FBP EFA positions and issues

With the current balance preview focusing fully on tank destroyers, artillery and some other units here and there, I find that the EFA are still (and in some cases ever further now) left behind in 1v1 when it comes to strategic options, diversity and versatility.

Ostheer

Faction design
Ostheer is a faction that relies heavily on combined arms, as its design entails it should. However, Ostheer has a faction related problem where it has to crutch and rely on its tier 3, or have the risk of losing the game in 99% of the cases. Tier 4 is almost always not a tier to that one can reliably get to in a 1v1 game, which is strange to say the least. This problem is to have significant issues if not fixed in the FBP.

Tier 3
Tier 3 is the workhorse of the Ostheer faction. It is the tier on which Ostheer crutches and a tier it can't skip in a 1v1 game, or it will lose the game vs any competent player. Tier 3 itself has some problems here and there, mainly the very cost efficient Stug and the overpriced Panzer IV. The Stug is the backbone of Tier 3 and the Panzer IV, which is the generalist mainline medium tank of the Ostheer faction, somehow is not. The Stug outperforms the Panzer IV in cost efficiency and performs better in many ways, including fighting armored fighting vehicles. The Panzer IV struggles vs cheaper tanks such as the cromwell. You can't rely on the Panzer IV like you can on a stug.

The STUG is getting nerfed (rightly so) in the FBP, but the Panzer IV's price and/or performance are not being adjusted. This means that the potency of the backbone (tier 3) of the Ostheer faction is getting nerfed without any kind of versatility buffs. This is a bad situation.

Since Tier 4 is nothing to write home about (more on that later), Ostheer players have to stick with Tier 3 or risk of losing the game by having no serious armor presence on the field. This means you will get into a vicious circle of getting Tier 3 units for the entire game.

Tier 4
Tier 4 is an entire different problem. The problem with tier 4 is that it is underwhelming and quite expensive to get too. It has an underwhelming 'tank hunter', namely the Panther, which performs nowhere near its cost. It has problems with performing its actual role: 'Hunting Tanks', since it can't hit anything on the move and has pretty poor accuracy on top of that in general. The Brumbahr is however a good unit, but requires constant attack ground babysitting to perform reliably. On top of that, it is expensive in an expensive tier. Lastly, the Panzerwerfer, which is the worst of the non doc rocket artillery, is getting nerfed. This unit is almost never seen in a 1v1, and I predict it will never be seen in a 1v1 after its nerfs. The unit itself is decent, but underwhelming compared to its counterparts. It is in an underwhelming and expensive tier which includes an underwhelming and expensive tank hunter and anti infantry tank. There is no reason to get this unit when you finally get tier 4 in a 1v1.

Tier 3 is getting nerfs in the FBP (stug) and is not getting its versatility adjusted (Panzer IV price reduction and/or performance increase to reflect its current price. On top of this, Tier 4 is getting nerfs as well without receiving any buffs. This means that Tier 4 will remain an underwhelming and overpriced tier with an underwhelming Tank hunter, a decent but micro intensive anti infantry tank and an even more underwhelming rocket artillery unit (weakest non doctrinal rocket artillery too).

There will be now even less incentive to get to tier 4. The FBP actually makes Ostheer tier 4 even more uninteresting and desirable . This is a very bad situation for Ostheer.

Soviets

Versatilty
The Soviet faction has a serious problem in where it has to play a certain way, or it will lose the game quite easily. The underlying fault in this problem is that the Soviet lack any kind of diversity in quality and their core units.

Infantry
The problem with the Soviet faction's infantry is that you need to go penal squads, or face losing the game because your infantry will be out performed in the later stages of the game. On top of this, Penal Battalions perform so well, that there is no incentive to even get conscripts. Not only do conscripts lose to Volksgrenadiers and grenadiers, but will lose quite harshly vs upgraded and vetted up versions of these units later on. No player in their right mind will thus rely on Conscripts.

The fault in this issue was shown by Maxim meta in the past and DHSK and Penal meta in the current live version of the game. The so called mainline infantry is not on par with its counterparts, even more so than grenadiers get outclassed by their counterparts. There is no relying on this unit, thus people resorted to Maxim spamming before the Penal buffs and Penal and DHSK spam after the Maxim nerfs.

The FBP buffs the Maxim and nerfs the Penals and DHSK, but does not fix the underlying problem. This versatility issue is not only limited to infantry however.

Support Weapons
The Soviet faction has some serious problems with team weapons and their performance. The Maxim was nerfed back to the stone age and is now receiving buffs. The DHSK is receiving some nerf, but will still stump the Maxim as a support weapon that can A-move its way easily across the map. However, there will still be nothing resembling a great incentive to choose maxims over DHSKs since you need tier 2 to get it. As Soviets you need tier 1 and your trusty Penals, or else you will face serious problems later on. This means that if you want to use the Maxim, you will need to get both tier 1 and 2. This is too taxing when you also need to get your T70 and/or SU76. Sure you might get tier 2 later on, but then the Maxim will not be up to the task when facing vetted infantry. So what will you do? Yes indeed, you will skip tier 2 and get a DHSK.

The Soviet mortar is another issue in the support weapon spectrum. This mortar is anything but impressive. This mortar has bad performance, poor accuracy, a poor rate of fire and has nothing going for it but its 6 men crew. I have had games where this unit got only one or two kills after 20 minutes. It is, for all intents and purposes, an expensive smoke dropping platform. This means you can't rely on the Mortar for indirect fire, since it not only sucks, but also gets outperformed by its Ostheer counterpart.

The Soviet anti tank field gun is something I see being used more often as indirect fire than the core mortar team. This is an issue.

Tanks and Tank destroyers
The Soviet faction has a very good set of tank destroyers. Their SU76 is very solid Tier 3 tank destoyer that can punch far above its weight. The SU85, although needing some veterancy to become truly potent, is a very good tank destoyer that struggles only with the heaviest of targets. The T34-76s however, the generalist mainline medium tank of the Soviet faction, leaves much to be desired and performs pretty subpar. Although it is very cheap, performs well vs infantry and can be used in mass due to its cheap price, is a serious problem when times get rough and you can only rely on this medium tank to help you through your darkest moments in a game. This means the Soviet faction has no choice but to either spam tank destroyers (su76) or rely on doctrinal tanks (T34-85 and mainly call ins) to fill their ranks with potent medium tanks.

The results of this are shown in almost every game you play as or vs the Soviet Faction. You either play or encounter T34-85s or (mainly) M4C shermans. This problem of course has something to do with the call in mechanics, which are being adjusted in the FBP, but more to do with the core of the Soviet Faction. Nothing in the FBP changes anything in this regard, which means the Soviet faction again has to play a certain way to fill its rank with more potent units (armor).

Further more, the Soviet heavy tanks (and tank destroyers) are all doctrinal. On top of this, the doctrinal heavy tanks are anything but special. When was the last time you encountered an IS2 or an ISU152 in a 1v1? That is right, a long time ago or very few times in the recent months. The IS2 is an expensive heavy call in tank with decent but somewhat lackluster performance that easily gets beaten into submission by 2 Stugs (way cheaper options). The ISU152 is anything but impressive and just leaves too much to be desired. These factors in combination with the T34-76 situation together push M4C sherman play even further, limiting the Soviet faction's versatility and options further. This is something the FBP doesn't adjust.

To add insult to injury, the KV1 dares to show its face as a proper Heavy Tank every solar eclipse.

Conclusions regarding the EFA and the FBP
The FBP, although changing many things for team games in a good and interesting way, does nothing for the versatility limbo in which the EFA operate. In some cases the FBP even negatively strenghtens the versatility limbo of the EFA.

This situation is serious and in serious need of adjustments.

The reason people spammed maxims had more to do with maxims being OP than cons being underwhelming (tho it certainly aggrevated the issue).

Besides, maxims are usefull again in FBP, very usefull I might say.

Other then that, I agree with most of what you say (especially ost t4 but that's a dead horse at this point).

The reason people spammed maxims had more to do with maxims being OP than cons being underwhelming (tho it certainly aggrevated the issue).

Besides, maxims are usefull again in FBP, very usefull I might say.

Other then that, I agree with most of what you say (especially ost t4 but that's a dead horse at this point).

With your experience, do you find maxims to be albe to function as mainline infantry again? I find they do.

I admire your reasoning but you fail to notice one thing, these are not new problems, they last for years now and nothing ever changes about that.

Soviet infantry and t1/t2
I agree with most of your observations. Biggest soviet problem is their units are worthless with few exceptions (penals, sniper, sc). Cons were bad before and now they became dogshit after volks stg upgrade. They are overpriced and get outscaled easily. And it wouldnt be such a problem if you had some kind of reliable way of killing infantry in t2. But you dont. If you had a mortar on par with ost mortar you could go double mortar, cons and probably do good. But there is no balance either in micro (unit vs unit) or macro scale.

Besides vickers maybe all other allied mgs struggle because of low arc of fire, sight radius and range but mostly no suppresion. Allied mgs dont suppress axis infantry at all. On top of that you cant deal with rifle nade spammers and incediary nades range (Did you see how fast and how far can incediary nades go?). Dshka imo is performing well only because of its sick suppresion but allied mg has to have sick suppresion to prevent it from being rifle naded from outside of its range sometimes.

Sov mortar is only good when used to counter mortar or mg. Nothing else. Its autofire is pathetic. Slow rate of fire, no accuracy. People use Zis or su76 to barrage instead because its more reliable xD what a joke.

Basically if you go t2 you lack infantry and support weapons that are good at anything. But you pay the same as your opponent. Its a joke.

Sov t3
T3 is has ok units. T70 comes late compared to its counterpart luchs. I mean you need 165 fuel if you want to rush it while luchs requires 125 fuel. While at the same time okw gets nades, fausts and stgs a packet worth of 40 fuel for free. So even if you paid that much your infantry would still lose and your t70 wouldnt be able to change a thing. Su 76 is a great unit but requiring a lot of micro. The quad comes so late that nobody even bothers to build it. Imo the transport vehicle should be moved to t2 or t1 for better early pushes with cons, which could be upgraded later on after you reach t3 to a quad and provide nice AI shock unit if it survived early. The biggest problem with soviet t3 or all allied light vehicles is the ammount of AT that axis get. Not only their infantry gets AT for free just by teching (no side techs) okw has raketen from the very start of the game negating any shock impact a light AI might have. I mean seriously axis dont even have to think strategically in this game because they get all the important stuff anyways. They dont have to weigh how important is it for them to rush a unit in comparison to having early at. They just get the at for free and rush the unit anyway. They dont have to choose whether they need a weapon more or a nade in thise set of circumastances. They get both for free. No tactical decsions to be made. And everything they get is better for the same price or the cheaper while being the same.

sov t4
Here you get a solid arty which in most games is the only thing that soviets can field which actually can wipe vetter infantry. TD that only upside is it can destroy okw trucks out of their range. And a really really really bad imitation of a medium tank which is cheap so its fine.


There are few things that I try to emphasize that are always neglected in balance discussions: Side techs, micro, cost effeciency, tier lacking.

Side techs
They implement the strategic decision making. Side techs should always apply to the things that have most tactical impact. Infantry is the core in every game and every faction here. So side techs concerning infantry is a good idea. But why only for one side?? Playing axis should also force you to make a decision "whether I need this weapon or abiility or not"?

Micro
Each side strive to be equally micro heavy. If one side plays itself seamlessly while in the other each unit requires pampering and attention the micro heavy side will eventually lose track and lose a unit. Again the main perpetrator is OKW. Most of their units require little to no micro due to tankiness or heavy firepower. Luchs is tanky, mobile and comes so early that most allied units cant do anything. Most axis infantry has good long range dps which allows them to just blob 3 or more units in teamgames and A move through the map. Since they basically never get pinned by allied mg because most of the time there are no allied mgs or their suppresion is so bad that it doesnt really matter they just blob and mow down anything that comes their way. They dont have to prepare an attack by wide spreading their units before the advance. Just blob and A move and kill anything in their way. Its especially visible in games vs soviets.

Cost effeciency
I dont mind a unit being dogshit but in that case its cost should reflect its performance. If cons are dogshit at everything I dont mind, but just make them cheap and expandable. Not at the same price level as volks. Also if volks perform better at every range make them cost more. Basically try to balance the cost to units performance for all sides. If a unit is performing great make it expensive. How cons cost 240 mp while volks with free ups, potentially 5 vets and stg cost 250 mp is beyond me. does 5 less mp per reinforcement reflect the difference? I dont know but doesnt really feel like it. My solutions would be this make initial mp investment reflect units vanilla performance and reinforcement cost should reflect units scaling capabilities. So volks might still cost 250 to 240 cons but reinforcement would be more like 25 to 12.

Tier composition
This is one of the main reasons some factions struggle af while others just stroll down each game. I get that it wasnt easy to make every faction different without making its tiers different but what has been done in coh2 is an abomination. Lets first sum it up:
- ost has t0, t1, t2, double t4
- brits get t0 equal to t1 1, tier 2 with side t3 unit, tier 4 with two side tier units
- sov get t0, double t1 to choose from, t3 and t4
- usf gets t0 equal to t1, double t2 to choose from (one of them with t3 unit stuart), t4
- okw gets t0 equal to t1, double t2, t3 and t4 with the ability to skip t2 or t3
Tier composition is very important because if its done correctly you have a tactical decision to make where you can skip one of the tiers, if on the other hand its done badly you forced to go a specific tier. So in most cases usf is forced to go cpt tier, soviets are forced to go t2 if they want reliable at, same goes for brits who have to tech to aec or bofors for reliable at. Otherwise they risk getting trolled to death by single luchs that comes really early and has high shock value due to its timing.

Every faction should have easy access to mg, at gun and vehicle snare for basic defense capabilities. Axis are designed this way. You always have access to a counter. Allies are forced to go a specific path making them more predictable in their gameplay. Its really no brainer which tier is usf gonna go in a teamgame. Now soviets currently are in such a fucked up situation that they are forced to go t1 to have at least good core infantry. Which is unreal. This faction is in such a bad state that it has to take the risk of playing with no reliable at to have a chance to win. Factions shouldnt rely on specific tiers to survive, tiers should provide something beyond basic defensive capabilities, some strategic depth.

It's worth noting that the Ostheer panther was, and still is, designed for fighting the Soviets, whose tank destroyers are all unturreted.

I admire your reasoning but you fail to notice one thing, these are not new problems, they last for years now and nothing ever changes about that.

I have not failed to notice this, I have played the game since launch. My point is that the current FBP actually enhances the problems that have existed since launch.

As for your other points, very well put. I agree with some of your views. However, you seem to be a little more Allied minded. Which is fine, but you can't get around the fact of actually acknowlidging that Ostheer's tier situation is fucked as it is and dictates particular play every single game or you lose.

I mean seriously axis dont even have to think strategically in this game because they get all the important stuff anyways.

Have you even played Ostheer?

It's worth noting that the Ostheer panther was, and still is, designed for fighting the Soviets, whose tank destroyers are all unturreted.

That is okay by design. However, the current game and expansions don't reflect that anymore. It should be changed period.

Have you even played Ostheer?

Ofcourse I do play ostheer and it has more then enough to counters to anything thats coming your way. Also every mp spent as ost is better spent than any other faction in the game. Only problem ost has is 4 man gren squads. Other than that ost has so much good units to choose from that sometimes I feel like a kid in a candy store. Anything I buy with my mp will be delicious.

You have no side techs, you dont rely on any tiers or commanders, all your units are high quality, you have versatile tiers, no hard counters, basically you're living the dream. Ofcourse you have to micro your units well but at least its worth it. With soviets you have to micro your worthless units and its not really worth the effort. ^^

Ofcourse I do play ostheer and it has more then enough to counters to anything thats coming your way. Also every mp spent as ost is better spent than any other faction in the game. Only problem ost has is 4 man gren squads. Other than that ost has so much good units to choose from that sometimes I feel like a kid in a candy store. Anything I buy with my mp will be delicious.

You have no side techs, you dont rely on any tiers or commanders, all your units are high quality, you have versatile tiers, no hard counters, basically you're living the dream. Ofcourse you have to micro your units well but at least its worth it. With soviets you have to micro your worthless units and its not really worth the effort. ^^

And you have just shown that you don't play Ostheer lol.

Agree with more or less all these. The thing is, the balance crew is aware since all of this (except Soviet mortar I think?) has been addressed in the Unofficial Balance Mod. Unfortunately for us, Relic is quite happy to let massive, generally agreed upon problems to sit for years without lifting a goddamn finger.

And you have just shown that you don't play Ostheer lol.

I think in big shortcuts so yeah you rely on t1 and t2 to stabilise the game but since they give you so versatile defensive capabilities I just never consider it in this manner. Its just normal for me to go t1 and t2 always. Maybe because the enemy doesnt have a fast stuka that would start wiping all my support weapons after 10 minutes or so.

i'm afraid that many ppl have the wrong sight. axis uses units cuz it is good. but allies uses units not cuz it is good, cuz the others are so bad.
anyway i just wonder why they didnt touch the volks and luchs at the fbp. they are the problem in current version.

Wandering : if the maxim was nerfed a bit and them swaped with the sniper ?

(Maxim should be nerfed from what it is in the actual tuning patch)
t0 : conscript (base)
t1 : maxim, penal, m3 (core)
t2 : sniper,at-gun, mortar (support)

The Sovs would be better with less maxim spam or penal+dsk...

Comments ?

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I do want to make one point: doesn't the ost panther have the same accuracy on the move as the Cromwell and comet (post nerf anyway)? I still think ost t4 is not viable in 1v1, and is mainly a teamgame tier, but the whole panther on the move accuracy being bad isn't that big of a deal IMO (unless I'm wrong about the stats and it's even lower).

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I do want to make one point: doesn't the ost panther have the same accuracy on the move as the Cromwell and comet (post nerf anyway)

The have the same accuracy modifiers on the move (0.5), but the Crom and Comet are inherently more accurate IIRC, so they're still much better when mobile.

Wandering : if the maxim was nerfed a bit and them swaped with the sniper ?

(Maxim should be nerfed from what it is in the actual tuning patch)
t0 : conscript (base)
t1 : maxim, penal, m3 (core)
t2 : sniper,at-gun, mortar (support)

The Sovs would be better with less maxim spam or penal+dsk...

Comments ?

I like it, but it is also tricky. This would mean that t1 has suppression, at and ai (penals) and a mobile platform (m3). Why get t2? You can then cruise your way into tier 3 and up.

Also as far as I know, the maxim suppression bulletin might be bugged, thus making the maxim way better than it actually is. Don't know if it needs further nerfs. It is so useless in live version..

I like it, but it is also tricky. This would mean that t1 has suppression, at and ai (penals) and a mobile platform (m3). Why get t2? You can then cruise your way into tier 3 and up.

Also as far as I know, the maxim suppression bulletin might be bugged, thus making the maxim way better than it actually is. Don't know if it needs further nerfs. It is so useless in live version..

No T1 sniper gives ostheer sniper more room to operate. Both maxims and penals are good targets for ostheer t1 in general, while the t0 MG42 would fear the mortar, sniper, (and ZiS barrage). Plus PTRS and satchel doesn't quite make up for no ATG.

Such a change could potentially affect conscripts for the positive as well, as they work well as a screen and spotter for snipers and mortars, as well as the ZiS. Maxims, being 6 man suppression platforms, need less support from conscripts, and are often popped into garrisons or built enmasse to cover each other. Penals, being the machines that they are, need less support from conscripts.

Mortars, snipers, and AT guns all have the most need of support of mobile infantry to function well. It makes sense. So much so that it's almost as if I fought for trying it out since before WBP was WBP.

Please save us some reading time and don't repeat the same point 3 times (the stug is getting nerfed)

Anyway the t34/76 is good for its price, in fact may need a fuel increase. Panzer 4 is more viable since the m10 & m4c are getting their price increased without tech, it was already improved vs brits since they got their tanks moving accuracy reduced to 0.5.

Since the JP4 nerfs most tank destroyers are similar in power level so there is nothing to complain about with the SU85. The most problematic thing being the stug vs the new Jackson, something you didn't bring up because I suspect you haven't even played the FBP.

Soviet support weapons are ok, the maxim after the changes seems to be worthwhile again. If you want to use conscripts pick a commander with the ppsh upgrade.

The only point I think you make correctly is the panzerwerfer isn't good enough.

Agree with the stock Soviet mortar, I don't remember seeing this thing ever being used.

The T34/76 is fine as is, perhaps it could have a fuel increased but the manpower price reduced. I seem to struggle with manpower more than anything.

Ostheer p4 needs a price reduction with a slight pen increase and tier 4 panther to be a reliable hard hitting, accurate anti-tank vehical.

Pazerwefer does seem a little underwhelming in the patch but my biggest gudge are the heavies.

I honestly don't think you would see them in 1v1 ever again. With Soviets you get to tier 4 and you have your anti infantry tank, your heavy TD and your arty piece. No need for a heavy (in my opinion).

With ostheer, it's a little more diverse so I would do believe you would still see them.

With your experience, do you find maxims to be albe to function as mainline infantry again? I find they do.

Oh yes.

Bulletins are unneeded aswell, if you know what you're doing.