Why do YOU prefer Axis over Allies?

You can drink and play Axis and still win the game, but sadly not with Allies.

Wow, I think you just hit on the key to the balance question.

Relic! Listen to this man. This is a game after all, and you have to be all serious and experty (yeah, I made it up) in order to win then by definition it is just less fun. People like to win.

I enjoy playing both, Allies and Axis...

I prefered Ostheer to Soviets due to faction design and use of combined arms. Soviets were too much built around strong call ins wherefore I did not really enjoy to play them but the latest patch changed this fact dramatically.

WFA factions feel weird to play, probably their design does not appeal me; have not played them since the patch neither. I do not prefer one of them over the other to be honest.

I think the main reason I like Ostheer above all else is the PzIV - it's the midgame backbone of a faction with great synergies and good design. Ostheer's thoughtful faction design encourages skilled combined arms play and does not rely on cheese (ie., flamer scout cars, demos) or overpowered units of the month (M5s, T70s, 240mm mortars).

Unfortunately this patch the PziV certainly isn't quite as good, as T3 is arguably pretty weak against multiple SU-76s but it will probably be back at some point.

Unfortunately this patch the PziV certainly isn't quite as good, as T3 is arguably pretty weak against multiple SU-76s but it will probably be back at some point.

I must disagree. PIV is still useful if you do not charge SU-76 frontally. PaK40 plus PIV is able to deal with SU-76 comfortably, even better if proper flank is executed. Besides that, PIV proves effective versus infantry.

One of the few games to play the mighty german wehrmacht.

I like playing the japanese faction, only because it doesn't disappoint me in any way shape or form.

+1

The units look cooler, the commanders are more plentiful and as a result, allow for more varied play. And above all, they are the strongest.

Even if you wreck your early and mid game you can still make a comeback. I had a great example of this yesterday, Allies had 500 points, we had 2. Allies had 2 VPs, we capped back the mid VP and that was it, GG. We bled them down to 100 points, and they realised it was GG. They had soviet industry, and a few other cheese strats that allowed mass tank production, but our heavies just shrugged them off. Very intense game which they'd have won if we had been slower by about 8 seconds!

Basically
https://youtu.be/inB-6R1-4ng?t=1m25s

Andrew Eldritch of the Sisters of Mercy got there before Brand:

"I think the great lesson of the 20th century is that you have to separate the ethics from the aesthetics. The Nazis did have the best uniforms, there's no denying it. The great lesson there is that you don't have to agree with what the Nazis did, but, yes, be honest about it, they did have the best uniforms. A lot of people can't come to terms with something as banal as that. They can't admit it, because somehow they feel like they're approving of what the Nazis did."

Thanks Hugo Boss!

At the moment ost/sov/okw(all on the same level) > usf as my preference, usf is just so boring and so one dimensional...

I'm primarily an allies player. I don't play German often because I find their design to be cheap and boring. IN team games the trick is to really just drag it out, if the game lasts long enough you'll probably win.

When I play Axis it is for these reasons:
No friends online and I want to play a team game
Pak 43
Walking Stuka
Panther

Pak 43 is just hilariously awesome.
Walking stuka is a lot of fun to play with. Feels so rewarding when you massacre a soviet defensive line with a well placed barrage.
Panther play is a lot of fun I have to admit. Being an allies player I tend to use it more aggressively than most Germans do anyways. Unlike most tanks it does exactly what you want it to for the most part.

I'm primarily an allies player. I don't play German often because I find their design to be cheap and boring. IN team games the trick is to really just drag it out, if the game lasts long enough you'll probably win.

If you look at this part of the COH2 design, and compare it to the original map designs of COH1 (Yes, Achelous, Lyon, Vire, Scheldt were ALL on the original list of automatch maps) you wold think that Relic designers really believed if only the Germans had held out long enough they would have won in the end.

But apparently their unit preservation and fortified lines weren't up to snuff.

But apparently their unit preservation and fortified lines weren't up to snuff.

Nah... they waited too long for their call-ins!

obersoldaten

Nah... they waited too long for their call-ins!

Steiner wasn't able to make his assault?! But it was an order! Hitler gave an order!!!

If you look at this part of the COH2 design, and compare it to the original map designs of COH1 (Yes, Achelous, Lyon, Vire, Scheldt were ALL on the original list of automatch maps) you wold think that Relic designers really believed if only the Germans had held out long enough they would have won in the end.

That seems... uncharitable.

The Allies in Normandy did come to the conclusion that if they fought the Germans on "anything like even numbers", they would lose. And so, as I understand it, the design intent was essentially that if the Axis can survive the Allied Zerg-rush, their individually superior units could or would turn the tide.

After all, it would not be feasible to merely declare that because the Germans lost the war, every German player must lose every game. That would be No Fun (TM). What they have done is determine that style in which the victory is achieved: the allies win by taking early map control and crushing the Germans under weight of numbers (especially viable back when territories gave popcap); the Germans win by holding off the allied assault and then beating them one on one.

This is a particular aesthetic, not a historical interpretation.

That seems... uncharitable.

The Allies in Normandy did come to the conclusion that if they fought the Germans on "anything like even numbers", they would lose. And so, as I understand it, the design intent was essentially that if the Axis can survive the Allied Zerg-rush, their individually superior units could or would turn the tide.

I was pointing out that the aesthetic itself was a choice, as is to believe in the myth of the aesthetic. Just don't think it was reality.

As to Normandy; one, normally you never expect an attacker to win on equal numbers. Obviously there are situations where the numerically inferior can win on the attack, but that is not the general case.

Normandy was even more unique in that so much preparation went into the landings and so little into the preparation for fighting in the Bocage once a foothold was achieved. No one spoke of "anything like even numbers" and for the most part they didn't think they were in any way inferior to the Germans. There were Germans they knew would be tougher opponents than others, but at no time did they think they couldn't get the job done or that they could only achieve it with overwhelming force. To WANT overwhelming force is a different matter. No soldier or general only brings the minimum they think they need to succeed. They bring everything they can afford to bring to ensure success (and a low casualty count).

^^

Since the dawn of recorded history the rule has been that when you're attacking, you must have an advantage of 3 to 1 or more.