Brits in 1v1 is a joke

what do you mean?

As we see on the test's bolster and weapon rack are mandatory upgrades if you want to survive as UKF in an even game.

Usually in a 1v1 5 squads benefit from bolster and weapon rack so u can split the tech cost by 5.
This would lead to another 60 MP and 10 Fuel for each squad. Then you have to reinforce to the 5th man for 28MP.

So a 5 Man double Bren squad cost 358 MP 10 Fuel and 90 Mun.

To test them again in a fair fight (by cost) i have to let fight two Section's against three LMG Gren's.

It's 716 MP 20 Fuel 180 Mun 16 pop vs. 720 MP 180 Mun 21 pop

Result: on all ranges in green cover, Gren's will win.
I tested this 8 times for each range and i non of the test's Section's have won.

this u forgot that
1) green pay for tier 1 so u didn't count it in the equation
2)1 IS is free form the start
3) green pays for more tech cost for lmg and nades (around 20 fu and 150 mp)
4) after upgrade any squad built will be 5 man with no extra cost

if we count it then it's 317 mp 60 mp and 10 fu for green (diving x 3 tech cost) vs 358 mp 10 fu and 90 mun of IS

so no it's not 3 green vs 2 IS
it's 3 green vs 3 IS 1 with 4 men and no LMGs

this uis not counting fiest IS is free

if we do then it's 2 is with lmgs and 2 IS 4 men no lmg vs 3 greens

this u forgot that
1) green pay for tier 1 so u didn't count it in the equation

Cost of tech AND tier structures is factored into balance for getting med tank.

2)1 IS is free form the start

Side upgrades manpower cost and fact that ost starts with bonus MP just for being ost make it irrelevant.

3) green pays for more tech cost for lmg and nades (around 20 fu and 150 mp)

Grens pay around 0 fu and 0 mp for unlocking LMG and nades, because its not any kind of extra cost on top of their teching, its a time lock exclusively, allies have upgrades locked behind extra costs, axis upgrades are locked exclusively behind time. Its hilarious that people are still dumb enough to try to use this argument.

4) after upgrade any squad built will be 5 man with no extra cost

Buy the time you have the upgrade, you aren't going to be building even a single extra IS squad, unless you lose some and you STILL have to pay 100 extra mp for 3 existing ones by that time to reinforce them.

Cost of tech AND tier structures is factored into balance for getting med tank.


Side upgrades manpower cost and fact that ost starts with bonus MP just for being ost make it irrelevant.


Grens pay around 0 fu and 0 mp for unlocking LMG and nades, because its not any kind of extra cost on top of their teching. Its hilarious that people are still dumb enough to try to use this argument.


Buy the time you have the upgrade, you aren't going to be building even a single extra IS squad, unless you lose some.

im literally talking about the 2 is vs 3 gren dumb example not medium tank timing

read for once kat if u want to be mod u need to read all the post

im literally talking about the 2 is vs 3 gren dumb example not medium tank timing read for once kat

Show Spoiler

if u want to be mod u need to read all the post

Given what kind of posts I've had moderated/invised in the past, I'm more then 100% positive its not a requirement

what does that no mean ? that u can't respond ? that u agree 3 vs 2 IS is stupid ?

what does that no mean ? that u can't respond ? that u agree 3 vs 2 IS is stupid ?

The whole example is stupid, because if you aren't building HMG as 1st unit as ost, then you've clearly picked wrong faction.
I'll stick by reasonable examples that revolve around med tank timing and possible BOs/side techs that come with it.

The whole example is stupid, because if you aren't building HMG as 1st unit as ost, then you've clearly picked wrong faction.
I'll stick by reasonable examples that revolve around med tank timing and possible BOs/side techs that come with it.

that i agree too, not the stupid "we need to count all the upgrade for IS but let's skip tier 1 for green or the fact they have battle phases to pay more"

https://www.coh2.org/topic/96750/redirect-thread-faction-teching-and-timing

this u forgot that
1) green pay for tier 1 so u didn't count it in the equation
2)1 IS is free form the start
3) green pays for more tech cost for lmg and nades (around 20 fu and 150 mp)
4) after upgrade any squad built will be 5 man with no extra cost

1) but the tech to P4 is what counts and its cheaper then UKF's tech with side tech
+ i calculated to build all buildings (T1,T2,T3) which in some cases can be skipped since you can
build PGrens from T0

2) OST start with 430 Mp 20 Fuel and one Pio, so its 630Mp and 20Fuel.
UKF start with 350 MP 20 Fuel and one IS, so its 620Mp and 20Fuel.
The "free" IS is payed with the starting resources

3) That's true but for faust, nade and no need for weapon rack its a very good price for performance
see point 1, side tech + normal tech cost just more then OST tech

4) yeah but when do you get the upgrade practical after the 3 or 4 squad, this dosen't make much
difference

1) but the tech to P4 is what counts and its cheaper then UKF's tech with side tech
+ i calculated to build all buildings (T1,T2,T3) which in some cases can be skipped since you can
build PGrens from T0

2) OST start with 430 Mp 20 Fuel and one Pio, so its 630Mp and 20Fuel.
UKF start with 350 MP 20 Fuel and one IS, so its 620Mp and 20Fuel.
The "free" IS is payed with the starting resources

3) That's true but for faust, nade and no need for weapon rack its a very good price for performance
see point 1, side tech + normal tech cost just more then OST tech

4) yeah but when do you get the upgrade practical after the 3 or 4 squad, this dosen't make much
difference

osther like SU can't cap with engineer as u need to build stuff = more capping and more resources, and if so that means engineer should have same dps as IS which they don't, dumb point

check again
https://www.coh2.org/topic/96750/redirect-thread-faction-teching-and-timing

u can skip bolster or upgrades too if u want to rush, it's not mandatory, they will still do their job bolster just make them near elite lvl

osther like SU can't cap with engineer as u need to build stuff = more capping and more resources, and if so that means engineer should have same dps as IS which they don't, dumb point

check again
https://www.coh2.org/topic/96750/redirect-thread-faction-teching-and-timing

u can skip bolster or upgrades too if u want to rush, it's not mandatory, they will still do their job bolster just make them near elite lvl

that's new to me that pioneers cant cap

and as i mention earlier and you can see in the test's, if you skip boltser and upgrades LMG grens will overwhelm you before you will make it to Cromwell except you play way better then your opponent.

The whole example is stupid, because if you aren't building HMG as 1st unit as ost, then you've clearly picked wrong faction.

You can crutch on a 2 assgren/1 gren into quick mech assault group opening. It works quite well actually.

that's new to me that pioneers cant cap

and as i mention earlier and you can see in the test's, if you skip boltser and upgrades LMG grens will overwhelm you before you will make it to Cromwell except you play way better then your opponent.

lmg green will not overwhelm u as they are not vet3 early game (i know very well why u tested them at vet 3 as IS has minimal vet bonuses) and IS are still better at long range as u showed in ur test, or u can just use bolster and beat lmg green keeping ur munitions as shown by derby test

UKF's weakness against Panzergrenadiers and Assault Grenadiers is a problem, not freaking Grenadiers. Vet 0 Sections beat Grens. Bolster only becomes necessary once Grens get their LMG's and will allow them to outperform Grens again until vet 2. You could get racks once all Grens have vet 2+ and LMG's, but you can safely wait until after Cromwell, because the difference in performance isn't that big. Grenadiers have no way to scale up against bolstered Sections that have 1 to 2 Brens.

You also fail to mention the advantages of Sections to make it seem like all odds are stacked against them:

- Sections are cheaper to reinforce at 28 mp vs 30 mp.
- Grenadiers require a 150 manpower med bunker and 80 manpower T1 structure.
- Sections have reusable on the field healing making it easier for them to keep map presence.
- UKF starts with a section, Ostheer with a Pioneer. Sections are a better combat unit for the cost.
- Any section can make a sandbag so they will often have a positional advantage.
- Once Sections get bolster, small arms damage gets spread out more, so they bleed less.

UKF has the initiative in terms of mainline infantry, while Ostheer has the MG42 and greater flexibility in terms of unit choices (Pgrens, different light vehicles, more doctrinal infantry, etc). However, because Sections aren't completely broken anymore the weaknesses of UKF have become quite exploitable. Therefore I'd propose to make UKF a bit more flexible by making Assault Sections a non-doctrinal upgrade locked behind weapon racks with the WP nade removed. Lend Lease could be given something like the artillery strike in USF's Mechanized Company instead.

lmg green will not overwhelm u as they are not vet3 early game (i know very well why u tested them at vet 3 as IS has minimal vet bonuses) and IS are still better at long range as u showed in ur test, or u can just use bolster and beat lmg green keeping ur munitions as shown by derby test

So you mean IS's scale bad at late game, u want to give them another Vet 3 buff?
I tested them on Vet 3 because of the poll about the latest vet 3 buff and people complain about late game Bren blob, so that they can see that a vet 3 LMG Gren blob is even better.


The test's where at the best conditions for IS and even then they struggle, what if if u want to attack or you cant stand still for 1 min because of mortars or don't find cover or... ?

You keep saying the same things again and again and ignoring numbers and facts, its pointless to continue discuss with you.

So you mean IS's scale bad at late game, u want to give them another Vet 3 buff?
I tested them on Vet 3 because of the poll about the latest vet 3 buff and people complain about late game Bren blob, so that they can see that a vet 3 LMG Gren blob is even better.


The test's where at the best conditions for IS and even then they struggle, what if if u want to attack or you cant stand still for 1 min because of mortars or don't find cover or... ?

You keep saying the same things again and again and ignoring numbers and facts, its pointless to continue discuss with you.

u literally made up numbers, that cost thing literally ur opinion, as i could just count the whole tech of the osther on gren cost which is dumb

and what im ignoring ? i know 4 men gren vet 3 beat 4 men IS 2 lmg at vet 3 close range, duh, lmg have inverse dps curve at close range they are worse than normal rifles (both bren and 42)

at long range IS generally wins as u and derby showed, u simply WANT IS to be shown as UP when they aren't

btw people complain of the vet 3 buff is stupid but yes vet 3 2 lmg IS with 5 men are a menace in the battle field with or without the the 5% better accuracy at vet 3

The first test was very biased and trying to prove sth rather than test. Vet 3 sections without bolster, with 2 brens and with no cover are just a funny scenario. The tests should be done at vet0 in all distances, with and without cover first. Then with upgrades, one at a time in the same scenario. Then with vet. The upgrades should include bolster. Without it the whole discussion does not take most realistic combat situations into account. Bolster is the best upgrade as it adds survaliability and doesn't change the squad cost. It also allows to buy 5 men squads for only 270mp. To me UKF is really powerful, especially with t0 mgs and sectiins. They are just fine.

The first test was very biased and trying to prove sth rather than test. Vet 3 sections without bolster, with 2 brens and with no cover are just a funny scenario. The tests should be done at vet0 in all distances, with and without cover first. Then with upgrades, one at a time in the same scenario. Then with vet. The upgrades should include bolster. Without it the whole discussion does not take most realistic combat situations into account. Bolster is the best upgrade as it adds survaliability and doesn't change the squad cost. It also allows to buy 5 men squads for only 270mp. To me UKF is really powerful, especially with t0 mgs and sectiins. They are just fine.

So just because the test shows grens do not suck as much as claimed by lots of wher players its a biased test.

You claiming bias on this test, when you only see up on axis side and op on allied side invalidates your claim entirely.

The test was to show 4 men grens vs 4 men sections. To show if you do not upgrade to 5 men what would happen in the inf department.

So just because the test shows grens do not suck as much as claimed by lots of wher players its a biased test.

You claiming bias on this test, when you only see up on axis side and op on allied side invalidates your claim entirely.

The test was to show 4 men grens vs 4 men sections. To show if you do not upgrade to 5 men what would happen in the inf department.

To me sections are fine. Brits have great versatile infantry. I always use bolster. As UKF you must play like ostheer and use the full power of sections AND mgs. You just can't play them like USF or Sov. Sections can easily carry you to next stages of the game and remain your staple infantry. I can't imagine a scenario where realistically speaking you don't put sections in cover where they are boosted. In their "natural" circumstances and when properly supported, they rock.

When it comes to testing - one should test all scenarios and only then draw conclusions. You can't set up a test in probably the only scenario when a given unit loses and use it as an argument to boost a unit. A risk of unbalancing is too great then.

To me sections are fine.

Sections are fine as now, but the faction is not.

Brits have great versatile infantry.

definition of "versatile": able to adapt or be adapted to many different functions or activities.

Possible functions of sections:
- Defense with bolster and LMG, camping cover, ok.
- AT with PIAT, but who event do that ._.
- Assault, not practical without doc.

I always use bolster. As UKF you must play like ostheer and use the full power of sections AND mgs. You just can't play them like USF or Sov.

Bolster is a mandatory upgrade so almost everyone use it, including me, except when i go for commando.

Sure UKF cant play like US or sov, but they either cant play like ost, because they lack many tools.

Sections can easily carry you to next stages of the game and remain your staple infantry.

They have to carry but no longer easily. They still can sort of do that but require heavily investment that delay your next stage.

I can't imagine a scenario where realistically speaking you don't put sections in cover where they are boosted. In their "natural" circumstances and when properly supported, they rock.

Scenario where sections can be caught outside cover: Assaulting, flanking, etc.

Their "natural" circumstances is defensive and they do good in that role, that's all.

To me sections are fine. Brits have great versatile infantry. I always use bolster. As UKF you must play like ostheer and use the full power of sections AND mgs. You just can't play them like USF or Sov. Sections can easily carry you to next stages of the game and remain your staple infantry. I can't imagine a scenario where realistically speaking you don't put sections in cover where they are boosted. In their "natural" circumstances and when properly supported, they rock.

When it comes to testing - one should test all scenarios and only then draw conclusions. You can't set up a test in probably the only scenario when a given unit loses and use it as an argument to boost a unit. A risk of unbalancing is too great then.

I think for the cost and getting their nades and lmg,s and punishment out of cover they are slightly up.
Your pay for a 5 men squad but get 4 men until you pay more. The 2mp less reinforce cost and sandbags dont cover that completely.