Who Needs Cover

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Rocksitter]

 In most of the games I have played exept for HMG people dont use cover they just spam a bunch of Inf and rush I thought this mod was trying to do away with the spam tactic maybe cover should get better bonus because right now it seems useless ..

 Take 4 or 5 Inf units and put them in red cover (no cover) and take 1 or 2 units in green cover I think that the 1 or 2 squads in cover should beat out the idiots standing out in the open ever time even though they dont have as many men but has it is right now theres no way for the 1 or 2 squads to chew up that many units hell its hard to kill even 1 unit in the blob unless you can focus fire..

  Maybe put a limit on the number of units or blobs that are allowed on the field makes for a more tacticle game when there is no spam...

 Rewards For Cover

[31stPzGren]

Putting troops in cover rarely pays off. It only works in "stand-off" battles where both sides engage at long distance.

With the huge increase in munitions, a lot of weapons are available to the players which requires "closing" in to the enemy to be effective... which is more easily done as one whole blob bum rushing people.

Grenades are at about between short-medium range to be thrown. Automatic weapons perform better at those ranges...  There's fire up etc etc etc.

There really isn't a point to use cover.

Not to mention british infantry REALLY function better using blobs.

[spinn72]

Being behind good cover is great for when you are defending against an infantry rush.  Any good inf squads will be able to annihalate incoming infantry with minimal damage taken to them.

However, the cover system as it is is not good enough at the moment.  Maybe a slightly increased benefit would be better, or else a decreasing moving accuracy modifiers more but i think just increasing cover benefits would be much easier to do.

[RikiRude]

Well with vet 3 and infantry units getting additional bonuses in cover I think we will see cover used much much more.

Also just because your opponent blobs or doesn't use cover doesn't mean you should. I mean it's something you usually don't notice, but pay attention to units health while one unit is in cover and the other isn't and rangers in crossing through red cover to get to 2 PG squad in green cover will take tons of damage compared to if they would of stayed in green cover.

[MistenTH]

Just 2 days' ago I witnessed Nevyn's 1xBren tommie squad and 1xRiflegrenade squad engage a PZG MP44 assault tank buster squad behind green cover at medium range. Both british squads standing in the middle of nowhere died to a man, whereas the PZGs ran off laughing with 2 men remaining.

Nevyn was incensed enough to order me to make sure the PZGs did not make it off alive, but despite my best efforts the last PZG escaped to ride off into the sunset ^.^

Cover right now still does make a significant difference, such that you need less MP and Mun in troops to counter an equivalent number. But it's not that significant that you can win a 2:1 numerical/munitional ratio of attackers.

And be careful what you want changed; make infantry assaults too difficult to carry out and you'd see a lot more artillery spammage to compensate.

[gamesguy2]

Being behind good cover is great for when you are defending against an infantry rush.  Any good inf squads will be able to annihalate incoming infantry with minimal damage taken to them.

However, the cover system as it is is not good enough at the moment.  Maybe a slightly increased benefit would be better, or else a decreasing moving accuracy modifiers more but i think just increasing cover benefits would be much easier to do.

Yellow cover reduces incoming damage and suppression by half, green cover reduces incoming damage up to 3/4(more against machine guns) and suppression by 90%.

Cover is really, really, good.

[MistenTH]

Since green cover reduces incoming damage by 75%, then the conclusion for troops in cover to lose to blobs standing in the open is because the blob has more men, weapons and firepower than the troops in cover by a factor of more than 4 times.

The blob will also have an easier time against troops in cover if they pack specific anti-cover weapons such as grenades and flamethrowers, which of course, cost more munitions.

[gamesguy2]

Since green cover reduces incoming damage by 75%, then the conclusion for troops in cover to lose to blobs standing in the open is because the blob has more men, weapons and firepower than the troops in cover by a factor of more than 4 times.

The blob will also have an easier time against troops in cover if they pack specific anti-cover weapons such as grenades and flamethrowers, which of course, cost more munitions.

Yes, but also because infantry with AT weapons like shreks, bazookas, and piats tend to destroy cover.

Still, cover is fine IMO.  When used correctly its a huge buff to your troops.

[MistenTH]

True, green cover doesn't last that long. But yellow cover is common and can't be destroyed once it's a crater. So at least a 50% buff.

[MannfredvonRitter]

G43 + Green Cover = Dead HMG.

[Smokaz]

Think of it like this rocksitter: the brit players you are seeing just blobbing in the open without cover are the hacks and frauds, the bad players, just as bad as the players that are unable to counter a blob in the open with mgs and mortars for cost. If you think the british blob is nasty in the open controlled by some attack move noob, just imagine how nasty it would be in the hands of someone using riflenade smoke, popping HC when he needs it the most, using cover and always using recon sections to flank and soak fire before the main blob moves into cover and eats up any mg.

[Two]

At the moment using cover is a death sentence, especially for allies due to how much axis mortars rape.

[Unkn0wn]

Honestly, if you do not use cover in low number, equal, infantry engagements you will always end up losing that fight to someone who does use cover.

I do agree though I miss the vCOH early game type engagements where cover, flanking, etc is used to great extent rather than the endgame phase where people blob mp44s/tommies/smgs.

[MistenTH]

At the moment using cover is a death sentence, especially for allies due to how much axis mortars rape.

Cover = good thing to have
Mortar = anti-cover unit

Solution 1 = keep moving (mortar does job; denies you advantage)
Solution 2 = Deploy own mortar (no cover advantage to either side in middle ground)
Solution 3 = Kill the mortar

Killing the mortar isn't too hard right now. Armour calliope. Infantry howitzer. British 25 pounder. RCA priest. British mortar pit (highly durable, outranges all other mortars in game).

[Mysthalin]

Moving would be nice, but the mortar shells have some interesting targetting - apparently they're "respawned" just like the stuka/neb shells above the heads of enemy infantry, if you're using an attack order/free fire instead of a barrage. So even when moving, you might die to the mortar if your army is large enough and spread out enough.

[Bubz]

At the moment using cover is a death sentence, especially for allies due to how much axis mortars rape.

i have to fucking quote for truth

[acker]

I'm wondering...

Can a MG42 team go into an Infantry Halftrack?

Like, the 60mm Mortar from the Beta can ride in the US halftrack, can it do the same thing in the Bren carrier?



Either of these things would be epic. A vet3 ability to dream of...

[Malevolence]

HMG42 in a car lol xD

[Ununoctium]

HMG42 in a car lol xD

PE inf ht + 2 HMG or + 2 flamerpios...... supress or burn? what to choose? Oh I know! 1 HMG and 1 Pio!
or what if you put an axis mortar in it lol..... costs more and its weaker..

[Smokaz]

Tbh Officer doing driveby arty drops in his halftrack is the mütter of all deutsche inventions