Engineers are Overused.

Lol. No.
They just made infantry combat more like a snowball fight, and tanks still wtfpwn every infantryman in sight.

IMO every gun should be renamed the woodchipper rifle. Because that's how they work. Yes, I'm overusing woodchips and 2.2, but it's true.

Scout rifle is hilarious too.

 

Engineers are semi-over used.

Their good against buildings, ok against infantry, can heal/repair, give ammo, and of course build stuff alot faster (Which is a given and good).

The one problem i got to say is..nader's suck at fighting infantry, ya fire a rocket directly at one of em and it doestn one hit kill em, yet the weapon can bust a heavy tank haul like a double layered tin can.

 

Prevents them from "Panzernoobing" though.

 

.. <_< Then can we get alternative Nader weapons, seeing as its the only class without a SMG. Maby a smg pistol, or...say have the rocket/nade launcher in one part of the class weapon, and a light SMG in another selection for weps.

Pistol-SMG-Launcher/Nader- Mines.:D

 

Again, at long range, Engineers can raise cover. I've seen it done before. And they can do it fast enough. Just plop down an NF ammo box or turret, or if you're fast enough, a wall section.

And the ammo box is definitely imbalanced. The Engineer is the premier building demolisher already, but he can do it even faster and far better than any other class because he can replenish his ammo.

In fact close range is where Engineer suffers against Riflemen. But other than that, they eat Grenadiers alive (except at long range) and Scouts just simply fail unless unnoticed.

Engineer is the most adept out of all classes at clearing turrets, due to large Seismic Grenade AOE, and the fact that they simply can hop on top of the turret and disassemble it with their Tool.

Engineers are not in fact, "good as they are". Compared to everything else, they're "too good".

 

This sir, is not true.

 

It's mostly true. While the Engineers are cowering behind their cover a competent Grenadier would use his mortar to take out their turrets (and by extension, them) or them out behind the walls. At medium range a skilled Grenadier can get a nice hit with the mortar on them and finish them off with the pistol, but he's more likely to get mown down by the SMG once the Engineer gets closer. At closer ranges, Grenadier relies on luck.

And Scouts? Might be exaggerating there. But the Scout's chances of survival rely on being unnoticed.

 

The first part is incomprehensible.

Coms don't drop armouries because APCs are more useful.

Well of course not, what point are you trying to make? That's why APCs are so much more useful.

The nadespamming is a problem when people are not around. Engineer Ramboes into unattended areas, destroys all turrets, and proceeds to demolish everything before anyone can be arsed to notice. Even when people are around it is a problem.

You mean Return to Castle Wolfenstein Enemy Territory? Either you don't play it enough, or don't play on the right servers. I don't usually have any ammo problems unless I go too far ahead alone.

What I mainly want to see is the Ammo Box dropping somehow separated from the Engineer, or requiring an Ability Slot.

 

Yes, because APCs are far smaller targets than an Armoury or Barracks, and are MOBILE. That means you can spawn closer to the enemy. The only real usefulness of Armouries only becomes apparent if the enemy is at your front door with tanks.

APCs are far more useful, because it gives you a ride and lets you reload in the field. So what if you can drop armouries before you can get vehicle factories? Armouries are utterly useless until you enter the "Combat phase", by then you should have a factory up.

You really have no idea how fast Engineers can destroy turrets do you. More often than not you have more important things to do. Plus 5 people killspawning just to kill an Engineer is a waste of tickets.

ET has its own problems (Field Ops, stupidly overpowered), but at least every infantry class got some equal play.

 

I stopped reading after this sentence.

Alceister, do you read anything anyone has said in this post?

When you post, do so with an open mind. I understand that sometimes people feel like others just don't get what they are saying, but when 3/4's of the posts (you having 1/4 of the posts) say that engineers really aren't as strong as you seem to think, engineers quite possibly aren't as strong as you seem to think.


also, APC's have an eighth the HP of an armory. Putting down an armory also sends a very clear message to the enemy that you are staking a claim in the area. APC's are mobile, so you need to just scare them off. Armories have more of the Umph impact that you need. They also allow engineers to quickly switch classes to riflemen or gren to quickly take out either a tank threat or an infantry threat ( Riflemen for stickies, Gren for Mowtar ^_^)

 

Seems what we have here is a failure to communicate.

What I meant by the reduction is that Dig In is only useful against infantry. Going prone to get any bonus explosive reduction is going to get you run over or gunned down by vehicles before you can get into range to lob a sticky at it.

Yes, the possibility exists. However what the majority thinks is not always right.

Anyways, my point about Engineers being overused (as is the thread title) is still valid. Time and time again I have exhaustively posted the same arguments and nobody has come up with any reasonable counters to them.

While the armoury is definitely more static, it is also much more of a defensive structure than anything. Otherwise there isn't much use to them. The APC is much smaller than the armoury or Barracks. That means you can go and drive it to a relatively discreet place, and wall up one hemisphere of it. An APC is much better overall simply because it can transport and spawn at the front lines, as well as replenish ammo and health wherever whenever. Hence why I suggested the "Advanced Infantry Equipment" to get more use out of armouries.

 

Every rifleman should be bitchslapped if he uses dig-in

Armorys are awesome, I always want armorys close to me

Armorys and APC are not compareable because you use them for different things

Cool, comms "grow" armorys and barrackses like mushrooms in a wet cellar


BESIDE THAT,
ALL YOUR POSTS SOUND LIKE POSTS OF SOMEONE,
NEW TO THE MOD, THAT THINKS HE KNOWS EVERYTHING
BEST AND IT HAS TO BE CHANGED.
THAT MAYBEE, THOSE THINGS, ARENT AS YOU SEE THEM.
IS SOMETHING THAT DOESNT SEEM TO COME TO YOUR MIND.

If you use, for example, the wrong rifleman skills or
dont know why or where you have to drop armorys
doesnt mean its useless/underpowered. It just means
you are dont play the game long enough to understand...

 

I've played the game enough to understand alot of things.

First of all, somebody a few pages back suggested that Riflemen get a bonus explosive reduction with Dig-In. I was trying to point out the flaws in that. Going prone against vehicles is suicide, and even against mortars, is plain pointless.

A forward Barracks might be nice early game, but later on unless you've got a factory elsewhere other than your main base you don't see them built that often.

More often than not, Armouries have more of a defensive purpose. That is, if you're being attacked by tanks, you rush in, change class to Grenadier and try to hit them with the rockets. Armouries are usually only useful if established in a base.

Anyways, we're getting side-tracked here. THIS IS AN "ENGINEERS ARE OVERUSED" TOPIC.

And maybe you should consider the possibility that you are too set to the "Old Ways" to see any new means of improving the game. I'm getting the feeling that you're simply being antagonistic because I'm a new member and I've posted this many suggestions so far. Some of them aren't good I admit, but this game is in fact, still in need of improvement, and I believe you can at least acknowledge that.

 

Armories are also insanely cheap at 75 res. Even an APC with plain armor costs more than that, and if you want decent armor + engine it can come to significantly more.

And an armory automatically regenerates the ammo of any tanks in a fairly decent radius, which can be useful. While, yes, engie crates do the same thing, it can still be worth placing armories at key places so engineers don't have to get out and other people don't have to find an engineer (this is especially true when using weapons with low ammo, like HE -- with those, an engineer can actually use ammo faster than they can drop boxes to recover it.)

Finally, an armory lets you change classes. This can be non-trivial; I've often taken advantage of them to rapidly switch to grenadier and rocket-snipe/mortar distant targets, then switched back to engineer to build things or whatever.

For 75 res, it's a pretty good deal. And they're surprisingly tough, too -- every second your opponents waste pounding on your cheap, expendable armory is one less second they're spending hitting your refs, VF, tanks, or other more high-value targets.

 

Also I've made the point that armouries are more or less defensive, which kinda restricts their versatility. Don't got nothing against them, but there is not much point in building an armoury in the middle of nowhere if required, whereas you can drive an APC to the middle of nowhere and then leave as soon as people get off.

We're getting away from the point though. For vehicles, engineers are their own mechanics and quartermasters. For a class that's supposed to build things they're remarkably self-sufficient. I'd rather that at least a new class or two be created, if only to take away the Ammo Crate and Healing capabilities of Engineers.