Paratroopers are probably the strongest squad in the game. Can't think of any other squad that can 1v1 them if both players play it as they should.
STG44 Obersoldaten are tied for first with them I think. Although they are really underrated.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Paratroopers are probably the strongest squad in the game. Can't think of any other squad that can 1v1 them if both players play it as they should.
Posts: 810
3 Rifles -> LT -> 1 para works well.
Pathfinders are overrated, don't bother. Paratroopers are the best american squad in the game.
Posts: 600
How can prepare Anti-vehicle? liuetnant's small 1 bazooka?
How can build light vehicle? 50cal? ambulance? NO MP, dude
Paratroopers are the best american squad in the game? sure, "best american to kill" for axis ^^
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
How can prepare Anti-vehicle? liuetnant's small 1 bazooka?
How can build light vehicle? 50cal? ambulance? NO MP, dude
Paratroopers are the best american squad in the game? sure, "best american to kill" for axis ^^
Posts: 888
Posts: 356
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
3 Rifles -> LT -> 1 para works well.
Pathfinders are overrated, don't bother. Paratroopers are the best american squad in the game.
Posts: 3053
3 Rifles -> LT -> 1 para works well.
Pathfinders are overrated, don't bother. Paratroopers are the best american squad in the game.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
I think it is like cutting one of your legs to not call a Pathfinder squad. Now I'm not telling that one pathfinder is better than one riflemen but they do wonder in team and can save you a lot of manpower and precious time to end faster an engagement and push/cap behind with two squads on good shape.
Could they be better? Sure, but I want to point out that it is already the squad that hit vet1-2-3 first, long before my riflemen.
1xRe + 1xPF + 2xRM + 1xOS and then a Para is still great in most cases.
I don't know, I really like pathfinders actually. They seem to work pretty well as supporting infantry, but aren't really able to 1v1 other squads obviously. Especially great because being able to paradrop reinforce paras and paratrooper-crewed team weapons is great.
Posts: 3053
Pathfinders aren't bad, but in my experience they aren't worth any more than a riflemen squad. I'd rather have a squad that can snare than replace one with a pathfinder squad. I don't think the benefits they have outweighs having another rifleman. Cloaking is nice for scouting lategame, but I like to win before then. I tested them a lot last year trying to find a niche for them, and I didn't. Their performance is just too similar to a riflesquad.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Pathfinders aren't bad, but in my experience they aren't worth any more than a riflemen squad. I'd rather have a squad that can snare than replace one with a pathfinder squad. I don't think the benefits they have outweighs having another rifleman. Cloaking is nice for scouting lategame, but I like to win before then. I tested them a lot last year trying to find a niche for them, and I didn't. Their performance is just too similar to a riflesquad.
Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
They just make your riflemen greater. Now that they are CP0 I use to call a squad just when my first RM squad is out so I can 2vs1 anything that OKW or OST send early game. Extra vision provided by the PF let you decide how you want to engage and avoid early HMG42 aggression. Honestly I don't understand your argument about snare stuff, do HMG.50 snare? Do M20 snare? Do not consider a PF as a replacement for a riflemen squad but a replacement of an early M20 or HMG.50
Posts: 600
Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
Why do you want to use every infantry unit as combat infantry?
And dont say you dont want to - you want it.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Ok... I would rather buy another rifleman, or an m20, or a .50 cal than a pathfinder. If you can make them work for you congrats. I don't think they are worth their price.
Posts: 600
Because I've actually played USF before and know what they are useful for.
Posts: 1527
Permanently BannedPosts: 48
Paratroopers are probably the strongest squad in the game. Can't think of any other squad that can 1v1 them if both players play it as they should.
Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
I haven't looked up the stats (nor do I know where to do that), but would you say even stronger than Rangers with Thompson?. I've only recently committed to more gameplay using USF, but from my experience they seem to play very similar, however I've had more success with Rangers. They feel more durable, but that could be due to the units I was fighting against.
26 | |||||
14 | |||||
8 | |||||
3 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |