Paratroopers are way better than Rangers.

Rangers kinda suck, at least compared to Paratroopers. Is there anything Rangers can do that Paratroopers can't do better? I don't see it. You can get 4 Thompsons and a BAR on a 5 man Ranger sqaud but BARs aren't that good and get dropped all the time on Rangers.

So why are Rangers 10 pop? Way, way too high, it should get lowered to 8.

Someone said 4 thompson is his ability ^^


I felt hopeless at his stupid thoughts

Someone said 4 thompson is his ability ^^


I felt hopeless at his stupid thoughts

I'm pretty sure no one even comprehends what you're trying to say here.

No utility and just rush and rush is only they can do

or just use them as AT infantry

Even shock troop is better than Ranger(2cp, 8 pop, no need weapon upgrade, smoke, 1.5 armor, enough strong)

Rangers kinda suck, at least compared to Paratroopers. Is there anything Rangers can do that Paratroopers can't do better? I don't see it. You can get 4 Thompsons and a BAR on a 5 man Ranger sqaud but BARs aren't that good and get dropped all the time on Rangers.

So why are Rangers 10 pop? Way, way too high, it should get lowered to 8.

Rangers can come from a commander which has the Persing. Paras can't do that.
So you think Rangers are on par with Panzer grens now?

Help

Rangers can come from a commander which has the Persing. Paras can't do that.
So you think Rangers are on par with Panzer grens now?

Rangers aren't the worst infantry its just well they aren't really THAT good. They come at 3 cp, pretty late, can't paradrop or pop out of buildings and they have a rediculous 10 pop cost. They struggle quite a bit against Obers and Fallschrimjagers which come earlier. They are a good AT sqaud with 3 bazookas. I've never tried 3 BARs.

Rangers aren't the worst infantry its just well they aren't really THAT good. They come at 3 cp, pretty late, can't paradrop or pop out of buildings and they have a rediculous 10 pop cost. They struggle quite a bit against Obers and Fallschrimjagers which come earlier. They are a good AT sqaud with 3 bazookas. I've never tried 3 BARs.

I'm pretty sure 3x bar ranger can beat lmg obers, tommy rangers beat falls from close. Hell vetted falls will even struggle against unvetted pgrens from close.

3x BARS is a terrible investment considering Thompsons give more DPS most of the time at most the ranges you want to be trading at. I mean, triple bazookas alone is typically a risky move. We're talking about 180 munitions being dumped into a single squad here. And no, I don't think that'd make them better than LMG34 obers at range tbh, mostly because Ober kars are so good.

Anyway, Rangers are good, they have a nice starting RA and, while it will take forever to achieve at vet 3, it gets even better while being a 5-man squad. Most axis elite infantry they face will only have 4 men.

I do agree that Rangers have a frankly kind of strange lack of abilities or utility of any sort other than the cooked grenade (that paratroopers also get). They had sprint in AA, iirc, though I can see why it was removed for multiplayer and why it stays removed now that they get elite bazookas. Likewise I think giving everyone smoke grenades is a bit off. IMO Tactical advance should have been given to them and not Paras, but whatever.

Fact of the matter is theyre good, and yes, they're better than Paratroopers when both have no upgrades and when both have Thompsons, just by their RA advantage alone. I do think Rangers could do with some better veterancy though, instead of literally just copying and pasting Para veterancy (where the ability recharge vet is especially useless considering their only ability is the cooked frag at 35m.)

3x BARS is a terrible investment considering Thompsons give more DPS most of the time at most the ranges you want to be trading at. I mean, triple bazookas alone is typically a risky move. We're talking about 180 munitions being dumped into a single squad here. And no, I don't think that'd make them better than LMG34 obers at range tbh, mostly because Ober kars are so good.

Anyway, Rangers are good, they have a nice starting RA and, while it will take forever to achieve at vet 3, it gets even better while being a 5-man squad. Most axis elite infantry they face will only have 4 men.

I do agree that Rangers have a frankly kind of strange lack of abilities or utility of any sort other than the cooked grenade (that paratroopers also get). They had sprint in AA, iirc, though I can see why it was removed for multiplayer and why it stays removed now that they get elite bazookas. Likewise I think giving everyone smoke grenades is a bit off. IMO Tactical advance should have been given to them and not Paras, but whatever.

Fact of the matter is theyre good, and yes, they're better than Paratroopers when both have no upgrades and when both have Thompsons, just by their RA advantage alone. I do think Rangers could do with some better veterancy though, instead of literally just copying and pasting Para veterancy (where the ability recharge vet is especially useless considering their only ability is the cooked frag at 35m.)

2x bar riflemen win vs lmg 42 grens at all ranges despite having 6% weaker RA. Rangers have 4% weaker RA than obers and have +45% dps at short and +6% at long with their regular rifles compared to riflemen. Obers are like vet3 grens. I
m pretty sure 3x Bar Rangers beat obers at every range.

Rangers just need better Veterancy 1, 25% reduction in grenade cooldown is not the best and should get replaced with something more useful.

The mentality that unit A is better than unit B so lets buff unit A is what has brought the power creep.

Rangers are fine and they certainly do not need a buff.

What they could use as many other QCQ unit is redesign so that they have a reinforcement discount and lower base but a timed ability allowing them take less damage. That would allow these units to perform good but for a limited time.

For once I agree with Codguy lol. Paratroopers with double LMGs are incredible.

Edit: oh wait it’s a balance thread crying for Rangers buffs, why am I not surprised?

They struggle quite a bit against Obers which come earlier

Since when do Obersoldaten with upgrades come out at 3 CPs?

The only thing about Rangers I would change is making them 9 popcap instead of 10 so you can get more than 1 squad of them.

For once I agree with Codguy lol. Paratroopers with double LMGs are incredible.

Edit: oh wait it’s a balance thread crying for Rangers buffs, why am I not surprised?

Yea I saw a cod guy thread comparing 2 usf squads and was super confused. Reading the actual post let me know I was indeed in reality.

Y'all aren't taking this seriously just because it's a codguy thread but he's right this time. Rangers are overnerfed and no longer cost/effective. They're simply not what you expect from a 350MP, 3CP doctrinal infantry that requires minimum 90 munitions.

Comparing them to Paras is out of question of course, Paras are balanced with their doctrines being not-so-powerful. So, buffing them to Para-levels is a terrible idea.

What I suggest is, instead of directly buffing them, give them a bit of utility like smoke/white phosphorus/sprint/moving camo etc. If they're supposed to be the versatile infantry that can choose from 3 options, giving them more utility shouldn't be a problem. I'd like to see a sprint ability but I'd prefer not to deal with sprinting triple-zook Rangers so, I suggest giving them a smoke grenade or moving camo to make them better against support weapons. This should also make the Vet1 bonus better by indirectly buffing it.

Edit: Now that I think about it again, it's possible to lock Sprint ability behind the Thompson upgrade. And giving them stock camo isn't a good idea. So, Sprint or Smoke would be better.

Y'all aren't taking this seriously just because it's a codguy thread but he's right this time. Rangers are overnerfed and no longer cost/effective. They're simply not what you expect from a 350MP, 3CP doctrinal infantry that requires minimum 90 munitions.

Comparing them to Paras is out of question of course, Paras are balanced with their doctrines being not-so-powerful. So, buffing them to Para-levels is a terrible idea.

What I suggest is, instead of directly buffing them, give them a bit of utility like smoke/white phosphorus/sprint/moving camo etc. If they're supposed to be the versatile infantry that can choose from 3 options, giving them more utility shouldn't be a problem. I'd like to see a sprint ability but I'd prefer not to deal with sprinting triple-zook Rangers so, I suggest giving them a smoke grenade or moving camo to make them better against support weapons. This should also make the Vet1 bonus better by indirectly buffing it.

Edit: Now that I think about it again, it's possible to lock Sprint ability behind the Thompson upgrade. And giving them stock camo isn't a good idea. So, Sprint or Smoke would be better.

Yeah give a 5man squad with smgs sprint with their awesome grenade. Amazing idea.

Or even better give them smoke so MGs are useless and they close the distance easily.

I'm pretty sure 3x bar ranger can beat lmg obers, tommy rangers beat falls from close. Hell vetted falls will even struggle against unvetted pgrens from close.

no one use 3 BAR ranger

u should play more and learn to play coh2

Y'all aren't taking this seriously just because it's a codguy thread but he's right this time. Rangers are overnerfed and no longer cost/effective. They're simply not what you expect from a 350MP, 3CP doctrinal infantry that requires minimum 90 munitions.

Comparing them to Paras is out of question of course, Paras are balanced with their doctrines being not-so-powerful. So, buffing them to Para-levels is a terrible idea.

What I suggest is, instead of directly buffing them, give them a bit of utility like smoke/white phosphorus/sprint/moving camo etc. If they're supposed to be the versatile infantry that can choose from 3 options, giving them more utility shouldn't be a problem. I'd like to see a sprint ability but I'd prefer not to deal with sprinting triple-zook Rangers so, I suggest giving them a smoke grenade or moving camo to make them better against support weapons. This should also make the Vet1 bonus better by indirectly buffing it.

Edit: Now that I think about it again, it's possible to lock Sprint ability behind the Thompson upgrade. And giving them stock camo isn't a good idea. So, Sprint or Smoke would be better.

Rangers got nerfed like once lmao.

Rangers are fine IMO, they're really really good at being a simple killing unit. If they had any utility they'd be OP and you have other units to cover utility for it. You can even make them sprint with captain vet1 ability lmao. I personally like paras better because of tac assault but you can't get a pershing with airborne doctrine.