Post by HangryBird on Mar 5, 2021 20:52:12 GMT
I don't know, I just don't see the use in them. Since mortars ignore the defense of buildings and fortifications, they are meant to take out fortifications and attack cities and buildings, but usually, I find that assault and anti-tank troops do the job better. As for engineers, they can build fortifications, making them great on defense. However, very rarely will you have the objective to defend a city for a certain amount of turns, which is the only situation where investing in fortifications is actually worth it. Again, you're usually better off using assault and anti-tank troops. Though if I were to improve mortars and engineers, I would do the following:
Mortars
I think the ability of mortars needs to be expanded; it suffers from being too situational. I think mortars should be able to ignore the defense of the terrain, like mountains and jungles, in addition to buildings and fortifications. Terrain with defense boosts are common in every map, so I think this addition would be a good improvement for the versatility of mortars. I think easytech was trying to push the mortars as a more versatile option compared to assault, who is specialized against infantry and anti-tank, who is specialized against armor. That's why I think improving the versatility of mortars is the best choice to make them stand out.
Engineers
I think the ability of engineers is fine, except for one thing. The main reason engineers are only good on defense is because you can't build and attack an enemy during the same turn. If you're on offense, it isn't worth it to build; you're wasting an opportunity to attack the enemy first. Thus, I think engineers should be able to build and attack during the same turn. This way, engineers can actually be used on offense, which is the situation you will most commonly be in. After all, paratroopers can paradrop and attack during the same turn, so why can't engineers do the same? Lastly, a small change in fortifications: land forts should not decrease an infantry's attack by 35%. Land forts are supposed to be infantry acting like artillery, but the damage they do isn't enough, so I would get rid of this debuff.
Mortars
I think the ability of mortars needs to be expanded; it suffers from being too situational. I think mortars should be able to ignore the defense of the terrain, like mountains and jungles, in addition to buildings and fortifications. Terrain with defense boosts are common in every map, so I think this addition would be a good improvement for the versatility of mortars. I think easytech was trying to push the mortars as a more versatile option compared to assault, who is specialized against infantry and anti-tank, who is specialized against armor. That's why I think improving the versatility of mortars is the best choice to make them stand out.
Engineers
I think the ability of engineers is fine, except for one thing. The main reason engineers are only good on defense is because you can't build and attack an enemy during the same turn. If you're on offense, it isn't worth it to build; you're wasting an opportunity to attack the enemy first. Thus, I think engineers should be able to build and attack during the same turn. This way, engineers can actually be used on offense, which is the situation you will most commonly be in. After all, paratroopers can paradrop and attack during the same turn, so why can't engineers do the same? Lastly, a small change in fortifications: land forts should not decrease an infantry's attack by 35%. Land forts are supposed to be infantry acting like artillery, but the damage they do isn't enough, so I would get rid of this debuff.
