run(requires Blitz Pioneers), Goliath(requires Blitz Pioneers), Trench(requires Fortress Pioneers), S-Mines(requires Fortress Pioneers).
Upgrade: Blitz Pioneers OR Fortress Pioneers.
Summary: The Ostheer Stormpioniers are ready to combat on the eastern front! Let them construct trenches or planting S-Mines by upgrading them as Fortress Pioneers or to assault a position with Run ability and  be able to construct Goliaths as Blitz Pioneers. [...]

they can't build them by default. they must be upgraded first. and keep in mind that they can only have one of the two upgrades...

QuoteHeavy Assault(HA): The units that belong to this pool are the Stormpioniers and the Sdkfz. 251 (aka Troop Halftrack).

you have to buy the pool upgrade first and not everyone will take this one. many will choose pak40 and ISG. so i really don't see a problem with the sturmpios being able to build trenches and clear them...

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 3:36 PM by Ghost

Ghost wrote:

you have to buy the pool upgrade first and not everyone will take this one. many will choose pak40 and ISG. so i really don't see a problem with the sturmpios being able to build trenches and clear them...

If you want one key point, I think the big one is that the Brits can't counter them (not easily anyway). The fact that the Sturmpios can easily clear trenches isn't an inherent problem in itself.

i'm not sure, but are riflegrenade squads / mortar pits / AVRE not effective vs trenches?

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 4:59 PM by Ghost

Rifle Grenades aren't worth much, Mortar Pits have very limited range, and i really don't think doctrinal units or abilities count.

Wilson wrote:

Ghost wrote:

you have to buy the pool upgrade first and not everyone will take this one. many will choose pak40 and ISG. so i really don't see a problem with the sturmpios being able to build trenches and clear them...

If you want one key point, I think the big one is that the Brits can't counter them (not easily anyway). The fact that the Sturmpios can easily clear trenches isn't an inherent problem in itself.

 
Furthermore it isn't clear how that pool system will work out. Could be that eventually it will be pretty cheap to swap pools (because otherwise there is a great danger that some pools will never be used)And tbh, atm I think the Blitz upgrade for the Sturmpios is far less rewarding than the fortress upgrade.

@ Ghost: AVRE is doctrinal and I don't think it even works against trenches, though the Croc sure will. But alas, it is also doctrinal and also comes very late and at a high price. Riflegrenades are okayish from what I gather but as of yet they only had to be judged as a tool to recapture british trenches. If the OH can build them whereever and whenever they want I wouldn't be suprised if they wouldn't cut it anymore. Far less effective than Flamethrowers anyhow.

And what's particularly annoying is that the Brits have Flamethrowers in the Operation Market Garden campaign...

Ghost wrote:
i'm not sure, but are riflegrenade squads / mortar pits / AVRE not effective vs trenches?

Rifle grenades are ok, but it would take them a while. I don't think AVRE is much good, and it's doctrinal and not early. And I don't think mortar pits are very good either (if anything I think trenches are maybe meant to be good against artillery?), and even if they were the poor Brits can't build mobile ones, so if you did set up a mortar, they'd just have to shift the trench back a bit.

I think this highlights well the problems Brits would have. You've got the croc coming far too late to help, commando grenades (?) which are also doctrinal and probably not great, or rifle grenade spam, which probably still wouldn't be great. All against something which only requires an upgrade on a non-doctrinal unit, and then no cost (if it's the same as Brit/Russian trenches).

Well, the Brits do have Snipers in their Recon squads... Although i've never used that ability on Trenches, i assume it would work...

For 25muni a shot + cooldown? It'll take weeks to clear a trench  ;)

I thought it was 35? Maybe that was the upgrade... Anyway, yeah, not to mention the super-short range of the "Sniper"! Ludicrous!

Skipping off the "hot" topic of trenches for now has the teching been worked out yet if so please let it not be "build any building from the start" youve done it with Soviets and RMC  :-\, doing it with a third faction would be in a word... stale.

Oh and down with trench's I guess.

Last edited January 19, 2011 at 6:51 PM by Raider217

Analpirat wrote:
I agree with all the trench-opposed people here. Imho trenches completely screw CoHs gameplay mechanics and I think everyone clearly sees that. No clever use of cover, no maneuvering,no flanking, no real micro(just delete it when they come with flamers). Just pop a trench and hop in and you're done. It isn't even the model, it's the mechanic.

And even if it comes relatively late with the Ostheer, why even bother?
Does it really need them?
Or are you just giving it to them for the sake of historical accuracy? Because that argument just doesn't cut it. Like, at all. I don't think I even have to name any examples for historical inaccuracies in CoH because everyone in the know clearly sees that. What made CoH such a hit is balance>>>realism, and you should stick to that. Just think of what playstyle you're promoting with trenches and then weigh that vs what you think you gain with a little more historical correctness.

Furthermore, do you think it is public perception that the Eastern Front was more static than the Western Front? Will it matter to people? Can you picture someone at GR.org saying: "Well, EF also has trenches for the OH and the Soviets which is important because, while not many people might know about it, warfare on the Eastern Front was a lot more static than you might think"

My plea is: if you're adding a unit or a feature, then do it for the gameplays sake, not for historical accuracy.

>Trenches completely screws with CoH gameplay mechanics and i think everyone can clearly see that.

I for one do not share that opinion of yours and I'm sure many other people do not hold that view point.

> Imho trenches completely screw CoHs gameplay mechanics
> No clever use of cover, no maneuvering,no flanking, no real micro(just delete it when they come with flamers). Just pop a trench and hop in and you're done. It isn't even the model, it's the mechanic.
This is not much different to buildings really. You just hop in it and sit there and shoot the enemy until they literally burn you out. Buildings have been on CoH since the beginning. Therefore if trenches are very simmilar to buildings then this would imply that either buildings also screw CoH gameplay mechanics or that your statement is incorrect.

>Or are you just giving it to them for the sake of historical accuracy?
Perhaps the Dev's intend to give the ostheer a different feel and gameplay to that of the Whermacht and Panzer Elite factions and giving the Ostheer Trenches is one way to achieve that.

>Furthermore, do you think it is public perception that the Eastern Front was more static than the Western Front? Will it matter to people?
I'm sure people won't mind a small history lesson. It's not like people are gonna go; "zomg this mod isn't like what I though the Eastern Front was like, I'm gonna go play CoD world at war instead because its WAAAAYY more unrealistic than this."
TL;DR were not gonna lose players over this unless they are gonna boycott it over something as trivial as a couple more factions having slit trenches.

>My plea is: if you're adding a unit or a feature, then do it for the gameplays sake, not for historical accuracy.
Trenches are going in for gameplay reasons as I explained above.

Also in regards to Brits themselves not having enough anti-trench weapons they already do. They have plenty of Arty to kill trenches as well as other weapons like rifle grenades, Piats, Croc-Churchills ect. How do you think they manage to remove German troops from trenches that have been captured. However on another note I do believe that this alone is not enough as those weapons I have stated are not as effective at dealing with trenches as flame/incindiary weapons. However I have full confidince that the Dev's have identified this and will likely implement balance to deal with this.

Building are placed by the mapper in specific places. They can't just be plopped down on a cutoff or inside someone's base. They can also actually be hurt by small arms and are annihilated by mortars, artillery and tanks. Trenches are almost invulnerable to all weapons except grenades and flame. Mortars, AVRE and artillery are NOT a counter to trenches. The only British units that can noticably damage the units inside are the recon snipe (which can actually miss due to trench modifiers), commando nades, commando det packs, croc churchill and riflenades. Obviously, none of these are actually a reliable counter to trenches since they either miss or require constant munitions spending, or are doctrinal (in a shit doctrine - churchills). Trenches in their British incarnation are bad for the game.

Also, this is false:

Raider217 wrote:
Skipping off the "hot" topic of trenches for now has the teching been worked out yet if so please let it not be "build any building from the start" youve done it with Soviets and RMC  :-\, doing it with a third faction would be in a word... stale.

RMC can't just build any building.

False you say...

blackbishop wrote:
Buildings can now be built at any time; they do not require an officer anymore. Also, you acquire all units from all buildings without the need of an officer.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
RMC can't just build any building.

Brits can call in (if youre going to be picky) from the start any base structure im not on about defenses. Simply saying I'd prefer teching of upgrading to new building (Wehr) or build a building to gain a building (PE and US). To another just build whatever then upgrade those buildings (Soviets).

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 3:29 AM by Raider217

Don't argue with me mate. I just played 3 games as RMC. It has been changed since that update.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Don't argue with me mate. I just played 3 games as RMC. It has been changed since that update.

Hey i'll accept defeat where it stands if it's changed im all good with that but in future I hope you don't just go False without explaining why as it sent the wrong message and not being a beta tester how was I supposed to know eh?

Fair enough. This is why it's difficult to provide information to you guys before it's finalised though. Things change if they're not good enough.

Versedhorison wrote:
>Trenches completely screws with CoH gameplay mechanics and i think everyone can clearly see that.

I for one do not share that opinion of yours and I'm sure many other people do not hold that view point.
...

As you may have seen, GodlikeDennis already rebutted your post with great insight and detailled explanation. (Although I think already made these points in the post you wanted to adress)
As to your point on history lessons, I never said people wanted an unrealistic game. I said people don't primarily care about historical accuracy but about gameplay. So they won't appreciate the reference to an obscure historical detail that the trenches for the OH are. And if you still don't get why trenches are bad for the gameplay then I guess you won't ever get it.

Edit: Well, I'm gonna spell it out anyway(again). Buildings are placed in maps by the mappers. They make sure the placement of the buildings is balanced, i.e. both sides can benefit from them.Trenches can be placed wherever the player wants. Facing(unlike in buildings) is irrelevant with trenches because the units inside have a 360° field of fire. Furthermore, buildings can be occupied by both sides. While trenches theoretically can be as well, in practice they'll always be scuttled by a competent player. Furthermore, trenches offer BETTER cover than buildings. That alone is absurd. To top it off, units in buildings can be countered by a wide array of units, including tanks,mortars, at guns, grenades, flames, etc. Trenches however are nigh on indestructible. You won't harm them with tanks, nor with mortars, nor with artillery. The only way is to get up close and personal with grenades and flames.

And finally, compare the effort needed:
Trench player needs a unit to build a trench. Has to build a trench (no cost). Intellectual component: Has to not place it on the most retarded spot possible, other then that no effort required because trenches offer 360° field of fire with max protection from all sides. If shit hits the fan, has to select trench and press Del 2x.

Trench attacking player is restricted from movement in the area of the trench until he has a counter. He thusly looses ressources. He has to spend ressources to acquire a counter. He has to spend/ utilize ressources to protect his counter while that is attacking the trench. And even if this effort should succeed, there's nothing stopping the trench player from just popping a trench in no time again.

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 8:14 AM by Analpirat

if your so worried about trenches early game then build a bike/jeep/bren carrier to stop units from building them. Otherwise deal with trenches accordingly as any player worth his grain of salt would.

Versedhorison wrote:
if your so worried about trenches early game then build a bike/jeep/bren carrier to stop units from building them. Otherwise deal with trenches accordingly as any player worth his grain of salt would.

I'm sorry, is there an argument hidden in between the lines or are you just trying to say l2p? Because if that were your point you'd have completely missed GodlikeDennis' and my point.

I guess it may sound quite disturbing... but shouldn't we make a new topic, where we will argue about trenches?? Maybe some poll?? This was supposed to be about entire update thread, not the "how trench sucks" tread.