Spamming Pathfinders

What's the best build order to abuse Pathfinders as best as you can? Because we're not going to play against them in their current state anymore.

vs. DAK mix a sniper in, they're helpless if u care a bit on light vehicles in early game. Pathfinder meta is so broken on its own but with a sniper its mental, its just over, you farm everyone, there's basically no counter play.
If you loose you did some embarrassing faults.

it's such a joke how cheap and tanky they are

vs. DAK mix a sniper in, they're helpless if u care a bit on light vehicles in early game. Pathfinder meta is so broken on its own but with a sniper its mental, its just over, you farm everyone, there's basically no counter play.
If you loose you did some embarrassing faults.

Extremely weird because as DAK I always push back pathfinder + sniper players back to their base after 4min with double pgren(or bersa) and flamethrower-250 in 2v2+. Then stall out the M16 for few mins with AT nades and Panzerjäger and completely push the opponent off the map again with rushed 8-Rad. Are you sure we're playing the same game?

And considering you've played a grand total of one USF game so far in CoH3, this sounds like serious balance cope and blame to me

https://coh3stats.com/players/8734?view=standings

"I did nothing wrong bro trust me. I'm an excellent DAK player and if I lose, it's because the game is unbalanced"

Extremely weird because as DAK I always push back pathfinder + sniper players back to their base after 4min with double pgren(or bersa) and flamethrower-250 in 2v2+. Then stall out the M16 for few mins with AT nades and Panzerjäger and completely push the opponent off the map again with rushed 8-Rad. Are you sure we're playing the same game?

And considering you've played a grand total of one USF game so far in CoH3, this sounds like serious balance cope and blame to me

https://coh3stats.com/players/8734?view=standings

"I did nothing wrong bro trust me. I'm an excellent DAK player and if I lose, it's because the game is unbalanced"

glad someone else is saying this, thought I was going crazy, out of all the weird one-trick-pony strategies I feel like this is weakest one I've seen thus far; especially since USF has soooo many strengths.

player card shaming is a bit much tho aera, we've all been around ages.

player card shaming is a bit much tho aera, we've all been around ages.

Was not meant for shaming the ranks or anything, it was just to prove my statement that he doesn't play USF.

Shaming ranks or winrates in unranked mode in a brand new game that I don't consider myself an expert in at all yet is even below my standards

glad someone else is saying this, thought I was going crazy, out of all the weird one-trick-pony strategies I feel like this is weakest one I've seen thus far; especially since USF has soooo many strengths.

player card shaming is a bit much tho aera, we've all been around ages.

Paths are bonkers op in 1v1. They have the most ridiculous map presence. Feels like playing against Wehrmach tPio spam as brit in CoH1. DAK might be a able to cope a little bit with Bike opening but it needs to outplay super hard to be even imo.

Extremely weird because as DAK I always push back pathfinder + sniper players back to their base after 4min with double pgren(or bersa) and flamethrower-250 in 2v2+. Then stall out the M16 for few mins with AT nades and Panzerjäger and completely push the opponent off the map again with rushed 8-Rad. Are you sure we're playing the same game?

And considering you've played a grand total of one USF game so far in CoH3, this sounds like serious balance cope and blame to me

https://coh3stats.com/players/8734?view=standings

"I did nothing wrong bro trust me. I'm an excellent DAK player and if I lose, it's because the game is unbalanced"

Ye i know, that is based on common 1v1 opinions among top players. Im not talking about punishing low rank 2v2 players. I gave that advice of early vehicle push as well but it simply wont work out against anyone halfway decent.

As you seem to like some research go around and ask top 20 of 1v1 and 2v2 what they'd think about pathfinder spam and especially how well a HT or Motorcycle works against 50 ammo Boy's Brits covering them up even further.

Ye i know, that is based on common 1v1 opinions among top players. Im not talking about punishing low rank 2v2 players. I gave that advice of early vehicle push as well but it simply wont work out against anyone halfway decent.

As you seem to like some research go around and ask top 20 of 1v1 and 2v2 what they'd think about pathfinder spam and especially how well a HT or Motorcycle works against 50 ammo Boy's Brits covering them up even further.

Neither me nor you play 1v1, so why does it matter how strong or OP pathfinders are in 1v1.

And this thread is about pathfinders, not AT rifle spam from another player. If a brit teammate has to help out his pathfinder teammate after 4 minutes already, the strat cant be that busted now can it. And that would either mean the USF guy has to go over to the other side or the brit has to send over section(s) that are missing from his side, allowing your axis teammate to cap his whole side

Neither me nor you play 1v1, so why does it matter how strong or OP pathfinders are in 1v1.

And this thread is about pathfinders, not AT rifle spam from another player. If a brit teammate has to help out his pathfinder teammate after 4 minutes already, the strat cant be that busted now can it. And that would either mean the USF guy has to go over to the other side or the brit has to send over section(s) that are missing from his side, allowing your axis teammate to cap his whole side

1v1 balance matters regardless of whether you or he plays it

1v1 balance matters regardless of whether you or he plays it

No it does absolutely not. I can already guarantee you that if pathfinders are broken in 1v1, then it's because of the map control they give you. A factor that is almost irrelevant in 2v2+ and especially on a tight map where it's about frontal assaults and manstop-power

No it does absolutely not. I can already guarantee you that if pathfinders are broken in 1v1, then it's because of the map control they give you. A factor that is almost irrelevant in 2v2+ and especially on a tight map where it's about frontal assaults and manstop-power

ok, let's just stop balancing 1v1 then, because aerafield doesnt play it

and dont tell me that map control is almost irrelevant in 2v2, not sure if youre trolling or not

pathfinders arent any less broken just because there is a choke point map you can kind of control them on... which is not easy given that they get free smoke and flares, plus good rifle nades

No it does absolutely not. I can already guarantee you that if pathfinders are broken in 1v1, then it's because of the map control they give you. A factor that is almost irrelevant in 2v2+ and especially on a tight map where it's about frontal assaults and manstop-power

Um no, this doesn't really make sense. Of course the context, 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 etc matters a lot... But its perfectly possible for something to be objectively unbalanced, regardless of the game mode.

(Not saying I agree or disagree about them being broken btw, just talking about the principle)

Was not meant for shaming the ranks or anything, it was just to prove my statement that he doesn't play USF.

Shaming ranks or winrates in unranked mode in a brand new game that I don't consider myself an expert in at all yet is even below my standards

thx for your understanding aera, as I say we're a small community I look up to you and I know others have as well. I point it out 'cos I know you're bigger than that

path spam could work in 2v2. But it has less chance to dominate in mid to late game.
that is the point of Earafield.

ok, let's just stop balancing 1v1 then, because aerafield doesnt play it

and dont tell me that map control is almost irrelevant in 2v2, not sure if youre trolling or not

pathfinders arent any less broken just because there is a choke point map you can kind of control them on... which is not easy given that they get free smoke and flares, plus good rifle nades

You're talking past each other. He's not making the "normative" claim saying that 1v1 balance shouldn't matter in the grand scheme of things. He's just saying that whether pathfinders are OP in 1v1 does not give you any information on whether they are OP in teamgeames.

Same for map control, he's not saying that map control as in "the amount of sectors your hold" is irrelevant, but rather that capping power is irrelevant in teamgames. Which again is completely true. This is the primary reason why it's impossible to balance all units for both 1v1 and teamgems (hence for example in CoH2 stuart was useless in 4v4 and ele was useless in 1v1 etc.).

The difference is even more egregious in CoH3 becasue capping power is WAY more important in 1v1 than it was in CoH2, and in teamgames it is even less important because of how ridiculously choke pointy the maps are.

Frankly, 99.9% of people don't have a clue what they're doing in teamgames and Aera belongs to the .1% so I'd trust him if he doesn't consider paths op. Also my impression from using them in teamgames is actually that they suck because they scale horribly and you can't use their numbers advantage. The only good thing is that you can comfortably rush AAHT with them and that Rifles are extremely hard to use/straight up bad in teamgames (unsurprsing given that the entire design of the unit just doesn't suit teamgames at all unless they finally include some maps that offer sufficient space to maneuver in teamgames).

I don't know why the focus on 2vs2 when the topic is clearly about 1vs1 since the beginning.
While I can agree one could have said that Path aren't a problem in teamgame for an extra overview standpoint, focusing on it doesn't make any sense for anyone here.

Now it's cool to know that nerfing Pathspam will not impact teamgame since the strat is already irrelevant but the main issue here is that DAK isn't really fun to play Atm with Pathspam and BritBoy spam. Not saying it is impossible to win against them but not vs someone equally skilled and having yourself good awareness during the match and exploiting with success your opponent's mistakes.

player card shaming is a bit much tho aera, we've all been around ages.

He didn't mention Win:Loss ratio or anything reflective of their skill, so it's hardly shaming.

It was more an observation of their possible biases (which we all have) if that. Ultimately giving everyone a bit of extra context.

and dont tell me that map control is almost irrelevant in 2v2, not sure if youre trolling or not

It's not the same I think is his point. Map control in team games is different because you're responsible for less of the map. You can group your forces tighter for a stronger force in a smaller area

You have to spread out a lot more to control the map in 1v1. If you spread out too much in teams, a strong deathball will just push you around and there goes your map control