agreed, seems the devs just wanted to make the engineer mainly, or, totally being arranged to other squads like at gunner nowadays. however, since they said they will strenthen the engineers in at and even could be sniper squad, the biggest clown is the original engineer squad. 4 engs isn’t that much better than 2 in fact.
Plus if you setup an anti-tank gun wrong it vibrates a lot
the easiest solution for that would be to allow engineers in engineer squads to use assaulter weapons too.
this way the squad becomes actually worth it compared to playing single engineers in other squads.
That’s rich coming from someone who’s been recently preaching against taking three+ assault squads and not trying other weapons. Also, what’s the point of assaulters, then?
1 Like
Yes Ladders please.
Refill Station for stuff like Artillery so it auto refill them without having you to do it constantly
Ability to call in Supply Truck or Infantry trucks to allow units to cross to safely would be amazing
1 Like
About that i suggest making the standard mgs building displaceable giving it more flexibility than HMGs
The engineering team still has its advantage.
And that’s because of giving orders.
The engineering team is able to build faster and more.
I would give the engineering team the opportunity to build 30 traps and 30 dams from sacks and Czech hedgehogs. And I would add the ability to issue trench digging orders.
Of course, it would be useful to construct structures that could only be built by engineers, such as Pillboxes.
1 Like
Here’s my take on it:
While SOMETIMES a coordinated team can get fortifications down and make a good defense, that is far from common. Unfortunately, the “established gameplay” pushes for more run-and-gun tactics, and puts defenses in a really awkward spot. There is not in-between time on objectives, and defenders are not told in advance where the objective is going to go. The only way to set up a really solid defense is to be on a map with a guaranteed location (such as Fortress on Tunisia).
Even then, the current fortifications get melted with such ease that it becomes extremely difficult to defend against certain kinds of attacks, such as flamethrowers, white phosphorus, GL, and artillery strikes. Not only do most explosives take out 90% of fortifications due to the lack of durability, but they can be taken down by hand, by any character type, without the use of special tools. Despite the fact that it requires an engineer, using a hammer, and resources of which he has a limited amount, to put it up.
In addition, tanks are usually where currently? Sitting in the back, because they can’t use vehicles to capture objectives, and they currently aren’t needed to push through fortifications. If the fortifications were significantly harder to destroy, they would have more reason to push forward and assist the ground troops.
You’re probably thinking at this point: “Then they would be too strong, I can’t get through them.” Surprise! You still can by using other engineers to break things down, TNT mines to clear fortifications, smoke to provide cover while you move around.
Mines currently are really only useful for defensive purposes, and are still quite limited. If they followed what I am suggesting, TNT mines would be more pertinent for attackers type squads, while the other mines are for defender type squads like the engineers. It could also pave the way for troops with Bangalore Torpedos, that can be used to clear fortifications.
This is especially necessary with the introduction of Paratroopers, as defenders now have to worry about attacks from all sides, not just one or two. Being able to actually hold back enemies is extremely necessary.
Overall, my point is that the “established gameplay” needs to be upset a bit.
1 Like
You know as well as I do that people who spend 40+ minutes grayzone camping or spamming “Need coordinates” while using even a fighter as a dedicated bomber regardless of the combat conditions won’t change their playstyle one bit.
Imagine every cap circle being covered in two layers of indestructible barbed wire. Imagine your regular spawn being the same, especially after it moves to a new zone. Imagine one of those bunkers in Norm having more wire than concrete inside. Well, the last bit you don’t even have to imagine. 
I get what you’re saying but they made a good compromise to avoid abuse.
In all fairness I already do that. Engineers with quick build remove barbwire and hedgehogs much more faster, and detonable TNT packs are just about my go-to solution for most problems. Attack or defense.
There’s a difference, though, in being able to clear fortification in 40-50 seconds (and that’s not something you can afford while the enemy is present in most cases) and not being able to clear them without extremely limited TNT packs or admittedly less limited explosive charges while the enemy can replace them in potentially seconds.
I think that’s the point people are missing when they’re saying this isn’t worth it. The engie squad, II+ especially, is just so versatile. The jack of all trades type squad.
The HMG is a beast, but your emplaced LMG can still do some serious damage and lock down an approach just as well if you pick a nice position.
AT cannon? It’s not a tiger or IS-2 but it’s rather nice direct fire support with the HE shells, and can catch most tanks by surprise. Provided you’re not building it in the open, or trying to kill a jumbo thru the UFP.
Or that it doesn’t bug out. 
AA guns? Yeah, a fighter is better, especially after recent changes. But it still gets the job done. The soviet one especially is a bastard when used to block off access to buildings and alleys.
So, I propose the engies ARE worth it precisely because of the currently established gameplay. They’re perhaps not as effective at sprinting and flaming everything in CQC, and they’re not as effective against any particular type of situation but they’re equally effective against potentially any threat on attack or defense. The ability to suppress infantry charge one moment, counter snipe entrenched enemies with HE shells or catch a bomber by surprise instead of leaving it to farm up kills is in my opinion quite valuable. Being able to create sandbags on the fly with most of your squad to support approaches or at least provide a stable firing position is also invaluable.
And it’s not like they lack firepower in the current state of the game. Pre-warK98s or manlichers, No4s and winchesters early to mid game; AVTs, FGs and M2s lategame, are all excellent weapons.
My point was for tanks. If more solid fortifications could withstand tank hits (shells) but not withstand being bulldozed by the tank, it would likely encourage tank players to move up rather than spam shells from the greyzone.
- Barbwire is a double-edged sword. It can slow and hurt their team as well, so its not as likely as one would think that it gets completely spammed with wire.
- Its still not as “indestructable” as you may be thinking. Engineers can still clear it, TNT can still clear it. If its outside, vehicles can still clear it.
- I can tell you first hand that it doesn’t take that long to clear any Defensive fortification.
- If it required an engineer to put it up, why does it not require any special tools to take it down.
The whole point is that the TNT packs are limited, because the defensive counterpart (AP and AT mines) is just as limited.
- I’ve pushed numerous times for a backpack that allows you to carry multiple mines on a character, since there is a version like that for grenades. If it were implemented, and TNT were used to clear fortifications, it would also help reduce grenade spam as less characters would be carrying grenade pouches.
The field gun occasionally has its uses, but usually the maps are too small to actually utilize it effectively. Tunisia is one of my favorite campaigns actually because there often IS room to utilize it. However, it cannot angle lower than 0 degrees, so trying to use it from a rooftop is near impossible except at long range, and even from hills it needs to usually be pushed to where it’s on a downward slope.
It can be useful to a certain degree, however its extremely difficult to protect, and a single bullet will break it, despite the fact you are using it to hold off a large number of enemy forces. If you could snap a sandbag on top of it that changes to a widowed sandbag, that would be different.
[u]1. The fact that people are using these types of structures as defensive blockers rather than the actual structures that are MEANT TO DEFEND, proves my point about just how bad the current defensive structures are.[/u]
2. They are far less capable than they were previously, and I honestly think that letting them angle down to be used against ground units shouldn’t be out of the question either. Since the HMG is simply better at defending for shorter range, they could be used for long range support. (If this was done, I would suggest the limit be 1 rather than 2.
I’m not talking about their “lack of firepower”, I’m talking about their lack of “defensive capability”. Since the introduction of paratroopers, I’ve seen the win-rate as defense plummet to MAYBE 10% in the campaigns that have them. Simply because the defense cannot hold against a full frontal assault due to lack of defenses, while being attacked from the sides, rear, and top by paratroopers at the same time.
1 Like
Agreed. Maybe also give engineer squad a option to build more defense more quickly. Example : instead of building 1 single sandbag / barbwire / tank trap / etc. at the time, add a option to build 3 at the same time for the time / resource of building 2. Add building option too like bunker, dig trench / foxhole, sniper tower, mortal pit, repair / replenish station for tank, etc
Anything short of reduced rewards or imposed penalties will fail to discourage greyzone camping. There’s no argument there.
Most people don’t give a second thought about chucking a WP or flaming allies. Even with no enemies present. Indestructible barbwire is griefing asking to happen. Sandbags are already near immune to small arms fire and that’s perfectly reasonable.
3-4 hedges covered in barbwire? 40-50 seconds is not unreasonable but optimistic. And that’s if it’s not mined, on fire, on phosphorus, contested by enemies or all of the above at once.
I would quite literally uninstall the game the very second that’s a thing. 9x AP mines is cancer already, now imagine 3x9 AP mines scattered in god-mode barb wire. For fucks sake man, I get what you’re saying but imagine even one player doing that. All game long. Now imagine a premade of four people doing that all game long.
That’s a paratrooper problem not an engie one. On one hand the Norm joker squad is straight up OP and no one can convince me otherwise, on the other people need to adjust their existing strategies and that’s actually a good thing. Upsetting the established gameplay as you said.
If anything paratroopers as a concept are a great idea as they add something unique to the game. They just need some work to polish out the rough edges.
Perhaps you’re not, and I applaud you for it. But look around and see people asking for field howitzers, flamers and assault rifles. What’s the point of different squads and specialized soldier classes if everyone is running around with the same faction AR in one slot and a flamer in the other?
If anything - the number of automatics should be reduced in the game.
The guy that proposed quick orders for ai engie squadmates to place structures is brilliant and should’ve been in the game from day one. Undestroyable concrete bunkers and immortal structures are too much and completely unreasonable, and wouldn’t help against flanking, flamethrower spam or paratroopers for example in the slightest. It would rather encourage it since you can’t clear them with conventional means designed to clear them anymore, such as artillery, planes or HE shells.
Repair / replenish stations for tanks would only encourage more camping.
Mortar pits are redundant with actual mortar squads. Besides, do you want a return to the unlimited ammo mortar spam?
1 Like
Yeah, I agree. Another thing I don’t think people are considering when I suggest stronger fortifications is the amount of time and resources it will cost to put them up. Its not like you will be able to put them everywhere in seconds. It would likely need multiple engineers (which can only really be obtained by the engineer squad in the first place) to put them up in a timely fashion.
i think there is still high value on eng squads.
probably still the best squads ingame.
but for a long. long time , they superior to other squad types tho…
but, i agree with OP , different Stuff could be introduced to them. different sandbags come to my mind
as suggested by other users in the past on forum
2 Likes
A foxhole would be quite reasonable. Now, if only we could make the AI use them.
i , and some others did suggest in the past like engineer pre-build templates for foxholes for the shovels.
as for eng, like sandbags avaiable on multiple berlin points , with litle windows , diferent barbewire… stuff like that would be dope.
2 Likes
That’s essentially what I’m pointing towards. If the fortifications can help protect against the long range shelling, they lose out on a lot of their points, no longer making it worth doing that.
I didn’t say take away the ability to remove it FROM TEAMMATES.
2 parts to this:
-
If its indoors, consider asking yourself “why”. Perhaps because the other structures that can be built for that purpose are simply too flimsy to do that job.
-
If its outdoors, there is a lot more than you think that can destroy that. Aircraft bombs for instance will immediately wipe out Czech Hedgehogs. If they are on soil rather than pavement, an HE shell from a tank will take them out currently (Though personally I think this needs to be fixed). Also, if its in the open, that is where smoke comes in.
Again, this is where I bring up tanks. Tanks would be able to drive over barbwire to destroy it no problem, and I would suggest making tanks trip AP mines. This way you can actually use them to clear a path for infantry. Especially with how many are now equipped with smoke grenades or shells.
In addition, remember that artillery fire can trip mines. On top of that, if they are placed too closely, they will chain reaction taking out multiple at once.
That is still an engineer problem though, because now as an engineer, or even just someone setting mines, you need to account for paratroopers.
PLEASE NOTE: I am not opposed to the idea of the paratroopers, but without some kind of provision being made that makes it actually possible to set up defenses to protect the front enough that you can deal with both frontal assault AND paratroopers, Defense will have absolutely no chance.
Again I must point out: the number of automatics is only an issue if there is no defense against them.
When you are trying to fight an automatic with a bolt action for example, in a head to head fight with no cover or hazards= the automatic will win nearly every time.
However, if you do add in cover and hazards, such as with an engineer, that fight becomes a LOT more balanced out.
In the case of flamethrowers, we all know how extremely powerful they are. Now think about how much easier they would be to contend with if you could slow their approach and pick them off. Instead of ARs and gas grenades, they would need to carry Bolt-actions or Carbines for long range encounters, and smoke grenades to be able to move forward.
I disagree.
- First off, nobody said they would be invincible. TNT charges, tanks rolling over them, Aircraft bombs direct hitting, engineers breaking them down can still destroy them.
- Secondly, they would definitely help against flanking, flamethrowers, etc. Less ways in makes those attackers far more susceptible to counter tactics, while also keeping defenders safer.
- Third, it can help against paratroopers by helping to stem the tide from the front, giving you a little more time to deal with paratroopers.
- Fourth, its not just defense this could potentially help, but offense as well.
I actually agree with you on that.
Mortar pits I think would actually be useful. I’ve made that suggestion in the past. The idea is not so much about “unlimited ammo”, as you refill the ammo like you would for the AT field gun, or the AA.
It’s more about being able to utilize both mortars in a squad at the same time.
Concrete bunker won’t be invincible but tough with destructible part (can be repair / maintain with resource points). Ok maybe not repair station i take it back, but the ability for engineer to repair / replenish tank ammo (not 100% of course) at the cost of resource points like any building. And mortar pit is a good idea, a conceal hole with camouflage and a refill of, for example, 1 shell every 30 sec. Also mortar pit would have a limit of 2 or 3 at same time like tank / plane
1 Like
Hahaha i can see we both agree a lot today…#fuckadam…
I like repairing tanks, any of my toons can repair a tank even 