Posts: 888
There is only one troll, and it is you. Say what the USF has against the kubel, before the opening of the T1 and T2. I hope you won’t tell me to choose a mechanized doctrine with the WC51, just to play against the kubel.
Posts: 888
I agree 100% give them 4 bars from the start
Posts: 960
1. The Riflemans are OK. Their problem is vet. I still can’t understand why can’t give them an AT grenade after opening T1 or T2. And put on the first vet an improvement in combat performance.
OKW has raketen in t0, or panzerfusillers against the against british universal or M3. The USF has nothing against the kubel; it can calmly drive you out of hiding.
There is only one troll, and it is you. Say what the USF has against the kubel, before the opening of the T1 and T2. I hope you won’t tell me to choose a mechanized doctrine with the WC51, just to play against the kubel.
Posts: 268
You can't do anything to counter a Kubel unless you catch it by surprise. You have no snares, no AT.
its basically not a threat.
Posts: 960
Dude, always complaining about the USF, in particular, hating Jackson, says:
https://youtu.be/1zPSA2t4MqE?t=336
Timecode
5:36 and 6:00
Posts: 268
I point out things that are OP for all factions, like how "Panic Puma" shouldn't return to OST, how PF spam isn't being addressed in this patch, and even made a detailed thread about how USF needs an intermediate AT... but I guess pointing out that USF has the highest win-rate, and that it might be OP, makes me biased.
As for your video, at 5:36 it's a single rifle squad vs. a Kubel, an SPio, and Volks squad. The Rifle squad was losing either way. At 6:00 it's again a single rifle squad vs. all 3, with an RE squad joining in a bit later.
Neither of these engagements were decided by the Kubel showing up. They were lost because it was a 3v1, which is exactly how those situations should play out.
If you mean the kubel pushing squads around; every vehicle can do this. The M3, UC, WC51, etc.
Posts: 960
> In the team tournament of the 2x2 Masters Cup, the USF was the worst. (alright, there was simply no luck)
> In the next 1x1 tournament, the USF shared the best result with the Soviets, with a difference of 1% (No, it's all Jackson's fault, it's OP)
No bias.
And the WC51 is doctrinal.(Apparently you forgot) And OKW has raketen to defend against it.
Posts: 563
[Ok, I actually agree Pathfinders are pretty pathetic tbh (I could have sworn they had 0.9 RA once, but at 1 RA they're squishy af with very little combat value), but they offer great sight and let you reinforce your paratrooper models in the field with beacons, so when going airborne or recon support they are more of an investment into future units than anything else.]
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
And the WC51 is doctrinal.(Apparently you forgot) And OKW has raketen to defend against it.
 | Playercard of T.R. Stormjäger | |||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
Fuck i messed up quoting
Posts: 503 | Subs: 1
Dude, always complaining about the USF, in particular, hating Jackson, says:
https://youtu.be/1zPSA2t4MqE?t=336
Timecode
5:36 and 6:00
Posts: 1563
So I'm thinking about units available to USF as alternatives to Riflemen the three are:
Pathfinders
Assault Engineers
Cavalry Riflemen
All are horrendously over priced, none are particularly good combat units.
Pathfinders have some useful abilities with a large sight range, ability to place beacons and cloaking ability. They are poor combat units however and cost an astounding 290 MP so I can't see them as a viable alternative to Riflemen.
Assault Engineers are also quite expensive at 280 MP, same cost as Riflemen but are pretty poor combat units as well especially at that price, they also seem to scale very poor and become less and less viable the longer the game goes on, in fact after the first 5-10 minutes they seem useless. They cost the same as Assault Grenadiers and you'd think they'd have comperable combat preformance but that they do not. Their repair and construction abilities are redundant to RETs.
Cavalry Riflemen arrive at 1 CP so I guess for that reason alone you really couldn't use them as a Riflemen replacement but more of a Riflemen supplement. They aren't a particularly good combat unit in and of themselves but they are much better than the other two afore mentioned units. They preform best when fighting inside an M3 halftrack due to their very squishy nature. Their AT satchel alone makes them a fairly good unit but they are too weak to be an effective CQB unit on their own.
So really we're still stuck with the dumb Riflemen, Riflemen, Riflemen, LT/CPT build order. I hate having more than two Riflemen because they bleed your MP dry and are terrible later in the game and take up valuable pop and MP for better infantry units like Paratroopers or Rangers.
Posts: 2358
Posts: 3260
Posts: 1563
I must have been dreaming when NOS Markov and freedom (the chinese top20 player) went Recon Support and dropped paratroopers against me. I must also have been dreaming when AshaGod said in another thread he always goes Recon Support vs Ost because the combat group is broken OP.
Posts: 5279
There is only one troll, and it is you. Say what the USF has against the kubel, before the opening of the T1 and T2. I hope you won’t tell me to choose a mechanized doctrine with the WC51, just to play against the kubel.
Posts: 783
To be fair Rangers(specially thompson ones) have a chance to get shreded by lmg gren, which is bot hilarious and kinda pf a bummer.
Posts: 1563
What... rangers with thompsons who close on LMG42 grens massacre the grens.
Unless the grens are vet 3 and full health, and the rangers are vet 0 with prior damage.
Posts: 268
Gunfire.the usf has gunfire agaijst the kuble because its made of paper. You know how sometimes when you move your infantry behind objects a colored shield pops up? Thats cover.put your units in the green ones and the kuble will lose.
 |
|
|
39 | ||
|
|
|
|
15 | ||
 |
|
|
804 | ||
 |
|
|
114 | ||
 |
|
|
98 | ||
|
|
|
|
29 | ||
|
|
|
|
20 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
