Need critiquing of my USF 1vs1 skills

•  
  

  0

  VS

  VANE

  d?BK?

  2nd 1vs1 match as USF - W

  by: VANE map: Langreskaya

  1

  -

This is only my second 1vs1 as USF, and so far I feel good, but I think there are a lot of points where I definitely need to get sharper at.

Main thing is, I know I didn't face an enemy that was likely to have as much experience that I have in the game; however, I feel that in the early game, I was getting quite bossed around until I got my captain out. Any suggestions and critique would be extremely helpful, as I really want to improve my 1vs1 skills!

Another problem I have in the beginning may come down to the way I choose my strategy. With a map with as much points as this, would have I been better off starting with 2 Rear Echelons instead of a rifle squad right off the bat? I also did really bad with my AA HT, and lost it early as a result.

Thanks!

This replay never loaded for me,if you dont mind could you upload another?

This replay never loaded for me,if you dont mind could you upload another?

•  
  

  0

  VS

  VANE

  d?BK?

  Reup 2nd 2v2

  by: VANE map: Langreskaya

  1

  -

Reuploaded. Is this working now Cookiez?

•  
  

  0

  VS

  VANE

  d?BK?

  Reup 2nd 2v2

  by: VANE map: Langreskaya

  1

  -

Reuploaded. Is this working now Cookiez?

will watch this evening thanks

Now, I'm not as l33t as Cookiez, but I'm floating around the 800 mark atm in 1v1 so I should be able to help you.

The first thing that came to mind was that you have trouble multitasking, something that was illustrated multiple times throughout the game. You lost quite a few units simply because you were inattentive to volks grenade spam.

Personally, I never go LT anymore unless I'm supremely confident I can end the game with the AAHT. I'd also recommend switching Armor for Infantry Company as Cookiez wrote an excellent guide for using it here. On maps like Langres that are wide open, the M1919A6 will greatly help your riflemen scale into late game well as well as mitigating the 'nade volleys with the suppression granted by defensive stance.

Your LT opening left you pretty vulnerable to the OKW AAHT which is the reason why I barely use the LT tier anymore. You used your own AAHT well until you lost it to the Puma in a ballsy rush to destroy the OKW Flak HT. Again, Captain + Stuart would have shut him down from the get go and the 1919 would cover any gaps in your ai firepower.

You did manage to destroy his AAHT when he retreaded his volks, good job, that took a lot of pressure off of you. Unfortunately, you chose to wait on the E8 call-in. This isn't the Red Army, your regular M4A3 Sherman is more than capable of dealing with just about everything OKW has, even the Panther (rear armor shots). I have no problem with getting one E8 as a spearhead tank, as it can take more punishment, but a couple of stock Shermans would have ended the game much quicker. Their HE shells are nasty against infantry and can also deal damage to light vehicles.

You also produced FIVE E8's. Now that is a veritable ass ton of fuel wasted imho. Just some quick math here, Major is 90 fuel, regular M4A3 is 110, and the E8 is 145. So with your 5 E8's, that's 725 fuel on a frankly mediocre tank. For that amount of fuel you could have gotten the Major (and a forward retreat point) and 5.7 M4A3's. That's almost 6 Shermans and a Major for the same price as those E8's.

Why the economic rant? Because you never needed the E8 that whole game. When the Panther came out, you had two AT guns ready and frankly if you had just used M4A3's instead, the game would have probably never lasted that long. The M4 is an excellent squad wiping machine. Instead, you fiddled around with the E8, but they failed to make much of an impact, even when you had 3. Those volks/ raketenwerfers would have never been able to stand up to 3 HE Shermans for anywhere near that length of time without getting wiped off the face of the planet.

This brings me to yet another point. You make the same mistake I've seen others do and I wonder at it's origin. At one point, your tanks were taking fire from a Raketen, but instead of moving out of its cone of fire and flanking/wiping it, your tanks just sat there. I don't understand. You're taking fire, so the natural reaction would be to move, right? Medium tanks are excellent at flanking as they have great mobility, so there's no real point to just sitting there and letting them take free shots. Yes, you did wipe it, but you want to maximize the amount of time your armor is on the field instead of at the repair shop.

The OKW player made the massive mistake of not getting a Medic Truck until ~30:00 which really gave you the advantage in terms of attrition. Your medics kept your men fit and your flamers were racking up kills like credit card numbers. In addition, you saw the OKW player use his Stuka zu Fuss. That should have been an immediate green light to rush an M4A3 since you now know he won't be getting any real armor any time soon.

Also, if you manage to push your opponent off the field and have excess MP, throw down a fuel cache. That's how you prevent comebacks.

The USF requires a late game combined arms approach more than any other faction I'd say. They don't have LMG42 Grenadiers, Shocks/Guards, or Obers and unless you go for Airborne, the humble Rifleman is your only infantry unit all game.

This is why I'm such a proponent of the M4A3, it's a truly amazing tank with its versatility. I used to think that the E8 was the best tank the US had, until I had my eyes opened by how the much cheaper stock Sherman was frankly a lot better in terms of the combined arms approach. It excelled at wiping out entrenched infantry and accompanying rifles could easily deal with any AT guns/ shattered remnants of your enemy's forces.

Again, I have no issues with using one E8, but more is a mistake imho.

Sorry for the long rant, but I've seen so many players throw away the game with their expensive Easy Eights when with a bit of additional micro the more combined-arms oriented M4A3 quite frankly outperforms it.

I'm sure Cookiez will cover what I missed. I hope this helps.

Will just give you my notes as i watch. Sorry if they are hard to understand or not as good as usual,im tired from work.

So....doctrine choice....

what doctrine you pick decides your initial build order if you're going to pick a doctrine that early,especially as USF.

In your case, since you picked RIfle,PERSONALLY, I absoulutely love 2 RE's,1 normal rifle,then 1 vet rifle,into LT with rifle company.

This allows you to counter kubels with m20 vs OKW(if they get one) or get access to the monster of a unit,especially vs OKW:the NEW 50 cal. If they go AA HT(OKW) themselves then YOU go AA HT and counter. (which you did)
Fighting position you made to cover munitions was a good idea,but IMO, was a bit misplaced IF I WERE YOU,but its subjective. I would put it on the fuel,or the cutoff point.

Or,if you're aggressive enough,you can put one on your ENEMY's cutoff.

But,covering munitions is also fine too.


Because you went for 4 rifles,your LT was a bit late,coming out at the same time your opponent has a flak halftrack and a shrek already on the field,making your LT a bit redundant if you werent already rolling,

Thats why build order is important as USF,ITS so critical,especially in 1s.

You probably shouldve went captain if you were just gonnna go for 4 rifles flat out like that.

AND your opponent basically went all in on mech regiment units with a flak HT and a puma,and punishes you badly(initially),but part of the reason it did was because you went 4 rifle LT but not enough aggression. 4 rifle LT is BAD idea unless youre really confident. Again build order is important. 4 Rifle captain? wouldve won you the game right there. 2 rifle 50 cal AAHT? won it right there.


Bazookas were a decent choice,but just side tech to captain if you find yourself in that situation of no fuel or munitions after losing AAHT early on again.

Opponent threw you a bone with his own AA halftrack fail.
ignore earlier note,You DID go captain,very gud.
Except you were almost at 9 CP and couldve afforded an easy 8 much earlier at that point
Your initial build order is STILL haunting you. Imagine if you went captain first from the get-go,into stuart?
His entire mech reg opening wouldve been rekt.

Floating 700 manpower with both officers out,bad. GET a 50 cal or something. you went LT. USE HIM.
u were behind in infatnry most of this game,and honestly if your opponent wasnt being a silly goose and using only mech regiment units it wouldve gotten ugly for you fast.


armor piercing rounds on AT gun dont actually help you penetrate a puma,HOWEVER,they do actually give you more accuracy(at least on the Jackson and M10,but on the AT gun I need to be cited on that.)

22 minute 50 cal after 2 ATG guns first, when you had bazookas researched,meh.

You couldve just relied on zookas vs the light vheicles and then got 50 cals for Anti infantry. you didnt need the 57 mms at all.


When you have 2 EZ 8s and you kow your opponent went Stuka,flak HT,and puma,and the puma is dead? GO kill hunting for the stuka with both shermans,he cant stop you. Even losing 1 sherman is a good trade.

When you have two(3!) shermans also,go kill flak HQ,again he cant stop you. Raketens and shreks cant shoot through it,so use it as a shield when attacking,if that makes sense.

Annnnd game over.

The more i watched, the more i feel your opponent should have sent in this replay instead of you. YOU played pretty well for being new,but your opponent also threw you a few bones.

If you want to send a replay in the future,hopefully you send one where you lost. That helps you much more.

I hope I(We) helped.

snip

snip

Thank you for the advice! So I guess I'm mainly having build issues, and also some bad logic

I'll definitely think more about those things you guys mentioned, especially about the Easy Eights and normal Shermans the next time I play. As soon as I have a really tough loss I'll upload it

That's what we're here for.
Good Luck!