1. It is feasible to replace Riflemen with Assault Engineers as a mainline infantry unit? Riflemen seem worse at close range compared to Assault Engineers since the Assault Engineers have M3 Grease Guns compared to M1 Garands. Would veteran I/II/III Riflemen be better than veteran I/II/III Assault Engineers?
2. Is spamming M10 Wolverine tank destroyers (10 population) better than using a few M36 Jacksons (14 population) as a primary anti-tank unit? How does a M10 Wolverine compare to a Panzer IV or StuG III Ausf. G?
3. Is this USF bulletin (Priority Fuel — Fuel caches are 5% cheaper and 10% faster to build) actually in the game still? I find it odd I see no one using it since it seems like it would be extremely useful. I'm asking since I think the site I'm using (Company of Heroes 2 Intel Bulletins Database) might be outdated. I also noticed that this only affects Rear Echelon Troops according to that site, so does that mean Assault Engineers do not benefit from this bulletin?
Few USF Questions
5 Feb 2018, 20:54 PM
#1
Posts: 19
5 Feb 2018, 21:05 PM
#2
Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1
1. Nein.
AssEngineers lack durability to scale into the lategame as a direct combat unit, they have one less model that costs more manpower to replace and lack any sort of RA bonuses to be able to keep charging into enemies to use the optimal range of their Grease Guns.
2. M10s are great, but will fail when pit against anything above a PZ4 in a direct fight, you need to use their agility and often numbers to flank and circle enemies to destroy them, losing one for an enemy PZ4 is always a good trade and what they excel at.
The Jackson is more of a long term investmen as if you can keep it alive it will scale well into the lategame and be able to even take down King Tigers.
3. In most games you rarely build caches, 1vs1 wise, in 2vs2 if often build 1 or 2, if there is spare Manpower, but I usually prefer munitions as the USF, for more BARs, Bazookas, Smoke, Grenades and P47s.
AssEngineers lack durability to scale into the lategame as a direct combat unit, they have one less model that costs more manpower to replace and lack any sort of RA bonuses to be able to keep charging into enemies to use the optimal range of their Grease Guns.
2. M10s are great, but will fail when pit against anything above a PZ4 in a direct fight, you need to use their agility and often numbers to flank and circle enemies to destroy them, losing one for an enemy PZ4 is always a good trade and what they excel at.
The Jackson is more of a long term investmen as if you can keep it alive it will scale well into the lategame and be able to even take down King Tigers.
3. In most games you rarely build caches, 1vs1 wise, in 2vs2 if often build 1 or 2, if there is spare Manpower, but I usually prefer munitions as the USF, for more BARs, Bazookas, Smoke, Grenades and P47s.
5 Feb 2018, 21:59 PM
#3
1 
Posts: 2885
5% of fuel cache price is 10 manpower. So you actually need to build at least 3 caches to get the worth of reinforcing one (sic!) model. In effect this bulletin is pretty much useless.
5 Feb 2018, 22:38 PM
#4
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
5% of fuel cache price is 10 manpower. So you actually need to build at least 3 caches to get the worth of reinforcing one (sic!) model. In effect this bulletin is pretty much useless.
Actually it is 12.5 not 10.
5 Feb 2018, 23:07 PM
#5
Posts: 818
1. Nein.
AssEngineers lack durability to scale into the lategame as a direct combat unit, they have one less model that costs more manpower to replace and lack any sort of RA bonuses to be able to keep charging into enemies to use the optimal range of their Grease Guns.
2. M10s are great, but will fail when pit against anything above a PZ4 in a direct fight, you need to use their agility and often numbers to flank and circle enemies to destroy them, losing one for an enemy PZ4 is always a good trade and what they excel at.
The Jackson is more of a long term investmen as if you can keep it alive it will scale well into the lategame and be able to even take down King Tigers.
3. In most games you rarely build caches, 1vs1 wise, in 2vs2 if often build 1 or 2, if there is spare Manpower, but I usually prefer munitions as the USF, for more BARs, Bazookas, Smoke, Grenades and P47s.
Actually AssaultEngineers have target .9 as of last patch, I also believe their reinforce was changed to 30 Mp just like grens. Still not advisable to spam though b/c they are still less durable and worse vs vehicles and mgs(no nade)
With regard to the original question 2, if you say your fuel income is ~25 per minute you can get one M10 2 minutes sooner than your first jackson. Can you afford to wait 2 minutes to get a better tank? Jackson is much better right now but the M10 is a fine and effective AT unit for the cost not a waste If your gonna die or get wrecked without one.
I don't think an 2 jacksons is probably better than 3 m10s for the pocap though
 | Playercard of Hon3y | |||||||||||||||||||
|
6 Feb 2018, 16:37 PM
#6
Posts: 320
1. Riflemen still do pretty damn good damage close range. Riflemen also are still useful at all other ranges whereas assault engineers are ONLY good close range. Though Assault engineers on urban maps are pretty rad. I used to try going 3 Assault engineer start in 2's, it can kind of work to gain key parts of the map but the later the game goes on the more likely you are to lose because you have no range to win engagements.
2. It's not that the m10 is bad, it's just that it's a bit too costly at the moment considering a jackson could come out instead. When you could skip major tech and save 130 fuel the m10 was awesome. Jackson has tank sniper range, good health, good pen. M10 has the whole swarm tactic going for it. I think you can get two m10's for near the fuel price of a jackson?
3. You don't save all that much on manpower honestly. Maybe in 4's I could see it being pretty good. As outsider said, I feel allies would want more munitions then fuel if given the choice.
2. It's not that the m10 is bad, it's just that it's a bit too costly at the moment considering a jackson could come out instead. When you could skip major tech and save 130 fuel the m10 was awesome. Jackson has tank sniper range, good health, good pen. M10 has the whole swarm tactic going for it. I think you can get two m10's for near the fuel price of a jackson?
3. You don't save all that much on manpower honestly. Maybe in 4's I could see it being pretty good. As outsider said, I feel allies would want more munitions then fuel if given the choice.
6 Feb 2018, 16:38 PM
#7
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
I wouldn't mind using Cavalry Riflemen instead of Combat Engineers in Mechanized Company...
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
91 | ||
 |
|
|
854 | ||
 |
|
|
51 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.623225.735+1
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.919405.694+3
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
883 users are online:
883 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49147
Welcome our newest member, TalgatCoh
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, TalgatCoh
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM