Riflemen are too expensive.

Simply put, I feel that Riflemen's cost does not measure up to their performance, especially considering their counterparts (Volksgrenadiers 250mp, Grenadiers 240mp) outperform them in nearly every aspect at vet0 and in the early game with the exception being close range engagements. Their cost is especially evident in going against OKW due to the disparity in starting unit (RE vs. Sturmpio) and the disparity in mainline infantry cost (250 vs. 280mp, 25 vs. 28 re-enforce). Couple this with the mediocre performance at long range of Riflemen and you have a situation in which you are at a pretty significant disadvantage. The weakness of Rear Echelons only exacerbate this, as often times your first engagment with an OKW player will be 1-2 Riflemen and your RE against a Sturm and 2 Volksgrenadiers.

The simplest solution to this is a price reduction to Riflemen to bring them in line with their performance when they come onto the battlefield. Making them in the range of 250-260mp seems very reasonable, and will help alleviate some of the mp woes that USF often deals with. I honestly find it harder to maintain a positive K/D with USF than with Soviets due to how lousy Riflemen seem to perform in many matches. I'm not arguing that Riflemen are a terrible unit, they are not, but their cost does not reflect their performance, and they become quite the manpower drain because of the losses you take.

For example, in order to make the most out of Riflemen early on, you need to engage Volks and Grenadiers at a range that utilizes their close range damage output, often meaning you can't just sit back at range in green cover and peck away at an opposing squad in green cover, your only choice to win the engagement is to close in, or draw their fire with another squad and move in with another Riflemen to win the engagement at close range, taking more damage as you move into position. It simply more often than not leaves you in a bad position in terms of manpower losses that is hard to recoup.

The only other option I can see to make Riflemen better would be to adjust their long range accuracy modifiers, but I think a simple MP cost reduction with no unit re-balancing is the best method to ease the MP drain that USF has to deal with in the early game, especially vs. OKW. If a price reduction was given, the only other change necessary would be a slight reduction in USF starting resources to compensate.

Thoughts? Other suggestions?

I voted yes, because it's the easiest solution, though removing OKW's extra manpower could help too but that would upset the balance of other matchups. I wouldn't mind cheaper BARs either, given that doubling up is less of a privilege and more of a requirement nowadays, in order to beat cheaper units if their manpower cost stays the same.

Long ranges will always have an advantage, since they do good damage at a safe distance, often from dominant cover positions in most maps. Even now Riflemen are still good, they are fun to use too but they are so weak early nowadays that people have started to go AEs, just to bleed a bit less.

outperform them in nearly every aspect at vet 0 and in the early game with the exception being close range engagements.

So you would also like to tone down their vet and weapon upgrades then?

Because a cost must be paid for superior vet and DPS

I would say their base MP Price isn't really the problem it's the cost of Bars that is more of an issue. Having to spend 120 muni on every squad is really expensive and USF is constantly bled for Munitions which I find is also a problem with Ostheer. I would rework Bar's to be similar to what they did with Bren guns. I would nerf the performance of the weapon a bit but make it cheaper so it's easier to double equip your squads to allow you to deal with upgraded Volks and Grens. But it would nerf their peak performance when they get Vet 3 and have 2x Bars. Which I think makes them a bit too powerful but it takes a while to achieve. Rifles are more expensive than Volks and Grens but generally win 1 on 1 engagements to compensate. This issue is they aren't as cost effect long-term. They struggle a bit in the mid game which is kind of where USF is at their weakest imo.

Thoughts? Other suggestions?

Balance issues started when OKW was given extra 100 manpower at start. Remove it and OKW / USF matchup would probably be more balanced. USF issue isn't the first engagement but that OKW will pump 4 volks faster than you do and roll over you in a blob to your cutoff when the map allows it.

You can't touch riflemen cost or veterancy because USF is like Brit, they don't have stock elite infantry such as Pzgrenadier/Penal/Obers, so their base infantry need to have such veterancy to compete with them to a certain extend. Not saying they need to beat them and be equal but if you reduce their vet, USF late game will go back to the black hole here it was for ages.

"From my post in another thread:

"I did this comparison for cons, but now I think it would help to do it for riflemen too. Raw numbers in the top section, relative ratios at the bottom, sorry for the formatting:

Rifle squad effective durability: 5.15 effective models

Volks: 5 effective models

Rifle squad DPS at max range: 8.49 DPS

Volks: 9.035 DPS

Rifle squad DPS at 3 range: 33.945

Volks squad DPS at 0 range: 23.71

Rifle squad vet 0, 1 bar, 34* range DPS: 10.835 DPS

Volks vet0, 2 stgs, 34* range: 9.488 DPS

(*volks stgs spike up in DPS from 1.446 at 35 to 1.96 DPS at 34, given this detail, its probably more useful and informative to take the DPS at 34 and not 35)

Rifles, vet 0, 1 bar, close (3 range): 40.36 DPS

Volks, vet 0, 2 stgs, close (0 range): 29.266 DPS

Rifles, vet 3 effective durability: 7.81

Volks vet 3 durability: 6.49

Rifles, vet 3, 2 bars, 34 range: 18.062

Volks, vet 5, 2 stgs, 34 range: 13.326

Rifles, vet 3, 2 bars, 3 range: 64.439

Volks, vet 3, 2 stgs, 0 range: 39.779




Rifles/volks vet 0 effective durability: 103%

Rifles/volks vet 0 DPS max range: 94%

Rifles/volks vet 0 DPS close: 143%

1 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 0, 34 range: 114%

1 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 0, close range: 138%

Rifles/volks vet 3 effective durability: 120%

2 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 3, 34 range: 136%

2 bar squad/2 stg squad, vet 3, close range: 162%


Didn't double check my calculations. Even counting the difference in utility (flame nades, and sandbags) and rack costs, to me, these numbers justify rifles costing 12% more. If you make rifles 260/26 as some have suggested, then ask yourself whether or not the utility that volks bring is actually equivalent to these combat advantages rifles have."

So yes, I DO think volks are operating according to cost. I could do the same comparison against tommies or penals, but there's no point. The results are already pretty obvious. I already did the work for this comparison though, so it's at least fairly easy to copy paste this every time someone decides to make a post that either makes up random numbers, rewrites facts, or ignores how the game ACTUALLY works."




So rifles are basically even with volks at long range, and single bar rifles beat stg volks at close range.

Beyond that, half of your points about how riflemen are not cost efficient have nothing to do with riflemen:
"REs are weak" has nothing to do with riflemen cost efficiency.
"Sturms are strong" has nothing to do with riflemen cost efficiency.

The simplest solution to this is a price reduction to Riflemen to bring them in line with their performance when they come onto the battlefield. Making them in the range of 250-260mp seems very reasonable, and will help alleviate some of the mp woes that USF often deals with.

Since I take this to be your main point and primary solution, I simply can't agree with this post given the information I provided above. Do let me know if there's something I'm missing though.

Simply put, I feel that Riflemen's cost does not measure up to their performance, especially considering their counterparts (Volksgrenadiers 250mp, Grenadiers 240mp) outperform them in nearly every aspect at vet0 and in the early game with the exception being close range engagements...

Compare the reinforcement cost of Grenadiers and Riflemen (that would probably would also have to go down) and not the original cost and you might get another picture.

Compare the reinforcement cost of Grenadiers and Riflemen (that would probably would also have to go down) and not the original cost and you might get another picture.

The only picture you'll get is that less entities squads reinforce individually for more, but reinforcing full squad from 1 man is still cheaper, so the final picture is game is balanced around SQUAD formations and individual model comparison invokes massive bias due to not taking into account squad as a whole.

The only picture you'll get is that less entities squads reinforce individually for more, but reinforcing full squad from 1 man is still cheaper, so the final picture is game is balanced around SQUAD formations and individual model comparison invokes massive bias due to not taking into account squad as a whole.

That is another nice but false theory.

One has to either compare everything in squad level where a Riflemen Squad has more EHP than Grenadiers Squad (for slightly less DPS at long range)
or
Everything at entity level where grenadier are more expensive.

Bottom line what ever comparison ones uses that cheaper Riflemen would make USF OP vs Ostheer.

Unless you want to argue that Riflemen should be cheaper and that would not cause any issues vs Ostheer.

That is another nice but false theory.

One has to either compare everything in squad level where a Riflemen Squad has more EHP than Grenadiers Squad (for slightly less DPS at long range)
or
Everything at entity level where grenadier are more expensive.

Bottom line what ever comparison ones uses that cheaper Riflemen would make USF OP vs Ostheer.

Unless you want to argue that Riflemen should be cheaper and that would not cause any issues vs Ostheer.

That is another nice but false theory.

Rifles are more expensive squad then grens by a large margain(especially considering that volks are just 10mp more expensive then grens and at least 20% stronger then them, completely stomping cons unless vet3 and ppsh are in the picture), therefore they perform better overall, as they should. Everything else is irrelevant here, especially per entity comparisons, which have absolutely no place between squads with different number of entities.

And I never said Rifles should be cheaper, I completely disagree with OP.
I merely pointed out the fact that its completely moot to compare units on any other basis then squad vs squad.

change RM`s vet bounus that would be better

The thing about riflemen is that they probably underperform for their price at vet 0, but they most certainly don't at vet 3.

Having said that the removal of smoke grenades has been a clear downgrade, so measures could possibly be taken to give them more utlitity in another way, again possibly locked behind veterancy.

That is another nice but false theory.

Rifles are more expensive squad then grens by a large margain(especially considering that volks are just 10mp more expensive then grens and at least 20% stronger then them, completely stomping cons unless vet3 and ppsh are in the picture), therefore they perform better overall, as they should. Everything else is irrelevant here, especially per entity comparisons, which have absolutely no place between squads with different number of entities.

And I never said Rifles should be cheaper, I completely disagree with OP.
I merely pointed out the fact that its completely moot to compare units on any other basis then squad vs squad.

So basically you are simply continuing your "prove Vipper wrong" crusade, ok nothing new here.
I am not going to help you derail yet another thread.

Have a nice day.

Show Spoiler

no

The thing about riflemen is that they probably underperform for their price at vet 0

Again though, where are the numbers to back up that statement? Every time I've seen this argument made within the last few months, it was never supported by numbers.

it's never supported by numbers cause this forum is polluted with fan boys we have a perfectly fine site https://coh2db.com/stats/#51 that show us with graph the dps and they still don't use it/ignore it

First of all i dont think riflemen are too expenisve. I do think that USA can struggle against okw in a certain matchup because of the initial MP advantage OKW has, but thats just the same if you go cons as soviet.
You pay more to refresh your rifles because of the higher cqc potential/ scaling you have in comparison to the OKW/WHER player, that doesnt mean that you have to rush the opponent 24/7. Wher doesnt have the tools to push away rifles in green cover in the early game, making rifles on a cutoff a big pain for wher. OKW has the flame nades but has other flaws like no proper way of dealing with 50cals.

Botton line is: If you want your riflemen to flank or cqc you should prepare for it by purchasing nades or Bars depending on the situation

I would say their base MP Price isn't really the problem it's the cost of Bars that is more of an issue. Having to spend 120 muni on every squad is really expensive and USF is constantly bled for Munitions which I find is also a problem with Ostheer. I would rework Bar's to be similar to what they did with Bren guns. I would nerf the performance of the weapon a bit but make it cheaper so it's easier to double equip your squads to allow you to deal with upgraded Volks and Grens. But it would nerf their peak performance when they get Vet 3 and have 2x Bars. Which I think makes them a bit too powerful but it takes a while to achieve. Rifles are more expensive than Volks and Grens but generally win 1 on 1 engagements to compensate. This issue is they aren't as cost effect long-term. They struggle a bit in the mid game which is kind of where USF is at their weakest imo.

Why not do a global upgrade like in COH1?
Pay 300 manpower, 30 fuel and all present and future Riflemen come equipped w 2x BARs
for free. In COH1, all Sherman 75 present and future changed to Sherman 76 this way, too.

Plus, they had the + bonus (Sandbag armor on the tank) when buying the overpriced top .50 cal pintle.
If you think that's too much, throw in grenade upgrade there too

i think they mostly need reinforce cost reduction to 26 or somewhere simular and re to 20. I am fine with riflemen costing 280mp as they can be really damn good with upgrades, but its the reinforce cost that often causes the most issues (at least for me)

Again though, where are the numbers to back up that statement? Every time I've seen this argument made within the last few months, it was never supported by numbers.

You are absolutely right. I haven't crunched the numbers on this so this is more or less solely based on my own subjective impression which might very well be fallible.

I wouln't say that this is based on any sort of bias towards USF or allies as some people seem to imply, because I pretty much play all factions at a similar rate and with a similar ranking (or lack thereof )

Having said that I still think it makes sense to look at units in other way than sheer DPS and also in terms of utility (availability of grenades, snares, weapon upgrades, building structures etc.)