USF on life support

As the last tournament showed USF are not as OP as some forum warriors last patch argued, actually it's the opposite. We hardly saw anyone pick USF and their weakness vs axis is just obvious in team games when a single jagdpanzer can shut down their entire tank roster.

I feel any further nerfs to core units like Jackson, Pak how or rifles will kill the faction like old Tommy nerfs did to Brits.

We already had the m20, howitzer carriage and Pershing removed from viability, these three should be prioritized with buffs so they actually become viable again

The funny thing is that these units were hardly adjusted. The Pershing was changed the most and it was not alone in the heavy tank adjustments. The same is also true for the jagdpanzer 4. While I have not seen the replays yet, I can say it is not these units individually, unless this is interaction dating back for years.

I look forward to following this thread.

Right now, mechanized is propping up USF pretty well in 1v1, but it just doesn't have a great toolkit for 2v2.

As far as units, the only huge problems I personally have with USF is the M20 being badly overnerfed, and the 81mm Mortar being outright inferior to the Ostheer version with nothing to compensate.

Outside of that, my complaints are mostly about doctrinal stuff. There are a ton of units that are only available in a single doctrine, and several of the doctrinal units need some help (greyhound).

There is some tertiary stuff as well, like Brit grenades being cheaper to upgrade, cheaper to throw, and having a shorter fuse while keeping the same damage profile. Or the 1919 costing more munitions than the LMG42 despite being an inferior weapon, but those are on the lower end of importance to me.

You just come across significantly better players. When you play against a similarly skilled axis player, allies usually have a bit of an edge, and that includes USF. Switch to axis for some time and play. See their weaknesses this way. It will take you on a very steep learning curve to play the game better.

Riflemen should be 6men by default and the M4 should toggle between HE and sabot shells.

Snip

5 mans grens are OP because it was the doc use to win 100% of the matches won by axis which represent 10% of all. Now USF is weak because none used it.

USF were not used because Soviet is very versatile but have weak early that everybody want to exploit with better inf and light vehicule, now remember what have UKF: an really early AT Light Vehicule and a powerfull infantry, USF doesn't have this AT light and so doesn't synergize as well as UKF.

Now stop this kind of reflexion without proper argument over what is really a problem and why. Because the first "forum warrior" who got the incredible idea to complain about "Axis OP" based on a tournament where they just got destroyed was you.

usf doesnt have AA halftrack, stuart, m8? when were they removed?

Show Spoiler

Im pretty sure it can still do wonders in 1vs1s

As for teamgames, yeah, there is a broken AF howi that will soon get nerferino for sure and a lowly-lethal but highly efficient mobile mini-howi and the only allied MG that can supress. Also the best TD.

But all the other factions have much more to offer and there is little reason not to pick them over USF

Im pretty sure it can still do wonders in 1vs1s

As for teamgames, yeah, there is a broken AF howi that will soon get nerferino for sure and a lowly-lethal but highly efficient mobile mini-howi and the only allied MG that can supress. Also the best TD.

But all the other factions have much more to offer and there is little reason not to pick them over USF

*dshka cries silently in the corner*

Since SOV is a given in team games due to the Katyusha, we maybe should take a look about what USF and UKF have to offer compared to each other.

UKF has:
- mines
- a normal ATG
- a mortar pit that has proven to be very resilient due to hiding behind shot blockers and the OKW T2 teching (at least true for the recent 2v2 tournament)
- a more beefy Comet if needed against Panthers
- the AEC that synergizes well with the T70
- decent recon options with the AEC and the pyrotechnic sections (and flares on Royal Artillery as one of the most prominent commanders)
- can build both an MG and a ATG


USF has:
- the Jackson (however I'd argue that it is only that great because it's USF's only reliable late game AT)
- the PaK howie
- the HE Sherman

USF's ATG is quite a muni sink though if you want to use it in the late game, and people tend to spend more muni on commander abilities and grenades. USF's LVs don't synergize with Soviets and scale worse into the mid game. And the lack of mines and either ATG or MG makes them more prone to being overrun.

USF is good in 1v1, but since team games focus so much in late game artillery there is not much USF can offer beside the doctrinal Calliope. And in the early game it's better to have an AEC against the inevitable Puma that can actually force the Puma back than having a Stuart or AA half track that are just prey. Yes the ATG can fight the Puma very well, but then you end up with a munition sink in the late game and you're locked out of an MG for quite some time.

nondoc Lieutenant laughs joyful

I play loads of OST 2v2 with my mate and I think 2xUSF is the easiest matchups there is. It's only when paired with SOV/UKF that they are OK. Obviously, SOV/SOV or SOV/UKF or even UKF/UKF is stronger. No doubt that USF lacks oompf. Dual Puma (one one each team) stalls vehicles that USF has using push/pull and tease tactics and keeping max range. Easy Prey for Pumas. Even better when Puma spots an early ambulance outside of the base at the usual places around the map. There is the inevitable Jackson/Rifleblob in lategame but at that point, its Stug/Tiger/Panther/PaK/PGren/Brumbar or Artillery time!!

Since SOV is a given in team games due to the Katyusha, we maybe should take a look about what USF and UKF have to offer compared to each other.

UKF has:
- mines
- a normal ATG
- a mortar pit that has proven to be very resilient due to hiding behind shot blockers and the OKW T2 teching (at least true for the recent 2v2 tournament)
- a more beefy Comet if needed against Panthers
- the AEC that synergizes well with the T70
- decent recon options with the AEC and the pyrotechnic sections (and flares on Royal Artillery as one of the most prominent commanders)
- can build both an MG and a ATG


USF has:
- the Jackson (however I'd argue that it is only that great because it's USF's only reliable late game AT)
- the PaK howie
- the HE Sherman

USF's ATG is quite a muni sink though if you want to use it in the late game, and people tend to spend more muni on commander abilities and grenades. USF's LVs don't synergize with Soviets and scale worse into the mid game. And the lack of mines and either ATG or MG makes them more prone to being overrun.

USF is good in 1v1, but since team games focus so much in late game artillery there is not much USF can offer beside the doctrinal Calliope. And in the early game it's better to have an AEC against the inevitable Puma that can actually force the Puma back than having a Stuart or AA half track that are just prey. Yes the ATG can fight the Puma very well, but then you end up with a munition sink in the late game and you're locked out of an MG for quite some time.

You've summed up what I wanted to express perfectly, I agree with everything here and to respond to the trolls ITT I was only trying to highlight how dead in the water USF would be without the Jackson, rifles Etc people test in a vacuum then complain about in other threads.

The scott used to be the big indirect threat that would make USF/UKF teams viable, double Scott's and Jackson used to be a pretty formidable addition to beefy UKF Churchill's but builds like this have been nerfed into the past. Sovs are mandatory now as they have the only reliable allied indirect. (Non doc)

I'm afraid the only way to change less of USF on the battlefield is to nerf some UKF and Sov units. Buffing USF does not seem a great idea imo. But one thing that must be remembered is the simple fact of 3 vs 2 factions. Out iof those 3 there will always be the one which is used less.

There are some abilities/units that shoud be nerfed. For example, if quite unbalanced Valentine was one cp later (for example), guards were nerfed (button/hit the dirt abilities were looked into, maybe some muni cost for their ptrs), ZiS barrage was nerfed (move to vet 1, make it one shell only at a grenade price), USF could be much more viable.

The question is whether USF+X are underperforming atm or whether Brit+Sov are just overperforming and therefore picking USF is redundant.
I think USF is in a pretty good spot in 2vs2 atm. Not too good and not too bad (like Ost without 5 men grens).
But i agree that some units like the m20, pak howie or the M8A1 need adjustments.

to the trolls

If you're not on my side, you're just a troll and I won't take the time to properly argue with you.
If your argument are well made, I will just ignore them because there are true and prove that I just want my favorite faction being buff cause I'm bad.

Your lovely USF just get overshadow by UKF, exactly like double Ostheer or double OKW are bad. Does that mean Ostheer/OKW are weak for this reason? No.

And stop looking down on people because you think you have the absolute truth.

My biggest problem with USF is that by the time you can deploy Paras or Rangers you already have 6 infantry squads and there is just no room. Just make them 1CP and lock the weapon upgrades behind Major or sth. If you want to have both ATG and MG you need both officers and by the time you deploy your first officer you will have 3 rifles or you will lose early engagements. This combined with starting Rear Echelons is more than enough when it comes to infantry. Guards, Schocks, Falls not only come earlier (at 2CP compared to 3CP of Paras), but are also featured in factions that don't force you to have this much inf and doctrinal units are easier to put into your build order.

BARs are expensive but that would be OK if not for the stupid focus fire = false... this is why the doctrinal LMG are so much better than BARs even for the higher cost. Right now the most efficient use of USF infantry in teamgames is via blobbing which is stupid on multiple levels.

Vet 3 Calliope is a unicorn. You can have ~50 kills with Calliope and still sit on vet2 with ~95s cooldown, while Pwerfer has ~65s cooldown at vet2. Calliope vet bonuses are just bad. You really need the indirect fire to get rid of teamweapon walls in teamgames otherwise you can't even try to get close with your vehicles, this is why Soviets are so good and why Brits used their cancer Royal Artillery doctrine or land mattress doctrine almost every game. Many 2v2 maps are too small or too narrow to present good flanking opportunities (Poltava, Rails and Metal), or if they are large maps, they usually have some other design flaws like VP and fuel next to each other on Vaux Farmlands combined with wooden fences along the road forcing your troops to retreat home over red cover. I really wish retreating infantry would jump over the fences on their way home. Also No game on Minsk Pocket lasts less than an hour as trying to capture enemy VP, one might get escorted home and wiped by enemy tanks, so it's usually 2:1 VP slow drain and all teamweapons, arty and TDs clash on the middle VP. Some factions with rocket arty and Elefant/ISU/JT are better at this kind of standoffs.

Map design has a lot to do with balance and as an example of a good map in 2v2 I like to present Fields of Winnekendonk because it has it all, long distances, short distances, sight blockers, smartly distributed cover and many many cut offs allowing you to strike different targets and making map control more sophisticated than just sitting in a corner of the map with all your forces controling both fuel and VP.

1 cp. are you mental?
just make obers a t1 unit then
falls 0 cp like Pfusiliers.
jaeger 0 cp like Pfusiliers

airborne guards 1cp

lets just make every elite unit available from the get go so noone even needs to build mainlines. yeaaah

My biggest problem with USF is that by the time you can deploy Paras or Rangers you already have 6 infantry squads and there is just no room. Just make them 1CP and lock the weapon upgrades behind Major or sth. If you want to have both ATG and MG you need both officers and by the time you deploy your first officer you will have 3 rifles or you will lose early engagements. This combined with starting Rear Echelons is more than enough when it comes to infantry. Guards, Schocks, Falls not only come earlier (at 2CP compared to 3CP of Paras), but are also featured in factions that don't force you to have this much inf and doctrinal units are easier to put into your build order.

Those are "elite infatry" and they are not meant to be the core of one's army but a supplement.
Soviet "elite infatry" come earlier as leftover of the older faction design.

Vet 3 Calliope is a unicorn. You can have ~50 kills with Calliope and still sit on vet2 with ~95s cooldown, while Pwerfer has ~65s cooldown at vet2. Calliope vet bonuses are just bad.

1) Unit gain veterancy with damage not kills

2) XP value of unit has to do with cost and since Caloipe cost more than Wefer it also have higher XP value and vet slower

3) vet bonus of caloipe are fine:
Show Spoiler

4) Caloipe is one of the most durably artillery type units, with higher armor and HP and can not be one shoted like other rocket artillery.

5) Caloipe fire a large number of rocket