Ostheer and Trenches

Ostheer and trench-making caused quite big argue. Poll is simple, but try to support your choice with some arguments.

IMO having one-sided heavy cover for Ostheer would be the best choice. As we know all factions were created with limited historical accuracy ( ie. Bergetiger) but having nice gameplay and balance ( somehow). Also all the factions have something original, even in terms of defences. My vote goes for originality of Ostheer defences, not copying old schemats.

I gave my vote for this

---

Post Merge: [time]Чтв 20 Янв 2011 02:43:27[/time]

---

Or something, like this.
Meaning: it should look like a trench, but it shouldn't act like any of those, already present as buildable by brits or sovs.
Maybe, there's a need for restriction of these to be built only in closeness to resource points (like soviet "camps").

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 10:47 AM by IJoe

I like the idea of another type of heavy cover like PE Roadblocks or the large trenches in the picture above. ;)

I voted for the buildable heavy cover. To me that also includes things like the trenches found on some maps that can be entered, like Joe proposed.

Best suggestion I've seen so far was cephalos' idea, you could also give it a rad name like Panzerbattlement or something like that  ;)

I voted for buildable heavy cover, because I could be done in an interesting way I'm sure, without any of the balance issues vs Brits that trench quality cover would bring. Also because it's more interesting than trenches when two other factions already have them.

Buildable trenches like brits but not destroyable by pressing a button. So you need to stay or lose the position to the enemy.

walki1 wrote:
Buildable trenches like brits but not destroyable by pressing a button. So you need to stay or lose the position to the enemy.

Given that the OH unit who builds trenches is also a trench-wtfpwnz0r unit I don't think the Ostheer would be hurt by a lost trench as much as the brits, for example, would be.

I voted for buildable heavy cover. Cephalos' battlement looked good to me.

Like i had explained at the Schützen war cmap thread;
I want a trench system.
Ostheer hadnt large squads (4 men). Ostheer use a lot of "small weapons" u cant place in buildings or trenches. So the majority of Ostheers firepower have to stay outside of such a trench system xD

And u have to keep in mind; With the unit pools u have to decided either u want to play offensive or u want to play defensive.
Ostheer is expensive ;) So u will need a lot of resources and have to reflect your decisions.

Lord wrote:
Like i had explained at the Schützen war cmap thread;
I want a trench system.
Ostheer hadnt large squads (4 men). Ostheer use a lot of "small weapons" u cant place in buildings or trenches. So the majority of Ostheers firepower have to stay outside of such a trench system xD

And u have to keep in mind; With the unit pools u have to decided either u want to play offensive or u want to play defensive.
Ostheer is expensive ;) So u will need a lot of resources and have to reflect your decisions.

Putting all aside, what about 2x2 and bigger games, where OH will be accompanied by other german factions? Trenches would definitely cuase A LOT of problem and drastically affect the game-play.

i don't understand it. even if you say "brit can't counter trenches", US and soviets can (flamers, grenades and croc).
PE don't have flamers and have to use flame nades or incidiary rounds from mortarhalftrack. so they have disadvantages vs trenches as well.
but that problems are not caused by ostheer beeing able to build trenches.
it is caused by relic not giving their expansion faction enough anti-trench  weapons.
if you say "ostheer having trenches will destroy the game balance" then you would have to ask devs to make axis factions unable to use empty brit trenches, as this would cause the same problem.
and keep this in mind: brits have trenches AND mg nests, mortar pits, 17pounder and bofors. as far as we know from the updates, ostheer will have NO defensive building (just the flak as base defense) and will have to use trenches as defenses.

QuotePutting all aside, what about 2x2 and bigger games, where OH will be accompanied by other german factions? Trenches would definitely cuase A LOT of problem and drastically affect the game-play.

why? it's the other way around. if you have 2 or more allied faction it is likely that it's not just brits but also US or soviets. so the allies would have anti-trench weapons.

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 1:54 PM by Ghost

Lord wrote:
Like i had explained at the Schützen war cmap thread;
I want a trench system.
Ostheer hadnt large squads (4 men). Ostheer use a lot of "small weapons" u cant place in buildings or trenches. So the majority of Ostheers firepower have to stay outside of such a trench system xD

And u have to keep in mind; With the unit pools u have to decided either u want to play offensive or u want to play defensive.
Ostheer is expensive ;) So u will need a lot of resources and have to reflect your decisions.

You know, we're not arguing against the basic idea of having trenches, we're arguing against the lame ass brit trenches. Wouldn't you prefer buildable trenches like those that are already present on some maps? (Pointe du Hoc for example). You could also place Heavy Weapons in such trench systems as it was done historically and it wouldn't be imba because you can already make that with sandbags.

+1^^. Additionally, it would be neat and new ;D

Ghost wrote:
i don't understand it. even if you say "brit can't counter trenches", US and soviets can (flamers, grenades and croc).
PE don't have flamers and have to use flame nades or incidiary rounds from mortarhalftrack. so they have disadvantages vs trenches as well.
but that problems are not caused by ostheer beeing able to build trenches.
it is caused by relic not giving their expansion faction enough anti-trench  weapons.
if you say "ostheer having trenches will destroy the game balance" then you would have to ask devs to make axis factions unable to use empty brit trenches, as this would cause the same problem.
and keep this in mind: brits have trenches AND mg nests, mortar pits, 17pounder and bofors. as far as we know from the updates, ostheer will have NO defensive building (just the flak as base defense) and will have to use trenches as defenses.

You see, you are massively wrong here. You don't balance old factions to be able to put up with new factions. You balance the new factions around the old factions. And thusly, the problems we are talking about would be exactly caused by the Ostheer having trenches.
As to the argument of the Ostheer capturing British trenches: The Brit player has control over his trench and he can decide whether its captured or not(because he can just delete them). The Brit player hoewever does not have control where and when the OH player builds his trenches. Simple as that.

And to make an analogy to your reasoning: it is like going to a fencing match and bringing a machine gun and then saying: Well it didn't make it unfair by bringing the machine gun, you should've brought machine guns in the first place.

Analpirat wrote:

Ghost wrote:
i don't understand it. even if you say "brit can't counter trenches", US and soviets can (flamers, grenades and croc).
PE don't have flamers and have to use flame nades or incidiary rounds from mortarhalftrack. so they have disadvantages vs trenches as well.
but that problems are not caused by ostheer beeing able to build trenches.
it is caused by relic not giving their expansion faction enough anti-trench  weapons.
if you say "ostheer having trenches will destroy the game balance" then you would have to ask devs to make axis factions unable to use empty brit trenches, as this would cause the same problem.
and keep this in mind: brits have trenches AND mg nests, mortar pits, 17pounder and bofors. as far as we know from the updates, ostheer will have NO defensive building (just the flak as base defense) and will have to use trenches as defenses.

You see, you are massively wrong here. You don't balance old factions to be able to put up with new factions. You balance the new factions around the old factions. And thusly, the problems we are talking about would be exactly caused by the Ostheer having trenches.
As to the argument of the Ostheer capturing British trenches: The Brit player has control over his trench and he can decide whether its captured or not(because he can just delete them). The Brit player hoewever does not have control where and when the OH player builds his trenches. Simple as that.

And to make an analogy to your reasoning: it is like going to a fencing match and bringing a machine gun and then saying: Well it didn't make it unfair by bringing the machine gun, you should've brought machine guns in the first place.

@Ghost - Yeah, you've got things the wrong way round a little as Analpirat points out. As is, it doesn't matter that the Brits can't clear trenches easily, because only allies can build them. If a Brit player lets a trench fall into enemy hands, he's playing badly and deserves to have huge difficulties clearing it again. Brits were not designed to have to fight trenches placeable by an enemy faction.

No faction needs defensive buildings to defend locations, troops and vehicles can do that just fine if necessary. As you can see with PE, who are fairly limited in static defensive buildings.

PE flame nades aren't unreasonably expensive and they do hard-counter trenches. Nothing the Brits can get without going out of their way is as effective.

I think the aforementioned reverse Sand Bags is the best option. Possibly with mounted guns...

Analpirat wrote:
[...] You don't balance old factions to be able to put up with new factions. You balance the new factions around the old factions. And thusly, the problems we are talking about would be exactly caused by the Ostheer having trenches.
As to the argument of the Ostheer capturing British trenches: The Brit player has control over his trench and he can decide whether its captured or not(because he can just delete them). The Brit player hoewever does not have control where and when the OH player builds his trenches. Simple as that.[...]

the point is that relic caused the problem: by not giving brits effective trench-counters. and the flame nades are strong vs trenches but only if you get close enough (that's why i mentioned the mg nests ;)).
i don't think that brit players have control why's in their trenches...they can't delete the trench if it's lost to the enemy.
and the big thing about this discussion is that some people believe that OH players will just dig in and build trenches all over the map...but who knows if that's gonna happen?!
and like lordrommel mentioned trenches will balance the fact that ostheer infantry will be expensive and that it has 4 men squads plus the fact that there is no other defensive building.

but there might be a simple solution to the whole thing: give the brits some sort of trench fighting reward unit. maybe alternative sappers with flamers instead of piats or something else.

Well, the simplest solution would be not to include trenches in the first place. I will agree with you that Relic might have created the Problem by not giving the Brits an anti-trench weapon (which,otoh they didn't really need) but there's no reason to aggravate that problem by giving the axis acces to trenches.

(btw, as a Brit you delete the trenches before you loose them,ofc)

Think u forget a point;
With trenches Ostheer demobilises itself.
Perhaps they could dig in at important map points
but u get the chance to manoeuvre around this positions
to attack the important fire support weapons like the Flak 38,
the Pak 40 and the LeIG 18 from behind! So when Ostheer player
decided to dig in he will lose a part of his mobility!

Lord wrote:
Think u forget a point;
With trenches Ostheer demobilises itself.
Perhaps they could dig in at important map points
but u get the chance to manoeuvre around this positions
to attack the important fire support weapons like the Flak 38,
the Pak 40 and the LeIG 18 from behind! So when Ostheer player
decided to dig in he will lose a part of his mobility!

I don't understand, what's so good about standard trenches (except for the fact, that they already exist and don't require a bit of work), that you are so stuck to them?

Lord wrote:
Think u forget a point;
With trenches Ostheer demobilises itself.
Perhaps they could dig in at important map points
but u get the chance to manoeuvre around this positions
to attack the important fire support weapons like the Flak 38,
the Pak 40 and the LeIG 18 from behind! So when Ostheer player
decided to dig in he will lose a part of his mobility!

and what should I do when OStheer dugs in the chockepoint ( ie. bridgehead)?? Aske them to make more space to flank them?? That's silly...

Victory-point games are one game modus ;)
But like i said. It is expenisve and cost a lot of manpower and resources.
I'm confident that Ostheer wont be able to defend all points with
absolute fire advantage.

I'm sure that the trenches could be balanced.
And like i had explained; trenches are an important part of military battles. Infantry had to dig in when they wont be killed by artillery or mortars.

Out of historical view and gameplay view i cant see a problem that cant be solved by ef team. And it seems to me that the only real problem is the british faction because the rest get weapons against entrenched enemys.

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 4:28 PM by Lord Rommel

Lord wrote:
Think u forget a point;
With trenches Ostheer demobilises itself.
Perhaps they could dig in at important map points
but u get the chance to manoeuvre around this positions
to attack the important fire support weapons like the Flak 38,
the Pak 40 and the LeIG 18 from behind! So when Ostheer player
decided to dig in he will lose a part of his mobility!

That's the thing with trenches, you don't really. If you're being flanked, just blow up your trench (instantly) and move your men to counter the flank. There's no downside to building a trench except time, pretty much. And for Ostheer you'd have to get an upgrade on a unit of Sturmpios, but that's not a huge deal.

Lord wrote:
Victory-point games are one game modus ;)
But like i said. It is expenisve and cost a lot of manpower and resources.
I'm confident that Ostheer wont be able to defend all points with
absolute fire advantage.

I'm sure that the trenches could be balanced.
And like i had explained; trenches are an important part of military battles. Infantry had to dig in when they wont be killed by artillery or mortars.

Out of historical view and gameplay view i cant see a problem that cant be solved by ef team. And it seems to me that the only real problem is the british faction because the rest get weapons against entrenched enemys.

What's expensive? Trenches are only expensive if you build a ton of them and have them garrisoned, you don't need to do that. One trench at a key point (e.g. a VP) that can't be countered will spoil the game.

History isn't relevant to this, there are plenty of things that were important in the war that aren't covered. The main problem is the British, yes. But that's a whole faction, so it's a very big problem. A reward unit to counter trenches would be effectively mandatory if nothing else was done, and a clumsy solution in my opinion.

Edit: And yes, VPs are only one game mode, but so is annihilation. They both have to work well.

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 4:32 PM by Wilson

Ok, so I agree to give Ostheer trenches. As far US, Wehr and PE will get them. Soliders should have chance to dig in, don't you think?

Wilson wrote:
[...] And for Ostheer you'd have to get an upgrade on a unit of Sturmpios, but that's not a huge deal.

+ resources for the building
+ resources for the unit pool
+ research time
= a lot of factors u have to keep in mind ;)
When u want to play with this unit pool u have to play a bit more defensive like.
But thats one of the ideas of the Ostheer; decided between offensive and defensive gameplay.

Lord wrote:

Wilson wrote:
[...] And for Ostheer you'd have to get an upgrade on a unit of Sturmpios, but that's not a huge deal.

+ resources for the building
+ resources for the unit pool
+ research time
= a lot of factors u have to keep in mind ;)
When u want to play with this unit pool u have to play a bit more defensive like.
But thats one of the ideas of the Ostheer; decided between offensive and defensive gameplay.

Eh, they don't really come into it. You won't be doing that stuff purely for trenches. I imagine it will be fairly likely that you'll get that building anyway. It isn't going out of your way enough to justify trenches. Even if it was, it doesn't solve the problem. Once the trenches are there, how do the Brits cope?

Edit: I know that stuff is a concern, but it isn't enough to make up for if the trenches are unbalanced.

Jeah. Okay. British faction had problems (but i had never disclaimed this point).
But this is ONE faction and in combination with US and USSR playes had to work together to hit an entrenched enemy.

And perhaps we will find a way to help british army against trenches ;)

Plus you must go with HA, HA really make you suffer in terms of anti tank support, giving you the only option for anti tank is to go the LS from first building, which makes you suffer in anti infantry in T1.

Lord wrote:

Wilson wrote:
[...] And for Ostheer you'd have to get an upgrade on a unit of Sturmpios, but that's not a huge deal.

+ resources for the building
+ resources for the unit pool
+ research time
= a lot of factors u have to keep in mind ;)
When u want to play with this unit pool u have to play a bit more defensive like.
But thats one of the ideas of the Ostheer; decided between offensive and defensive gameplay.

+ research cost and what rizz said:

Rizz wrote:
Plus you must go with HA, HA really make you suffer in terms of anti tank support, giving you the only option for anti tank is to go the LS from first building, which makes you suffer in anti infantry in T1.

which means no pak and no ISG

Lord wrote:
Jeah. Okay. British faction had problems (but i had never disclaimed this point).
But this is ONE faction and in combination with US and USSR playes had to work together to hit an entrenched enemy.

And perhaps we will find a way to help british army against trenches ;)

You're not supposed to change default factions in any way, just deal with it as it stands, right?  ;)

Lord wrote:
Jeah. Okay. British faction had problems (but i had never disclaimed this point).
But this is ONE faction and in combination with US and USSR playes had to work together to hit an entrenched enemy.

And perhaps we will find a way to help british army against trenches ;)

But why create a problem that you then attempt to fix? It just isn't logical. Plus relying on US and Soviets in 1vs1 won't work.

IJoe wrote:

Lord wrote:
Jeah. Okay. British faction had problems (but i had never disclaimed this point).
But this is ONE faction and in combination with US and USSR playes had to work together to hit an entrenched enemy.

And perhaps we will find a way to help british army against trenches ;)

You're not supposed to change default factions in any way, just deal with it as it stands, right?  ;)

Are you forgetting something about the brits ;)?

IJoe wrote:You're not supposed to change default factions in any way, just deal with it as it stands, right?  ;)

what's wrong about trying to fix what relic screwed up a long time ago? EF has made balance fixes before and if missing british anti-trench capability is a problem, why shouldn't it be solved?
and let's be honest: the brits are right now far from being a balanced faction. hope RC will change that ;)

Hmm, those are good points. It's true that the choices of teching and so on could have a big impact on how viable trench Sturmpios are, but it still strikes me as a potential imbalance that could be avoided by giving Sturmpios something other than trenches.

If it isn't prohibitively expensive to change focuses, you might well be able to go anti-inf with the Infanterie Gruppen Post, then switch to AT after you get some MGs/Snipers, allowing you to go for the Sturmpios with the Schutzen War Camp. I admit I don't know the tech costs/times etc, but if it isn't deemed totally unfeasible to go for Sturmpios relatively early, if their trenches are a problem for Brits, it's a problem for balance.

Obviously it becomes less of an issue in 2v2s, but the game has to be balanced in 1v1 as well. You can say the Brits are only one faction, I can say the Brits are a whole one faction. I'm guessing the devs aren't going to make a whole faction super difficult to use against one other faction, so if trenches are a problem something will have to be done.

Edit:

Ghost wrote:

IJoe wrote:You're not supposed to change default factions in any way, just deal with it as it stands, right?  ;)

what's wrong about trying to fix what relic screwed up a long time ago? EF has made balance fixes before and if missing british anti-trench capability is a problem, why shouldn't it be solved?
and let's be honest: the brits are right now far from being a balanced faction. hope RC will change that ;)

I gather the philosophy of the team has been to avoid major changes to the current factions. Hence RMC being a reward faction rather than just changing Brits. Plus there's always the risk of causing all kinds of balance chaos in changing a faction. Especially when there'll be six factions.

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 4:50 PM by Wilson

Rizz wrote:
Plus you must go with HA, HA really make you suffer in terms of anti tank support, giving you the only option for anti tank is to go the LS from first building, which makes you suffer in anti infantry in T1.

You see, I'm really sceptical if you're gonna pull that off the way you think it should work. Because the early game is about infantry, so no one would pick the Anti Tank pool. On the other hand, in T2 you'll need AT, so no one would pick the other side. Which would leave 2 pools heavily underused unless you make it so that players do have a practical (spending assloads of ressources and time makes it a choice in theory only) choice. In which case we've come full circle and it is just as if you could pick any unit any time.

Well.
Ostheer is the answer against the red army.
So it is planed to fight at its maximum against this infantry spam army.
BUT i'm absolutly confident that we could balance the Ostheer against all possible enemies.

We had already listed u the facts of the trench.
When u want to play with trenches u will accept the aftermath of your decision.
U have a lot of costs for the Ostheer, u get problems of tank fighting and u wont be able to build up so much offensive troops to control/dominate your enemy.

I can understand that u are thinking of the pro and contra of this "trench unit" but like i had already written; I'm sure we could balance this point.
And when we see during BETA that we cant find a way to deal with trenches we will inform u and will change this point.
BUT till we had a beta phase with significant results we wont change this unit.

Edit: I would take the LS pool because of the 2cm Flak :P Only way for the Ostheer to shot down planes and fight early armour. ;)

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 4:55 PM by Lord Rommel

Analpirat wrote:

Rizz wrote:
Plus you must go with HA, HA really make you suffer in terms of anti tank support, giving you the only option for anti tank is to go the LS from first building, which makes you suffer in anti infantry in T1.

You see, I'm really sceptical if you're gonna pull that off the way you think it should work. Because the early game is about infantry, so no one would pick the Anti Tank pool. On the other hand, in T2 you'll need AT, so no one would pick the other side. Which would leave 2 pools heavily underused unless you make it so that players do have a practical (spending assloads of ressources and time makes it a choice in theory only) choice. In which case we've come full circle and it is just as if you could pick any unit any time.

Mmm, this has a huge bearing on the balance. We are all theory-crafting a lot here with not much to go on, but at a basic level, if trenches are too good against Brits, they have potential to be a problem regardless of when they come out.

Ghost wrote:

IJoe wrote:You're not supposed to change default factions in any way, just deal with it as it stands, right?  ;)

what's wrong about trying to fix what relic screwed up a long time ago? EF has made balance fixes before and if missing british anti-trench capability is a problem, why shouldn't it be solved?
and let's be honest: the brits are right now far from being a balanced faction. hope RC will change that ;)

The problem is that it conflicts what this mod set out to to: not change the vanilla gameplay. And if you're now starting to change things to make the vanilla factions fit your mod-factions you've left your path and you're down with all the other mods that are a balance mess.

Lord wrote:
Well.
Ostheer is the answer against the red army.
So it is planed to fight at its maximum against this infantry spam army.
BUT i'm absolutly confident that we could balance the Ostheer against all possible enemies.

We had already listed u the facts of the trench.
When u want to play with trenches u will accept the aftermath of your decision.
U have a lot of costs for the Ostheer, u get problems of tank fighting and u wont be able to build up so much offensive troops to control/dominate your enemy.

I can understand that u are thinking of the pro and contra of this "trench unit" but like i had already written; I'm sure we could balance this point.
And when we see during BETA that we cant find a way to deal with trenches we will inform u and will change this point.
BUT till we had a beta phase with significant results we wont change this unit.

Fair enough. I guess it won't hurt to wait until beta. Hehe, you'll certainly be checking to make sure it's balanced now.

@wilson:
changing unit pools will require time and ressources. which means that you won't just switch to 1 pool and after 30 seconds to the other pool. and keep pop cap in mind...you will not be able to build countless units. and while you focus on getting your units, your enemies will simply overrun you ;)

@analpirat:
like lordrommel/rizz said: it's about the choices YOU make. if you go for anti-inf and your enemy comes with tanks....game over ;) the brits need balance changes anyway regardless of OH having trenches or not.

Analpirat wrote:

Ghost wrote:

IJoe wrote:You're not supposed to change default factions in any way, just deal with it as it stands, right?  ;)

what's wrong about trying to fix what relic screwed up a long time ago? EF has made balance fixes before and if missing british anti-trench capability is a problem, why shouldn't it be solved?
and let's be honest: the brits are right now far from being a balanced faction. hope RC will change that ;)

The problem is that it conflicts what this mod set out to to: not change the vanilla gameplay. And if you're now starting to change things to make the vanilla factions fit your mod-factions you've left your path and you're down with all the other mods that are a balance mess.

Dude, Opposing Fronts fucked up the balance, not Eastern Front. In my opinion, Eastern Front should aim to fix the balance problems aswell as add the new armies.

I don't know why everyone is thinking we are going to change somehow the original brits, do you remember that reward brits will be out soon?

blackbishop wrote:
I don't know why everyone is thinking we are going to change somehow the original brits, do you remember that reward brits will be out soon?

That doesn't mean, that default brits should become even more useless, than they are right now, does it?

blackbishop wrote:
I don't know why everyone is thinking we are going to change somehow the original brits, do you remember that reward brits will be out soon?

And that's what it's about: The original Brits will still be around. And they, without relying on reward units or one specific doctrine should be able to deal with the OH as good as the US or the Soviets should be able to. If they can't they Ostheer isn't properly balanced. And you can't make that go away by saying: Well Relic screwed them up anyway.

And the Best part is: one of the screwed up things about the Brits is their trenches, the same trenches you want for the OH. To me,that just doesn't make any sense.

If you are just adding an improved British army, and not removing the old 1, the old 1 will become obsolete anyway...

Imo that means "use it at your own risk". EF team is creating reward brits because we cannot fix normal brits without changing the faction too much(against policies). If you don't want to use them, and prefer their broken style is up to you.

The problem on normal brits is not the trenches by themselves, you should know it. As Lord Rommel said, until ostheer reaches beta we cannot discard it, then we're going to see how it works, if it's a failure, it will be changed.

pariah wrote:
If you are just adding an improved British army, and not removing the old 1, the old 1 will become obsolete anyway...

And you are thusly implying that your British faction is superior to Relics British faction which won't be attractive for the Main CoH player Base which doesn't neither like great changes nor things not made by Relic.

If you'd allow me a pun, I think the respective sides are deeply entrenched in their positions and there is no easy way to find a balance
wahahahahaha

But seriously, trenches are gonna fuck up balance quite a bit.

;)

Ghost wrote:
@wilson:
changing unit pools will require time and ressources. which means that you won't just switch to 1 pool and after 30 seconds to the other pool. and keep pop cap in mind...you will not be able to build countless units. and while you focus on getting your units, your enemies will simply overrun you ;)

Of course, but what I suggested only required three unit pools to be bought. And Ostheer trenches aren't going to come super early like Brit trenches can, but even though they would come along later the Brits still won't have a decent anti-trench tool.

I suggested that you get the first building (probably something you'd buy anyway?) and then go for the anti-inf pool. You play a bit, then get the second building. At this point, if you're concerned about AT, swap pools at the first building while you get sturmpios from the second building. I'm kind of assuming here that it won't cost huge amounts to change pools, otherwise people would hardly ever bother as Analpirat mentioned above somewhere. I don't know teching times, but Brits can't get armour or even vehicles other than the Bren that quickly, so the Ostheer would have a little while to do this. They might not even need to swap the first building over to AT before getting trenches.

Edit: Also, not quite sure where you're going with the pop-cap and "while you focus on getting your units, your enemies will simply overrun you" comments. I really can't see pop-cap preventing you getting one unit of Sturmpios to build trenches if you can afford the tech. And you'll be buying fighting units and using them, not trying to go straight for trenches with no other combat units. That would be silly. Again, it all depends on the relative costs of tech/units, but surely going for Sturmpios can't be that prohibitively expensive or risky against vehicles, otherwise no-one would ever bother.

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 5:20 PM by Wilson

Jeah. We are entrenched.
And the reason it quiet simple;
Ostheer faction design was made by the team. I'm part of this team and so i will defend "our project" at all costs.
You are entrenched because u just know the trench in combination with british faction and wont give trenches with other faction any chance.

And when i'm informed right some other mods used trenches for all factions ;)

Last edited January 20, 2011 at 5:23 PM by Lord Rommel

Lord wrote:
Jeah. We are entrenched.
And the reason it quiet simple;
Ostheer faction design was made by the team. I'm part of this team and so i will defend "our project" at all costs.
You are entrenched because u just know the trench in combination with british faction and wont give trenches with other faction any chance.

And when i'm informed right some other mods used trenches for all factions ;)

Two words: Institutional bias
Don't let it bite you.
(Same goes for me, I know)