Give the engineer some love!

[Avtomat]

Yea sure like the producers would indeed give credit to all the realistic ideeas and spend years putting them to practice instead of making use of the exisiting mechanics which are easier, I understand that you can't see above your vanity but please stop making these stupid conclusions about Battlefield and Call of duty it only proves how limited you are, have you run out of arguments?

Well lets see, how exactly would they spend years on changing a couple of codes and making models for an M38 carabine, Luger and DT29? (at least the luger is probably in works already)

I think making a blowtorch model, making a double barreled shotgun and a mechanic for the blowtorch to work would be a much tougher job.

We are limited, because you can only think about stuff you saw in other games (not any, but BF) and you want to see them in a game that is supposed to be the complete opposite of that game.
If you want to change this game so damn much and hate it's community, just leave and play BF that you enjoy so much. It even has aircaft, US Marines running around with AEK-971s and every russian VDV guy wears a gasmask. It's awesome.

Blowtorch guy repairing a T34's thrown track in seconds. Pathetic.

 

[ross]

To continue on from Avtomat's post; we are limited because the game itself is limited. It is called Heroes of Stalingrad.

Stalingrad.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

I dont get it with all this nonsense of what the game is trying to be or things like that your only point of example is Ostfront

I didn't say anything about Ostfront. Please don't make up statements to attribute to me.

this is the suggestion forum so you cant suggest everything that comes to mind

And if those suggestions are bad, you'll get people telling you they're bad.

This is a game not a simulator I dont think the producers would be happier if you give them a useless feature that is more timeconsuming but realistic but has the same purpose as a simpler much more useful one in gameplay, like repairing a tank.

You don't seem to understand the role of realism. Some people hate realism, some like a bit, some love lots. Some games avoid realism, some have a little realism, some have lots. Every game aims to fits somewhere on the spectrum. RO2 aims to be fairly realistic, because some people like games that are fairly realistic. That's who the game aims for. Your suggestions reduce the realism, in many cases significantly so. You say this is because it would make the game more fun, but that's not the case; they might make it more fun for some, but for the people the game is aimed at, they make it less fun.

If you want a less realistic shooter, then you should probably take one of the many other games out there that are less realistic. Attempting to make every game fit on the same point on the scale of realism, however, is both pointless and stupid. Sometimes you might want RO2. Sometimes you might want Wolfenstein. Sometimes you might want Serious Sam. However, what works for one of these games will not always work for the other two, and that is where proper game design comes in.

 

[Victhor-ASH]

The suggestion with the blowtorch would work only on small maps, because it is easyer to repair it and there's no need to go for the ammo box to repair the tank, again a blowtorch/or welding device call if however you want would also be able to cut through obstacles instead of exploding everything when you want to sneak past the enemies.

The engine has its limitations and we cant expect everything that we wish for to be in the game. Realism can be defined in many ways, you are sustaining your ideeas I understand but now really whats the point of having a support role class if it cant handle any situation which is confrunted? Like repairing a tank near you, or building making a deffense position with sandbags something more rather the original inventory from Ostfront, realism is defined by many factors, one of them beeing the posibility of handling a specific situations in much more many ways, this flexibility would translate as realism thats the point I am reaching about.

I am not suggesting to make the game like Battlefield/Call of duty I only have the reason of thinking that the engineer should be something more that it was in Ostfront, I am linking these examples because I thought its much more easy to understand the point if you have an image of the concept and how it should work from a game in which it had already been implemented.

My point with the shotgun is that if we need a flamethrower a shotgun can provide the same support also beeing easyer to develop than a flamethrower it would be more like a provisory weapon to test how close combat weapons would work in Red orchestra before adding a flamethrower. As we know it maybe it wouldn't work at all in such a game there's no need to rash, but every addition has its consequences, maybe more gamemodes and availability to modify maps would fix the problems we have now.

 

[ross]

It wouldn't work anywhere, because this is a realistic game (well, in theory) with a historical setting. It was made for the exact kind of people who don't want magical vehicle repairs in their games, because almost everybody ignores them and makes games with unrealistic mechanics. You clearly like unrealistic mechanics. As a general rule, the people who play this game do not, or we wouldn't play this game in the first damn place.

I'm really not sure why you seem so vexed as to how come nobody likes your suggestions. You are suggesting the opposite of the audience this game is marketed towards.

 

[Victhor-ASH]

Yes but what other way to solve the problems you stumble about in the game unless you implement this kind of mechanics? as a general rule you can handle more situations with more tools at your disposal.

 

[ross]

Yes but

Oooh boy. Too bad I'm out of booze.

what other way to solve the problems you stumble about in the game unless you implement this kind of mechanics? as a general rule you can handle more situations with more tools at your disposal.

What problems? I don't see any problems. None. In fact, the problems I have that do exist in the game are all the ones related to making the game more accessible, or more interesting to casual gamers, because they took a giant dump on a title that was once renowned for its faithful adherence to historical accuracy and realistic mechanics.

There is zero need for repair kits in the game. In fact, I'd be glad to see the ability of resupply points to repair tanks to be completely removed, too. I have no idea whose idea that was, but it was a terrible one.

 

[Sarkis.]

Yes but what other way to solve the problems you stumble about in the game unless you implement this kind of mechanics?

What problem? Aside the fact that the engineers ends up blowing all his friend to bits along with the enemy, and once even blew the T34 and the PZ4 at the same time. I don't see any problem.

Not being able to repair a tank is certainly not a problem.

 

[Victhor-ASH]

Yea but I found myself in the tank beeing damaged, I couldnt explode it, what could I do to repair it if the tank was still operational, it is indeed unrealistic to have repair at ammo dump, but is rather more annoying to respawn your tank and respawn after killing your foe.

 

[ross]

Yea but I found myself in the tank beeing damaged, I couldnt explode it, what could I do to repair it if the tank was still operational, it is indeed unrealistic to have repair at ammo dump, but is rather more annoying to explode your tank and respawn after killing your foe.

Complain about the stupid tank tether, then, not about an inability to repair them. Tank crews abandoning their vehicles is not only realistic, but something that would do a world of good for tank combat in this game. People can piss and moan about bailing just before a shell hits all day - just add a 5-10sec exit animation and if they still get out, suck it up and be glad you just removed a tank from their firepower pool. People who care about kills in this game that badly are missing the entire point anyway.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

Yes but what other way to solve the problems you stumble about in the game unless you implement this kind of mechanics? as a general rule you can handle more situations with more tools at your disposal.

Yeah, I'm with ross here. What problems? The engineer isn't really hurting for anything. Giving them a bolt would be nice, but otherwise, I'm not seeing how there's anything to fix. They certainly don't need a shotgun when they already have an SMG...

(Aside for maybe fixing the brain-dead teammates that moth to any deployed satchel. Any engineer that tries to do their job tends to be session banned within the first couple satchels)

 

[Sarkis.]

Yea but I found myself in the tank beeing damaged, I couldnt explode it, what could I do to repair it if the tank was still operational, it is indeed unrealistic to have repair at ammo dump, but is rather more annoying to respawn your tank and respawn after killing your foe.

just type '' `suicide and enter ''

...


Yeah.. yeah... In game! Don't forget!

 

[Victhor-ASH]

You try playing with 64 players on Gumrak, after dieying a few times with all your friends in the tank it becomes annoying after a while, also for some reason I found a weird bug that if players are on a specific hill on Gumrak they can hit you only once and you die I dont know why but the problem persists, especially when playing with russian T34's.

 

[ross]

Gumrak is a bad map, the tank combat is poorly thought out, and tank crew tethers are stupid.

Fix all that and it might not suck so hard. It'll take more than a magical blowtorch, though.

 

[Trotskygrad]

Gumrak is a bad map, the tank combat is poorly thought out, and tank crew tethers are stupid.

Fix all that and it might not suck so hard. It'll take more than a magical blowtorch, though.

Silly ross, don'tcha know Soviet Tank Crews were literally CHAINED to their tank?

It's to prevent desertions and stuff, don't you know?

I saw it in that movie, Gates of the Enemy or w/e.

(no but seriously tank crew tethers was one of the reasons why I didn't buy this game until GOTY edition, and your animation fix would work just fine)

 

[Holy.Death]

Off topic has been deleted. If you don't have anything to say on topic then don't post at all.

 

[THunter]

Im all for the Engineers to have mines for tanks. Although I do not know which class would be more appropriate to have them in, the engineers or anti tank class. I lean towards Engineers as they would be the ones planting and disarming explosives in real life.

If there going to be any type of anti tank mine to be put into the game I believe it should only be the German "Tellermine" 42. The Tellermine 43 wasnt produced untill March 1943 so that rules out any chance of it seeing action before or during Stalingrad. Tellermines rarely, if ever were set off by a person stepping on the pressure plate due to the high amount of pressure needed ontop of the pressure plate to set it off. They were solely designed for anti tank and anti vehicle purposes so there WILL NOT be anybody playing as infantry complaining about being killed by a mine planted in a doorway or some other random spot.

I believe Engineers should be able to choose between spawning with ONE tellermine or ONE satchell. Both of which can be resuppled by visiting ammo resupply points. There would need to be a cap on how many mines or satchells a Engineer can recieve during one life to prevent engineers spamming mines and sathcells everywhere. Tellermines would be the perfect solution to prevent tanks from spawn raping and a great way to prevent and discourage enemy tanks from entering unwanted areas. If a tellermine does go off due to a tank running over it, any infantry closely behind or to the side of the tank would be killed. If an enemy tellermine is spotted, it can quickly be disarmed by having a Tanker shoot a HE round at it to detonate it, or having an engineer plant a satchell ontop of it and detonating it that way. Allowing engineers to plant and disarm mines would be another perk added to make people WANT to play as an engineer.

Points would be given for "Disarming enemy anti-tank mine" or destroying or helping to destroy enemy tanks by planting them. No wire cutters, fancy animations, blowtorches, JB weld, or any other stupid idea needed. Engineers are not tank mechanics, there were dedicated mechanics BEHIND the lines that fixed tanks at repair depots.

I do not support bouncing bettys. I do not want this game turned into COD:WaW.

 

[AtheistIII]

I'm not sure if planting mines during the battle is to be considered historically correct...
The idea seems a bit wrong to me.

As for tank repairs, i could live with minor (!) repairs, just so far as enabling the tank to drive back to the next repair-point, but for this to make any sense tanks would need to be the valuable machines they were in reality, not something thats delivered in amounts that equals the amount of MG-ammo.
Yes i know im exaggerating, but i think you get the point.
I would also prefer if this repairs would be made by the dismounted tankcrew instead of the engineers.

 

[Dokb]

Engineer's did not qualify to repair tanks, they were there to deal with enemy and friendly fortifications and defenses, building bridges/pontoons and making sure roads/bridges quality could take the weight of tanks without getting bogged or caught as well as inspecting the equipment such as ordinance (ie: mines, high explosives etc.).

People who worked on tank repairs usually did it in the safety of a warehouse or tank factory and didn't participate directly in fighting. The most you'd ever see of a tank repair in the middle of battle would probably be changing tank tracks if they had spares available (better to change your tracks then to sit around doing nothing hoping not to get blasted into oblivion). This would usually take a very long time either way.

Sorry, just giving my two cents.

***


Engineer's, ESPECIALLY not combat engineers which I think we can all agree is the closest the RO2 Engineer will come did not go into battle and fought against tanks with a single tellermine. Whoever thought of that tactic in battle, sending a combat engineer fresh out of training armed with a single mine to hinder the tanks progress probably would've found himself up against a wall giving the old five gun salute.

While I do like the inclusion of the tellermine, I'd like to see it implemented in a different way. Why not have actual minefields in the game at least? I know there was a case during the battle of Stalingrad during the earliest days of the fighting where the Germans ran into a minefield that stretched for a kilometer at least (I can't remember the name of the instance for the life of me )

 

[Victhor-ASH]

Or why not give engineers the ability to fortify and place tank traps, barbed wire, or make tranches, or sandbag deffenses, would be cool to have engineers build something rather than blowing up everything, some tools to built them would surely look interesting also if the enemy does same thing you need to counter them. I think such a fortification posibility for the engineer would work best in a capture deffense type of match, the defenders would build theyr deffenses while the atackers prepare to storm in, mines would be also great for protecting a objective but the only problem remains how can you detect them.