US faction too effective?

So, to the topic.

I'm curious why you'd assess that Ostheer is the better 1v1 faction.

If I recall correctly, you stated that you believe the current balance is Osth>US>Soviet>OKW.

As another poster mentioned earlier, the level of play is going to weigh in on one's opinion.

I'd have to look at each individual poster's opinion as well as the available player cards, but my own personal experience varies from 50's to 300's depending on bracket and so forth.

That being said, I really feel the balance is more US>Osth>Soviet>OKW with Osth and Soviet being fairly interchangeable on the ladder.

As I've said, and many others, I don't think US is that over the top, but they do have a few obvious leads that I believe put them at top rung.

Curious what the counter points are for those who believe ostheer is in the better spot.

So, to the topic.

I'm curious why you'd assess that Ostheer is the better 1v1 faction.

If I recall correctly, you stated that you believe the current balance is Osth>US>Soviet>OKW.

As another poster mentioned earlier, the level of play is going to weigh in on one's opinion.

I'd have to look at each individual poster's opinion as well as the available player cards, but my own personal experience varies from 50's to 300's depending on bracket and so forth.

That being said, I really feel the balance is more US>Osth>Soviet>OKW with Osth and Soviet being fairly interchangeable on the ladder.

As I've said, and many others, I don't think US is that over the top, but they do have a few obvious leads that I believe put them at top rung.

Curious what the counter points are for those who believe ostheer is in the better spot.

Basically the combination of LMG Grens, MGs, PaK40s and Tiger is extremely potent.

Ost vs USF is a difficult fight for the Ost player, don't get me wrong. It is certainly an uphill battle in the early game, but once your MG42s force a couple retreats and you get your LMGs equipped things become a lot more bearable. This is further helped by the availability of the 251 for mobile/forward reinforcement.

Finally the USF AT gun has weak penetration compared to the ZiS, and they don't have a tank that can actually soak hits from a Tiger like the T34/85s or IS-2 can. (Generally Soviets, in 1v1, kill Tigers with Mark + ZiS while T34/85s soak damage) Jacksons are remarkably strong, I love them, but they simply cannot contend with the sheer firepower of a pair of properly positioned PaK40s - especially once one of them gets Vet 1 (which happens very quickly).

Currently I feel like neither the Soviets nor the USF have the capability to go toe-to-toe with a properly managed Ostheer late game army (LMG Grens, MGs, PaK40s + Tiger). The trick/difficulty is managing the MGs and PaK40s, there isn't very much margin for error unfortunately.

This, I think, is the primary reason (also the M15/Elite Rifle nerfs, among other things has been huge - the poll is a few patches old) for the difference in opinion between myself and others. Ostheer, played to near perfection, is highly potent - unfortunately achieving this level of play is difficult to say the least.

I really hope this post does not come off as super ego ridden. I hope that, by now, everyone knows that I spend a lot of time on stream/YouTube trying to help people improve their play.

Main issue with ostheer too many useless units,bad teching and highly predictable.
USA has very few useless units and lean teching.
Unitwise the early halftrack swings the thing in favour of usa.Rifles alone can be fended with mg support till lmg 42s unless u made blunders.Lategame easy eight call in is the other problem.Other than this its not that much issue.

Main issue with ostheer too many useless units,bad teching and highly predictable.
USA has very few useless units and lean teching.
Unitwise the early halftrack swings the thing in favour of usa.Rifles alone can be fended with mg support till lmg 42s unless u made blunders.Lategame easy eight call in is the other problem.Other than this its not that much issue.

Yeah, can't disagree with you at all. All of Ostheer T4 is pretty much non-existent when it comes to 1v1s. Against USF you're pretty much pigeon-holed into holding out for a Tiger. T4 is too expensive and T3 loses horribly to E8s or Jacksons. Against Soviets T4 is just too expensive. By the time you have a Panther they'll have 3+ T34/76, or a pair of T34/85 which will #RektCity your poor Panther. The Ost T3 vs Soviet T3 is actually incredibly well balanced, but a pair of PaK40s can generally camp against T3 until you have a Tiger - and the Tiger is so strong there's almost no reason to tech T3 on most maps. Plus the Tiger is a lot safer against T34/85s than a P4.

I'd love to see some love for Ost T4 in the future. While they're super strong once they hit critical mass, they're certainly the most narrow faction in terms of viable builds. You have to crutch really hard on MG42s, LMGs and PaK 40s.

Rifles need a serious nerf. Easy 8 need a serious nerf. Shermans need a cost increase and the HE shell needs to be made less effective. Also abislity for a squad to carry 2 MGs should be removed.

OH stands ZERO chance against USF because they are dominated early game. US blob is just ridiculously noob and OP.

PGs are minced by Rifelman and cant even get close. They need 1.25 armor and Cost increase them to 360 would be fair.

Rifles need a serious nerf. Easy 8 need a serious nerf. Shermans need a cost increase and the HE shell needs to be made less effective. Also abislity for a squad to carry 2 MGs should be removed.

OH stands ZERO chance against USF because they are dominated early game. US blob is just ridiculously noob and OP.

PGs are minced by Rifelman and cant even get close. They need 1.25 armor and Cost increase them to 360 would be fair.

Just NO.More than USF nerf,wehr units like panther and panzergrenadiers are the ones that needs a little bit restructuring..especially the teching.
Sherman don't need fuel increase..pz 4 may go to 120.
Rifles don't need serious nerf,the infantry company lmg needs however no suppression.
The halftrack needs to come later or needs a setup time.
And E8 needs maybe 10 fuel increase.In general attempt should be made to fix the call in problem across all factions.I have played usa and playing the 2 sides these are my general impressions..
Early game the situation becomes difficult as u have to keep up with rifles ,defend the mg with ur grens and creep,and also get manpower to tech and build plus 320 for the pak..while he gets free lietenant..this creates an earlygame imbalance.Otherwise once grens have lmg 42 they can go toe to toe and even dominate with proper usage of rifle nade and mg 42 until quite lategame when all rifles can get 2.But the easy eight gain messes up the equation into mid-late game by rendering t3 obsolete.

Agreed allies are easymode. As ost if u wanna stop their blobs, u cant use an MG, since allies at distance with HMG will completely obliterate it in seconds.

This, I think, is the primary reason (also the M15/Elite Rifle nerfs, among other things has been huge - the poll is a few patches old) for the difference in opinion between myself and others. Ostheer, played to near perfection, is highly potent - unfortunately achieving this level of play is difficult to say the least.

I think that's the problem.

This might be a debate for another time, but should "balance" be considered balance when it must be played to perfection? I'm honestly not sure, but I'm inclined to say no.

I'm not saying ostheer needs a buff or some such(I do think they need fixes though), and you very well may be right, but I think the rub here is that US has much more wiggle room.

I'm spending a little too much time on thinking while I post which probably means I should wrap it up. However, even with this information, I do still think US needs to be edged some, and just that -- edged. Big sweeping changes ruin balance. A good start would be nerfing riflemen long range. As I said before, I feel that Osth and Soviet are pretty close to what they need to be (minus katyusha's and a few other random squad wiping abilities, ISU among them), I just think OKW and US could stand to be tweaked to be on their level. If there was anything Ostheer needed, it's choices. Because right now you play be rigid rules, and if you don't, you lose. It's incredibly boring.

I agree to be honest.

The US is too effective for a variety of reasons. Their kit allows them to deal with most of what OST has at any given time. Early game it is probably the worst, especially with the Rifle Company commander.

All the US player has to do is mass his riflemen, which will easily win any skirmish against your grenadiers. MG's are negated once they get smoke grenades. Even with LMG's on the grens, they'll have either BARs or 1919's on their riflemen, and will be on their way to an M15 or Stuart, both of which are extremely potent against infantry.

The only way to really win (that is, if both factions play with minimal errors) is to hold out until you can call in the heavies. Even then, if the US has the upper hand for most of the game, they will already have fielded several Easy 8's and Jacksons. Those in addition to their AT guns, and there isn't a whole lot you can do with a Tiger.

I just feel like the US is an easy faction to win with. You essentially just spam riflemen, which are one of the best early game infantry units. Once you have the upper hand after the first few engagements, you just snowball from there.

I'm not saying that it is impossible to win as OST, it's just much more difficult than playing against Soviets.

I think that's the problem.

This might be a debate for another time, but should "balance" be considered balance when it must be played to perfection? I'm honestly not sure, but I'm inclined to say no.

I'm not saying ostheer needs a buff or some such(I do think they need fixes though), and you very well may be right, but I think the rub here is that US has much more wiggle room.

I'm spending a little too much time on thinking while I post which probably means I should wrap it up. However, even with this information, I do still think US needs to be edged some, and just that -- edged. Big sweeping changes ruin balance. A good start would be nerfing riflemen long range. As I said before, I feel that Osth and Soviet are pretty close to what they need to be (minus katyusha's and a few other random squad wiping abilities, ISU among them), I just think OKW and US could stand to be tweaked to be on their level. If there was anything Ostheer needed, it's choices. Because right now you play be rigid rules, and if you don't, you lose. It's incredibly boring.

There has to be some skill level that balance is calibrated against. The problem with choosing anything less than perfection is that there will be situations where no matter how well you play you will lose because there is now a ceiling on how well you can do.

Once you have a good baseline balance sorted out though, you can divert full attention on broadening the wiggle room (that's a great way to describe it) instead of dividing resources between the two.

I dont understand how they nerf Obers (TWICE!!!!!), Falshims etc and leave US infantry whcih was way more OP the way it is. LOL

There has to be some skill level that balance is calibrated against. The problem with choosing anything less than perfection is that there will be situations where no matter how well you play you will lose because there is now a ceiling on how well you can do.

Once you have a good baseline balance sorted out though, you can divert full attention on broadening the wiggle room (that's a great way to describe it) instead of dividing resources between the two.

Nobody plays perfectly, not even the top 1v1 players. But balancing the game to be competitive for the top 100 1v1 players may satisfy the most hardcore people, but will ultimately be leaving the majority of players out in the cold, by definition. Theoretically, if Wehr was the strongest 1v1, but it required far more skill to use to its fullest (because it's micro intensive or whatever), I would not consider that a balanced game. The mid-tier Wehr players need more love. To try and satisfy both you would need a substantial alteration to the balance, buffing and nerfing across the board to try and make things more consistent. I don't believe it's as simple as nailing the balance in one tier of play, then slowly getting each other to fall into line, because changes to one group will inevitably have an impact on the others. It's like one of those puzzles where you have to make all the things line up, but you can't just move one thing at a time, you have to move multiple ones.

My goal when starting this topic was to get familiar with an opinion of more advanced players rather than general consensus especially that majority of time common opinion won't represent the problem.

The idea that some public vote will represent the true balance of factions is just ridiculous especially that majority of the community don't even know what they talk about in terms of balance or not even bothered with it. What if they only play 3v3? They will still vote but is this even remotely related to 1v1 balance?

To cut the long story short can we please stop talking about this silly poll? I doesn't bring anything into discussion nor it is a valid representation of balance in the game.

http://www.coh2.org/topic/20222/faction-strength

To people that think that this poll is valid:
Most of playerbase is playing one faction/side.
This poll profs nothing as you dont have valid sample for voting - most people will vote that opposing faction is stronger... Thats why you have more cries on coh forums that us/soviets is stronger than nazi... Not because it is but because there are more players on one side.
That why you cant balance game basing on forum posts/polls etc.

Ok, dude. If you wish, I can do that.

The poll is "good" and valid though (due to huge voter turnout and structure of the questions) and infact agrees with your point in OP, that US are performing best in 1v1.

But yeah, I think enough has been said about it, so Ill leave it there. No problem!

But still, the mega blobs and E8s do spoil things. Are the blobs a result of faction design or is it because rifles stronk so build rifles?

....are you really asking that question?

What else is the US supposed to make?

Are the blobs a result of faction design or is it because rifles stronk so build rifles?

Launch the game, pick USF, get in game and start building.

Look at all the amazing openings USF have compared to any other army.

Players spam rifles, because the faction is designed around spaming rifles, you have no other alternative.