Trench suggestion

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

- Make trench built time a bit less for all factions, even with the buffs from doctrines.
- Trenches should be given more resistance to the regular artillery or rocket one, to avoid their quick destruction.
- Occupants should be given more resistance to the explosive damage from artillery.
- HE tank rounds should be a bit less effective, when encountering garrisoned trenches, either in dealing less damage or having less accuracy.
- If it's not going against the purpose or perspective of infantry squad in question, every basic infantry squad should be able to build a trench, in return, maybe much slower, than it could do the specialized squads.

This is my thoughts, after many matches playing against heavy artillery or rocket fests. RNG + Amount of explosions you can get, literaly annihilates your whole armies, making game boring and much harder to play, even if you have a counters.
It could be also an exchange of mobility for safety and given chances for regular infantry be at least a time obstacle, against rush tactics or elite infantry. Because in the current version, trenches are more like a death trap, than a safe position...
Last edited by F31.58 on 24 Feb 2021, 14:13, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Warhawks97 »

True. I often avoid using trenches. Also if hmg crews die inside you can't pick the hmg again.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 561
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by CGarr »

It'd be nice if we had the model for the circular fighting positions like in EaW mod as well, they're more compact so I feel like I use them a lot more.

Red
Posts: 16
Joined: 05 Oct 2020, 12:40

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Red »

I have split views on this.
On the one hand, I totally see the arguments made.
On the other hand, I think one also has to consider bunkers, which have a similar purpose, but cost levels and ressources to build. So bunkers should always be better then trenches in every dimension except for cost. Hence, buffing trenches would mean buffing bunkers, and I am not sure if such can be done in a way that would find a lot of agreement.

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

In other topic there was a suggestion to buff flame tanks, it would be a nice hard-counter to garrisoned trenches/buildings, but not everyone has it...
Main counter of course would be grenades or smoke+flamethrower combo, even HE tank, but with less effectiveness

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 561
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by CGarr »

Red wrote:
24 Feb 2021, 13:53
I have split views on this.
On the one hand, I totally see the arguments made.
On the other hand, I think one also has to consider bunkers, which have a similar purpose, but cost levels and ressources to build. So bunkers should always be better then trenches in every dimension except for cost. Hence, buffing trenches would mean buffing bunkers, and I am not sure if such can be done in a way that would find a lot of agreement.
I think making bunkers (Def doc and PE) reinforcement points by default rather than requiring upgrades would be enough to set them apart from trenches without making them OP.

Could also maybe let bunkers deploy weapons if that's possible. Like 100 muni and an LMG34 would spawn in front of the bunker (cost is higher than normal to offset the fact that any squad can pick it up). It'd be nice for Def doc, as you could throw those MG's on pios to make them more effective trench fodder without the work of messing with their stats. For PE, maybe have the bunkers deploy support weapons like unmanned mortars, MG's, and AT guns since they're already committing to a defensive playstyle by building a bunker anyways.

From an allied perspective, I don't see either implementation being an issue. If someone wants to dump all their muni into weapon upgrades, it's a lot easier to bleed them out with indirect fire because they wont have the muni to fire back. It also makes the bunker a big juicy target for indirect fire because there's going to be inf crowding around it to pick up weapons and reinforce. The change would also give bunkers additional purpose on top of the ones already seen in game, and their role would overlap less with trenches because they would serve as a support building rather than just cover.

MEFISTO
Posts: 196
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by MEFISTO »

I don’t really like any buff for trench, camping games are so bored, also with the ammunition upkeep it’s going to be painful to play vs groundhog payers, I think trench are good as they are now.

H.Drescher
Posts: 16
Joined: 03 May 2019, 12:26

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by H.Drescher »

CGarr wrote:
23 Feb 2021, 20:23
It'd be nice if we had the model for the circular fighting positions like in EaW mod as well, they're more compact so I feel like I use them a lot more.
We actually do have one. The American Observation post for Infantry doctrine is a circular fighting area. Anyone garisoned inside can fire from any direction. It's a very strong and effective, abliet niche. Obviously it can only be built on points. Very strong building overall.

I also don't think its worth buffing trenches. Units inside already get Rate of fire buffs and accuracy buffs if I can remember. This is rather good trade off when compared to bunkers. It can already be very annoying trying to dig out a unit without them. Trenches are also free too.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 561
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by CGarr »

H.Drescher wrote:
24 Feb 2021, 22:50
CGarr wrote:
23 Feb 2021, 20:23
It'd be nice if we had the model for the circular fighting positions like in EaW mod as well, they're more compact so I feel like I use them a lot more.
We actually do have one. The American Observation post for Infantry doctrine is a circular fighting area. Anyone garisoned inside can fire from any direction. It's a very strong and effective, abliet niche. Obviously it can only be built on points. Very strong building overall.

I also don't think its worth buffing trenches. Units inside already get Rate of fire buffs and accuracy buffs if I can remember. This is rather good trade off when compared to bunkers. It can already be very annoying trying to dig out a unit without them. Trenches are also free too.
Meant one that can be buildable anywhere, that one is kinda limited in terms of positioning and even if it wasn't limited to capture points, it's huge.

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

MEFISTO wrote:
24 Feb 2021, 19:47
I don’t really like any buff for trench, camping games are so bored, also with the ammunition upkeep it’s going to be painful to play vs groundhog payers, I think trench are good as they are now.
It's more not about camping, but a saving an army against campers with high amounts of artillery.
https://youtu.be/AiZOiGEjSpg - good example, it much much boring trying to avoid artillery damage, having useless units which die from it any way and just repeating the cycle until who will be tired first, enemy or you

MEFISTO
Posts: 196
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by MEFISTO »

F31.58 wrote:
25 Feb 2021, 07:10
MEFISTO wrote:
24 Feb 2021, 19:47
I don’t really like any buff for trench, camping games are so bored, also with the ammunition upkeep it’s going to be painful to play vs groundhog payers, I think trench are good as they are now.
It's more not about camping, but a saving an army against campers with high amounts of artillery.
https://youtu.be/AiZOiGEjSpg - good example, it much much boring trying to avoid artillery damage, having useless units which die from it any way and just repeating the cycle until who will be tired first, enemy or you
It was a 2 hours game, can you imagine the same game with more resistance trenches? Probably 3 hours or till some one just get bored and leave the game, also with ammunition upkeep I don’t think a player can handle more than 2 artillery pieces.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Warhawks97 »

I think Mefisto has a good point here that should be considered.

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

MEFISTO wrote:
25 Feb 2021, 15:57
F31.58 wrote:
25 Feb 2021, 07:10
MEFISTO wrote:
24 Feb 2021, 19:47
I don’t really like any buff for trench, camping games are so bored, also with the ammunition upkeep it’s going to be painful to play vs groundhog payers, I think trench are good as they are now.
It's more not about camping, but a saving an army against campers with high amounts of artillery.
https://youtu.be/AiZOiGEjSpg - good example, it much much boring trying to avoid artillery damage, having useless units which die from it any way and just repeating the cycle until who will be tired first, enemy or you
It was a 2 hours game, can you imagine the same game with more resistance trenches? Probably 3 hours or till some one just get bored and leave the game, also with ammunition upkeep I don’t think a player can handle more than 2 artillery pieces.
Might be, but it won't be the same stalemate at least, with less unit's total annihilation all players will have more troops to clash each other and game will be more alive. I'm not saying that trenches should be the panacea against artillery, but just giving more chances to survive from. Just by a tip, players will have a one more argument to not play as total arty support army for the rest team

Even without stat buffing trenches, I consider at least those suggestions:
- Make trench built time a bit less for all factions, even with the buffs from doctrines.
- If it's not going against the purpose or perspective of infantry squad in question, every basic infantry squad should be able to build a trench, in return, maybe much slower, than it could do the specialized squads.

Consti255
Posts: 47
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Consti255 »

+ for MEFISTO.


I dont like the idea of Buffing trenches. They are fine for me as they are.
Nerf Mencius

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

Consti255 wrote:
28 Feb 2021, 03:08
+ for MEFISTO.


I dont like the idea of Buffing trenches. They are fine for me as they are.
Underused? Fine

Consti255
Posts: 47
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Consti255 »

They are not. I had yesterday a game with Dicky and Kwok where an HMG squad just survived 4 barrages of a 81mm mortar.
I am really against a buff. The trench had only lost half its healthpool.
They are still a pain to deal with when a HMG + AT squad is inside and just boring in my opinion. Imagine buffing them and the games go even longer as they do now. Plus CW just spams them with RE (consider the PIAT Buff which might comeing and Captains and Leutnant just hiding and give auras while they are invincible to arty fire what you were asking for.

We can consider buffing them if we lower the slots from 7-6. Which isnt a case because 7men Units exist.
My opinion on the Trench buff request.
Nerf Mencius

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

Smoke was the best thing to counter emplacements and is it was in my mind, as pure counter now and in case trenches would be buffed.
Mortar barrages can't be compared to the long range rocket/artillery guns, which usually in case of rockets, one shell enough to wipe all occupants inside of it, even if will land near of it. And you will more often see rocket/arty spamming, than 2-4 units of mortar weapons (99% of time happening).
Nonetheless, I repeat quote of myself again:
I'm not saying that trenches should be the panacea against artillery, but just giving more chances to survive from. Just by a tip, players will have a one more argument to not play as total arty support army for the rest team

Consti255
Posts: 47
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Consti255 »

When trenches are getting buffed you surely wont see just one or two trenches which are in range for a smoke barrage.
All i see is Royal Sappers spam the shit out of them because they are free and you asked for faster building for some inteded units (which they are).
RE and DEF is hard enough to play against once they started groundhoging in certain points even with smoke. Giving them a trench which is even better and still free would just even more end in arty fests.
it is still a trench and not a bunker with a roof. So direct hits should hurt.
Thinking about faster trench is okay but even buffing them in terms of cover or hp is a big no no.

i also think about some docs which having trouble for getting in smokes. PE TS for example.
Nerf Mencius

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

That's the thing, even non-direct hit, can cause wipe (hi stuka).
Trenches themselfs are too fast dying to explosive, so it's like time wasted. But don't take it as ultimatum, even your own suggestion to get trenches out of underused zone would be nice, I don't like this current middle ground of nowhere

Consti255
Posts: 47
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Consti255 »

i dont know why you are all the time saying they are underused.
They are not..
Nerf Mencius

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

Consti255 wrote:
02 Mar 2021, 20:10
i dont know why you are all the time saying they are underused.
They are not..
In average it 0-2 trenches built in one game for both sides, that's why for me its underused

Consti255
Posts: 47
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Consti255 »

so mg emplacements are underused aswell ?
i normally see 0-1 .
Noone suggest a change or to buff them.
Not a valid argument for me.

i just want to stress out that trenches are for free.
Last edited by Consti255 on 04 Mar 2021, 11:51, edited 3 times in total.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Warhawks97 »

trenches are weird as i recently figured.

A stuka bomb does little to no damage to the guys inside. But a sniper takes out one dude with every shot.

HE shells frequently squad whiped the guys inside. But it seems that this is a matter of the angle from which the HE is fired into the trench as it seems.

Consti255
Posts: 47
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by Consti255 »

all i am seeing is CW hard camping with buffed piats + HMG in 10+ trenches shooting over obstacles.

Also as you were saying. They are in a current middle ground which should be the ideal case.
Nerf Mencius

F31.58
Posts: 79
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: Trench suggestion

Post by F31.58 »

Consti255 wrote:
04 Mar 2021, 11:44
so mg emplacements are underused aswell ?
i normally see 0-1 .
Noone suggest a change or to buff them.
Not a valid argument for me.

i just want to stress out that trenches are for free.
So just because no one said a word about MG emplacements - it becomes non-valid arguement or what?
Yes, they are free, does it changes a thing? If you say that enemy goes camping hard with the trenches, I can only blame you for this is happening, since match obviously not a sandbox with preparing time for the players. Also, I don't remember trenches can be having more than 7 men.
And I don't remember trenches being only useful except having MG inside - that's all. Because anything else, will fail against a simple grenade rush or artillery that just ignores a trench with it's AOE damage

Post Reply