Give US Snipers!

Seriously, there is no reason that they shouldn't have them. US have absolutely no proper counters to an enemy sniper. The utility car is instantly destroyed (and snared) by panzerfausts and even then the AT gun destroys any light vehicle in 2 hits (regardless of armor skirts).

US have nothing but infantry units that they HAVE to make and these units are easily countered with MG squads. Smoke and grenades are a costly way to deal with MG's and if you go this route, then scout cars will just come out and kill units with range while snipers just sit in the rear. There is NO counter to this. Even if you manage to get in range, they will just retreat, heal up and start it over again costing them nothing. Then out comes tanks and that's game since you spent all your resources trying to kill a sniper.

I don't understand why US never had snipers ported from COH1, there was a reason the US faction had a weapons support center, and that was to deal with MG's, mortars, and other snipers. Why would you leave MG's, mortars and snipers for OST, but then take them away from US? Diversify this game and give US proper units to counter so it comes down to gameplay and not blind luck.

If Pathfinders could spend munitions to snipe at veterancy one it would please me. Otherwise, build an M20.

I understand you frustration with lack of "easy" (if you forgive me for using that word) counter for sniper, but if your opponent invests in T1 and 360 MP unit you have to beat him with superior map control and as a result - faster teching.

I know, there are maps that are extremely good for sniper, but general idea is what I've described above.

Seriously, there is no reason that they shouldn't have them. US have absolutely no proper counters to an enemy sniper. The utility car is instantly destroyed (and snared) by panzerfausts and even then the AT gun destroys any light vehicle in 2 hits (regardless of armor skirts).

First of all, Pathfinders.
Second, the fact that M20 has counters doesn't mean USF doesn't have effective anti-sniper counters. It looks like the real problems aren't snipers, but inability to dodge anti-tank threats. Seeing as AT is far more prevalent than snipers, you're worrying about the wrong thing and fantasizing snipers as being the solution.

US have nothing but infantry units that they HAVE to make and these units are easily countered with MG squads.... you spent all your resources trying to kill a sniper.

Then maybe you should have engaged everything else? Ostheer has smaller squad sizes.

I don't understand why US never had snipers ported from COH1, there was a reason the US faction had a weapons support center, and that was to deal with MG's, mortars, and other snipers. Why would you leave MG's, mortars and snipers for OST, but then take them away from US? Diversify this game and give US proper units to counter so it comes down to gameplay and not blind luck.

I'd take the reason being that they were designed to fight against different factions in that game. That's like saying I don't understand why you don't speak French, since I do and so does everyone else in Quebec, so why not some guy from New York? How would cloning a unit to suit a particular person's gameplay style add to diversity as opposed to less diversity?

I don't see how USF having problems with snipers equate to a need to have sniper units themselves. Would USF snipers actually solve the problem you're having?

Lastly, if USF suffers so much from snipers, then why are they arguably the best faction to play in PvP?

End of the day, it sounds like just another L2P.

Main reason? MP drain against OST would be insane. Grens are 4-man, 30mp per model squads, whereas USF squads are both bigger and less expensive; combined with rifles being better (and cheaper) than grens, giving them the ability to MP drain OST that hard would make USF insanely overpowered.

Seriously, there is no reason that they shouldn't have them.

The US didn't use snipers like other Britain, Germany, and Russia did. Making Snipers in those countries meant extensive training in marksmanship, stealth, camouflage, and such. Making an American Sniper was simply taking the most accurate soldier and giving him extra marksmanship training. Afterward, they usually operated as part of an Infantry Platoon and wore the same uniforms and used to the same tactics.

In the end, Jaeger Light Infantry squads are more like US Snipers than Pathfinders are. There is an unused weapon rack for M1 Garand Snipers, so it's a shame that was scrapped. Also it's interesting they chose the Garand, since the Springfield was the assigned weapon for most American Snipers.

Snipers are high-risk, high-reward, but they are also a high-micro reward unit, they get better the more skill a player has. At highest level they become nigh unkillable

The fact they even made it into the game that is supposed to be all about cover and position is bullshit, the rationale of snipers was to be in camouflage and wait to take out priority targets (in this game I suppose that would mean the weapon teams). The rationale was definitely not to take potshots at enemy infantry, then turn around and run for your life while the Benny Hill theme plays, with the ability to get Romulan cloaking field by the sole virtue of touching a wooden fence with your pinky finger (while running at full speed, mind you) and baiting infantry into a Machine gun.

At least they are way better implemented than in coh1.

At least they are way better implemented than in coh1.

Cloaking field then instead activating seconds later after shooting you because fuck you

If Pathfinders could spend munitions to snipe at veterancy one it would please me. Otherwise, build an M20.

Pathfinder voice files suggest that a snipe ability may have been thought about at some point as well as pathfinder grenades. Both of these can be heard in the first minute of the video.

Main reason? MP drain against OST would be insane. Grens are 4-man, 30mp per model squads, whereas USF squads are both bigger and less expensive; combined with rifles being better (and cheaper) than grens, giving them the ability to MP drain OST that hard would make USF insanely overpowered.

This was my thought as well when someone brought this up on reddit. Rifles already outclass Grens at all stages of the game (except for the brief period in most games where Grens have an LMG and USF has not yet gotten BARs or LMGs of their own). Grens would have absolutely no chance against Rifles if a Sniper was dropping them to 3 models before the Rifle / Gren fight even started.

I am, however, not necessarily opposed to them adding a 2 or 3 CP Sniper to Recon Commander or something like that. Obviously it would be the main attraction of that commander and you'd never combine it with LMGs or a Pershing or something.

Pathfinder voice files suggest that a snipe ability may have been thought about at some point as well as pathfinder grenades. Both of these can be heard in the first minute of the video.

It's used in the campaign.

It's used in the campaign.

Oh... didn't notice that at all. lol
I would be all for bringing it into multiplayer then (even though that probably won't happen).

I am, however, not necessarily opposed to them adding a 2 or 3 CP Sniper to Recon Commander or something like that. Obviously it would be the main attraction of that commander and you'd never combine it with LMGs or a Pershing or something.

Even then it would need to be limited to one at a time. Even mid game, being able to drop a gren squad to 2 models (even if there's 3 squads) is way too powerful. Only time it would be balanced is at late game, when you really don't need them that much (at least at most levels of play).

Main reason? MP drain against OST would be insane. Grens are 4-man, 30mp per model squads, whereas USF squads are both bigger and less expensive; combined with rifles being better (and cheaper) than grens, giving them the ability to MP drain OST that hard would make USF insanely overpowered.

So a rifles 28 MP reinforce cost per model is that much better then right? If you do the math it's actually more expensive to fully reinforce a rifle squad then a gren squad, but you're saying it's fine to MP drain US.....that doesn't make OST insanely overpowered? Have you played US? Do you not know how you spend ALL your MP on reinforcing just 3 squads of rifles from sniper fire? US is HIGHLY underpowered with no late game whatsoever.

You can't port over abilities and squads from COH1 and leave their counters out and think the game is going to be balanced.

USF can snipe in the Ardennes Assault Campaign; Pathfinders have a munitions ability that works like the Recon Infantry Section for Brits in vCoH1. It's really cool and helps infantry deal with priority targets like Obersoldaten or MGs in houses.

Even giving it to both Pathfinders in the base game wouldn't be bad, it requires using the small recon squads so you're locked in specific commanders, cost munitions, and a lengthy cooldown time. It could just be locked behind vet1 unlock or something.

First of all, Pathfinders.
Second, the fact that M20 has counters doesn't mean USF doesn't have effective anti-sniper counters. It looks like the real problems aren't snipers, but inability to dodge anti-tank threats. Seeing as AT is far more prevalent than snipers, you're worrying about the wrong thing and fantasizing snipers as being the solution.

So what are the effective anti-sniper counters then? Can't name any? Oh yeah that's right cause their aren't any effective counters! My inability to dodge anti thank threats? ROFL yeah ok, with the massive damage of a panzerfaust AND engine critical damage, nice try. You're going to post and tell me that I need to l2play (yet I am lvl 13 in the 1v1 ladder) yet you give no constructive advice on how to effectively deal with snipers as US.

Everyone else that would like to respond, please give constructive advice on how to properly counter snipers other than saying L2play please.

So what are the effective anti-sniper counters then? Can't name any? Oh yeah that's right cause their aren't any effective counters! My inability to dodge anti thank threats? ROFL yeah ok, with the massive damage of a panzerfaust AND engine critical damage, nice try. You're going to post and tell me that I need to l2play (yet I am lvl 13 in the 1v1 ladder) yet you give no constructive advice on how to effectively deal with snipers as US.

Everyone else that would like to respond, please give constructive advice on how to properly counter snipers other than saying L2play please.

I try to get an M20 as fast a I can and try to chase down the sniper with the M20 (flank). Furthermore you are getting a bonus with the M20 to kill the sniper and you can eat at least one pfaust. Most of the time enough to kill the sniper.
But ask some strategist, they have far more experience.

So a rifles 28 MP reinforce cost per model is that much better then right?

Yes.

Rifles are a larger squad (5 vs 4), cost less to reinforce (28 vs 30), use the same pop (7 each), have two default upgrade slots (vs 1), have a larger variety of upgrades available (AT, Close AI, Far AI), have access to smoke grenades, have FAR better vet, and can be healed and reinforced in the field via a mobile vehicle (Grens can only reinforce while mobile). That's just stats/abilities.

Then there's the inherent effectiveness drop rates:
1 Gren mode = 25%
1 Rifle model = 20%
That means that after losing 3 models, the gren squad is down to 25%hp/dps (and needs to retreat), while the rifles are at 40% (and cost 6 less MP to reinforce).

Then there's the inherent problem of smaller squads getting insta-wiped by explosives (rifles have 20% extra models).

If you do the math it's actually more expensive to fully reinforce a rifle squad then a gren squad

Yes, to go from 1 rifle model to 5 costs 112 vs. going from 1 gren to 4 costs 90. But rifles have an extra model. At the same model cost, it would be 112 vs 120.

but you're saying it's fine to MP drain US.....that doesn't make OST insanely overpowered?

Yes, because USF isn't an inherently MP starved faction. Unlike grens, rifles are a mainline infantry that lasts the ENTIRE game. Try fighting vet 3 grens vs. vet 3 rifles; it's no contest - especially with upgraded weapons. Grens work well in early game, but you need to diversify; you'll want PGrens for AT roles, you might want assault grens for AI... But USF? Just keep building rifles. That vet helps those units all game, and they only get better as time goes on.

Have you played US? Do you not know how you spend ALL your MP on reinforcing just 3 squads of rifles from sniper fire? US is HIGHLY underpowered with no late game whatsoever.

Yes, you just need to rifle blob. Works at almost every skill level. If you get matched against someone good, just rifle spam and micro. That 1 sniper might be annoying, but you'll be doing insane amounts of damage against Ost's infantry at every single engagement.

Veto Crossing the Wood which is a sniper map and that's fine if RNGJesus isn't against you.

The real problem is when you concretize a good flank and that fucking sniper doesn't die because of dumb game mechanisms.

Even then it would need to be limited to one at a time. Even mid game, being able to drop a gren squad to 2 models (even if there's 3 squads) is way too powerful. Only time it would be balanced is at late game, when you really don't need them that much (at least at most levels of play).

Make it a cheap ability but with long cooldown like infiltration nade, that ability can be used to soft counter MG in building too, USF has no late game effective counter to sniper and Garrisoned MG so that would give Pathfinders some utility, alternatively it can be a recon element upgrade to rifleman like the old vCOH upgrade for IS, Rifleman can no longer pickup weapons but they gain increased sight and a snipe ability with long cooldown.