OST clubbing UKF like a baby seal

OST really beats the hell out of UKF. This is probably the most lopsided match up in game right now. There is a massive cost-preformace gap for UKF units at the moment along with a lack of abilities.

With USF you have good units in a crappy tech tree, with UKF you've got a good tech tree but your infantry are lacking. I have to say I think Infantry Sections are the worst mainline unit in the game right now. They want to charge you 35 fuel and 150 MP just to allow your infantry sections to fight Grenadiers on equal footing. You've got no long range units and your CQB units are subpar. The Officer was a good addtion but really expensive and forced to vet for the 5th man.

Meanwhile OST has everything cheap and available like always, and it actually preforms well. It seems like the WFA are all underdeveloped compared to OST and Soviets, UKF is definitely the new hard mode.

I have to say I think Infantry Sections are the worst mainline unit in the game right now.

Volks conscripts and grenadiers would like to have a word with you...

It seems like the WFA are all underdeveloped compared to OST and Soviets, UKF is definitely the new hard mode.

Sov is the worst faction ingame in terms of winrate soo i doubt SOV is anything to complain about... ostheer meanwhile is a strong faction but not an oppressive one... just an annoying faction to fight in teamgames because of how hilariously broken the mg42 is...

Outside of teamgames ost is mostly fine...

OST really beats the hell out of UKF. This is probably the most lopsided match up in game right now. There is a massive cost-preformace gap for UKF units at the moment along with a lack of abilities.

With USF you have good units in a crappy tech tree, with UKF you've got a good tech tree but your infantry are lacking. I have to say I think Infantry Sections are the worst mainline unit in the game right now. They want to charge you 35 fuel and 150 MP just to allow your infantry sections to fight Grenadiers on equal footing. You've got no long range units and your CQB units are subpar. The Officer was a good addtion but really expensive and forced to vet for the 5th man.

Meanwhile OST has everything cheap and available like always, and it actually preforms well. It seems like the WFA are all underdeveloped compared to OST and Soviets, UKF is definitely the new hard mode.

how con u fail with UKF vs ost, when you have similar unit in your loadout? Mostly in even better version (grens vs IS, bunkers vs bofors, motor emplacment vs mortar, AEC vs 222,... ) common...its not this hard

I dont know how it looks like in 1v1's , but in all team game modes infantry sections dominate the playing field as a mainline. In early game its often unavoidable to fight them out of cover, while in mid game they either get their brens up or are 5 man squads, additionally they slaughter with vet 3 and brens.

In my experience as a filthy UKF main, the tommy vs grenadier matchup is more or less fine. It's the early Ostheer sniper that totally dominates Brits unless the Brit player has IQ > 200.

UKF is OST on steroids.
Everything OST has, UKF simply do it equal or better.

4men IS >>> 4men Grens.
5men IS > 5men Grens.
AEC > 222 and 251.
Comet = Panther.
Cromwell = P4.
Bofors > Bunkers.
Centaur >>>> Ostwind.
Trenches and 17pdr dont need a Doctrine.
Ost Teching is horrible, compared to UKF.

Only MG42 is wayyy better than Vickers.

UKF is OST on steroids.
Everything OST has, UKF simply do it equal or better.

4men IS >>> 4men Grens.
5men IS > 5men Grens.
Comet = Panther.
Cromwell = P4.
Ost Teching is horrible, compared to UKF.

Only MG42 is wayyy better than Vickers.

wrong wrong and wrong again

1. 4 man grens even with 4 man IS... 4 man grens have 7% larger target size and have 8% less DPS but grens 12% cheaper and more importantly dont have their DPS halved while outside cover... this means IS have to stay in cover when fighting against grenaders which leaves them vulnerable to riflenades...

4 man grens > 4 man IS
2. 5 man grens are superior to IS despite their lower target size... same arguments from the 4 man case but this is because grenadiers get a G43 rifle which not only has significanly higher DPS than a normal grenadier KAR98 but also has the chance to proxy crit models... granted the upgrade is technically more expensive since it is done per squad and costs more than insignificant amount of munitions but grens still take the cake...

5 man grens > 5 man IS
3. the panther outclasses the comet in terms of anti armor... the panther has more HP penetration accuracy and ROF in exchange for slightly more armor more AOE and a bit of speed...

the comet normally outclasses the base panther in terms of anti infantry but the panther can equip the pintle MG42 which increases its anti infantry DPS dramatically pushing its DPS to around that of a comet
TLDR; panther outclasses comet in terms of anti armor and is even with the comet...

panther > comet

4. the stats for the cromwell are bugged and cannot be opened in https://coh2.serealia.ca/ but i am sure the panzer 4 can 1v1 the cromwell quite comfortably while still packing anti infantry power

panzer 4 > cromwell

5. if you think ost teching is horrible wait till you see SOV and OKW... OST actually has one of the cheapest tech costs in the game especially after its numerous buffs... you will find OST T3 to be quite a bit cheaper than SOV or OKW T3 by quite a margin

OST really beats the hell out of UKF. This is probably the most lopsided match up in game right now.

I guess you forgot UKF beating the shit out of OKW.

I guess you forgot UKF beating the shit out of OKW.

USF vs OKW is even worse... USF kicks OKW in the face soo hard the shoe print is imprinted on it...


id say UKF vs OST is fairly balanced however the matchup is dependent on your ability to take out the ostheer sniper...

....

I agree with a fair bit though some things are a bit iffy.

I think the 4man gren vs 4man IS matchup is close, slightly in the IS favor. The balancing factor is of course IS are also a bit more expensive out of the box. Rifle nades im not sure are much of a factor here since close range is where the grenadiers actually best the IS in dps but you cant use a rifle nade from this range. The advantage of rifle nade vs a unit that needs cover is going to come down more to situation and player skill.

5 man grens are better than 5 man is definitely. Only thing is that grenadiers don't get the "Sniper" G43, so they don't get model crits. Otherwise I agree.


Even with pintle MG, comet is better than panther in AI due to the main gun and other anti infantry attributes(wp smoke, crew grenades). Panther is better at anti tank naturally. Plus it can take an extra hit and has longer range.
I'd say they fairly even in terms of what they bring to the table overall.



Some other things-

AEC > 222 and 251.
Bofors > Bunkers.
Centaur >>>> Ostwind.

Id hesitate to say AEC is just flat better then the OST lineup. It does scale better and it does beat both the 222 and 251 in a straight match, but both vehicles are substantially cheaper and offer a lot more utility then the AEC. The 222 is better vs infantry, is better at recon, and has AA. The 251 can initially reinforce and heal, and the flamethrower upgrade is absolutely devastating if your opponent lacks mobile counters.


Bofors are worse then bunkers in cost effectiveness. Bunkers are better at suppressing blobs, have no fuel cost, do not require tech, and do not lock the player out of a different unit.

The ostwind is far better then the centaur. Its faster, its better against vehicles, and its projectiles dont collide with terrain as much as the centaur. The only real advantage the centaur has is anti aircraft power.

I agree with a fair bit though some things are a bit iffy.

I think the 4man gren vs 4man IS matchup is close, slightly in the IS favor. The balancing factor is of course IS are also a bit more expensive out of the box. Rifle nades im not sure are much of a factor here since close range is where the grenadiers actually best the IS in dps but you cant use a rifle nade from this range. The advantage of rifle nade vs a unit that needs cover is going to come down more to situation and player skill.

the ehh IS in close range end up losing to grens while IS at long range can easily be riflenaded... i dont think its by a lot though but id say its safe to say 4 man grens are a bit better than 4 man IS...

5 man grens are better than 5 man is definitely. Only thing is that grenadiers don't get the "Sniper" G43, so they don't get model crits. Otherwise I agree.

they get the jager G43 according to the statpage but it may be a different iteration... cannot confirm soo id like to have absolute confirmation from a modder...

Even with pintle MG, comet is better than panther in AI due to the main gun and other anti infantry attributes(wp smoke, crew grenades). Panther is better at anti tank naturally. Plus it can take an extra hit and has longer range.
I'd say they fairly even in terms of what they bring to the table overall.

im pretty sure their MTTK vs infantry is comparable since the pintle does do alot of damage (equal to the T-34-76s machinegun dps which is alot)

but yeah WP smoke and crew grenades do make it easier for comets... though honestly ive only really used crew grenades vs weapon teams... WP smoke is more general purpose for sure... though the panther`s overdrive/combat blitz is also a pretty good general purpose ability aswell...

still im inclined to think the panther is a bit better for what it gives and how much it costs...

Bofors are worse then bunkers in cost effectiveness. Bunkers are better at suppressing blobs, have no fuel cost, do not require tech, and do not lock the player out of a different unit.

i think the bofors is alot more useful than the bunker in teamgames where the bofors can lock down an area for longer time than a bunker... but for 1v1s the bunker is better for sure

P O S T R E P L A Y

e but this is because grenadiers get a G43 rifle which not only has significanly higher DPS than a normal grenadier KAR98 but also has the chance to proxy crit models...

VSL Grens get a regular Grenadier G43 which is just a Kar 98K with higher close/mid and moving DPS, not the sniper variant. Only the JLI G43 can crit models.

...

The ostwind is far better then the centaur. Its faster, its better against vehicles, and its projectiles dont collide with terrain as much as the centaur. The only real advantage the centaur has is anti aircraft power.

Centaur uses accuracy and Ostwind AOE so direct comparison is rather misleading. Are sure that Centaur even has projectiles in it auto fire?

USF vs OKW is even worse... USF kicks OKW in the face soo hard the shoe print is imprinted on it...


id say UKF vs OST is fairly balanced so long as the ostheer sniper isnt around...

A little offtopic but I find it funny how the USF vs OKW matchup has been a onesided stomp for ages. Either OKW destroys USF or USF destroys OKW.

I guess you forgot UKF beating the shit out of OKW.

OKW vs UKF in 2020

OKW vs UKF in 2020

OKW vs UKF isnt as bad as OKW VS USF....

volks get slaughtered by rifles soo hard it isnt even funny.... the only real chance OKW has vs USF is to abuse their lack of an incendiary nade and to stay in buildings... even then its still not a guarantee (thanks to the mortar)

Centaur uses accuracy and Ostwind AOE so direct comparison is rather misleading. Are sure that Centaur even has projectiles in it auto fire?

I did some testing. First, it does have collision properties with terrain like hedges and lower elevations as well as vehicles, though it seems to just phase through others such as haystacks. Second, the Weapon DOES have AOE, AND it has attack ground, which leaves me to believe it is in fact a projectile.

the ehh IS in close range end up losing to grens while IS at long range can easily be riflenaded... i dont think its by a lot though but id say its safe to say 4 man grens are a bit better than 4 man IS...


they get the jager G43 according to the statpage but it may be a different iteration... cannot confirm soo id like to have absolute confirmation from a modder...



im pretty sure their MTTK vs infantry is comparable since the pintle does do alot of damage (equal to the T-34-76s machinegun dps which is alot)

but yeah WP smoke and crew grenades do make it easier for comets... though honestly ive only really used crew grenades vs weapon teams... WP smoke is more general purpose for sure... though the panther`s overdrive/combat blitz is also a pretty good general purpose ability aswell...

still im inclined to think the panther is a bit better for what it gives and how much it costs...




i think the bofors is alot more useful than the bunker in teamgames where the bofors can lock down an area for longer time than a bunker... but for 1v1s the bunker is better for sure

So dodging a rifle nade at long range is very easy, even if the initial animation bugs out. I wouldnt call it a win for grenadiers if that is the winning factor.


The jaeger G43 is the standard close range variant. If you look at Jaeger light infantry, they too have this, but JLI ALSO have a version called "Jaeger Light Recon". This is the sniper variant.
Edit: The reason for this is that on release, the JLI came equipped with x4 standard G43s instead of their current kit.

The comet has poo for machine guns so if we are just talking about machine gun fire, yeah the panther definitely outstrips it. It should also be noted that the T-34's GOOD machine gun is actually its hull gun-with over 17dps at out to 10 meters- and not the turret gun.
Also, you do get warspeed with the comet, which has a rough parity with blitz in terms of application.


Yeah for the larger modes where the AEC is going to be a liability and you have other players to cover up for your fuel expenditure, the bofors will have more utility. In the smaller modes though, its almost more a hindrance then help.

So dodging a rifle nade at long range is very easy, even if the initial animation bugs out. I wouldnt call it a win for grenadiers if that is the winning factor.

the real winning factor is cost... even without the riflenade id say 4 man IS are slightly worse than grens... but with the riflenade i think id put my money on grens...

The comet has poo for machine guns so if we are just talking about machine gun fire, yeah the panther definitely outstrips it. It should also be noted that the T-34's GOOD machine gun is actually its hull gun-with over 17dps at out to 10 meters- and not the turret gun.
Also, you do get warspeed with the comet, which has a rough parity with blitz in terms of application.

1. the 3 (plus pintle) machineguns of the panther have a combined DPS equal to that of the T-34s combined machineguns though majority of the DPS is with the pintle... sure it has less anti infantry than a T-34 but as youve said before the comet has crap machineguns... the panther`s anti infantry comes from its machineguns while the comet`s is from its main gun... i have no exact MTTK tests but i have a feeling they are at least comparable

2. yeah but removing engine governor breaks the engine after its use...

Yeah for the larger modes where the AEC is going to be a liability and you have other players to cover up for your fuel expenditure, the bofors will have more utility. In the smaller modes though, its almost more a hindrance then help.

agreed