Yes, a specific character that is the only one that can build structures, that you can have a limit of one or two in non-engineer specific squads. If they die, no other character in that squad can pick up that hammer and build things. ONLY engineers can build. (Yet all characters can take down?)
That depends on what you are building and if you have the perk or not.
The more complex the structure, the more materials it takes to make. Rally points, ammo boxes, (H)MG nests, AA guns, AT guns, all take significantly more materials to build than sandbags, wire, and hedgehogs. HOWEVER, for the sandbags, wire, and hedgehogs, it usually requires far more than 1 single piece to make a difference. Quickly draining your material count if you aren’t thinking about what you are placing.
As far as the perk goes, it requires 8 of the heart points to get, meaning it eliminates half the list of other options regarding that type of perk point. It removes their ability to get +35% vitality for example.
Engineers are required to take the hammer. They cannot drop it, and they cannot fill that slot with another weapon. If they try to pick a weapon up off the ground, it replaces their main weapon. They cannot carry a second main weapon, only a pistol for additional firepower. They trade that slot specifically for the ability to build structures.
which makes sense as building these fortnite castles can be done in matter of seconds while disassembling takes quite alot more time.
What you are asking here is tachnically same as what tankers has been moaning past years how everyone should not be able to take out tanks.
Which has been explained in detail rather many times why that isnt a option.
As it should be.
Just tried my engineer in smg squad, 6 hegdehogs, 10 barbwires,6 sandbag walls before he ran out of materials.
And I could have 2 engineers in said squad so, id say theres plenty of materials for fortnite castles.
Not really, as tanks still have the option of mobility. Fortifications do NOT (with the limited exception of the AT field gun). Besides, once again I’m not saying they need to be invincible. There are still plenty of other ways to take them down. It’s just this one way that is extremely OP.
They don’t have the same degree of up-front combat efficiency, they are supposed to have the defensive capability to make up for it. With all soldier types being able to take down fortifications at no cost, that defensive capability is far less than the opposing attacker capability of carrying an additional weapon.
Oh right that definitely nullifies the fact that theres reason why taking them out aint limited to certain classes.
Needing a specific unit to fight your fortnite castle pretty much is exactly what you are asking.
Much like planes has been just flying tanks for few years due to not having proper counter & requiring specific unit to take them out.
No they get to build fortnite castles and most importantly radios which quite often are the decising factor of either winning or losing.
As well as HMG’s, lmgs, antitank guns & AA guns. So pardon me having hard time to get in to engineers suffer mentality.
No, its not. What I am asking for is a reasonable tradeoff. Instead of letting them remove the structures for free, and only costing them time, something needs to be consumed in return.
Toolkits can be carried by all units, and if you wish to carry them in addition to medkits, you need to use backpacks. (This also helps with the grenade spam issue.) Making it cost a toolkit for non-engineer structures to break down is a fair trade!
In the case of engineers taking down fortifications, they already are sacrificing their second weapon for that ability to interact with structures.
Last but not least: TNT mines. All soldiers are allowed to carry them. The only trick here is that you have to get close to place it, and you must activate it with the soldier that placed it. Which, if you want to keep that soldier alive, you must back away from it a little bit.
I’m simply asking for a more balanced system when it comes to the cost of setting up and breaking down fortifications. As it takes premeditation to have an engineer to build them, it should take some premeditation to break them down.
This would be a significant if not a game breaking change. Defenders could block all access points with barbed wire and a hedgehog alone. The defenders already stand in a humongous advantage compared to the attackers. Making the contraptions only removable via tool-kit (which doesn’t make any sense btw [inb4 U n33d PliErS t0 CuT B4rb0 WirE du Uh lmao haven’t u warred ever?? My grandp4 fought in 1st 2nd and 3rd world war with plirs only and was mvp of war]) would simply just halt the attackers, not slow them down.
Apply 1 molotov, or 1 mortar, and keep shelling the hedgehog = all engies die, the pliers vaporize (as they should naturally, when engineer dies his tools and cannons and AA guns and all other things he carries with his pocket simply vaporizes), nothing can remove the obstacle, defenders lose.
Now - I’ve been seeing you pushing this shit for like 6 months for now and every time you’ve been told this same thing. What is your fetish with this?
Turning infantry into bob the builders just because you have hammer ? Yeah I dont think its that reasonable.
You kind of answered to yourself it costs time. Time while ur doing your bob the builder task your vulnerable to anything.
Regardless you could command your bots to do it, they still are vulnerable to everything while doing it.
Yeah that definitely sounds reasonable as only thing your engineer sacrifices is the second rifle. Which vast majority doesnt even use as for some reason 2 BA rifles uses same ammo so its entirely pointless to bring 2 BA rifles or SA.
And its quite irrelevant to compare 2 entirely different units. Engineers are “support” unit that is not a combat unit like smg squad etc.
They both have entirely different roles.
Infantry can and should be able to disassemble structures how ever they cannot build any structures like engineers can which is the trade off here.
With your logic, every assaulter should also have a tank because tankers can use SMG’s or plane as pilots can also have smg.
Doesnt exactly make sense.
Oh yeah, they just can build AT guns, AA guns, HMG, regular LMG but sure they lack the second rifle option I see that they are suffering.
Quite alot more firepower compared to regular smg soldiers.
Because you asked, I’ll give you my reasons. At least read them through before you judge me again.
I keep pushing it because its an entire chunk of the game that is underutilized. We keep having massive balancing issues when it comes to: grenades, flamethrowers, SMGs, tanks, planes, artillery, etc. The thing is that when you slow down and break all the issues down to a basic strategic level, a LOT of them come back to things that potentially could be fixed with the engineer and other underutilized parts of the game!
Grenades- There are several parts to this.
For starters, there isn’t really any kind of counter to these grenades other than not letting the thrower get in range in the first place. Wire out front as well as sandbags in windows work to counter this to some degree, but the fortifications are broken so easily through so many different methods, it doesn’t really hold up for very long at all.
Grenade pouches are arguably the most used backpack slot item, simply because other than ammo pouches for MG gunners, there really isn’t anything of equal value (strategically) available. If fortifications required toolkits to break down, then there would be something of equal strategic value, backpacks with extra toolkits and medkits. This would help to reduce grenade spam.
Flamethrowers
Flamethrowers are in a similar situation as grenade throwers. They are dangerous when they get close enough. Keeping them back at a distance is your best strategy. However, given how flimsy and easy to break down wire is, that is unlikely.
The next best way to deal with them is to limit where they can shoot. For the most part, they need to be able to fire at a cone directly where they can see. If the area is blocked off however with sandbags, it makes them far less lethal. Unfortunately, sandbags don’t last for very long as they are destroyed so easily, especially by flamethrowers that can one man army run up and break down the fortification at no cost. Why are they allowed to carry a rifle, a flamethrower, a grenade, a mine, a medkit, and still be able to counter fortifications all at the same time?
SMGs
The topic of this post is even asking why SMG squads are taken so frequently.
SMGs require less stamina when running, are extremely lethal at close range, can pack grenade or ammo pouches, and can only really be countered if you can hold them back at range or if you are using an OP flamethrower from the defensive side.
The only reason they ultimately as strong as they are is because there aren’t good options to keep them at bay, or to keep them out of areas through fortification. They can break things down by hand then pour bullets and grenades through with ease.
Tanks
Tanks for the most part are just sitting in the back of the map, not pushing forward because there is no need to. Fortifications get ripped down so easily that they have free range on their targets especially when on offense. If infantry couldn’t take down sandbags so easily, and sandbags could be double layered to resist tank fire, tanks would have a lot more reason to push forward.
In addition, tanks would have more reason to push forward to help clear wire fields and AP minefields. After all, once those defenses are gone, defenders are unlikely to be able to come back out and reset them up in the event they are destroyed.
Planes
I see tons of people complaining about planes pretty constantly. The thing is, AA is be capable of eliminating planes with ease, the only problem is that the only “safe” location which to put it down is generally in your teams greyzone. However, placing it here removes a team from the fight, leading to a lack of firepower to push or hold a line.
Now imagine if sandbags could be set up to better protect the AA if it were placed further forward, and say close to an MG nest. I know you are probably thinking “they can”, but how hard is that area (that took an engineer time to set up) to destroy? Bomb hits are one thing, but for an enemy infantry team to hit it, then continue to raze all the sandbags and everything without requiring any special tools or even explosives, is a whole different story.
Basically if engineers could build forward positions that could both deal with planes and give fire support, there would be far less issues.
Artillery
Artillery both for offense and defense is problematic, as it doesn’t cost anything other than requiring a radio operator and some time. The most you can hope to do to “counter” it is to hide in a building or run away. My question is that why are you not allowed to build some kind of structure that is resistant to it? I’m not saying “immune”. If the shell from artillery were to hit a sandbag wall, it should break it. However, currently I am seeing sandbag walls that are OUTSIDE of the red circle even being destroyed by fragmentation damage.
On defense, being able to better protect soldiers from artillery fire would allow for safer areas for troops to hold.
On offense, trenches combined with sandbags could actually provide safe locations to shelter from artillery, and possibly even attacks from the air, let alone bullets and ground fire.
My overall point being that a VERY large portion of the game isn’t even being utilized due to lack of strategic balance. There are tons of ways to deal with fortifications other than walking up and breaking them down, yet that is one of the most OP ways to deal with them given to infantry just to make the game “easier” for run-and-gun players. If it were removed and the other methods just required some for-thought, we would see a huge shift for the better in the game, across multiple other facets, including primarily those that I mentioned above.
I give you the credit of writing a huge chunk of text. Well done. If it had some sense it would’ve been better. There’s a fundamental flaw here: the things you listed counter each other sufficently enough.
In infantry PPsH counters everything, tanks are countered by eg. planes, mines, hedgehogs on chokes,
and nothing the attackers have counters hedgehogs.
Nothing.
Also tanks are mostly infantry support anyway, except in some countries still using T-55 because they thought otherwise. I don’t understand why there’s this glorified thought that tanks should drive through trenches and create breaches but I digress.
Attackers have nothing to counter fortified positions. Making fortifications ever stronger what they are now is just game breaking.
Also flamethrowers are countered by shooting them. Like, just use a PPsH. The TTK of the flame is to8 low to save you from being deleted by a BA or a SMG.
Oh, and people use SMGs because they have most ammo in a clip to clear bots with. /thread tbh.
You’re right, tanks do have counters. However, what they don’t have currently is a reason to push up.
Currently, hedgehogs can be destroyed through the use of aircraft bombs and TNT mines, as well as HE from a tank, though personally I believe that part should be taken out.
Engineers as many people have mentioned are usually in squads already, though limited. Engineers being capable of taking them down but regular infantry not being able to doesn’t seem like it would be an issue to me. Especially if they remove the ability to place them indoors.
Because that is what a lot of them were designed to do. A large point of an armored unit like that is to cross through territory otherwise deemed too hazardous for regular infantry to traverse, to remove (flatten or destroy) fortifications that would impede or be otherwise hazardous to infantry on foot.
I beg to differ. I have several times shown that there are in fact methods for infantry to deal with fortifications. The only thing is that they take some degree of preplanning to use. In addition, smoke is an option to blind the opponents and then flank around. The options ARE there.
In the current state of things, a flamethrower only needs to get in range of the building to begin pouring flame through any open crack, window, or door. Even being able to penetrate through walls in some buggy occasions. The only good way to counter them is to take them down at range. Which, in the current state without being able to impede them decently with fortifications, can be quite a challenge. Especially as almost every player has at least one squad of them on standby.
So lets fix issue with another issue and fix that issue with another issue ?
How about idk, limit the grenades in first place
Well you got all the time in world, wire grants more time if you still fail to do it well cant really blame the game.
idk, perhaps because the maps are small cqc oriented ?
You do know defenders can as well use smg ?
Except the defenders has exactly all the same tools as attacker has ? As well as they dont have tickets so they can push the attackers to edge of greyzone without 0 fear of losing tickets.
Not a single casual tanker would sacrifice himself for taking out sandbags or hedgehogs.
Im quite sure the tanks dont push nexto cap as we speak for that simple reason they die in 2 seconds.
And your suggestion wont change this simple fact.
Quite logical isnt it ?
The said engineer squad doesnt exactly have that much of firepower probably due to being support class ? Could it be that ? Idk
Yeah cant remember a single issue the AA did in past when you could use for “firesupport”
Probably because its casual game ? In current terms without a proper matchmake I can rather confidentally say 90% of players dont give a fk about teamplay rather do theyr “own thing”
And for that exact same reason im relatively sure no one would bring a single toolbox to game, they can just quit the games untill they get the defense and use what ever they want while theyr opponent is required to carry a toolbox with them.
They shouldn’t have, because pushing up is retarded. There’s absolutely no reason for the tanks to push up. That’s a map design “flaw”, and as the game-modes have nothing to do with actual war, the tanks main purpose is infantry support. eg. shelling from afar.
In WW1.
As in the nature if this games match-making system, there’s no pre-meditation capabilities for free-to-play-players anyway. Making obstacles practically undestructible against anything that breathes and guards it. Like I said, there’s 0 counters to mortaring and chain-molotoving the obstacles even now - not to mention if they are only removable by a special class (which is stupid anyway).
I can’t believe I have to say this but: when you see flame come, you click at the center of it, and then you press a key and magic! you swapped to another bot and the flamethrower is dead - assuming you can breathe and move your mouse at the same time. That’s it! Countered it! You can call up to me any time if you need advice on how to kill a flamethrower.
Fortifications are good as in they are now, and already decide games - considering that most of the players in this game are bots anyway.
