My proposal to making USF more appealing

Relic please add thanks

USF Air support doctrine:

1 cp: Air recon
2 cp: Muni supply (spend 50 gas for 150 muni)
4 cp: Strafe run (.50 cal weapon)
6 cp: Close air support (air craft will loiter the battlefield targeting and strafing any infantry unit)
9 cp: Rocket strafe (mark area and it will be attacked with rockets)

A big problem here: historically the Tank destroyer battalions claimed a 3:1 kill ratio against the panzers (real ratio lower, of course) and USA greatly outnumbered them in both tanks and TDs.

I don't feel like the US has 'armor parity (for the sake of the game)' when the Ost can just stug spam to Tigers.

I agree with CoH2player! No but seriously, part of the american doctrine on tank engagements was to find the enemy and let the tank destroyers engage from a safe position. I think this is what relic tried to mimic and it's a good idea. It gives the US their own gameplay. As long as they get good TDs and recon options, this can works and this makes a for a much more interestting playstyle than just copypasting the one of the other factions.

What could give more love to USF: Improving Core arty capabilities and resiliency. I have never see a Howitzer wipe a full life 4men squad like a ISG does (and I don't really want to see that but it's an example). Same it not reliable to kill or at least pin anything in his targeted area.
Americans works with combined arm but indirect fire support is absent of the equation or doctrinal with a high cost of munition. In many matches I faced an OKW easy defense core with the flak truck as milestone and it is almost impossible to take out with a doctrinal strike.

In my idea, indirect fire arms doesn't need to have more abilities to kill, but to stun vehicles and building (disable functionality for a time) or pin squad ability in a area of effect so you can follow with a massive attack.

Now, for the Pershing part of the topic, I don't know what to think, but one thing comes to my mind. MG34 is a doctrinal ability that brings small arm support to an army that should have it, same for the Panther. Why should I face OKW panther, this army hasn't been design with it but still Relic gives it at an option for gameplay - and I fine with that. In my opinion, the Pershing gives the same option, it obviously comes later than the Panther in the game. So each player has room of strengths and weakness. If you know the USF player will have a pershing, you must close the game before instead of sitting in your side waiting for CP cooldown.

@Coh2player: maybe a doctrine ability that reduce the global price for USF T4 units so you can "spam" them and be closest to the reality

A big problem here: historically the Tank destroyer battalions claimed a 3:1 kill ratio against the panzers (real ratio lower, of course) and USA greatly outnumbered them in both tanks and TDs.

I don't feel like the US has 'armor parity (for the sake of the game)' when the Ost can just stug spam to Tigers.

I am not sure what you mean. Do you mean that the US currently dosen't have what it takes to take them down? I haven't used the Jackson much so i can't say, but what i can say is how horrible the Wolverine is. It ambush a puma 1 on 1 and loose consistantly.

As long as we give em speed and firepower with low armor/health. I am sure we could see interesting games. But between the high price of the Jackson and the poor performances of the wolverine... it seems pretty hard to counter a cheap tank spam from the germans.

To increase their firepower further and show they are really glass cannon to use while abushing rather than going gung-ho AND be historically accurate, we could give them a slow turret traverse speed. Making them unreliable if they were to engage from a short distance or get dropped on.

They do have the jackson but as others point it out US armor late game takes more micro skill than German. The fact that it takes more skill to win in the end means that the germans have armor superiority.

IF you want to go that route of glass cannon spam, the US then needs a non doc spammable type of AFV like the Stug. Jacksons are too valuable and expensive.

Currently the Wolverine is it, but it is doctrinal and it is UP .

IMO, adding the non doc Hellcat at 100 fuel would be a good compromise (high speed/fastest tank in the game, 76mm gun, 50 range)

Dont worry about the matchmaker %.

It means absolutely nothing for many many reasons.

Indeed, it's just pro-american Relic propaganda. More people actually play USF/Soviets because they're OP.

They do have the jackson but as others point it out US armor late game takes more micro skill than German. The fact that it takes more skill to win in the end means that the germans have armor superiority.

IF you want to go that route of glass cannon spam, the US then needs a non doc spammable type of AFV like the Stug. Jacksons are too valuable and expensive.

Currently the Wolverine is it, but it is doctrinal and it is UP .

IMO, adding the non doc Hellcat at 100 fuel would be a good compromise (high speed/fastest tank in the game, 76mm gun, 50 range)

Well i can't say i hate a good challenge. If it's more micro for better effect i am down for it. Also it dosen't have to be a spam, but it all depends on price/power ratio it needs more in the power departement in the end since they have paper thin armor and slow turret traverse speed.

The feeling of seeing a plan unfold with this kind of tank is glorious!

I wrote this already in another thread but I think it's more fitting here. I feel like the US is arguably the best 1v1 faction in the game right now, though not by a huge enough margin to warrant a lot of the complaints I've been seeing. The US has a lot of strengths in that they're great at taking territory but, but they have a hard time keeping it for prolonged periods of time. I just want to give my two cents about the faction as a whole:

1) The entire faction is built around riflemen. If they get nerfed, they have to be extremely well-thought out and reasonable nerfs. We can't have them turning panzergrenadier bad, or else the US faction will be the laughing stock of the game. I believe that the problem is blobbing, not the riflemen squad itself. A better change would just be a increased received accuracy to clumped units as others have suggested, which would both make rifle blobs more reasonable and improve the entire game's tactical value overall. Considering rifle blobs are basically the only "OP" complaint I see levied against the US faction besides the AA halftrack, I don't see why anybody would disagree with this.

2) AA Halftrack is great against Ostheer and good against Oberkommando. I'm more convinced that the reason it's so good against Ostheer is because of a deficiency with them not because America is OP. Keep in mind that this thing is 60 fuel and one of the few units people actually tend to build besides riflemen. It should be effective for its cost. I'm going to echo what I said with riflemen about overnerfs, because Relic has a tendency to overdo it with their balance changes. People don't need another reason to build nothing but one unit type.

3) ...why is their HMG 280 manpower instaed of 240? Especially after they got nerfed (excuse me, "bug-fixed"), it doesn't seem any better or worse than the MG42, except it comes out later. Maybe someone can correct me on this, because I personally don't see much difference in performance.

4) Pack howitzer is utterly worthless, but everyone knows that already. Either it needs a cost and population reduction to a normal mortar squad's, or (preferably) just gets a buff to be worth a damn. This thing had amazing AoE in the alpha and was a monster of an artillery piece. Now all it does is make a cool whooshing noise.

5) Is it just me, or are Shermans worse against tanks than T34/76's? It's like the vet 1 radio net ability is the sole reason Shermans are good, forcing you to spam them like riflemen. Their HE shell is odd, also. It has tremendous splash and damage, but it barely ever hits even when stationary. It really needs an accuracy increase and a splash decrease to make it more consistent.

6) The supervise ability on the captain is just stupid and adds more micro to an already micro-intensive faction. Nobody used the Wehrmacht Officer in the first game, so I have no idea why Relic thought people would enjoy a similar unit in the sequel. Is the captain supposed to be AT support, or a babysitter? Just cut down on the tank build times a little and get rid of supervise.

7) Rifle company is so good it invalidates every other American doctrine, in my opinion. The veteran riflemen ability could use some sort of change.

8) Rear Echelon troops need mines. There is quite literally no purpose to this unit whatsoever since volley fire got nerfed (it was stupid anyway). Vehicle crews can repair themselves, and US don't get sandbags except in one doctrine.

9) Having to pay 5 population just to have any sort of healing utility at all is annoying.

10) Last but not least, US early game is just flat-out boring because the only unit you can build is riflemen. No wonder people blob.

Honorable mention: Pershing. Pretty please?

Relic please add thanks

USF Air support doctrine:

1 cp: Air recon
2 cp: Muni supply (spend 50 gas for 150 muni)
4 cp: Strafe run (.50 cal weapon)
6 cp: Close air support (air craft will loiter the battlefield targeting and strafing any infantry unit)
9 cp: Rocket strafe (mark area and it will be attacked with rockets)

Are you trolling, right?