Just a friendly reminder that CoD takes skill to master, and in Enlisted there’s nothing to master really.
This doesn’t make any sense. Players would be utterly confused that why they can’t put two sets of barbed wire parallel to each other. I know why, you know why, but anyone else with a shred of imagination wouldn’t - and the common player this game suffering the lack of - wouldn’t be able to wrap his head around this.
It makes sense why would you want to nerf the wires so you couldn’t place them so, but it doesn’t make sense in any other realistic instance.
“It’s in the barbed wire building codex, can’t do it sir, we can put ye barbed wire miles on like this, but not two parellel to each other, no sir, it’s a violation of the regulation sir, nuh-uh, I ain’t gonna do that”
Building elements in this game are fine as they are now. They are underutilizied now because bots don’t build.
Making it so that some elements would be only “DECONSTRUCTABLE” (imagine not being able to shove sandbags aside without having an ENGINEER training to do so, or having a various set of pliers and tongs with out which magically vanish after shoving some sandbags aside) would make fortification building into a carneval mass of exploitation.
I know I would exploit the living hell out of it before the devs got back to their senses, like IEG. HMG, FLAK20 penetration, Rifle-Grenade-Squad-Madness.
Hold on for now: you ain’t using engineers to build - like i don’t know - MG’s, PAK-cannons, FLAK’s and radio beacons and ammo boxes? Engineer is already an essential, vital unit for any squad composition.
I dont exactly consider building another sandbag to replace destoyed one as difficult task either but here we are
Yeah, no.
How exactly they are restricted ? Okay I grant that they can carry only 1 main weapon but otherthan that they can have everything else as every other class.
So they swap option for second rifle to having AT gun, AA gun, MG, Ammo box and ofc the fortifications.
I can totally see how they are restricted & suffering.
In a head to head fight, engineer vs. assaulter, who is going to win?
Given that the assaulter’s perks are generally geared towards making them a more efficient fighter, in comparison to the engineer’s which at least half of the perks are usually more geared around positioning (jump height, climb speed, etc) or around building (building speed, added resources).
Off perks alone, the assaulter is far more likely to win.
In terms of primary weaponry, the assaulter’s weapons are generally superior to the Engineer’s. Currently, the ONLY advantage that an engineer might have is if they take a semi or bolty rifle for range, assuming they have the opportunity to pick off the enemy at range. This can however be easily remedied by the assaulter as they are capable of picking up a second weapon to fill the need for range, whereas the engineers can only hold 1 primary at a time.
So again, assaulter’s win again.
Assuming the engineer gets time to set up fortifications, even a MG nest, they might have an advantage… until they get flanked. All but one or two maps have the options of complete flanks. Meaning that while engineers momentarily have the advantage IF THEY PLAY STRATEGICALLY, and have time to set up, they can still be out maneuvered by assaulters.
So again, assaulters come out on top.
You asked how they are outmatched. Here you go.
The ONLY advantage they have, which SHOULD be strong enough to counter the advantages of the others, is currently too easily defeated. Hence the reason for the post.
The main selling point of the game is “SQUAD” system, which the braindead AI doesn’t help at all, would be good that all the squad can help you building stuff like any milsim games as long as you use an engineer to set a blue print, or maybe make a shovel a requirement to do such task
Both of which are quite easily defeated with smoke or moving along areas with cover.
At decent range, the MG is unlikely to really do much. The Field gun on the other hand… maybe we can finally add an advantage to the board for engineers!
Considering that either recoil reduction or reload speed is something that BOTH were likely to have equipped, I didn’t see the need to mention it.
However, there are a fair number engineer players that give up that ability for melee speed, in order to dig trenches faster and provide better support as engineers.
I already covered the MG and AT field guns. I’m really not sure why you decided to add AAs, as if you remember they cannot angle down. So unless the assaulter is balancing on the wing of a plane, I’m not really sure how that applies to this conversation.
However, since you felt the need to bring it up, I would like to note that there are a few responses from people on other forum posts regarding the AAs that have said the SMGs they are firing often seem to be doing more to aircraft than the AA guns currently, so that’s something to consider.
You can’t actively flank with the MG or AT guns like you can an SMG. Might I remind you that it still takes time to set them up, whereas the assaulter doesn’t need to worry about that for his firepower.
In a head to head fight, they are at the disadvantage. If they get a long enough time to actually set up, they have a slightly better chance. However that still requires time that engineers usually don’t have, and even less effect when the structures they do put up get destroyed by every little piece of fragmentation flying across the field.
if its that simple theres your solution for fighting assaulters, just use smokes.
Yeah engineers suffer
If you prefer to spend your time with spade, then go for it.
Cant have both, just like assaulter cant.
Yeah idk, completely forgot that other classes can also build AA guns out of thing air.
Quite sure assaulters cant build any weaponry against planes, which engineer can.
But yeah, ik engineer suffer
Yeah, bug.
But if you want to stick to that we may as well mention the fact that AA indeed was capable to angle down in past and got nerfed for engineer being OP.
Sure you can, disassemble and build again.
AT gun has wheels on it, if you feel unsecure with your rifle skills while flanking.
No and assaulter cant build AT guns either so not sure what your exact point here is ?
Just an observation - wire in WW1 was destroyed by fragments and blast both- but HE rounds tended to penetrate too far before exploring, while timed shrapnel was very hard to set accurately to damage the wire.
Which is why the “instantaneous fuze” worked - any shell fitted with it would explode at the right time!
Also the 2" “Plum pudding” spigot mortar worked well but only at short range - low velocity and spherical warhead meant it didn’t penetrate he ground before exploding.
As for what OP posted, I like a lot what was written.
I dont think barbed wire needs to be changed in regards to its placement and function, just needs to be slightly more durable.
Sandbags are decently durable, but they could improve against certain types of explosions.
Id rather fix the pathing instead of removing hedgehods from inside buildings tbh.
I do like the idea of removing the ability of non-engineers being able to deconstruct items unless equipped with a toolkit, gives more purpose to the item aside from tankers.
The primary reason that I added that is that people tend to just pile wire into doorways, which in some regards can be overpowered. My hope with changing it in this way would be to change how players go about setting up defenses. It would promote using killzones and chokepoints rather than just spamming wire in an entryway and blocking the interior for their team as well.
If sandbags were more durable, able to be stacked, and couldn’t be deconstructed without engineers/toolkits, it would remove the need for Czech hedgehogs indoors, as sandbags would then do the same job, more effectively, at the same cost.
It would however free up a bit more space for defenders to work indoors, rather than having to work around hedgehogs.
I think that bot squads should be equipped with some toolkits, so that they are able to clear obstructions from doorways. This would also help to fix pathfinding issues.
Agree to make fortifications more resistant, all the restrictions you mentioned why? What is it with Enlisted members always wanting to restrict things instead of finding a creative solution. “Can’t place barbed wire parallel to each other”. What? That’s the only way that they can effectively fulfill their role, there is a reason why gigantic barbed wire nets were built during WWI, imagine if someone said “nuh-uh you can only place them next to each other, not parallel”. Completely ridiculous. Same with not being able to build czech hedgehogs indoors, just why?
Needing a tool kit to deconstruct fortifications? I can see why, but that that wouldbe just annoying as hell.
What the hell are you even talking about? In a 1v1 fight it’s not about the classes it’s about who has faster reflexes and better aim lol.
About the perk points, I give every soldier vitality and recoil reduction, so no you’re not at a disadvantage when fighting against an assaulter.
About the weapons, if you are good you can wipe an entire squad with a bolt action, so yeah you shouldn’t struggle when equipped with a semi-auto.
No idea what the whole MG, AT talk was about, you place MG nests to cover paths they have to cross to get to the point and AT guns to kill tanks 10 seconds after they left their spawn. In a 1v1 fight you use your gun but okay.
If you are talking about which class is better, engineers every day of the week. Assaulters can’t build rally points, fortifications, AT and AA guns and MG nests. I play as axis and the FG 42 II is all you need and better than SMGs cause it does more damage at mid and long range, at short range you just swap to auto. You don’t even need to worry about running out of ammo.
and? its not like you lose games cause someone placed a hedgehog in a doorway, if it annoys you that much just remove it. The last time I saw a hedgehog in a doorway was months ago, I just sat behind the door, destroyed it, enjoyed 6 free points and moved on.
This is due to the prevalence of players spamming barbwire in door ways. It hurts BOTH teams when players do this.
There are SEVERAL game exploits that come about from placing Czech Hedgehogs indoors. Meanwhile, they are basically NEVER used for their intended role.
Its really not as bad as you would think. We’ve tested it in custom games (only deconstructing with engineers and otherwise using TNT and other methods. It actually made the game CONSIDERABLY more fun for both the Attackers and Defenders.
It incentivizes players to break away from the meta of grenade and ammo pouches as well. Helping to reduce grenade spam a considerable amount, and even increasing the frequency at which SMOKE grenades are taken. (This is because fornications become much more viable, players are more likely to try to flank them or push past by blinding with smoke.)
banning certain ways and places for fortifications just leaves new players confused. They have to figure out by themselves why placing barbed wire on the point hinders them more when playing the defending side then it harms the attackers. I used to place barbed wire on objectives when I first started playing the game and quickly realised that it never really helped in defending the point and that its just a waste of time that can be used more efficiently by pushing the attackers as close to the grey zone as possible and draining their tickets. When I see someone on my team placing barbed wire on the point I remove it and explain why it doesn’t belong there and if they want to place it to place it close to the grey zone.
I give every soldier a large grenade pouch with one explosive pack and two smokes, great to cover open ground. Does it really change the game that much if you would need tools to desrtoy fortifications? I play with 2 engineer squads anyway, so I don’t really care and even if you play with only 1 or none you have an engineer in every squad so if you need to destroy something you just use him. I don’t really see how that would make a difference.
