Guards vs Airborne Long Range

If regular gaurds are so good or even op why dont we see them in every game?

Guards are shit thats why.
They drop all of the weapons that they have like pinatas and they will bleed your MP dry.


People make guards for Vehicle Button to prevent vehicle dives, not for its combat ability.



This is one of those situations where on paper a unit may win but in actual gameplay it is a completely different story.

For example a Puma vs Su-85 in a 1v1 lane matchup like the one shown by OP the SU-85 would win every time but in the hands of a skilled player, using map LOS, flanking then the Puma can beat the SU-85 with ease.





For Combat I would rather use Airborne Guards or Shock Troops any day over regular Guards.

Guards are shit thats why.
They drop all of the weapons that they have like pinatas and they will bleed your MP dry.


People make guards for Vehicle Button to prevent vehicle dives, not for its combat ability.



This is one of those situations where on paper a unit may win but in actual gameplay it is a completely different story.

For example a Puma vs Su-85 in a 1v1 lane matchup like the one shown by OP the SU-85 would win every time but in the hands of a skilled player, using map LOS, flanking then the Puma can beat the SU-85 with ease.





For Combat I would rather use Airborne Guards or Shock Troops any day over regular Guards.

the thing about guards is that you WANT to drop a ptrs because you get a mosin and the loss of AT means really little for guards, if anything, cause its only effective against LVs and you lose against the likes of a p2, later on the ptrs become tickle machines at best. If you drop a DP though you gotta pick it up



Button is extremely situational, It IS more useful than the airborne guard's IL2 ability, but its purely defensive and is only effective when enemies drive tanks into melee range (the guards cant move and LOS obstruction auto break the button, so combat blitz just negates it). I have no clue why people even mention it


the guards have firing positions that basically give 25% free rate of fire, which is quite good, although it can be shut down a bit too easy with the abundance of grenades the enemy has to throw at you

This is a clear case of bug that gives a clear advantage to Guards under certain conditions (enemy in green cover or garrison). This should be fixed.

The rest is just mental gymnastics ranging from silly claims that green cover does not matter, to sillier claims that "guards are shit".

This is a clear case of bug that gives a clear advantage to Guards under certain conditions (enemy in green cover or garrison). This should be fixed.

The rest is just mental gymnastics ranging from silly claims that green cover does not matter, to sillier claims that "guards are shit".

While I don't agree that green cover doesn't matter/guards are shit, it's just not that clear of an advantage

The video shows it, if they need to be prone in heavy cover just to have a chance against obers then it's also not the massive deal some are making it out to be

Should it be fixed? Of course. It's going to change a lot? No. There's a reason many people don't bother picking up/replacing dropped ptrs with guards

I have no clue why people even mention it

Because it's good. If you think it's not worth mentioning you are very mistaken. So good at setting up kills for teammates

It can give you more time to get off another snare. Button tanks for brit teammates all the time so they can tulip them. I've done it for myself to setup an AT satchel

Guards are shit thats why.
They drop all of the weapons that they have like pinatas and they will bleed your MP dry.


People make guards for Vehicle Button to prevent vehicle dives, not for its combat ability.



This is one of those situations where on paper a unit may win but in actual gameplay it is a completely different story.

For example a Puma vs Su-85 in a 1v1 lane matchup like the one shown by OP the SU-85 would win every time but in the hands of a skilled player, using map LOS, flanking then the Puma can beat the SU-85 with ease.





For Combat I would rather use Airborne Guards or Shock Troops any day over regular Guards.

Guards rifles arent shit. They are good just not op as some claim because they saw a video and stationary tests.

Also that gaurd motor is nearly in everyone cmmd list indicating the doctrine is to strong according to some is silly. Every faction has a commander or 2 every one goes for.

Because it's good. If you think it's not worth mentioning you are very mistaken. So good at setting up kills for teammates

It can give you more time to get off another snare. Button tanks for brit teammates all the time so they can tulip them. I've done it for myself to setup an AT satchel

Button is situational, and almost purely defensive. For it to be truly good, your opponent has to drive a tank at almost melee range next near the guards, then you get the full effect and a very easy tank kill. It's offensive purposes are almost non existent, unless the tank in question is sitting idle or stunned, the button will be short lived and probably a waste of muni. Its good but only if you have a bad opponent who recklessly dives your SU-85 with something like a p4 or panther and then walks into guards or conscripts range


it also breaks if you order the guards to do anything and their ptrs doesnt seemingly focus the target, which is fun

Button is situational, and almost purely defensive.

No shit it's defensive. Just a heads up, ALL snares are defensive... Except maybe on conscripts because of hoorah

You don't need the full duration of the ability to make it worth it, a few seconds can be enough to get in the extra damage/follow-up snare

Not to mention Mark target is on two guards commanders, combining that with button can be extremely deadly

it also breaks if you order the guards to do anything and their ptrs doesnt seemingly focus the target, which is fun

You can easily fix this by telling the guards to attack the target first before you button it. Not at all an issue

Not to mention you don't use it just to setup more ptrs fire. You're supposed to use it to setup damage from something else

Guards rifles arent shit. They are good just not op as some claim because they saw a video and stationary tests.

Also that gaurd motor is nearly in everyone cmmd list indicating the doctrine is to strong according to some is silly. Every faction has a commander or 2 every one goes for.

Guard Motor is taken because of Mark Target and the T-34/85. It has nothing to do with Guards and more to do with the fact that the T-34/76 is basically an upgraded T-70/Ram Throwaway Machine while the T-34/85 can actually damage tanks. The Cost of the T-34/85 is also very good and its efficient for the stats that is has on the tank. Combine that with Mark Target and that is why Guard Motor has been a strong/meta pick since COH2 launched.

SU-85 is a good unit but it is a little clumsy due to the lack of a turrent. A player with less micro or even a map where SU-85 would be less ideal the T-35/85 with Mark Target can serve as a replacement.









Guard Rifle Combined Arms Tactics would be considered a "complete" commander with Guards in it as well yet it is not Meta because the KV-1 is another Upgraded T-70 that is only really useful against infantry. It has Guards, a tank, some air strikes yet I rarely have seen anyone use this commander because compared to the T-34/85 the Kv-1 is light years behind and borderline buns especially after the nerfs it got.


On paper Guards are one of those units that are nice but in actuality are shit because they don't offer anything new that Soviets don't have access too already.

Penal Battalions come out sooner than Guards and thus will have veterancy compared to Vet 0 Guards. You can upgrade them and the AT Satchel is a good enough deterrent against dives that Vehicle Button is not needed.

What I am saying here is that the Soviet base kit is strong enough that it doesn't need Guards. It is not like USF and Pathfinders. Guards are not a bad unit but are worthless. Against a player with a brain, they are not going to let your Guards sit in prone for 30 seconds while they take you out. They will be hit with grenades, hit with mortar barrages, Stuka/Panzerwerfered or even air striked.

The lack of mobility make Guards an easy way to drain your MP when you can simply have other units that are cheaper and almost as effective.


This is why Airborne Guards are vastly superior. Not everything is about damage and 1v1 but more about how they fit into the army as whole. Airborne Guards are better due to the more mobile combat of COH2, and the Vet 1 air strike may not do alot of damage but it can force the enemy to move while your units are safely shooting at them.

Forcing movement is a very powerful tool when utilized correctly as a soft form of crowd control. Take for example a situation where you have a Maxim and it is getting flanked by an OKW blob. Normal Guards can't do much to help you accept touch the ground and await the anal pounding that is about to happen to your Maxims.
Meanwhile Airborne Guards with Vet 1 can force the enemy to move buying you time to reposition allowing you to hold the position or avoid a hard retreat back to base.


Guards in a sense are like Rangers. Both units have good stats and do well in combat but are not needed at all by the main armies who use them. I never once played a game of COH2 and thought to myself that having Guards would have changed the outcome of that game compared to Airborne Guards which could have actually helped me hold onto a vital point or VP due to the Vet 1 ability.

Guard Motor is taken because of Mark Target and the T-34/85. It has nothing to do with Guards and more to do with the fact that the T-34/76 is basically an upgraded T-70/Ram Throwaway Machine while the T-34/85 can actually damage tanks. The Cost of the T-34/85 is also very good and its efficient for the stats that is has on the tank. Combine that with Mark Target and that is why Guard Motor has been a strong/meta pick since COH2 launched.

SU-85 is a good unit but it is a little clumsy due to the lack of a turrent. A player with less micro or even a map where SU-85 would be less ideal the T-35/85 with Mark Target can serve as a replacement.









Guard Rifle Combined Arms Tactics would be considered a "complete" commander with Guards in it as well yet it is not Meta because the KV-1 is another Upgraded T-70 that is only really useful against infantry. It has Guards, a tank, some air strikes yet I rarely have seen anyone use this commander because compared to the T-34/85 the Kv-1 is light years behind and borderline buns especially after the nerfs it got.


On paper Guards are one of those units that are nice but in actuality are shit because they don't offer anything new that Soviets don't have access too already.

Penal Battalions come out sooner than Guards and thus will have veterancy compared to Vet 0 Guards. You can upgrade them and the AT Satchel is a good enough deterrent against dives that Vehicle Button is not needed.

What I am saying here is that the Soviet base kit is strong enough that it doesn't need Guards. It is not like USF and Pathfinders. Guards are not a bad unit but are worthless. Against a player with a brain, they are not going to let your Guards sit in prone for 30 seconds while they take you out. They will be hit with grenades, hit with mortar barrages, Stuka/Panzerwerfered or even air striked.

The lack of mobility make Guards an easy way to drain your MP when you can simply have other units that are cheaper and almost as effective.


This is why Airborne Guards are vastly superior. Not everything is about damage and 1v1 but more about how they fit into the army as whole. Airborne Guards are better due to the more mobile combat of COH2, and the Vet 1 air strike may not do alot of damage but it can force the enemy to move while your units are safely shooting at them.

Forcing movement is a very powerful tool when utilized correctly as a soft form of crowd control. Take for example a situation where you have a Maxim and it is getting flanked by an OKW blob. Normal Guards can't do much to help you accept touch the ground and await the anal pounding that is about to happen to your Maxims.
Meanwhile Airborne Guards with Vet 1 can force the enemy to move buying you time to reposition allowing you to hold the position or avoid a hard retreat back to base.


Guards in a sense are like Rangers. Both units have good stats and do well in combat but are not needed at all by the main armies who use them. I never once played a game of COH2 and thought to myself that having Guards would have changed the outcome of that game compared to Airborne Guards which could have actually helped me hold onto a vital point or VP due to the Vet 1 ability.

I agree that gaurds are not the selling points for the commanders they are in. I said this as well to the other guy.

When i go GM its almost always for the t34 85 and crew repairs. The mortar and guards i use occosionaly. MT is also in a good place.

Forcing movement is indeed a very powerfull tool esp vs units such as tw and guards in particular. So i agree fully here as well. I just dont use airborne guards as much. I need too i see.

Gaurds do add a few things soviets lack stock/are designed without. Long range ai inf, actual nades, and hh at for however minimal effective they are.
GM also offers a other thing soviets lack a durable and strong vehicle, the t34 85. You wont need an su85 or zis3 as much with this tank in your doctrine.

While I don't agree that green cover doesn't matter/guards are shit, it's just not that clear of an advantage

Glad to see that we agree on the obvious points.

The video shows it, if they need to be prone in heavy cover just to have a chance against obers then it's also not the massive deal some are making it out to be

The problem with that line of thinking is the use of obers as the benchmark. Guards are an all around unit while obers are a pure AI infatry and guard should have no chance against them.

There is a bug that makes Guards perform better than AI infantries under certain circumstances and that is regardless of any video.

Should it be fixed? Of course. It's going to change a lot? No. There's a reason many people don't bother picking up/replacing dropped ptrs with guards
...

The impact of such a change can be meaningful since other Soviet units might become more attractive.

I always pick Guard's PTRS regardless if I play axis or allies. I am not sure which or how many people do not or even if they are aware that Guards PTRS is different weapon than Penal PTRS.

The problem with that line of thinking is the use of obers as the benchmark. Guards are an all around unit while obers are a pure AI infatry and guard should have no chance against them.

But that's the entire point, they usually lose. Outside of that situation, obers will reliably beat guards, as they should

There is a bug that makes Guards perform better than AI infantries under certain circumstances and that is regardless of any video.

Not sure what you mean by regardless of any video. The video is literally showing one of the only scenarios the bug applies too

And I'm honestly not convinced it's because of the bug. That performance could just be because of the firing positions

I always pick Guard's PTRS regardless if I play axis or allies. I am not sure which or how many people do not or even if they are aware that Guards PTRS is different weapon than Penal PTRS.

Well aware. If you know that then you clearly know that guards have their own mosin, which has better dps than their ptrs

Unless you want the AT, there is no reason to pick up/replace a dropped ptrs on guards. That's a mistake on most squads to be honest. Gren/Vgren kar98ks, penal svts, even conscript mosins all have better dps then guard ptrs. And they can fire on the move

Many patches ago, sure their ptrs profile was stupid OP. Not anymore. You really shouldn't be picking it up on anything besides maybe engineers

On paper Guards are one of those units that are nice but in actuality are shit because they don't offer anything new that Soviets don't have access too already.

Penal Battalions come out sooner than Guards and thus will have veterancy compared to Vet 0 Guards. You can upgrade them and the AT Satchel is a good enough deterrent against dives that Vehicle Button is not needed.

What I am saying here is that the Soviet base kit is strong enough that it doesn't need Guards. It is not like USF and Pathfinders. Guards are not a bad unit but are worthless. Against a player with a brain, they are not going to let your Guards sit in prone for 30 seconds while they take you out. They will be hit with grenades, hit with mortar barrages, Stuka/Panzerwerfered or even air striked.

The lack of mobility make Guards an easy way to drain your MP when you can simply have other units that are cheaper and almost as effective.


This is why Airborne Guards are vastly superior. Not everything is about damage and 1v1 but more about how they fit into the army as whole. Airborne Guards are better due to the more mobile combat of COH2, and the Vet 1 air strike may not do alot of damage but it can force the enemy to move while your units are safely shooting at them.

Forcing movement is a very powerful tool when utilized correctly as a soft form of crowd control. Take for example a situation where you have a Maxim and it is getting flanked by an OKW blob. Normal Guards can't do much to help you accept touch the ground and await the anal pounding that is about to happen to your Maxims.
Meanwhile Airborne Guards with Vet 1 can force the enemy to move buying you time to reposition allowing you to hold the position or avoid a hard retreat back to base.

If your a Penal player, I would assume you would know at best you will have 1 Vet2 Penal at CP2, if all your units have seen equal action you might have all Vet1 Penals. The moment Guards hit the field and get DPs they are similar to or better than Penals at ranges 20 and above. At R20 Guards do 15.7 while Penals do 18.7, that is comparing 4 models to 6 because I am not sure if the PTRS damage figures are accurate if you include them Guards beat them at R20. And just so we are clear, Guards Vet1 is not being used for DPS calculation.

You also need to remember that Guards will Vet faster compared to AI Penals since they can reliably damage and chase away if not destroy LVs.

Next you want to upgrade Penals with PTRS, that now means you have 1 squad that is now useless in an AI battle. 3Penals/1Guard is going to beat out 2Penals/1PTRS Penal/1LMGAirborne thru sheer DPS along with Guards PTRS having way better performance due to the bug. Now you might want to include Airborne VeT1 ability into this, that pass takes about 3-4 secs to come in. Moving and resetting your units separately will negate it just as it would in you weak example of the OKW blob vs maxim. Literally breaking the blob into 2 smaller blobs would completely negate and force you to retreat just as it would with regular Guards.

Now the weird thing to your arguments is that you act as if Guards have to stay in fighting positions for their performance. They don't, they just perform better when they are. So PW/Stuka/nades/air strike/mortar will do the same to them as any other unit, also they can retreat while in fighting positions I am really not sure why you brought that up.

Now the weird thing to your arguments is that you act as if Guards have to stay in fighting positions for their performance. They don't, they just perform better when they are. So PW/Stuka/nades/air strike/mortar will do the same to them as any other unit, also they can retreat while in fighting positions I am really not sure why you brought that up.

I know this wasent stated to me, but i find it curious.

Gaurds inf have 4 weapons that can only be fired stationary. Having just 2 (better) mosins doenst do a lot if anything noteworthy during movement. So it does effect them more then most if not all other squads if they are forced to move imho.

This entire thread is focusing on the scenario of obers Vs guards behind green cover at max range.

That is such a small case that it qualifies as a minor bug at most.

Any attempts to blow it out of proportion with a motive to buff axis, are ridiculous - which is what the rest of the thread is.

Any attempts to blow it out of proportion with a motive to buff axis, are ridiculous - which is what the rest of the thread is.

Wait, who said anything about buffing Axis? It's been specifically about Guards and how they perform against Obers... that and Guard Motor being OP.

Guard Motor is taken because of Mark Target and the T-34/85. It has nothing to do with Guards and more to do with the fact that the T-34/76 is basically an upgraded T-70/Ram Throwaway Machine while the T-34/85 can actually damage tanks. The Cost of the T-34/85 is also very good and its efficient for the stats that is has on the tank. Combine that with Mark Target and that is why Guard Motor has been a strong/meta pick since COH2 launched.

SU-85 is a good unit but it is a little clumsy due to the lack of a turrent. A player with less micro or even a map where SU-85 would be less ideal the T-35/85 with Mark Target can serve as a replacement.









Guard Rifle Combined Arms Tactics would be considered a "complete" commander with Guards in it as well yet it is not Meta because the KV-1 is another Upgraded T-70 that is only really useful against infantry. It has Guards, a tank, some air strikes yet I rarely have seen anyone use this commander because compared to the T-34/85 the Kv-1 is light years behind and borderline buns especially after the nerfs it got.


On paper Guards are one of those units that are nice but in actuality are shit because they don't offer anything new that Soviets don't have access too already.

Penal Battalions come out sooner than Guards and thus will have veterancy compared to Vet 0 Guards. You can upgrade them and the AT Satchel is a good enough deterrent against dives that Vehicle Button is not needed.

What I am saying here is that the Soviet base kit is strong enough that it doesn't need Guards. It is not like USF and Pathfinders. Guards are not a bad unit but are worthless. Against a player with a brain, they are not going to let your Guards sit in prone for 30 seconds while they take you out. They will be hit with grenades, hit with mortar barrages, Stuka/Panzerwerfered or even air striked.

The lack of mobility make Guards an easy way to drain your MP when you can simply have other units that are cheaper and almost as effective.


This is why Airborne Guards are vastly superior. Not everything is about damage and 1v1 but more about how they fit into the army as whole. Airborne Guards are better due to the more mobile combat of COH2, and the Vet 1 air strike may not do alot of damage but it can force the enemy to move while your units are safely shooting at them.

Forcing movement is a very powerful tool when utilized correctly as a soft form of crowd control. Take for example a situation where you have a Maxim and it is getting flanked by an OKW blob. Normal Guards can't do much to help you accept touch the ground and await the anal pounding that is about to happen to your Maxims.
Meanwhile Airborne Guards with Vet 1 can force the enemy to move buying you time to reposition allowing you to hold the position or avoid a hard retreat back to base.


Guards in a sense are like Rangers. Both units have good stats and do well in combat but are not needed at all by the main armies who use them. I never once played a game of COH2 and thought to myself that having Guards would have changed the outcome of that game compared to Airborne Guards which could have actually helped me hold onto a vital point or VP due to the Vet 1 ability.

The best analysis I have read here this month.

This entire thread is focusing on the scenario of obers Vs guards behind green cover at max range.

No the thread is focused on a bug and not in obers vs guards.

That is such a small case that it qualifies as a minor bug at most.

Again no, it effects all fight where Guards fire vs units in heavy cover or garrison and regardless of your definition of minor it should be fixed.

Any attempts to blow it out of proportion with a motive to buff axis, are ridiculous - which is what the rest of the thread is.

There no post calling for any buffs to any axis units. On the contrary plenty of rants about how bad allied units are (from guards, to t-34/76 to kv-1 and even Rangers...) which you should actually classify as ridiculous.

The video that OP mentions is focusing only on Guards in green vs green cover fights, which is the only setup where the bug is present and PTRS Guards perform better than they should. Then he puts the conclusion out, that PTRS Guards are always the better choice. It would be interesting to see how they perform in neutral and yellow cover though and if airborne Guards have their advantage in these situations. Especially since late game and team games are more about yellow cover than green cover.
As someone else said already, PTRS shots neglecting damage reduction of green cover is probably one of the most "realistic" bugs CoH2 ever had. Nevertheless, this oversight should have been fixed, since PTRS Guards are not supposed to act that way.

The Obers and Guards matchup is fine, even without the fix. Those units cost a similar amount of resources and Obersoldaten win reliably. The test Gonk made was again only green cover to green cover, which is only representative of a fraction of the fights that will take place.
Now, one could make the argument that PTRS Guards are "allrounders" and Obers AI specialists, which is true to a certain extend, but: Guards have high AI specialization as well. Their PTRS works mostly against LVs but already has problems against mediums (their DPS gets reduced to about a third of what they would have against LVs). So past 15 min, they move to a mostly AI role with a "soft snare". Second, Obers also have some utility that is not directly combat related: The defensive Blendkorper with even some minimal anti vehicle defense, the booby trap and sprint. Plus, they can make a makeshift MG with suppression at vet4.
All in all, if Obers win roughly 50% in green cover fights (to be taken with a grain of salt since Gronk seemed to have only a whopping 4 tests) and probably most/all of all other long range fights, then there is no problem.

The question that should probably be asked is: Are airborne Guards too weak? They cost slightly more than Obersoldaten, a worse grenade, the overall utility I'd probably call roughly even (strafe + rally + infiltration spawn vs Blendkorper + sprint + booby trap) and still lose to Obers (again, only 4 tests by Gonk, but looking at the remaining HP there were no really close calls).

The question that should probably be asked is: Are airborne Guards too weak? They cost slightly more than Obersoldaten, a worse grenade, the overall utility I'd probably call roughly even (strafe + rally + infiltration spawn vs Blendkorper + sprint + booby trap) and still lose to Obers (again, only 4 tests by Gonk, but looking at the remaining HP there were no really close calls).

What is rally? If your talking about the rally point that is only available in Airborne but not Terror Tactics. Airborne ACC vet is overall worse than the other Soviet elite units also but probably to late to address.