So Axis SMGs really are intentionally inferior?

There is no point in comparing the actual stats between weapons with arbitrary profiles. Just compare the stats.

Okay, compare the stats.

Assault Grenadier, Volksgrenadier and Pioneer SMGs are utterly useless, while Allied SMGs are extremely deadly -- not only because of the weapons themselves (Axis SMGs only deal damage in melee range) but also because of the units wielding them (no Axis units get a received accuracy buff when they receive their SMGs, making it impossible to use them as assault troops).

So stats-wise, Allied SMGs have higher DPS and actually work beyond melee range, making them viable, while Axis SMGs have terrible DPS and only work in melee range, making them unviable.

^ This is something Dane pointed out (about how LMGs and assault rifles and regular rifles dominate). Any weapon that only does anything in melee range is not viable. This is obvious to anyone who's played longer than 10 hours.

So what's the difference between discussing it in these terms and in terms of profiles?

The end result is the same, as with all other aspects of balance between the two sides in CoH2: Axis units are not allowed to pose a grave threat to Allied units, but Allied units are allowed to pose a grave threat to Axis units.

The only way the "defensive faction" argument can possibly work is if Axis (and Ostheer especially) units had the same hyper intense DPS at max range as Allied units have in melee range, forcing Allied players to literally cower in fear and run squads around hiding behind buildings and begging whatever pagan gods they worship to come upon an enemy immediately in melee range -- as in, an analogous experience to what Axis players go through now, just in reverse, where Axis players have to tremble in terror at all times because the moment an enemy squad appears out of the fog of war, if they do anything other than get in cover at max range from the Axis squad (which they never do, because they're allowed to run across open fields into enemy fire without losing any models), the Axis squad may as well retreat right away.

Bolt actions, semis and LMG dominate because the map pool is built around those units and backbone infantry using them. Please see why USF gets laid out on long range maps like crossing in the woods and langreskaya. Not because SMGs are bad, but because they're situational. Some more than others.

Okay, compare the stats.

Now compare the price.

The only smg that is significantly better is the thompson, which is on expensive niche units.

Now compare the price.

The only smg that is significantly better is the thompson, which is on expensive niche units.

Didn't you hear the news? Differences in cost are literally meaningless since resources are infinite

(no Axis units get a received accuracy buff when they receive their SMGs, making it impossible to use them as assault troops)

Might want to check the patch notes again.

Just watched this off the home page today:



Is what Dane saying accurate? Is the reason Assault Grenadiers are complete and utter trash and always have been because Allied SMGs get an assault rifle profile, while Axis SMGs, including the ones Volksgrenadiers now get in Feuersturm, get a different profile, which is what makes them such trash at anything other than melee range?

So all the Allied units with SMGs get to run and gun through open fields and actually be effective, while Axis SMG units need to pull of nigh impossible feats of flanking to do anything at all?

And are the new Ostheer Stormtroopers going to have an SMG profile or an assault rifle profile?

Assuming what Dane is saying is correct, this is just further proof that Axis, and Ostheer especially, are simply intentionally designed to be inferior, given issues like this and the fact that the 222 "armored car" is STILL not actually armored to this day.

What excuse can there possibly be for just blatantly making Axis weapons and units objectively, observably worse? Not in terms of tournament win/loss ratios, not in terms of vague theorycrafting balance discussions, but in terms of objectively observable facts (i.e. weapon profiles of SMGs and absence of actual armor on an armored car).

Why don't Assault Grenadiers and SMG Volks get to have the sheer destructive power of Allied SMG squads? Like, crap-your-pants-while-hitting-retreat power, the way Allied SMG squads interact with Axis units?

Why do Allied light armor units get to drive around the entire map and into an Axis base without taking literally a single point of damage, while the 222 blows up from base MGs while trying to finish off a sniper?

And the overarching question that covers all of this: why do Allied factions get to pose a GRAVE THREAT to Axis players, yet Axis units pose NO THREAT to Allied players?

I personally have never known anything about weapon profiles, and to anyone else who didn't, this Dane video is going to be a revelation of epic proportions that showcases just how blatantly unfair CoH2 faction design is.

If Dane's problem is the weapon damage, i got an idea.

Let's nerf ALL allied units to the ground by giving them Mannlicher-Schönauer bolt action rifles, and give to every Axis unit HK G3A3 and HK G36C Assault Rifles so that you will be satisfied.

PS : They are better because RATE OF FIRE! That's why!

with all due respect, the channel you linked that video from is biased towards wehrmacht.

Didn't you hear the news? Differences in cost are literally meaningless since resources are infinite

So pop cap is the ONLY thing that matters and since weapons don't have pop cap they should all perform the same.... Right?

So pop cap is the ONLY thing that matters and since weapons don't have pop cap they should all perform the same.... Right?

They all shoot bullets, therefore they should all perform the same.
QED.

Assault Grenadier, Volksgrenadier and Pioneer SMGs are utterly useless, while Allied SMGs are extremely deadly -- not only because of the weapons themselves (Axis SMGs only deal damage in melee range) but also because of the units wielding them (no Axis units get a received accuracy buff when they receive their SMGs, making it impossible to use them as assault troops).

So stats-wise, Allied SMGs have higher DPS and actually work beyond melee range, making them viable, while Axis SMGs have terrible DPS and only work in melee range, making them unviable.

The only unit worthy of mention there is Assault Grenadiers. Not because of damage, but that they fall flat in utility after the first 5 mins of the game. Which reminds me of several other allied units with SMGs as well.
Volks SMG would see use if they didn't get access to STG which are way stronger, even with all the utility they get.
Assault Grens will never be a force to be reckon with if they are CP0. Same problem as Assault Engis.

Volksgrenadier Assault Package

Grants 0.93 received accuracy to the squad

Let's ignore plenty of SMG non ever seen units because they are allied and OP only plays Axis at 4 rank digit...

1-Complains about Pios, even though at 200mp category, they are the best starting engineer in the game. Compare it to RET/CE. RE coming later with stens are still not doing nothing worth mentioning.

2-What are grease guns and what's the point on using a vet 0 vehicle crew.

3-What are Partisans, Assault Guards, Assault Engineers.

The problem with SMGs, is that the moment they are GOOD, you are gonna complain way harder because now the game revolves around running around the map and immediately rushing below 10 range with blobs.

They all shoot bullets, therefore they should all perform the same.
QED.

Breaking news: allies have guns that shoot bullets. Please nerf. Someone could get hurt.

OP, you're still talking like the Thompson isn’t literally the only allied smg out of like 5 different allied smgs that has good dps beyond 10m.

Tried out the mod recently, maybe its just me but it feels like the stormtroopers mp40s are better than their assgren counterpart's-seems better at both mid and close range. Ill have to test it some more, but can anyone confirm if they are using an existing weapon profile, or get unique variants?

Assault grens are weaker because they're cp0. And i sure as hell do not want 0cp thompson worthy squad rolling me over. If i want assault grens stronger, they need to come out later.

Tried out the mod recently, maybe its just me but it feels like the stormtroopers mp40s are better than their assgren counterpart's-seems better at both mid and close range. Ill have to test it some more, but can anyone confirm if they are using an existing weapon profile, or get unique variants?

Check post #13, storm mp40's are much stronger

Check post #13, storm mp40's are much stronger

Definitely felt like it. They seem more like thompsons in terms of damage output to me.

No, what Dane says isn't entirely correct. IMO, I'd sort them like this:
...

One has to keep in mind the following:

After the release of WFA Relic focus on fixing the performance of mainline infantry one vs the other.

In order to achieve that the come up with 2 principle "weapon profiles curves" and "relative positioning".

Weapon profiles curves meant that weapon of the same type should have similar curves and perform better in certain ranges.

That would allow for player to easily know what range is optimum for their Squad. It would also allow to maximize the advantage when fighting against unit with other "weapon profile".

That help with the concept of "relative positioning" where a player would in a get more out of his unit if he was able to force a engagement to take place in certain ranges.

Things become more complicated for weapon upgrades (and doctrinal units) since they would had to be worth investing so some weapon do not follow "weapon profile curves".

To make thing even worse some of the latest patches seem to be moving away from this 2 principle and seem to be using linear weapon profiles.

My main point here is that (up until some latest patches anyway) many default weapon follow "weapon profiles curves" while many weapon upgrades (or doctrinal infantry) are more "exotic".

This is actually a shame since the 2 principles where a huge improvement and patch should look for solution with in these parameters (and solution exist) instead creating weapons with unique/on typical performance.

Just watched this off the home page today:
...

Since Ostheer are designed to be good long range it makes sense that Soviets and USF are good at close range.

OKW become more complicated with the "weird" volks STGs and UKF are designed to be good at long range.

So generally one could argue that Axis SMGs are intentionally less cost efficient while Axis LMG are more cost efficient. (there are exceptions)

Since Ostheer are designed to be good long range

Correction: Relic SAYS they're designed to be good at long range as a "defensive faction". They aren't though, objectively, observably.

"Good" means extremely threatening, lethal, absurdly high DPS.

Allies have that at close range, with literally all units, from infantry to light vehicles to tanks, while ALSO having high model count squads, allowing Allied players to bruteforce Axis units, ignore all tactical mechanics in the game (cover, line of sight, etc.) and get reliable wipes.

Ostheer, on the other hand, doesn't have that at ANY range with the sole exception of Panzergrenadiers who have a four-man squad and thus get instawiped as soon as they get in range of that high DPS (as well as to artillery shells, satchel charges, booby traps, etc.).

All other Ostheer units have low DPS at far, medium and close range. Ergo, Ostheer is never threatening to anyone.

And then on top of this Ostheer also gets worthless SMGs.

So literally every base unit Ostheer has is not threatening to anyone, ever, and we get spat upon by also being given trash SMGs from call-in units and upgrades.

So fair. So balanced. So well designed.

Correction: Relic SAYS they're designed to be good at long range as a "defensive faction". They aren't though, objectively, observably.

"Good" means extremely threatening, lethal, absurdly high DPS.

Allies have that at close range, with literally all units, from infantry to light vehicles to tanks, while ALSO having high model count squads, allowing Allied players to bruteforce Axis units, ignore all tactical mechanics in the game (cover, line of sight, etc.) and get reliable wipes.

Ostheer, on the other hand, doesn't have that at ANY range with the sole exception of Panzergrenadiers who have a four-man squad and thus get instawiped as soon as they get in range of that high DPS (as well as to artillery shells, satchel charges, booby traps, etc.).

All other Ostheer units have low DPS at far, medium and close range. Ergo, Ostheer is never threatening to anyone.

And then on top of this Ostheer also gets worthless SMGs.

So literally every base unit Ostheer has is not threatening to anyone, ever, and we get spat upon by also being given trash SMGs from call-in units and upgrades.

So fair. So balanced. So well designed.

That's because Ostheer is a serious combined arms faction and will always be.
US barrelrolls its way to victory with rifles in the early game. If this does not work, because of good MG placement, they often lose the early, the mid and it snowballs to a sound defeat.
Ostheer however can go Osttruppen to cap fast and hold the ground, have an HMG in the back to turn engagements into Osttruppen favors, take pgrens on merry flanking adventures, bring the pain with flame HT and finish off with p4s, even panther if its needed.
There are not many units who breeze through engagements on their own, but by having them combined, they become lethal.
Or how do you explain Ostheer as the most picked faction in GCS2?
Also did you know that pgrens BEST engagement with their STGs is medium range? Its totally possible to fight with your mainline infantry (pgrens ARE NOT mainline infantry), then slightly flank with pgrens and let them stand in green cover at medium range. At vet3 which they gain quite fast with their high DPS they can even chuck their bundles from medium distance.
Conscripts are good in their indended role, however they arent lethal, have absurd DPS etc. etc.
Not everything has to be broken to do the designed job.
Mainline infantry never has and never will be broken OP on their own.
Thats where paras, pgrens, obersoldaten and other high cost infantry comes from.
Pgrens and obers are even nondoctrinal!
If you have time, educate yourself and watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwdVrJ2xyK8. 27:55 is good to shwo their lethality. They dismantle the AT crew in seconds.
33:25 absolutely annihilating that conscript squad close range.
Its a replay by Helping Hans in which he uses Stormtroopers hunting down 2+ snipers, several retreating and normal squads and made them ultaimte terminators. Their MP40s rule and they dont even cost anything in upgrading.
So to sum them up: no cost other than manpower, brutal DPS, high utility, good stealth for jumping over non-cover ground from cover to cover, sniper hunter. You dont even need a counter sniper anymore. Just pick these badboys and go onto sniperhunt duty.

Correction: Relic SAYS they're designed to be good at long range as a "defensive faction". They aren't though, objectively, observably.

"Good" means extremely threatening, lethal, absurdly high DPS.

Allies have that at close range, with literally all units, from infantry to light vehicles to tanks, while ALSO having high model count squads, allowing Allied players to bruteforce Axis units, ignore all tactical mechanics in the game (cover, line of sight, etc.) and get reliable wipes.

Ostheer, on the other hand, doesn't have that at ANY range with the sole exception of Panzergrenadiers who have a four-man squad and thus get instawiped as soon as they get in range of that high DPS (as well as to artillery shells, satchel charges, booby traps, etc.).

All other Ostheer units have low DPS at far, medium and close range. Ergo, Ostheer is never threatening to anyone.

And then on top of this Ostheer also gets worthless SMGs.

So literally every base unit Ostheer has is not threatening to anyone, ever, and we get spat upon by also being given trash SMGs from call-in units and upgrades.

So fair. So balanced. So well designed.

Oooook. Definitely an l2p issue.

Ever heard of lmg42s? They definitely have low dps at long range /s. hmg42s are also a thing. Pgrens have pretty dang high mid and close range dps. I’ve seen vet3 pgrens straight up beat my vet3 commandos before with no nades on either side and a camouflage ambush bonus on the commandos (rarely, but it happens). Their smgs are all on cheap units that come at t0 or 0cp, and one of those is an engineer unit that’s not even supposed to be a frontline fighter anyway. Of course you’ll lose if you put pios up against rangers or commandos lol. And the new stormtrooper mp40s are objectively extremely strong and on par with commando stens, while also having a situational ability that vastly increases their dps (while making them super vulnerable ofc, paratroopers have the same thing so there should be no complaints there) so that fixes any perceived problem there.

You also say “literally all” allied units have “extremely threatening, lethal, absurdly high DPS” (direct quotes) at close range. I’d like to see examples of rear echelons’ (without 120 muni of weapon upgrades ofc) and combat engineers’ extremely high close range dps please, good luck XD

...
"Good" means extremely threatening, lethal, absurdly high DPS.
....

Good means that they should trade well against more expensive units at long range.

If grenadier had absurdly high DPS they would be able to win all long range engagement while punishing any enemy trying to make a tactical move. The game was designed for "relative positioning" to be a factor with an impact on the outcome of an engagement.

Mainline infantry balance could use some tweaks but it generally in a good spot. The problem has more to do with units like Penals, Guards and other units that all come with their own issues.

Patch should simply stop trying to make units more attractive by increasing the DPS and try to add utility and new tactics for non mainline infantry.

High DPS make small arm fights more RNG depended and less tactical depended.