USA - Weaksauce late game?

So, the general consensus is the USA has a weak late game, more so in team games.
After playing them a good amount mostly in 2v2, i would almost dare to say they don't.


And this is mainly because of these units:

Paratroopers with 1919s. Think of them as 6 men Obersoldaten - with vet3 they dish out insane amounts of damage over long range and can also fire on the move, but better survivabilty to explosions (6 men) and much cheaper to reinforce. They are definitely leages ahead than any infantry the Wehrmacht has to offer.

Rilfes with double 1919s perform similar, and are also super good. (Maybe too good, the 1919 needs to be looked at)


M8A1 Howitzer. I haven't seen any OP threads about this vehicle yet, but i kinda expect it over time.

It's like a SU76, but better in almost every way.
-the autofire actually murders infantry and has also 60 range
-it can fire indirect
-turret, better mobility
-smoke with vet
-crew can repair itself, other tanks and can cap
-barrage is more or less the same, perfect against MGs and PAKs
-only costs 5 more fuel

With proper micro, this unit can deal safely with the fearful Volksgrenadier-Schreck-blob better than the Sherman.


M36. A fast turreted tank destroyer with 60 range that can penetrate everything with the vet ability. Nothing new to say there.


These three units alone, coupled with a forward retreat point and healing, can deal with almost anything that the OKW or Wehrmacht late game has to offer. They are only a few exceptions, the Jagdtiger and Walking stuka can cause problems that can be hard to overcome in my experience.

But still, i feel the USA late game is strong in the right hands. And that's the only real downside: It's considerably harder to micro multiple vehicles that die in 2-3 shots. The M8A1 and M36 have to been babysitted at all times and must kept constantly at range against any AT units. One late reverse move and you are guaranteed to lose a unit.

In other words: Playing other factions, i feel i can play them to about 90% efficiency on a good day. Playing USA however, i can only play them at about 60% efficiency - there's just so much to do, microing tank crews, positioning the ambulance truck and time the healing and so on... i know there is always one thing that can be microed better.

I'm not a high APM player, that's exactly why i play CoH2, but i can see the (late game) potential that the USA has. I would say it doesn't lack powerful units, rather the players lack the ability and perseverance to use them to the fullest.

Glad to see someone realizing the potential that USA has with the M8 and Jackson. They are both very strong and good at what they do, cheap too compared to other specialized units. Combined that with the fact you can build fuel caches and it isn't that big of a loss if you lose one late game.

The M8 used to be better it actually got a little nerf in Alpha IIRC =P

I think it's arcing got a little nerfed too, but not as hard as the Infantry support guns

I think right now the problem for US late game is that besides the Jackson - the US has absolutely nothing that will even scratch the paint of the OKW/Whermacht heavy armor (besides specialty call in strikes or luck of the draw Easy-8's).

The US AT guns need some love - and I'd dare say so do Bazookas.

Panzershrecks progress well into the game - there's no reason why Bazooka's shouldn't either.

The Soviets have their glass cannon - but they also have additional parts that reinforce it - i.e. heavy AT guns, guards, non-doctrinal mines etc.

The US don't.

That's why for the majority - the US end game is poor.

Using the M8, M36 well is not always easy in circumstances due to their glass cannon attributes.

Paras with double 30 cals are great, though.

Bazookas are OK only in 4s (Captain and a rifle)

I think the issue with US late game is the defensive nature they suddenly take since they dont have the heavy tanks.

The US AT guns need some love - and I'd dare say so do Bazookas.

You are right on the Bazookas, they are only useful against light vehicles and that's it.


The US AT gun however is better than it gets credit for. With vet and a little bit munitions (which you should have enough as USA) it destroys even heavy tanks at 70 range rather consistent. But again, this unit needs more micro to be efficient than any other AT gun.

The gun on itself is strong enough, the problem lies more in the lack of a reliable vehicle snare: AT rifle nades can't hit moving targets, mines are doctrinal and the stuart dies in two shots and must penetrate/get close to stun/disable vehicles.

The M8 used to be better it actually got a little nerf in Alpha IIRC =P

That's horrifying.

I agree with OP. Used properly with good planning and a good tactical head US late game can be a powerful force, but only if you don't play it like the other factions.

My biggest gripe is that the US is a faction that is definitely supposed to be more mobile and effective early game, which is their conceptual foundation. The rewards for flanking are a vinous given the large squad sizes, overall utility of rifles and ability for tanks to be quickly pulled out of the battle , repaired and sent back to the front. And yet none of this seems to matter much in the mid-late game because half of the map (the half behind and OKW Trucks) is largely unreachable or tactically gimped. Some maps are ridiculously underprepared for the faction designs that WFA has brought on.

How maps like Kharkov/ R&M, for example, we're Not flagged as a possible issues if WFA has been in development since coh2 released is beyond me. In 2v2 games they are ridiculous. Trying to flank on them as US against Double OK is excruciating and even used well, US late game armour cannot stand toe-to-toe with late axis armour head on.

Overall, I like US late game. It's challenging but also incredibly rewarding if used correctly. I'd just like to see a little less early game Central map grabbing and stalemate in the same place until the end I the game on And more of an emphasis on mobility and flanking that should give the US late game it's impetus.

It's dangerous to make bazookas any better than they are considering that you can equip any infantry with them.

yes it's 60mu a pop but you can mass enough of them in team games to make a very significant alpha strike value vs armour.

back on topic I agree. I don't think USF is as bad as people make them out to be in the late game.

I agree with the OP. However I feel like you can't really afford fuckups in any state of the game. If you can't secure atleast 2 VPs in 2on2 early game you might aswell quit.

The Bazookas are a bit weird. They are ineffective individually but can be effective only if blobbed (which is not good for the infantry though).

The Pzg PzS has better pen and does 240 damage per strike.

The Bazooka has less pen and does only 80 damage each. 2 x zooks do 160 damage.

Pretty much from experience I think critical mass is 4 x zooks, which is pretty steep investment as individual zooks are ineffective.

It's dangerous to make bazookas any better than they are considering that you can equip any infantry with them.

yes it's 60mu a pop but you can mass enough of them in team games to make a very significant alpha strike value vs armour.

back on topic I agree. I don't think USF is as bad as people make them out to be in the late game.

I'd like to see bazookas made a little more accurate at least. Right now it's pretty hard to justify the purchase.

It's dangerous to make bazookas any better than they are considering that you can equip any infantry with them.

yes it's 60mu a pop but you can mass enough of them in team games to make a very significant alpha strike value vs armour.

Can this logic apply to Volks with Shreks as well please?

Can this logic apply to Volks with Shreks as well please?

yes, massed shrecks on volks are also an issue but not relevant to the topic.

I'd like to see bazookas made a little more accurate at least. Right now it's pretty hard to justify the purchase.

depends on what target they are shooting at but at max range (35) they have at least a 60% chance to hit vs medium tanks and 54% vs the 222, puma and panzer II

I agree OP. I always disagree with people when they say the US late game needs a buff like a Pershing etc etc

2-3 Jacksons and some M8A1s along with any version of well equipped infantry will basically ROCK HARD counter everything short of a supported Tiger ace if you can kite well. (Since you cant kite the TA effectively unless you are a kiting god with its 50 range and CRAZY RoF and damage.)

Can this logic apply to Volks with Shreks as well please?

Volks with shrecks can't equip bars/lmg and dont beat other core infantry at all ranges + OKW is muni/fuel starved faction.

I agree 100% with what Ginnungagap said and this in particular:

But still, i feel the USA late game is strong in the right hands. And that's the only real downside: It's considerably harder to micro multiple vehicles that die in 2-3 shots. The M8A1 and M36 have to been babysitted at all times and must kept constantly at range against any AT units. One late reverse move and you are guaranteed to lose a unit.

In other words: Playing other factions, i feel i can play them to about 90% efficiency on a good day. Playing USA however, i can only play them at about 60% efficiency - there's just so much to do, microing tank crews, positioning the ambulance truck and time the healing and so on... i know there is always one thing that can be microed better.

I'm not a high APM player, that's exactly why i play CoH2, but i can see the (late game) potential that the USA has. I would say it doesn't lack powerful units, rather the players lack the ability and perseverance to use them to the fullest.

depends on what target they are shooting at but at max range (35) they have at least a 60% chance to hit vs medium tanks and 54% vs the 222, puma and panzer II

Exactly, it's horrible.

They can put up a strong defense, but after most axis armor is knocked out, what then? They'd need to push forward to exploit and this is often the problem.

With all fuel invested in Jacksons/M8s instead of shermans, exploitation of the situation is the problem.

The Pershing would solve the problem- it's both close support heavy armor, AI and AT.

I agree OP. I always disagree with people when they say the US late game needs a buff like a Pershing etc etc

2-3 Jacksons and some M8A1s along with any version of well equipped infantry will basically ROCK HARD counter everything short of a supported Tiger ace if you can kite well. (Since you cant kite the TA effectively unless you are a kiting god with its 50 range and CRAZY RoF and damage.)

The defensive nature of US late game puts the iniative back to the Axis side. They can more easily dictate where to attack when Us fuel is sunk into jacksons.

Serious question here.

In team games, what is to stop the US from building 4 shermans and just barreling though the front lines against the OKW?

In my experience that seems to work pretty well for the US. So as a US player, what would you see from OKW that would stop you from making that big push?

I don't see how a KT or JadgT are going to deter you much. Just circle them and pick them apart. Mines could be a concern, but with the muni starved OKW it is tough to invest in them enough to really cover yourself.

^^
Combined AT from

Pumas, Panthers, Puppchen, PzS mutually supporting each other on VPs.

Unlike kt/jadgpanzer, both Puma and Panther are flexible AFVs.

US doesn't really outnumber Ost T3 so there's:

faust, paks, pzS, cheap and effective stug IIIs (with vehicle stun to worry about), P4s, and Tigers or Panthers.

Then of course, mines.

Sherman 75 spam isn't really that effective.

Shreck blobs are usually the chosen form of AT you'll see in 2 v 2 or greater OKW.

Shreck blob to the super heavy armor typically.