[USF] Rear Ech Troops need more usage. (smoke)

#1
2 years ago

One of the reasons the main reasons rifles are so constantly spammed is because the support unit; the rear echelon lacks functionality for the front line. Yes they are support units and not combat units, but neither are pioneers and they are thrown into the fray. One of the main reason echelon troops aren't built is because all usf vehicles come with their own "engineer squad". Because of the high potency and all-around utility of rifles i believe this change would help a lot in balancing the faction so that it could function more along of lines of the ost, british, and soviets. In order to give the player a real-time serious incentive to build echelons, abilities need to be shared.

  • Rear echelon troops now have the ability to use smoke nades.
  • Smoke duration slightly increased by one second.
  • Throw time delay decreased.
  • Riflemen will have the smoke ability removed.

This is in fact why the usf mortar was introduced...to be blunt, players were just bored. Now the usf have two low tier units with high firepower that both have the ability to cover each other with smoke.

Example:
The soviets have an Elite doctrinal infantry unit with smoke. Shocks.
The ostheer dont even get smoke on infantry, just on their tanks, and that to is doctrinal. That's how powerful this ability is revered.
Look at the usf, its given to entry level units...a Juggernaut like riflemen should not be able to cover themselves with such a powerful ability, it needs to be given to echelons.

This change will force combined arms use and make echelons a crucial factor in the usf infantry line up. It will also end the spamming of riflemen due to their self-sufficiency to overcome any obstacle...which, isn't right.

«1

Comments

  • #2
    2 years ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 694
    This is something id like to see. Maybe mix the smoke in vet as well with increased range or recharge rate.
  • #3
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Great analysis @eonfigure i agree with your assessment. I think giving RE more oomph would really help the usf lineup, fixing volley fire would be really nice too....
  • #5
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited July 2017

    @Lazarus My favorite idea that was discussed in that thread was giving their fighting position rifle grenade more usage. Giving it like a 15 munitions cost and 30 second cooldown in ambient buildings would be a cool touch. That or make it an upgrade package for like 60 muni, and then they can use it for free in ambient structures but still w/ 30 sec cooldown. Maybe you could attach the smoke grenades to that upgrade, and take them from rifles.

    It's their vanilla utility that needs to be made a little better, their problem is that atm they need double weapons upgrades and veterancy to contribute anything beyond structure building.

  • #7
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited July 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    I think (dont hate me) taking emergency repairs OFF vehicle crews and throwing them on RE and maybe the vet crew upgrade would also help alot for pushing RE useage (and making the crew upgrade worthwhile) as well as dealing with the TOO self sufficient armour of the usf (keep crew speedy repair speed tho)

    I'm all for it. And I wouldn't necessarily keep the speedy repair speeds, especially if their was a nerfing to Brit and OKW ones as well. In that specific conversation I prefer lowering WFA speeds to EFA ones, rather than the opposite.

    So I'm all for making US rely a little more on REs for repairing, in addition to other ideas we've thrown around.

  • #8
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    I too would rather reduce the speed, i mostly said to keep it so there wasnt a "you just want to destroy the usf you axis swine" type reply. All in all i would really like to slow down the armour tide of wfa to more of an ost pace (I.E. taking damage hurts your field presence a bit)
  • #9
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723

    The main problem with R.E. as most other USF units is that Riflemen have so much utility that there little reason to built any other infantry.

    Abilities like "field defenses" and "forward observers" (among other things) could easily be moved to RE giving them more reason to be used.

    "volley fire" as most unit abilities should be made to scale with veterancy so it can be better balanced.

  • #10
    2 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    Moving unit or upgrades to another unit was used for things like Panzerschreck to from Volks to SPs, so I don't see how applying the same principal here is outrageous. Riflemen spam is pretty much same as Volks spam was.

    Some simple suggestions:
    -RETs can upgrade to Rifle Grenades; takes up one slot so you can't also go double weapons; this upgrade can let them fire smoke grenades without the grenade upgrade at HQ; the grenade ability is still relevant since you'd want Riflemen to have vanilla grenades and the ability to stun vehicles with the smoke grenade unlock.
    -RETs Volley Fire is replaced with Hunker Down when upgraded to BAR, removing the cover debuff when used; this not only enourages the ability to be used more, but it removes the penalties associated with the ability.
    -RETs will temporarily mark vehicles when they hit them with a bazooka, encouraging you to use them in conjunction with regular AT units to finish off a target; you will ALWAYS want to engage a tank with RETs so that your M36 will have an easier time killing it.

    The general idea with the abilities is that they bolster your other units' ability to take out the same enemy; you thus encourage combined arms and aggression with RETs, but at the cost of them repairing stuff because they are constantly used for fighting.

    I agree that some of the doctrinal unlocks like Forward Observers ought to be given to RETs instead, it emphasises their support role while ensuring a Rifle blob negates all of these advantages.

    The problem with Volks/ Rifle spam is that the units are all-round infantry and much of the game features go toward upping their strength rather than having you depend more on other units. Panzerschrecks to SPs was a step in the right direction, but the problem is that SPs are already burdened with other tasks, they are the extreme example of this principle.

  • #11
    2 years ago
    WunderKatzeWunderKat… Posts: 731
    edited July 2017

    @eonfigure said:

    • Rear echelon troops now have the ability to use smoke nades.
    • Riflemen will have the smoke ability removed.

    The problem is the mortar (which has smoke) still be an obvious better choice, so in the end you are just nerfing Riflemen.

    Also by the Ostheer have mortar smoke. They do have easy access to smoke like USF, although you don't see it as often because Grens aren't a kind assault unit that benefit greatly from smoke + flank in the same way as USF.

    Unless they become a stronger combat unit the Rear Echelons won't be a viable choice. They are too risky due to their poor scaling and also they are a waste of BARs that can be placed on rifles.

    I'd rather buff up some of the mid game units so that USF can get more mileage out of its first tech. Like a M20 redesign that is useful past the first few seconds of its deployment or an actually useful Pak Howie. That way USF has something more then RM to sink resources past T0.

  • #12
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,091
    Wat. The pack howitzer is amazing. The white phosphorous barrage is spectacular for a non doc unit. It basically makes FRPs useless.

    Also Ost has mortar smoke and thats it. Thats waaaay different to having smoke on your mainline infantry, all your indirect fire, all of your non TD mediums... for USF you need to put in *effort* to not have smoke at any engagement.

    The beauty is once REs are made in to smoke platforms we can finally remove the mortar fixing the early game again.
  • #13
    2 years ago

    They are already the most versatile engineer unit. All other factions get tank traps as doctrinal, and at vet 3 they get an extra man.

  • #14
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,091
    Thats because the USFs primary focus is speed and versatility (hence the racks rather than flat upgrades).

    The problem is too much of that strength is put in to riflemen and not enough in to REs. So you take some from one, heap it on to the other until you get something you can make diverse and interesting.
  • #15
    2 years ago
    WunderKatzeWunderKat… Posts: 731
    edited July 2017

    @Lazarus said:
    Wat. The pack howitzer is amazing. The white phosphorous barrage is spectacular for a non doc unit. It basically makes FRPs useless.

    Trust me I know what you are saying. I use it all the time it is my fav unit. The glaring issue with it is the minute long recharges on the barrage, it just can't respond often enough to sudden changes in battle to have a large impact on the game assuming you're firing it as often as possible (which I always am).

    The M20 is just too risky in its current state.

  • #16
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    M20 isnt bad by anymeans, but its a support unit, not a shock unit. Plus free zook!

    I find you are usually better off swapping your crew with yoyr free RE squad and using it as a mine laying transport that can repel lone flanking units. Its great in that capacity.

    But RE are not attractive becauae they dont do enough to qualify as support for rifles, at best the preform as economy rifles....
  • #17
    2 years ago
    SquishyMuffinSquishyMu… Posts: 434
    > @For the rest of his life said:
    > They are already the most versatile engineer unit. All other factions get tank traps as doctrinal, and at vet 3 they get an extra man.

    Yeah this was what I was thinking when I read this thread's title. Can equip bazookas/bars too.

    If most USF vehicles/tanks didn't have self repairing crews more people would buy the extra RE.
  • #18
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,653

    @For the rest of his life said:
    They are already the most versatile engineer unit. All other factions get tank traps as doctrinal, and at vet 3 they get an extra man.

    Because eeeeveryone picks all these doctrines with tank traps and spams them all over the place.
    Utility that no one ever uses is not really an utility you know. Its being used as glorified sandbag, not as a tank trap.

    In fact, if not for the weapon racks, RETs would be least versatile engi unit for the sole reason of being incapable of placing mines.

  • #19
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @Katitof ha detto:

    @For the rest of his life said:
    They are already the most versatile engineer unit. All other factions get tank traps as doctrinal, and at vet 3 they get an extra man.

    Because eeeeveryone picks all these doctrines with tank traps and spams them all over the place.
    Utility that no one ever uses is not really an utility you know. Its being used as glorified sandbag, not as a tank trap.

    In fact, if not for the weapon racks, RETs would be least versatile engi unit for the sole reason of being incapable of placing mines.

    And the fact that those "defensive" doctrines with tank traps are mostly utter trash has nothing to do with it, right ?
    Tank traps + m20 mines = dead tank.
    If you can't see the usefullness of those it doesn't mean that tank traps are useless.
    If not for the weapon racks usf will get fixed time requiring upgrades.
    RE are a 200 mp cheap unit that can double equip zooks, if you think is not useful enough for an infantry based faction to save up mp by being able to freely equip those cheap squads with at weaponry make a mod with panzergrens/sturmpios as AT infantry for usf and tell me how much you mp starve.

    No RE are ok like that.

  • #20
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    The fact that RE's only use is effective AT blob fodder proves they need a change. I really think a lil buff to volley fore would go a long way (slightly faster supression, keep the defensive debuff so repositioning is still important)
    The fact of the matter is that they dont bring enough to the game to warrant taking up the pop...
  • #21
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    The fact that RE's only use is effective AT blob fodder proves they need a change. I really think a lil buff to volley fore would go a long way (slightly faster supression, keep the defensive debuff so repositioning is still important)
    The fact of the matter is that they dont bring enough to the game to warrant taking up the pop...

    The point is that vehicle crews make them an at unit rather than engies.

    I'm the only one who would like to revamp bunkers and make bunker + RE worth to complement tier 3 as static suppression ?
    Both Wehr and USF bunkers shouldn't die/almost die to one barrage..be more durabe so the player can counter barrage with its arty and repair those.
    I still think RE are okey like that, but a worthy bunker could spicy up build orders a little.

  • #22
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822

    i wouldnt oppose a pit buff, i think that was mentioned last time this topic came up

  • #23
    2 years ago

    @Katitof said:

    @For the rest of his life said:
    They are already the most versatile engineer unit. All other factions get tank traps as doctrinal, and at vet 3 they get an extra man.

    Because eeeeveryone picks all these doctrines with tank traps and spams them all over the place.
    Utility that no one ever uses is not really an utility you know. Its being used as glorified sandbag, not as a tank trap.

    In fact, if not for the weapon racks, RETs would be least versatile engi unit for the sole reason of being incapable of placing mines.

    To which I say it's their fault for not using tank traps, not the rear echelon squad. Tank trap placed to screw up the already terrible pathfinding of tanks often means dead heavies or two panzer IV's somehow stuck inside one another and getting snared and killed.

  • #24
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited July 2017

    @For the rest of his life said:
    To which I say it's their fault for not using tank traps, not the rear echelon squad. Tank trap placed to screw up the already terrible pathfinding of tanks often means dead heavies or two panzer IV's somehow stuck inside one another and getting snared and killed.

    If you're ever on Dusseldorf in 2v2s, tank trapping your opponent's entrance to the courtyard victory point is one of the first things I ever do after securing the area. I've killed a panther on two separate occasions with far less firepower than you normally need exclusively because the Panther came in the side entrance and expected to be able to leave out the back. The horrible pathing allowed a sherman to kill 1 on its own, and the other I killed with 3 bazookas (1 on Rifle, 2 on RE) and an AT rifle-nade.

    As proud as I am of those moments, I have literally never had any other notable success in planting tank traps. They can be useful enough on certain maps for sure, but they don't exactly elevate REs to the usefulness level of other engineers. I also get caught building them all the time, as it usually takes a good amount of time to put up enough to block something.

  • #25
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    I think to make RE relevant, it just needs to be a series of small tweaks to the USF faction design to bring them in line with other engineers.

    They already have great flexibility with being able to be equipped from the racks, however adiitional utility with each weapon, like perhaps adjusting volley fire to be more effective with 1919's and bar's would be a good step, whilst the zook could unlock a different ability more in line with its job.

    Knocking down usf vehicle crews repair speed to make RE more relevant as the actual engineers could be another step.

    Transferring the USF doctrinal field defences to the RE.

    Adjusting the cost of fighting pits so that the initial purchase is cheaper (50mp?) with the 50.cal upgrade shouldering the 100mp from the original price.

    Then really I do believe that pushing them into a similar defensive infantry role, like the idea the mod-team came up with for cons, by giving them low damage with high accuracy so that they are more consistent at fighting and vet correctly.

  • #26
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798

    I like the idea of removing the smoke on riflemen and putting them on RE. As for the volley fire, I'd either just remove this awful ability or make it actually useful by removing the received accuracy modifier and making it cost at least 40 munis to use, and like farra said, bars should allow them to supress faster. In CoH1 bar riflemen had suppressive fire (without the lame RA penalty when using it)

  • #27
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @1ncendiary_Rounds ha detto:
    I like the idea of removing the smoke on riflemen and putting them on RE. As for the volley fire, I'd either just remove this awful ability or make it actually useful by removing the received accuracy modifier and making it cost at least 40 munis to use, and like farra said, bars should allow them to supress faster. In CoH1 bar riflemen had suppressive fire (without the lame RA penalty when using it)

    As much as i think volley fire is kinda up for it's cost, i efficiently used it to suppress a closing in sturm starting from max range, like 30 minutes ago.
    I would rather see it less situational and more worth of it's muni price.

  • #28
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    @1ncendiary_Rounds ha detto:
    I like the idea of removing the smoke on riflemen and putting them on RE. As for the volley fire, I'd either just remove this awful ability or make it actually useful by removing the received accuracy modifier and making it cost at least 40 munis to use, and like farra said, bars should allow them to supress faster. In CoH1 bar riflemen had suppressive fire (without the lame RA penalty when using it)

    As much as i think volley fire is kinda up for it's cost, i efficiently used it to suppress a closing in sturm starting from max range, like 30 minutes ago.
    I would rather see it less situational and more worth of it's muni price.

    "starting from max range" explains it all. And they were sturms. Grens, pgrens and other infantry would have shot up the RE before they get suppressed

  • #29
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Even sturms should have done a number on them unless they were behind 2 layers of green cover....
    Obviously its supposed to be used as a force mulitplier, but it really only works if you are already outnumbering the enemy at which point you are better off just shooting for damage...

    Can it be made scale with cover?
  • #30
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798
    edited July 2017

    And also to make RE (and sappers) more useful, force them to build the base buildings instead of relying on a one click techup. And i know people will point a finger at OKW but name one squad that is more burdened than sturms. They also take almost twice the pop cap

  • #31
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    Even sturms should have done a number on them unless they were behind 2 layers of green cover....
    Obviously its supposed to be used as a force mulitplier, but it really only works if you are already outnumbering the enemy at which point you are better off just shooting for damage...

    Can it be made scale with cover?

    Actually it was a micro intensive moment, RE were uncovered, but the enemy didn't move sturm for 2 seconds, than when they came really close, they just got suppreessed after several volleys.
    I traded 1 model with 2.

    Maybe it could be turned into a passive ability RE have at green cover ?
    Keeping same performances wouldn't be op at all imho.
    And i can see some good defensive build orders already...

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.