There is no point. RO2 is too fast paced for any of those, and most of them would be useless at best and easily used for griefing at worst.
Give the engineer some love!
- Thread starter Victhor-ASH
- Start date
In the realism sense, all of those take way too long for the scale of the game.
In the gameplay sense, freely-placed physical obstacles are probably the most easily-abused griefing tools to exist in games.
Maybe an option for the Capture and deffense mod to position baricades and sandbags, we have already a team in deffense and another one atacking the deffense would have time to prepare all of this, of course only in this mod not in firefight or any other mod, it would be useful only in a deffensive situation with limited amount of spawns.
No. There is not enough time for this to make sense. I don't know where you think defensive positions come from, but I'll give you a hint: it's not thin air. These things often take hours to build properly.
Soldiers actually in contact with the enemy don't entrench, they fight where they are.
Actually, they do, and they are supposed to, if terrain allows it and they can't advance. What do you think they have those small shovels for? Exactly for this kind of under-fire ad hoc entrenchment, when it is impossible to bring up engineers with proper tools (normal-sized shovels, picks, crowbars etc.)
But still, most field fortifications are made well in advance and not in combat. Building obstacles of any kind in RO is rubbish.
Entrenchment is something you do during a lull in the action or when you are not actually in contact.
By 'in contact', I mean in contact. Within clear firing range of the enemy, and liable to get whacked any moment. That is the point where you drop everything and fight. Whatever cover there is already will have to suffice.
Maybe leave it as is and let TWI address the real issues we face.
Well isn't that the Technical Support section? isn't this the section were you suggest new ideeas for the game and how to implement them? whats the point of ideeas and suggestions if we adress problems which are supposed to be discussed into the technical support section.
I just gave the engineer some love in the new Loadout in the Package of Improvements for Classic Mode thread. It is not up on the OP yet. But the engineer is to have one frag grenade, two AT grenades, two satchels, and a smoke grenade. Maybe he could use a sidearm as well.
btw, would it be possible to change the loadout so you can choose if you want the AT-grenades on infantry-only maps?
I find myself throwing them away at spawn on a lot of maps simply because there are no tanks on this maps.
I find myself throwing them away at spawn on a lot of maps simply because there are no tanks on this maps.
Engineers should have more choices to choose from, at the moment they have only explosives which they can handle but another choice wouldn't mind anyone, like a portable radio, maybe a flamethrower in the future but personally I hate to explode every obstacle I come in contact with I want a more quiet approach like having something to cut through obstacles or destroy them in a different way.
yup this is true
there was a documentary on the US's war in Afghanistan (Restrepo) and the soldiers gave an account about how they built a outpost. They dug, got shot at, stopped digging and returned fire, then kept digging
you don't dig and shoot at the same time.
Every map in the game assumes contact has been made, so there is zero incentive for silent means of breaching defences. If the enemy know you're there, and are shooting at you, being quiet is literally the last thing on your list of priorities.
Combat engineers are the guys blowing up stuff.
If you call them into battle you want any obstacle and enemy fortification gone as fast as possible, and you won't get any bunker faster than 50m/s skywards.
If you want to be quiet you get the commandos or the ninjas, but you don't call them in the heat of a battle because it doesn't make much sense to sneak around while the artilleryshells strike beside you.
The wirecutters are for the time after the battle, when you want to bring your troops through the battlefield without beeing hindered by additional craters.
If you call them into battle you want any obstacle and enemy fortification gone as fast as possible, and you won't get any bunker faster than 50m/s skywards.
If you want to be quiet you get the commandos or the ninjas, but you don't call them in the heat of a battle because it doesn't make much sense to sneak around while the artilleryshells strike beside you.
The wirecutters are for the time after the battle, when you want to bring your troops through the battlefield without beeing hindered by additional craters.
I dont understand why people keep mentioning wire cutters to clear barbed wire, when there isnt any barbed wire obsticles that can be cleared in any of the stock maps to begin with?! If by some insane reason tripwire actually DOES include wire cutters, they would have to add barbed wire "objectives" for engineers on all the already distributed stock maps, recook them and then redistribute. Sounds like a headache just to hear something go "snip" to me.
The whole idea of combat engineers building sandbags is stupid. Do you even have any idea how much coding, animation and in general WORK it would take tripwire just to make it somewhat sucessfull?! Obviously not. Theres plently of cover in the maps already. We dont need people "building" forts out of sandbags. Even if it was implemented, it would EAT resources and bandwidth alive in a game that is just barely squeeking by in the performance department. A portable radio?! So now the combat engineer is a friggin radioman!? wtf?! whats next you want uboats for the creek in apartments?!
Tellermines, IMO would be the easiest for tripwire to implement. Very little if any modifcations to the stock maps. Its pretty much all gameplay, some simple animations, models and some coding. The Rising storm team already has implemented working mines for the japanese team.
I still think spawning with one mine would be enough. But Id settle for spawning with two. After all youre not the only engineer playing. We dont want the map turning into a minefield of tellermines...nobody would want to tank then. No combat engineers carried around tellermines with them 24/7. They carried them on an as needed basis. Hence why I suggested you can choose between spawning with a satchel(s) or tellermine(s). I dont see what a pole charge can do better than a satchell, besides clear the nonexistant barbed wire???
oh and a combat engineer would probably not plant a mine in the middle of a firefight. Im not expecting some engineer to rush up to the front, find a enemy tank and throw/plant a mine in 5 seconds and get a kill like its a "AT grenade" while under fire.
Tellermines would be used more beind the line...when you know an enemy team is advancing and will probably overun the position where you planted the mines within the next 5-10 minutes. Used in defence. Get enough engineers working together with tellermines and you got yourself a defensive line against tanks. (aka the minefield you want Dokb).
Planting the mine itself should take atleast a minimum of 45 seconds. And thats insanely fast compared to real life.
The whole idea of combat engineers building sandbags is stupid. Do you even have any idea how much coding, animation and in general WORK it would take tripwire just to make it somewhat sucessfull?! Obviously not. Theres plently of cover in the maps already. We dont need people "building" forts out of sandbags. Even if it was implemented, it would EAT resources and bandwidth alive in a game that is just barely squeeking by in the performance department. A portable radio?! So now the combat engineer is a friggin radioman!? wtf?! whats next you want uboats for the creek in apartments?!
Tellermines, IMO would be the easiest for tripwire to implement. Very little if any modifcations to the stock maps. Its pretty much all gameplay, some simple animations, models and some coding. The Rising storm team already has implemented working mines for the japanese team.
I still think spawning with one mine would be enough. But Id settle for spawning with two. After all youre not the only engineer playing. We dont want the map turning into a minefield of tellermines...nobody would want to tank then. No combat engineers carried around tellermines with them 24/7. They carried them on an as needed basis. Hence why I suggested you can choose between spawning with a satchel(s) or tellermine(s). I dont see what a pole charge can do better than a satchell, besides clear the nonexistant barbed wire???
oh and a combat engineer would probably not plant a mine in the middle of a firefight. Im not expecting some engineer to rush up to the front, find a enemy tank and throw/plant a mine in 5 seconds and get a kill like its a "AT grenade" while under fire.
Tellermines would be used more beind the line...when you know an enemy team is advancing and will probably overun the position where you planted the mines within the next 5-10 minutes. Used in defence. Get enough engineers working together with tellermines and you got yourself a defensive line against tanks. (aka the minefield you want Dokb).
Planting the mine itself should take atleast a minimum of 45 seconds. And thats insanely fast compared to real life.
Last edited:
The problems with that are...
1. Combat engineers didn't go into battle armed with Tellermines, they were planted in large groups, before a battle and in such a large density that it would seriously hinder anyone trying to advance. Having one or two engineer's slowly setting singular mines is a waste of time, they were always planted in much larger numbers. And IF they were to be implemented, there are no maps large enough to justify planting mines in an attempt to recreate a minefield for tanks (Red October Factory is fairly close quarters with tanks anyway).
2. There is barbed wire on Mamayevkurgan in front of C that slows down the Germans advancing to assault the main large bunker. While it doesn't slow them by much, it does cause a hindrance when trying to reach the safety of the lip of the hill and you have to weave amongst the wire when coming from the right hand side. And that is a high traffic area for Germans assaulting the bunker so good luck not getting a team wound at the least when trying to clear them with satchel charges.
3. Pole charges vs Satchels when going against bunkers? Basically, a pole charge is several pounds of explosives on the end of a 8-10 foot rod. Under the cover of fire, you would place the charged end against the wall of the bunker, using the pole to push it up against the wall point securely where you would then pull the "pin" that ran down the middle of the rod. Much safer and more reliable than hefting a satchel charge against a pillbox, hoping to take out the bunker. In war time practices, combat engineers were trained to either plant a satchel charge directly against the bunker wall, or within it. Pole Charges were then developed to eliminate the problem of having someone expose themselves to enemy fire and be directly next to the bunker wall. Much safer to be 8 or so feet away (yet the danger is always present, let's not kid ourselves
).Unfortunately, this is RO2. So the satchel charge becomes a much more versatile weapon than it was used for in real life (aka, being a 15 second timer grenade that has the power of a single artillery round but has all its damage shaved off it a non destroyable object is in the way. A non destructible object will block a satchel charges blast if you are on the other side of it. ).
4. Back to tellermines, I can only seen them being implemented on larger maps. All combined arm maps at the moment are much too small, custom maps on the other hand are looking very good for this (Bridges of D. for example).
5. Back to barbed wire, I think everyone who wants barb wire objectives is hoping for new maps which actually utilize the real defensive value of these wonderful things. Which touches on my point before where most stock maps are too small to utilize the effectiveness of barbed wire defenses or they are just too small without being overpowered on some maps.
That new custom map, Gumrak Station uses the first point and barbed wire defenses beautifully AND they actually do damage and slow you down if you try to hug them. While it isn't that much damage, it is at least a lot more realistic than the barbed wire you find on Mamayevkurgan which you can jump all over and be none the wiser. Gumrak Station is a great map for tactics revolving around engineer's having to clear the barbed wire so it makes it much easier to assault the trench line.
Last edited:
Wait a second why are we supposed to make the placing, or building sandbags animations so close to real life, why can't it be like a structure beeing placed in a close position to you like the shadow of the construction from where you want it to be built and then while the sandbags are beeing built you can render a simple animation of the soldier shoveling or using his hand to pick up a invisible object at least this of thing was used for Men of war but please escuse me why would we need close real life animation just to waste time rendering them, you can always use a simpler implementation without consuming so much time.
Because this is supposed to be a realistic game, a concept you seem to still struggle with despite being told every other post what that entails.
It totally ruins the realistic atmosphere of the game if you can just magic sandbag revetments into existence in a few seconds where previously there was nothing. Also, you'll get shot.
RO2 is not, and should never be, the same as Men of War. MoW was a fairly realistic RTS, but because it's an RTS, it had unrealistic gameplay elements because it needed them to work well. RO2 is not an RTS, it doesn't need them. End of story.
We don't need any of this in the first place, so why bother wasting time with them at all? I'd rather see TWI actually fix the damn game than just give me even more reason to recommend my friends avoid it if they want a realistic, authentic WWII shooter.