GCS2 Barbarossa faction win rate

When was the last time you have seen IS-2 used by anyone?
Do people even remember how it looks?

Noggano gave Asten a crushin 7vps left defeat for Asten with that IS-2 being the main reason Noggano won. :>

Yeah, that's fair. I don't know that I'd tone down double LMGs any more though. They're already the worst upgrade in the game. Maybe nerf IS vet a bit instead? If you tone them down more, I don't think they'll be worth it.

Perhaps an idea indeed, but I don't know if further veterancy nerfs are the way to go. I rather think the problem with tommies being too good when they get a snare is their double lmg 5 men bolstered performance. They become absolutely too durable in that stage. Unfortunately, without adjusting the other things mentioned, they almost have to be.

the tommies already have the weakest veterancy in the game

+20% accuracy

-20% cooldown time

-22% incoming accuracy

grenadier:

+40% accuracy

-20% cooldown time

-23% incoming accuracy

the bren and vicker k should have been restricted to one per squad.

the tommies already have the weakest veterancy in the game

+20% accuracy

-20% cooldown time

-22% incoming accuracy

grenadier:

+40% accuracy

-20% cooldown time

-23% incoming accuracy

the bren and vicker k should have been restricted to one per squad.

Percentages don't mean anything without a base value.

the tommies already have the weakest veterancy in the game

+20% accuracy

-20% cooldown time

-22% incoming accuracy

grenadier:

+40% accuracy

-20% cooldown time

-23% incoming accuracy

the bren and vicker k should have been restricted to one per squad.

With this logic I could say, that when a T70 and the Panther are the only vehicles in game and the T70 would get 50% extra armor at vet 3 and the Panther would 10% extra armor at vet 3,the Panther has the weakest veterancy in game lol

With this logic I could say, that when a T70 and the Panther are the only vehicles in game and the T70 would get 50% extra armor at vet 3 and the Panther would 10% extra armor at vet 3,the Panther has the weakest veterancy in game lol

Panther 10% extra armor is actually a very weak veterancy bonus. It hardly makes any difference, especially with the penetration vet bonuses most AT units get and the XP value of the Panther.

Percentages don't mean anything without a base value.

I have calculated the dps of the lee enfield, bren, k98k, and lmg42 on vet3 tommies and vet3 gren verus each other. range are in 5 meter increment, rounded to 4 decimal and the dps take into account target size and veterancy

lee enfield
4.1507|3.9953|3.7061|3.4505|3.2229|3.0189|2.7476|2.5073

k98k
5.1387|4.5668|3.9625|3.4790|3.0836|2.7540|2.4010|2.1030

lmg42
6.0327|6.6416|7.2007|7.7055|8.1523|8.5378|8.7938|8.7506

bren
4.1720|4.6211|5.0058|5.3207|5.5613|5.7240|6.0328|6.3103

that double bren is really the only thing keeping the Tommy relevant.

I have calculated the dps of the lee enfield, bren, k98k, and lmg42 on vet3 tommies and vet3 gren verus each other. range are in 5 meter increment, rounded to 4 decimal and the dps take into account target size and veterancy

lee enfield
4.1507|3.9953|3.7061|3.4505|3.2229|3.0189|2.7476|2.5073

k98k
5.1387|4.5668|3.9625|3.4790|3.0836|2.7540|2.4010|2.1030

lmg42
6.0327|6.6416|7.2007|7.7055|8.1523|8.5378|8.7938|8.7506

bren
4.1720|4.6211|5.0058|5.3207|5.5613|5.7240|6.0328|6.3103

that double bren is really the only thing keeping the Tommy relevant.

So a lot more even then some ITT would suggest, interesting.

If you factor in grenade tech, bren tech, and five man tech (plus x3/x4 28mp for initial reinforced squads getting them up to 5man). I don't think there's any doubt here tommies are slightly better, but are they better enough to justify the massive fuel and manpower dump and lack of snare? Judging on how much they are struggling this is where I see it UKF's problem lies...

Tommy have 0.8 Target size when reach vet 2 their have 0.624
but weakness is their have low Acc gun power form lee enfield and vet 3 bouns
It stats mean good in def role by not atk role
if rework sapper it better idea ?
Vet bonus not have accuracy
Sten smg have better acc than Pioneer but dmg in halved (2.5)
sapper should more useful like Gren and Pioneer Mix up in early game

edit check Sapper sten smg stats

Acc same (pioneer)
Dmg 2.5 (Half of mp40)
Burst time 0.45-0.625 (too short right?)
Rate of fire 26 (WTH this gun)

and try to test by 1-1 close range by cheat command mod Sapper always beat pioneer (by 4 time)
but in realplay need to close for full power effect
I dont understand why relic design sten gun profile unique stats not clone pioneer Mp40 profile ?

I just don't understand why people are so opposed to giving Tommies a snare.

Yes, they're the best mainline infantry in the game - but they also require, by FAR the most investment.

Out of the gate they're extremely expensive, they're horrible at flanking because of their atrocious accuracy on the move, and as Firesparks has pointed out you have to spend precious fuel AND 90 munis to keep them competitive with Grenadiers as the game progresses. Yet Grenadier faust, unlike every other infantry-based hard snare in the game, isn't gated by tech/time.

Did people forget how much OKW struggled against light vehicles back in the day because of this exact lack of snare?

The ONLY reliable snare UKF has is on a research based light vehicle that isn't particularly durable or effective against infantry, AND that snare isn't pseduo-permanent like faust/AT nade/etc.

If you don't want to give Tommies snare, at least give it to sappers in some form. But I don't think that'd be enough. They're already too busy repairing/planting mines/sweeping mid/late game.

Another overlooked problem between UKF and other factions is their inability to terraform the map early game. Not being able to lay wire to deny important green cover/flanking routes is brutal for a faction that relies on engaging in cover and (preferably) at max range at all times.

Furthermore, tying snare to the grenade tech, UKF players will still have to invest EVEN MORE into Tommies to even let them snare in the first place.

Sometimes I just don't even... at the risk of sounding frustrated by people's logic let me lay it out the way it sounds:

1) Hey we know UKF is objectively the weakest 1v1 faction in the game.

2) Dang, they really struggle at actually killing tanks and can get flanked more easily than any other faction because EVERY other faction has a mainline infantry based snare to punish over-extensions.

3) Should we add a snare to UKF? Nope.

Edit: Even if Tommies get a snare, the faction is still going to struggle against HMGs, snipers, and have arguably the weakest assortment of tanks to choose from. Centaur is passable, but a shadow of what it used to be. Cromwell is probably the weakest overall medium in the game and the Firefly is slow, expensive, has an atrocious rate of fire, and requires a huge munitions investment to keep up with other TDs. Comets are hardly worth the cost. Churchills are nice, but difficult to get to in a 1v1. Probably their strongest tank these days though.

I have calculated the dps of the lee enfield, bren, k98k, and lmg42 on vet3 tommies and vet3 gren verus each other. range are in 5 meter increment, rounded to 4 decimal and the dps take into account target size and veterancy

lee enfield
4.1507|3.9953|3.7061|3.4505|3.2229|3.0189|2.7476|2.5073

k98k
5.1387|4.5668|3.9625|3.4790|3.0836|2.7540|2.4010|2.1030

lmg42
6.0327|6.6416|7.2007|7.7055|8.1523|8.5378|8.7938|8.7506

bren
4.1720|4.6211|5.0058|5.3207|5.5613|5.7240|6.0328|6.3103

that double bren is really the only thing keeping the Tommy relevant.

I'm curious about tommies DPS in cover vs out of cover as well, since I believe they get a RoF(?) bonus incover.

I just don't understand why people are so opposed to giving Tommies a snare.

Yes, they're the best mainline infantry in the game - but they also require, by FAR the most investment.

Out of the gate they're extremely expensive, they're horrible at flanking because of their atrocious accuracy on the move, and as Firesparks has pointed out you have to spend precious fuel AND 90 munis to keep them competitive with Grenadiers as the game progresses. Yet Grenadier faust, unlike every other infantry-based hard snare in the game, isn't gated by tech/time.

Did people forget how much OKW struggled against light vehicles back in the day because of this exact lack of snare?

The ONLY reliable snare UKF has is on a research based light vehicle that isn't particularly durable or effective against infantry, AND that snare isn't pseduo-permanent like faust/AT nade/etc.

If you don't want to give Tommies snare, at least give it to sappers in some form. But I don't think that'd be enough. They're already too busy repairing/planting mines/sweeping mid/late game.

Another overlooked problem between UKF and other factions is their inability to terraform the map early game. Not being able to lay wire to deny important green cover/flanking routes is brutal for a faction that relies on engaging in cover and (preferably) at max range at all times.

Furthermore, tying snare to the grenade tech, UKF players will still have to invest EVEN MORE into Tommies to even let them snare in the first place.

Sometimes I just don't even... at the risk of sounding frustrated by people's logic let me lay it out the way it sounds:

1) Hey we know UKF is objectively the weakest 1v1 faction in the game.

2) Dang, they really struggle at actually killing tanks and can get flanked more easily than any other faction because EVERY other faction has a mainline infantry based snare to punish over-extensions.

3) Should we add a snare to UKF? Nope.

Edit: Even if Tommies get a snare, the faction is still going to struggle against HMGs, snipers, and have arguably the weakest assortment of tanks to choose from. Centaur is passable, but a shadow of what it used to be. Cromwell is probably the weakest overall medium in the game and the Firefly is slow, expensive, has an atrocious rate of fire, and requires a huge munitions investment to keep up with other TDs. Comets are hardly worth the cost. Churchills are nice, but difficult to get to in a 1v1. Probably their strongest tank these days though.

I think people get lost along the way of trying to argue to change so many things at one time and then lose track of what they actually want in the game.

For example, I'd remove snipers and turn them into scout units. Therefore I wouldn't consider a sniper a struggle because it wouldn't be a struggle for UKF to play against.

I just don't understand why people are so opposed to giving Tommies a snare.

Yes, they're the best mainline infantry in the game - but they also require, by FAR the most investment.

Out of the gate they're extremely expensive, they're horrible at flanking because of their atrocious accuracy on the move, and as Firesparks has pointed out you have to spend precious fuel AND 90 munis to keep them competitive with Grenadiers as the game progresses. Yet Grenadier faust, unlike every other infantry-based hard snare in the game, isn't gated by tech/time.

Did people forget how much OKW struggled against light vehicles back in the day because of this exact lack of snare?

The ONLY reliable snare UKF has is on a research based light vehicle that isn't particularly durable or effective against infantry, AND that snare isn't pseduo-permanent like faust/AT nade/etc.

If you don't want to give Tommies snare, at least give it to sappers in some form. But I don't think that'd be enough. They're already too busy repairing/planting mines/sweeping mid/late game.

Another overlooked problem between UKF and other factions is their inability to terraform the map early game. Not being able to lay wire to deny important green cover/flanking routes is brutal for a faction that relies on engaging in cover and (preferably) at max range at all times.

Furthermore, tying snare to the grenade tech, UKF players will still have to invest EVEN MORE into Tommies to even let them snare in the first place.

Sometimes I just don't even... at the risk of sounding frustrated by people's logic let me lay it out the way it sounds:

1) Hey we know UKF is objectively the weakest 1v1 faction in the game.

2) Dang, they really struggle at actually killing tanks and can get flanked more easily than any other faction because EVERY other faction has a mainline infantry based snare to punish over-extensions.

3) Should we add a snare to UKF? Nope.

Edit: Even if Tommies get a snare, the faction is still going to struggle against HMGs, snipers, and have arguably the weakest assortment of tanks to choose from. Centaur is passable, but a shadow of what it used to be. Cromwell is probably the weakest overall medium in the game and the Firefly is slow, expensive, has an atrocious rate of fire, and requires a huge munitions investment to keep up with other TDs. Comets are hardly worth the cost. Churchills are nice, but difficult to get to in a 1v1. Probably their strongest tank these days though.

I think the PIAT itself at the current state is enough to deter light vehicle. The damage is bit low against actual tank, but I would like a damage buff for the PIAT to 100 from 80 damage.

I am not entirely against snare, but I think the british have a lot of underperforming ability to look at first. Gammon is nearly useless as a snare. The british tank under-performing as well.

and lastly: the bren and vicker should have been limited to one instead of their current state. dual bren is really the last clutch for the british.

alternatively, the gammom bomb could be made into an actual snare instead of its current state.

I'm curious about tommies DPS in cover vs out of cover as well, since I believe they get a RoF(?) bonus incover.

the cover mechanic is actually a penalty out of cover. the dps I posted is the in cover dps for the tommies.

UKF seems to be another victim of CoH's inherent problem of 1v1 and team games having the same balance. UKF do very well in team games where fights are more concentrated / corridored, but apparently seem underpowered in the more spread out fights of 1v1s. It's probably too late for CoH2 but if there's going to be a CoH3 Relic should seriously consider seperate balance for different game modes because that seems to be the root of most balance problems.

UKF seems to be another victim of CoH's inherent problem of 1v1 and team games having the same balance. UKF do very well in team games where fights are more concentrated / corridored, but apparently seem underpowered in the more spread out fights of 1v1s. It's probably too late for CoH2 but if there's going to be a CoH3 Relic should seriously consider seperate balance for different game modes because that seems to be the root of most balance problems.

Different balance for 1vs1, 2vs2, 3vs3, 4vs4 would help so much.

Also different casual, ranked balance.
That way, you wouldn't need to ruin the flavor of every unit in the game every patch.