This is not aimed as a slight against people who like USF. For the record, I've played only about 20 games as USF, mainly in 2v2AT.
I'm just curious to see if anyone else finds this faction really one-dimensional and boring?
You're forced to go with the same opening every time, it's just a question of how many Rifles you want to spam.
90% of games in 1v1 people go 3 rifles into LT into M20 into Sherman. #yawn
I feel the way this faction is designed actively encourages blobbing: why get support weapons when spamming infantry works better and is easier?
Do you enjoy playing USF?
27 Apr 2015, 23:59 PM
#1
Posts: 471
28 Apr 2015, 00:02 AM
#2
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
OKW and USF suffer from a lot of the same issues, lack of support weapons, little in the way of good builds outside of the standard cookie cutter, low amount of doctrines, ect.
But two things that makes me like playing OKW more is the more interesting tanks (Relic REALLY messed up with how few of the Sherman varients they put in), and you have a much much wider selection in the infantry you can get.
I would have a lot more fun playing USF if you didn't have 1 infantry unit and nothing else.
But two things that makes me like playing OKW more is the more interesting tanks (Relic REALLY messed up with how few of the Sherman varients they put in), and you have a much much wider selection in the infantry you can get.
I would have a lot more fun playing USF if you didn't have 1 infantry unit and nothing else.
28 Apr 2015, 00:05 AM
#3
Posts: 204
Permanently BannedDon't like them, easy mode all the way, especially if you riflespam against ostheer on most of the maps. Just a walk in the park boys, just a walk in the park
28 Apr 2015, 00:21 AM
#4
Posts: 2561
I love usf, every other factions forces me to commit to an opening before I know anything about what my opponent is doing. USF might not have any options on when you star, but there is a shit ton of options on what your next step will be. US is all about adapting and any player who knows what he is doing going into a game doesn't truly understand USF.
If you really want an alternate opening, that's what the commanders are for.
Remember:
If you really want an alternate opening, that's what the commanders are for.
Remember:
28 Apr 2015, 00:30 AM
#5
Posts: 2561
OKW and USF suffer from a lot of the same issues, lack of support weapons, little in the way of good builds outside of the standard cookie cutter, low amount of doctrines, ect.USF and OKW don't lack support weapons, they just aren't any good. Buffing the leig, pack, and .50cal would go a long way in diversifying these factions. OKW also has a lot of what I would call "support vehicles" rather then many support weapons.
But two things that makes me like playing OKW more is the more interesting tanks (Relic REALLY messed up with how few of the Sherman varients they put in), and you have a much much wider selection in the infantry you can get.
I would have a lot more fun playing USF if you didn't have 1 infantry unit and nothing else.
US might only have rifles, but with 4 different upgrade options they come in many diverse forms. Also okw and USF have more forms of "support infantry" like pathfinders, jeigers, and assault engis.
28 Apr 2015, 00:42 AM
#6
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Only for the first 15mins and not on all maps.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
28 Apr 2015, 01:05 AM
#7
8 Posts: 2470
i hate USF early game (prior to a tier) and i don't like fighting multiple heavies with only jacksons but other then that i enjoy it. haven't voted because i'm not sure how to vote.
28 Apr 2015, 01:26 AM
#8
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
I think they're a lot of fun. Their units have a lot of character, particularly the officers.
28 Apr 2015, 01:40 AM
#9
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
USF and OKW don't lack support weapons, they just aren't any good. Buffing the leig, pack, and .50cal would go a long way in diversifying these factions. OKW also has a lot of what I would call "support vehicles" rather then many support weapons.
US might only have rifles, but with 4 different upgrade options they come in many diverse forms. Also okw and USF have more forms of "support infantry" like pathfinders, jeigers, and assault engis.
All of the USF support weapons are non doc, while 1 of the only 3 OKW support weapons is doctrinal. Both armies selection still pales in comparison to the other armies.
No mortar
No howitzer
No sniper
list goes on.
USF might have the option to upgrade rifles but simply look at the unit lists of each faction:
USF has Rifles and Paras for direct combat units, Pathfinders/Assault Engineers for support
OKW has Volks, Obers, Fuss, Fallsch, JLI all as direct combat units with Sturms for support.
28 Apr 2015, 01:41 AM
#10
Posts: 300
I did not vote as there is no middle ground. But will say for the most part its too one dimensional. Just rifles into M20 and on to Shermans basically some of this because certain units kinda sucking rest is just bad design.
What I cant stand is Relics insistence to try to create SUPER UNIQUE factions in a game BUILT AROUND REAL WORLD ARMIES THAT ALL USED COMBINED ARMS In the end we just always end with gimmicky factions that always seem to encourage blobbing. This idea that factions should lack important weapon systems like mortars or getting MGs late is horrible!
I'd love to see both WFA get reworks so that they both have support early and good support weapons with weaker infantry so as to encourage blobbing.
USF Should get heavy Tanks
OKW SHOULD have medium tanks!
Soviet stock armor Should be viable!
ETC ETC ETC.......
Inb4 "want all factions to be the same"
What I cant stand is Relics insistence to try to create SUPER UNIQUE factions in a game BUILT AROUND REAL WORLD ARMIES THAT ALL USED COMBINED ARMS In the end we just always end with gimmicky factions that always seem to encourage blobbing. This idea that factions should lack important weapon systems like mortars or getting MGs late is horrible!
I'd love to see both WFA get reworks so that they both have support early and good support weapons with weaker infantry so as to encourage blobbing.
USF Should get heavy Tanks
OKW SHOULD have medium tanks!
Soviet stock armor Should be viable!
ETC ETC ETC.......
Inb4 "want all factions to be the same"
 | Playercard of PyroPlazma | |||||||||||||||||||
|
28 Apr 2015, 01:42 AM
#11
1 
Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
I pinch my nipples and giggle like a little girl while playing USF
28 Apr 2015, 01:48 AM
#12
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
I think they're a lot of fun. Their units have a lot of character, particularly the officers.
I really like the Captain unit's general stuff (Wish Zookas were good though) [I'd like the Major unit if he didn't have a blob-city retreat point ability and the rest of his abilities were actually cost-efficient], but the Lieutenant's a Rifle squad + a Thompson and free BAR, different vet and - AT RG. He's...not very characterful.
28 Apr 2015, 01:50 AM
#13
Posts: 379
I think USF might be my favorite faction. They play very similar to the USA in CoH 1 which was my favorite faction.
I like the fluid infantry centric early - mid game
I like the fluid infantry centric early - mid game
28 Apr 2015, 01:58 AM
#14
4 Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1
I like USF because the lategame revolves around combined-tank arms (if thats even a thing), and forces you to micro multiple weaker tanks vs. singular, better tanks. It really feels fun in the lategame because of the emphasis on ambushes and tactics.
That being said, earlygame is a little silly in 1 vs. 1 vs. ostheer, but this I feel is more a problem of ostheers design mixed with USFs design, over anything else.
That being said, earlygame is a little silly in 1 vs. 1 vs. ostheer, but this I feel is more a problem of ostheers design mixed with USFs design, over anything else.
28 Apr 2015, 02:00 AM
#15
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
I did not vote as there is no middle ground. But will say for the most part its too one dimensional. Just rifles into M20 and on to Shermans basically some of this because certain units kinda sucking rest is just bad design.
What I cant stand is Relics insistence to try to create SUPER UNIQUE factions in a game BUILT AROUND REAL WORLD ARMIES THAT ALL USED COMBINED ARMS In the end we just always end with gimmicky factions that always seem to encourage blobbing. This idea that factions should lack important weapon systems like mortars or getting MGs late is horrible!
I'd love to see both WFA get reworks so that they both have support early and good support weapons with weaker infantry so as to encourage blobbing.
USF Should get heavy Tanks
OKW SHOULD have medium tanks!
Soviet stock armor Should be viable!
ETC ETC ETC.......
Inb4 "want all factions to be the same"
good post, +1
28 Apr 2015, 09:02 AM
#16
Posts: 471
I pinch my nipples and giggle like a little girl while playing USF
lol
28 Apr 2015, 09:07 AM
#17
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Boring as hell.
Rifles, Rifles, Rifles, LT/Rifles, M20/AA, Major, Sherman/Scott Jackson all day long.
Right now Im enjoying most OST. So many options... 4x Grens or 2x Pio, 2xMG, or 3x Grens, 1xMG, then mortar, sniper, pzgrens, scout car... So many options.. And late game? Tiger, Elephnat, Pak43, Panther, Brummbar. Ostheer is best designed faction in my opinion.
Rifles, Rifles, Rifles, LT/Rifles, M20/AA, Major, Sherman/Scott Jackson all day long.
Right now Im enjoying most OST. So many options... 4x Grens or 2x Pio, 2xMG, or 3x Grens, 1xMG, then mortar, sniper, pzgrens, scout car... So many options.. And late game? Tiger, Elephnat, Pak43, Panther, Brummbar. Ostheer is best designed faction in my opinion.
28 Apr 2015, 09:13 AM
#18
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
USF are badly designed, but they are enjoyable.
Much more enjoyable then Sov as you can play with whatever doctrine you want thanks to reliable and adaptive T4.
Much more enjoyable then Sov as you can play with whatever doctrine you want thanks to reliable and adaptive T4.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
28 Apr 2015, 09:46 AM
#19
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
What I cant stand is Relics insistence to try to create SUPER UNIQUE factions in a game BUILT AROUND REAL WORLD ARMIES THAT ALL USED COMBINED ARMS In the end we just always end with gimmicky factions that always seem to encourage blobbing. This idea that factions should lack important weapon systems like mortars or getting MGs late is horrible!
My sentiments of WFA exactly.
28 Apr 2015, 13:03 PM
#20
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
USF are badly designed, but they are enjoyable.
Is there any faction, in your conception, or game, that is not bad designed?
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
543 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.592215.734+7
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.272108.716+23
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1233
Board Info
703 users are online:
703 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49090
Welcome our newest member, BrubeckDeclarkBurche
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, BrubeckDeclarkBurche
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM