Just an expansion on the 800 previous threads to let engineers upgrade structures.
A simple way to implement this could just be to make the upgraded structures inherent to Engineer II.
This could come in 2 forms: a direct change in what’s being build, like an M1919 MG nest at engineer 1 being replaced by an M2 at engineer II
It could also come in the form of being able to build more, such as 2 rally points per squad instead of 1. Though with rallies you would need a way to designate which gets destroyed first.
Some examples:
Extra sets of barbed wire
A row of dragon teeth to replace hedgehogs
Tank-compatible ammo crate
Reinforced sandbags that are harder to destroy and slower to tear down
Guns are pretty simple, just a better AT or AA gun at the higher tier, or another ampumolet
I like the idea that eng II should have upgraded or simply different constructs.
Say a long range artilary piece, a heavy mortar, a re-enforced bunker, tank ammo box… So many cool possibilities
How about structures that require more than one specialist? Say, an engineer to build, a sniper to give coordinates and a radio man to call the shot…
I think Engineer II squads should encourage logical and historical progression.
Let’s take Moscow Axis for example.
Engineer Is should be able to build (once upgraded):
PaK 36 (37 mm) AT gun;
Single barrel 20 mm AA gun;
Machinegun nest with a WW1-era machinegun, or an interwar one (MG 34, like we have now).
Engineer 2 squads should:
Be able to build the same constructs as Engineer 1s when not upgraded (maybe, even let the players choose which ones should be available to build pre-battle, reasons could be - it is cheaper and easier to construct older weapon emplacements), but, with upgrades:
PaK 38 (50 mm) AT gun, the one we have now;
Quad 20 mm AA gun, like we have now, OR single barrel 37 mm AA gun;
Machinegun nest with Mid-war machinegun (such as MG 42).
To further encourage progression towards Engineer 2s, they could have more building points, such as 25, instead of 20.
Of course, newer weapons should also be more time consuming, and costly to build:
Let’s say it costs 6 points to build any of the Engineer 1 construct;
but it costs 8 or more points for engineer 2 type construct.
As for those simple constructions - I think variable sharpness, length, thickness, height of sandbags and barbed wire should be the right step forward - letting the players plan and choose more elaborate ways to build them.
Similar with shovel-equipped troops - it should also allow players to issue commands and plan out what shape (depth, sharpness, height) of trench they want, and get A.I. squadmates to dig that out.
The thing is, historical progression is not always the same as logical game progression.
That’s for 2 reasons: cost and application.
Progress irl sometimes means making something that’s cheaper but less effective. So sometimes in game you get older equipment that comes later in the tree, like with Kar 98Ks getting worse as they get newer.
Application is more like those 37mm flak guns: IRL higher caliber flak was better, but in game fire density is better.
True.
That can indeed (and probably will) be the case for Berlin and other late-war campaigns.
I also prefer to give player an option to choose between quantity and quality approach.
You want me to share ideas about Normandy and other campaigns? I was mostly focusing on Moscow (and, this is part of the reason why I prefer going early-war (or even ahistorical) campaigns).
I do quite agree with what you said. I’ve always thought something similar, as to other soldier types being needed to create certain types of structures. A machinegunner being necessary to build an MG nest, or a mortarman to make a mortar pit. Unfortunately, they’ve gone so far down the route they have already, I don’t see this happening.
That said, I also think you have a point by saying there needs to be more artillery or heavy mortar type of options. I say this because I honestly think that the current system of how the radioman works is extremely OP. Having squads that can fight (usually snipe) at the same time, gets EXTREMELY spammed. Adding in buildable artillery and nerfing back the radiomen would be a great way to help balancing. It also gives more targets for aircraft to actually be effective against. However, more into that would likely warrant its own thread.
