COH: Europe In Ruins

Putting this out there to the general community.

Its a long standing complaint that wehrmacht has no mobile or flexible way to move around an ability to destroy engines, button or stun vehicles and tanks.

What if pioneers could deploy buy 2 mines instead of 1? Would this help even it out somewhat.

Do you feel its fair that wehr needs a doctrine ability to do what Brits and Americans do for free?

Post your thoughts.

2 mines for 2 pop Wehrmacht
2 mines for 3 pop US

Reason why

1 Mine 2 pop

Let say Pios got 3 mines for 50 munitions, and engineers got 4 mines for 45.

Lets say mine squads could no longer carry demos or flamethrowers or goliaths.

What then?

Mine spam FTW

I get this "omg minespam" comment from quite a few reactions.. but minesweepers are dirt cheap in pop and cost now.. imo they should be a much more valued part of the game.. real armies sure as hell didnt forego minesweepers

Even with mine detectors being dirt cheap, it's harder to counter them than you're making it seem.
I played against Wind's tellerspam the other day, I had mine detectors and mine flails all over the place but that still didnt stop my team from running into them. (It's really not that convenient to keep a 2 man detector squad alive in a dangerous combat environment)

In addition, the sheer thought that there could be a mine anywhere on the field makes the game fairly unenjoyable (heavily restricting mobility, etc) to play. You're better off playing minesweeper if you like it so much :p

The psychological effects of minespam are just as bad if not worse for gameplay than the spam itself

The psychological ... whaaat?

What about the psychological effect of seeing your lmg grens being slaughtered by carabine rifles? Your tiger dying to 4 rr squads that dropped on top of it.. 

Not using minesweepers is something of the past now, all the good players use those squads.

Now a question for me is how the "good" players that crash their blobs of armor or t17s into close range with your AT infantry would end up being.. if wehrmacht could employ mines a little more effectively than 1 mine per pio

You mean a bit like seeing unvetted riflemen and you don't know if they can trow stickies at you from 20 meters away? Dude, I personally think that stickies are a lot more "Psychological" effective than mines, I mean, I literally fear EVERY normal, unvetted riflemen squad as soon as it is near one of my tanks... That is QUITE rediculous.

id like to see how it turns out with some more mines on the field. real pros in coh also use lots of mines, but here in eir you just cant place any lot of them.
it has become even worse when the unit supply system was put in, too much pios in ur army = not good for the grens.

also, if mine availabilty gets higher m10 will need mineflail.


now ive read unkowns post, its indeed probably not good for the gameplay. renember 1 mine blows up tanks engine or almost totally destroys one squad's health.

maybe this would still be kinda cool if you could place one mine per time instead of 3 clustered together. it would slow tank like volks mine, also do some dmg and basically snipes one rifleman and supresses the rest.

the thing i never liked that you cant just mine an entire field full of mines, but theres always just one mine sitting somewhere. cant SE doctrine get an ability that drops butterfly mines that are a bit stronger vs vehicles in a much larger radius with more distance between the mines?

TO BE FAIR.. the pop argument really only comes into play in extreme scenarios where people field a LOT of mine squads. Why should this completely overrule normal play where both factions want to start with 2 mines but wehrmacht is forced to go 1 pop over americans for just wanting to field 2 mines?

First off you're comparing the average use of mines in EIR (since minespam is quite uncommon in the current metagame) to the abundant amount of riflemen fielded by every allied player. A correct analogy would be to compare the excessive spamming of mines with that abundant amount of riflemen being spammed instead.

Stickies do indeed have an incredible psychological effect, every rifleman is a potential damaged engine. I'm sure every axis player shares this fear. This fear is however not as bad as the fear that would derive from the excessive spamming of mines, simply because you can just treat every rifleman as a 'don't go near zone'. You can kite them with tanks and avoid getting close to any rifleman squad all together without too much issues.

Mine spam on the other hand is entirely invisible, the counter to it is rarely present and when present does not always succeed. (Again, mine detector engineers are a vulnerable unit, a smart mine spammer would prevent you from detecting his mines.)

Because of that spam, the entire map (not just parts of it with a certain unit on it) feels like a no-go zone severely restricting or even destroying your mobility.

if pios (2pop) could have 2 mines the upgrade should cost slightly more than mines for engineers (3pop)
on the other side pio mines shouldnt cost more than engie mines because you dont have a vehicle disabler as wehrmacht

You could make it add +1 pop to the pio squad if it's a problem with that.

I have to agree with unknown on this one. I do not think we want to shift the focus of this game to mine spam. I think this is already a severe threat to gameplay and does ruin many individuals game experience. The solution is not to add another mine to wehr, rather, remove the double mine from engineers.

Although you can easily get a minesweeper, actually being able to use them is another story. They are terribly fragile units and you can never have enough map control to detect all mines. So although they are a counter, they aren't a very effective counter in many scenarios.

Wind has already shown how powerful mine spam can be. And from personal experience it completely ruined my gaming experience. In many ways its far worse than sticky spam.

PQ

edit: Did someone fuken edit my post? Mine spam is worse than sticky spam imo...

You guys are refusing to use counters here. Minesweepers, tank mineflails are in the game for a reason. You pay for a safety. As earlier stated you dont need to actually sweep the mine. All you need to know is where it is, and a quick poke in there will accomplish this.

Its in no way better game design or less ruining of the game experience to have mineflails or minesweepers not being used because people dont like the idea of another player using a lot of mines.

From my mentor perspective, this is fail logic at its worst and I'm tempted to draw the L2P card from the bunk. You have counters, use them.

Also - One player doing something retardedly easy to counter and it being unexpected the first time hardly is a argument.

Lol, my American company is both mine and sticky spam...

I really don't want to start another T17 thread here and I don't want anyone to make it a T17 thread after this comment, but all the threads made about it show that T17 spam ruined a lot of peoples' gaming experience aswell, so that hardly is an argument against it.

Also, upping the number of mines to a reasonable amount(2) will just encourage the use of minesweepers even more, moving to another level of gameplay. Just because people can buy 2 mines doesn't mean that everyone and their mother will spam them. You will eventually find the usual spammers but it won't be any different than what you are used to from allied players...

@Baine, Just as T17 spam ruined the gaming experience of many other players, so too will mine spam. This is a valid argument because devs should be considering game play as a major aspect of balance. I'm advocating to make all mine upgrades just one and allow maybe 1 or 2 doctrines purchase an extra mine as a T1 or something.

Its not a question of whether counters exist, its a question of whether we want gameplay to become more slow and tedious. This mod has always been relatively fast pace, mine spam turns that around and makes game play much slower due to the added caution.

@ Smokaz, its a matter of opinion. You think it should be an integral part, I do not. You have your reasons, I have mine. When you consider EIR's environment and game play mechanics, mine usage in vCoH is quite different and consequential than mine spam in EIR. If you hit a mine in vCoH the engineers following your tanks can quickly removing the damaged engine. In EIR, you have to use a repair kit. The cost effectiveness is quite different!

You started this topic arguing that it was not fair that engineers had 2 mines and pioneers only had one. I've suggested that we make it equal on both factions. I don't see the contention here? It seems like a logical compromise does it not?

PQ

Can you explain to me how reducing strategy/game options makes for a better game than increasing it? Because thats what your solution will do. It will downplay the possiblity of spending munitions on defensive weapons like mines, it will downplay the usage of mine flails and detectors. There's no opinion here your solution will funnel the game into being more bland and conservative while mine expands the use and possiblity of it while reaching towards the possiblity for all factions to be able to use these types of weapons equally. Thats the way we are going currently, just look at the Minesweeper squads we have implemented. You and unknown's take on it is against current discourse.

If tellers or other mines are too powerful in your eyes compared to direct or indirect fire or whatever else you can choose to spend muni/manpower on its a pricing issue. End of story.

Ironically, when I brought up a similar argument with regard to officers sharing auras, you argued fiercely that my point (taking away option and thus reducing the dynamics of game play) was a "fail argument". Just something to consider :P

For someone who is supposedly going to law school, you really have an inability to appreciate all aspects of an argument. For example, if we reduced each faction to 1 mine each, that in no way removes a players option to field mines. It limits them yes, but you seem to think it will totally remove that aspect from game play.

My main point to consider was what mines do to game play. They slow it down. If that is the direction the devs want to go than so be it, I just wanted to point this fact out. Mines should still be part of game play, just in a more limited way. (again, look at my points regarding how mines operate differently in EIR vs. vCoh).

PQ

If you reduce the amount of mines possible to field, you sure as hell downplay the player's perceived need of having mineflails or minesweepers, thus reducing overall options. You can't avoid that arguement, PQ.

As for your fail analogy to the officer thing its a comparison completely out of proportion. That shit had seriously balance reprecussions and there was never any agreement upon its implementation or the way it was implemented at all. 2 mines on a pio squad already exists on defensive pioneers, engineers, sappers etc without anyone crying foul.

I do appreicate the minespam concern but as Ive now just recently pointed out Wind's teller mine is possible because PG supply is 1, and that might be flawed.

For a person who's also supposedly going to law school, you sure are good at nitpicking at details without seeing the larger picture. You'll make great judge potential bro

Think of crab mine flails that aren't mainly used for infantry hack&slay but for their original purpose! Madness!


Furthermore what smokaz is trying to say is that you can't base your opinion of normal mine"spam" on a tellermine spam company.

And to be honest why shouldn't Pios get two mines, all the time the allied engineers had 2, did you hear anyone complain about mine spam?

Your view is blinded by the shadow of Wind's tellermine gimmick my friend.

first off, do not assume that my view is blinded by wind's teller mine spam. I was simply citing it as ONE example to illustrate the psychological effect on players and game play. That is, it made game play both tedious and slow.

Second, unlike your arguments (smokaz and baine) mine is rationally connected. I'm suggesting 1 mine all around in order to reduce that negative psychological effect. I have yet to hear any discussion in regards to that discussion. Why is that not a valid compromise? It seems to me if you truly were concerned with balance, you would at least be open to that. However, neither of you have even regarded it which tends to make me think there is an ulterior motive.

PQ

No I have the most idealistic motive of us two, because I think mineflails and sweepers promote smart and broad gameplay. If they are ineffective like you have pointed out, perhaps this could be looked at? I've just not seen any complaints about the new minesweepers before this thread.  Everyone I've talked to have described them as extremely pop-effective, spotting units.

pio's get goliaths and bunkers and demo charges. engies and sappers only get mines and demo's. I fear pio's more than i do engineers because every pio is a potential mine AND goliath. I've seen some goliath spam that is just absolutely nasty. Now that's walking on tippy toes cuz u know walking into enemy territory you may get a mine or get blown up by a goliath it's insane.

I think it's just fine, i can't imagine what it'd be like going up against a 4 pio start (8 mines 4 goliaths) + p4 + hmg + officer

and if u want mine spam, go tank hunters, for god sakes, all their pzgrens get teller's, so every infantry fielded is a potential tank destroyer. the axis have their mine spam, it's just in another doc. Brits don't get mines, heck i rarely see people use them.

Oh and then we forget about volks mines for wehr, they get two of them, and imo they can be nastier than stickies because of the higher rof of paks. Stick a pak near a volks mine, tank comes, runs into it and its basically deadmeat. at least w/ engine damage you can still move and get away from an at gun, with a volks mine, forget it, you're stuck.

sure the m-18 gets the hawks but whos going to keep laying down those mines or m8's mines. having them on infantry is much easier to drop than using vehicles. IMO, the Axis have a much better invisible war system than the allies do, in mobile and in ambush so to add any more to do is stupid, leave it alone smokaz, the axis are fine.

Are we back to 2007 again? back then pios had 2 mines and 3 with terror ability.

it was nerfed to 1 mine and 2 with terror ability for a reason , leave as it is , no need for change here

 Pioneers with 2 mines and goliaths would be absolutely absurd.

 The argument that "allies get it, so should axis" (vice versa) is a method of balance reasoning that has time and time again proved to be ineffective and illogical. And yet as many times as it is used, I'm still surprised to see it used here.

 Axis pioneers get goliaths, so should americans? Hell no.

 I disagree with this idea completely.

 -Wind

Ehm yeah, planting a mine that is more effective than a normal mine with an m8, that can't be killed as easily as normal engineers and that can rush into the middle in ME mode and plant it before the enemies arrive is definately not as good as on infantry...

pios with 2 mines wouldnt be absurd, it would be a viable counter to light vehicle spam

 Grenaiders that could purchase RR's would be a viable counter to light vehicle spam.

 See the problem?

 This format of logic is fundamentally flawed when applied to an EiR CoH balance topic.

 -Wind

Grenadiers with RRs would be absurd. Double mines are not, they are already in the game.

 The line of reasoning here was that the argument "allies have it, so should axis" (or vice versa) is fundamentally a flawed approach. The example is not meant to be taken literally.

 As to double mines, yes it is already in the game and yes it is a suitable perk for the Defensive doctrine. This means that if someone is willing to pick that doctrine, and pay the pps for the abillity, then they can have the option to have pioneers with 2 mines that also have the option to use goliaths while still being only 2 pop. Not to mention health kits.

 But why does this need to be stolen from Defensive's uniqueness and given to all Wehr?

 To counter light vehicle spam?

 Nonsense, because there are many ways to counter light vehicle spam effectively as WM. The only people who have problems doing so are those who are unable or unwilling to alter their company to counter it. Like any spam, you have to adapt or die. Most people unfortunately decide what they believe a proper company should be, and get very upset if they come into contact with an opposing player who's company does not allow them to win with it.

 Because allies have it?

 Weve already seen why this isn't a valid argument.

 -Wind

 

IHT = faster than m8, drive 2 pz grens into middle of map, plant, run. I've seen it done several times. Play against a real good teller spammer it's the most annoying tactic and  you just dont want ot use vehicles lol

what id like to see is mines that are more used like barbed wire and tank traps instead of nasty little things that annoy you and lie on unexpected places.

i am thinking about making the minesweeper unit 4 or 5 man in size (not pop). other than detecting the mines they will get an upgrade ability that costs quite much munitions. you will place it like you would activate a butterfly bomb strike, but instead of the mines falling out the sky the engineers will walk to the spot and place mines in that area, the area is a bit bigger than the butterfly strike area and the mines are quite spreaded out. also the mines do less damage and have less chanse to damage engines.

these mines can be easally countered becouse when you run one squad in it, you instantly know youve ran in a minefield. so you bring out the mineflail or minesweepers to clear all the mines. ofcourse this will take some time and slow you down. and this is exactly what the other player wanted, and how minefields should work.

People can jsut shoot into the minefield. No need for sweepers if you know they are there. Sweepers are for mines that you don't know are there.

that would take much longer than minesweepers, since there are alot of mines. mineflail can be used to quickly break through.

One shot of a tank and boom, Kettenexplosion mein Freund!

i said they need to be spreaded out >.>

Since we're on the topic of mines, if a mine is detected (by minesweeper) can you just walk over it?

Yes

Def pios.

Some of you guys are vastly ill-informed on the balance direction. Look at minesweeper implentation. Equal for all.

More mines = bigger need for minesweepers = opens new level of gameplay = good.

And goliaths? They are hardly what they used to be, no need to get more than 1. So much awarness and detection even on vehicles, everything detects it before it can reach anyone.

i think theres no good argument against giving pioneers a 2nd mine for the same price engies get them.

 Please read all posts carefully before posting. Otherwise we would spend all day putting in corrections that serve no purpose, and aren't necessary.

 -Wind

they would have tripple mines then or sth.

 Aloha that post was in reference to Smokaz' putting in an observation that Def pioneers already get 2 mines, despite the fact that this was a bafflingly unnecessary reminder.

 
  As to your statement that there is no good reason t for not giving Pioneers 2 mines, it is no more valid (not saying it is valid at all) than the opposite argument that there is no good reason for giving pioneers mines.

 That is to say, once both sides have made their cases and remain unconvinced, it then becomes purely a subjective stalemate and the devs will have to ultimately decide based on the points given.

 -Wind

So you would be ok with giving it to engineers then?

Because mine detectors are dirt cheap it's easier to counter them than you're making it seem.
I played against wind's tellerspam the other day, I had mine detectors and mine flails all over the place and that stopped my team from running into them. (It's really easy to keep a 2 man detector squad alive in a dangerous combat environment)

In addition, the sheer thought that there could be a mine anywhere on the field makes the game extremely enjoyable (heavily restricting mobility, etc) to play. Real life had mines, not just mine sweeper.

The psychological effects of minespam are just as good if not better for gameplay than the spam itself.


Opinions. Fuck yeah?

Sure go on, i rather take demo charges on my Pios.

I somewhat agree with the folks here.

Mines are the easiest thing to counter. 80 mp 10 mun and 1 pop. These fellows aren't spotters. Imo their LoS should be decreased to kill the use of them being a spotter.

Mines reduce the mobility as stated several times. Who reads CoH Tips? Place mines on your flank to prevent enemy from flanking you.

CoH tips rules

Why are engineers even 3 pop? Just make them 2 pop like pios. Or the other way around (up pios to 3 pop)

Have you played against a high level player spamming mines? I can assure you its harder to counter than a lot of people here are making it seem. I'm sure Wind can concur from his perspective.

In the current state of EIRR, Mines are no ment to be Overwhelming on the field of battle, unless you truly pay a lot for it. 

Want a movable mine, get a Goliath with your mind and it can do some serious dmg.

Mines used sparingly are much more effective and with small army sizes...  mines are ve devastating in their limted uses as is.

give axis 2 mines and let allies place DEMO anywhere they want  just like old times

would be a nice t3 if not a t4

Yes we really need more invisible units insta-gibbing entire squads.

Since minsweepers are now a low cost low pop counter giving more mines to factions/doctrines should be considered.

But first we need to address a critcal point to the current system, call in times.

All minsweeper only callins should arive on field instantly so you can get the counter when you need/want it instead of waiting 2 mins and increaseing the length of future call ins.

Also can minsweepers be made dropable?

WISE FROM YOUR GRAAAAVE!

I have an idea - how about making mines dedicated? As in, you would have dedicated AT and AI mines. The code is in the game, since tellers can only be triggered by vehicles - it should be doable.

My only problem with mines is their cost effectivenes vs vehicles. Against infantry, mines arent actually that great! Perhaps, it could be intresting to expreriment with the idea of having anti-tank mines with high immobilization rate, and anti infantry mines which can get pretty good at killing infantry, rather than gibbing one guy.

This will help to move away from the problem of one-size-fits-all mines. I am leaning more towards having LESS mines on the field (since it does make the gameplay slower-paced), but at the same time making them an attractive defensive option. I would gladly drop 60-90 munitions on a mine that has a high chance to immobilize/destroy engine on a tank, or an equal amount on a mine that can cause 30%-50% casualities on a squad. That would make minesweepers even more viable, and the mine metagame would change from simple spam to something more tactical.

Mines are awesome versus infantry. Suppressed infantry is dead infantry.

Only if there are units around to finish them off. Besides, elite allied infantry can break supression, not to mention is that the whole idea behind mines is area denial rather than a guard post.

If you've forced the infantry to waste their fire-up, then that's extremely effective. Now, that infantry is easy to kill with an hmg.

Now, you're just "doin' it wrong"

The way you use mines (for maximum effectiveness) is in this way - with units for support. Without supporting units, they're not all that effective, but remember, they're force multipliers, not your entire force in one. They cripple armor and make them easy prey for AT weapons, and suppress infantry, leaving them easy pickings for your infantry. The best use (IMO) is put them on your flanks. There they're unlikely to be hit by artillery, and most likely to come in handy diffusing a quick enemy flank.