One of the main complains we get constantly in the forum is about tanks camping far away from the battlefield, to great effect. So far away that infantry have a very hard time dealing with it.
Usually using a plane or another tank is way to deal with them but specifically when someone has a low tier tank, it might not be enough to kill the other tank, or the slot might be occupied by someone with no interest to help his team by dealing with said tank.
So what I propose to help lay this debate to rest is to add 2 global slots for engineers in non engineer squads to build AT guns that only have AP ammo. As they usually are strong enough to deal with camping enemy tanks and aren’t as powerful against infantry.
Also engineers in engineering squads should keep their separate slots for AT guns with both AP and HE shells, that way we don’t affect the engineer squads utility.
They made the grey zone camping problem infinitely worse when they greatly reduced duration you could enter it. It used to be a fun challenge to delete a camping tank with an infantry squad-- now its impossible.
Yeah that was a bad dev move. I deployed a respawn against a grey zone on one of the Berlin maps, and whilst my Eng was building stuff, the AI decided to run half my squad all over the adjacent ruins which happened to be under the enemy’s greyzone control. By the time I finished building, my poor sods ran so far into the grey zone that by the time I was able swap to them as the active player to run them back, the timer had expired and they started dropping like flies. Worse yet, the other part of the squad now took the lead off the active player and ran into the grey zone too… I had the squad under a close formation order to try and prevent them from wandering off, but there is still a reasonable range of dispersion which they can adopt.
Needless to say I got away with only the engineer who was building the spawn and luckily got stuck on a random rubble pile.
I agree with you, before that change I used to say that gray zone camping could be dealt with easily.
But I also propose this to add a tactical element to the engineers, that would close the range gap in between handheld AT weapons and AT grenades, which usually remains unfilled because it is impractical to always have an AT squad present, but it is practically to have an engineer in between your squads
That’s the whole point of having to think about the squad you bring in, knowing that a single squad can’t perform all the desired functions.
That was the dev concept for the game, but they’ve broken their own design by allowing any infantry to carry detpacks and oversaturating the roles with access to SMG and other fully automatic weapon options, thereby making much of this decision making redundant.
Net effect is a much poorer game experience and an unrealistically sped up arcade run and gun experience.
You will just get a griefer with a Flamethrower/Molotov’s on the spawn points. Putting the grey zone timers back would be better but too many people complained and cried when they camped at the back of the map deep in the grey spamming HE shell after HE shell, whoring points were getting killed by suicide runs of infantry and it wasn’t fair for them
Its a fair point, although maybe an alternate implementation of a “grey zone” could address that.
Some of the options to consider might be:
no building of anything in grey zones.
timer allows for normal movement and then the player is marked in red for everyone to see, and given the lethality of the bots for anything in LOS these days, they would make short work of those folks.
You think removing det pack will let people coming out of gray zone? One of the major reason people camping at back is because the field of view of tank is very limited. So people camp at back to get better view of the battlefield so they can farm more kills.
If I have a tank I try to stay as far away as I can from enemy infantry because it’s ridiculously easy for them to kill tanks in this game, As it was posted for above if you want to encourage tanks to be closer to the front, remove those silly TNT bundles and as noted again above force players to actually use the anti-tank equipment that the game provides
Because what you have is one very bad gameplay element forcing another it’s cause-and-effect.
Another problem of course is that it’s really really really too easy for aeroplanes to kill tanks with bombs.
Most of the time tanks are being killed by aeroplanes or they’re being killed by infantry with TNT bundles it’s not too often the tanks actually wind up killing one another, at least if they’re the kind of player that wants to take his tank into the heart of the action and their life expectancy is simply in minutes.
The guy with the tank that hangs back and tries to survive and get kills is actually doing his team a favour largely because most players have hugely negative kill death ratio so it’s the guy in the back that’s making up for that that’s Killing the enemy, both players are necessary for the game to work
Where the tanks can draw LOS from in order to apply fire is a separate issue. There are some ridiculous elevations on many maps that contribute to this.
If they significantly flattened out the maps, provided sufficient undulations for soldiers to crouch or crawl through, then you’d have a harder time of bringing fire to bare, particularly through the relatively plentiful obscuration by way of wrecks, random bits of farming equipment, etc… The object boxes for these are quite substantial and block much of the explosive effects and MG fire.
If the detpacks had to be placed on tanks rather than thrown a them, you have a marginally better level of defence from the bots if nothing else, as you have to approach the tank attach the explosive and then detonate it. This gives the tanks and any infantry in range a chance to defend.
That along with the LOS limitations I mentioned above would go a long way to move tanks out of grey zones and allow them to maneouvre on the battle space more aggresively. It would increase the amount of tank on tank combat and you would see commensurate rise in the use of AT guns and AT mines.
All beneficial outcomes as far as the game is concerned, would you not agree?
For me personally one of the biggest detractors from most of the campaigns apart from Tunisia is the fact that they are so cluttered that it’s ridiculous, I avoid playing almost all of the chapters apart from Tunisia because the maps are too small and there’s too much junk on them, only the daily challenges get me to play Normandy or Moscow, And on those I’ll try and fly if I can
Not just about camping at elevated places. Irl tankers don’t go so near because their view is very limited. So why should player go near in this game when having similar view with real tank? With the zoom of the gun and many tank lacking cupola view, it is ineffective to fight close in this game.
Bad idea, who wants a completely flat map?
How many wrecks will it takes without cluttering the battlefield?
I think you are reading too much into this, I am not advocating to bring the tank into a “knife fight”.
Sitting back at a suitable range is sensible, but equally I would like to see a higher degree of vehicle maneouvre than is currenly possible given the claustrophobic maps.
The other aspect of flattening out the maps gives vehicles a degree of protection via maneouvre, which is currently artificially constrained and perhaps is shaping the percepions around the effectiveness of certain weapons like detpacks.
I don’t think you understood my last point about obscuration, but its a combination of volume, ie number or objects/wrecks etc, which will grow as tanks gets destroyed, and the implementation of the terrain itself - ie how the object is implemented into the map, and how it constrains either LOS or the ability of the round to interact with it.
Fundamentally, both of these are contributors to sitting back and trying to find areas of elevation to apply fire for its own sake - ie harvesting kills, rather than being able to meaningfully contribute to the broader “mission” embodied in the map and its objectives.
Yes, engineers should have more building option when out of original squad.
Alternatively to at gun, there could be one at weapon available per ammo box.
Just right clit the ammo box and choose the faction related at infantry weapon.
I guess it would depend on the evolution of the Engineering concept as the game matures.
As it stands having an engineer in every section is very fake, they’re needed to build spawns and ammo, but those two functions are irrationally tied into that role, as they are neither historical, nor role associated with engineers.
Given that the game has not defined an actual hierarchy - ie Squad leader or 2IC etc, there is a cognitive dissonance between what each role should or shouldn’t do, which leaves ppl grasping at straws within the current construct.
Since Enlisted is in beta, it would be equally useful to try to shape the devs to create more historically authentic constructs and design the roles to fulfill those functions in game which much more realistically reflect the roles they would have performed.
the smartest thing i have seen
if you were to take away the “grey zone” for tanks they would be less then %75 effective as they are now, tanks are long range mobile artillery support for infantry, and before any one says “BuT yOu NeEd InFaNtRy SuPpOrT” then you should have no problem sitting around a tank that has to sit more then 100 meters away from targets to engage them, waiting for some people that MAY or MAY NOT be rushing the tank?
tanks during ww2 would operate in platoons of4 upwards so they would all be coving each other from different angles
Yeah that’s definitely part of the problem as far as these games go is that often people say that infantry will simply protect them but that’s never really the case it just doesn’t work out that way, largely because the guys playing infantry have their own concern and it’s not the player that is sitting in the giant metal bulletproof box.
One of the reasons tanks, and really anybody that’s using a weapon at some distance, it could be an AA gun or even an MG 34 mounted in a good location can get a lot of kills is because the AI is really stupid and does not use cover, but like I said above most players have a negative kill death ratio because of the way they choose to play, they’re doing the Instant gratification thing and running into the point where the action is and getting involved in some CQB Goodness, this of course is messy and with your AI troops being stupid you are gonna lose a lot of them, I killed like 10 of them yesterday with a sword inside of a room in just a few seconds.
I will be honest I do play thanks as often as I can, but my main focus is playing the daily challenge and that means that I mostly play infantry, when I do play thanks it’s pretty rare that I wind up being the number one player simply from being in a tank, i’m not gonna lie it has happened before but only a few times, and I’ve only been the number one player flying in planes a few times, i’m sure there is probably players that can make it work for them every time but I would be surprised to find if that was normal, i’ve also killed over 10 tanks in a match just flying around in an SBD, it’s not like they’re not easy to kill at the moment.