Profile of Corsin

This issue with 2v2 balance (and i do alot of 2v2s both sides) is the fact that allies have way too many squad wipe capabilities, where as the germans have fewer and weaker vehicle equivalents.

Infantry Issues:

The USF Rifle received accuracy: at vet 3, the received accuracy of riflemen is nearly the same as a gren squad in heavy cover. This allows them to blob+Amove with 2 lmgs per squad and mow down anything without being punished for poor micro and tactics.

Brits having access to 2 Brens per squad and a received accuracy vet bonus. While its not as good as the USF infantry bonuses, the fact they can field 2 LMG's per squad, and have 5 men squads, gives them a far higher dps than Grens/volks, Especially when in cover.

Conscripts and penals - Cons are pretty balanced, but keep in mind they are 6 man squads. The reason Prostruppen is working in 1v1s atm is because of the squad survivalbility of a 6 man squad. Here the sovs take this advantage for granted while actually been rather versatile troops. Penals are currently too good... Yeah they cost alot, but they pay for themselves with the early map control they give. In 1v1s its not too bad, you can punish them with fast light vehicles, but in 2v2s your ally can cover for this weakness leaving no weakness to the allied synergy.


Now, if we look at these advantages, and look at the Axis starting infantry. Their squad seize and heavy weapons limit to 1 per squad makes them A - Less durable, and needing to group squads to beat down allies, they simply cant 1v1 squads early game giving the allies more map control and are way more vulnerable to being 1 shot by demo/mortar/artillery. and B - Less deadly.

In the early game as axis you are left to try and cling to a vp and a fuel like a homeless man to a marsbar until you hit T2 and get some squad wipe potential. The allies dominate the early game, in 2v2 especially. Sadly this is where 90% of game results are decided.

Tanks -

Now axis have the "best" tanks, they also have the worst repair options, especially the ostheer.

However no matter how good their tanks... Fireflies/Jackson + Soviet Market target in a 2v2 will basically own anything really fast. Imo Marked target should be removed from the game, its a stupid unrealistic ability that has been ruining game balance since the beginning that even continues after the plane is shot down. So this is what makes allies abit nuts in the tank department. Yes axis have better tank stats, But allies have better ways of dealing with them, better repairs and better faction synergy.

Artillery...


onestly i think Axis artillery across the board needs buffing. Or at least given more options.

Pwefers are pretty much confetti bombs, that kill maybe a few guys, and draw circles around the target.

Stukkas are good but fuel expensive which leaves you with no armor until mid-late game.

LeFE isnt bad, but still seems to be abit lack luster...



Where as the Land mattress is just... ugh, ridiculous for how cheap it is and is easily better than a Pwerfer. Infact its 1 volly is nearly the equivelant to 3 pwerfers after eachother.

The Callipoe is a decent unit. I wouldn't say it needs to be nerfed or buffed... would just be nice if the axis had a similar unit.

Katyusha... Now alot of people say the pwerfer is better because of its alpha strike... But i disagree, The katy's AOE per shell is alot bigger. and even if you retreat as soon as you hear it fire, its second volly will plink your guys in the back of the head as the 2nd volly always seems to slightly overfire. (weapon teams have no chance). I wipe more squads using this than i ever have using a pwerfer except from the vanilla days when the pwerfer was worth its fuel cost.

To those who say the Pwerfer's alpha strike is better, what would you prefer? a quick slap in the face? or someone punching it 4 times? Its the same thing, especially when its fired at base trucks ect



I dont know the whole set up doesnt make sense... Axis having smaller squad sizes. Then Allies having the better artillery and squad wiping capabilities. As if the demo charges wernt enough to worry about. + the fact that the ostheer especially rely on weapon teams to fight rifle/penal blobs ect. Then to be hard-countered midgame by superior artillery options.


Theres a bunch more stuff like Demos, weapon team sizes, critical repair, maxim setup time.... the difference in effectiveness between things like a centuar > Ostwind, and so on.... But i think the core stats on the non-doctrinal units is the main issue.

Use support weapons like mgs and mortars.

Already established a land mattress/calliope/or even a 120 or US motar, rapes Axis weapon teams...

Not even including all the call-in AOE options.

Honestly i think Axis artillery across the board needs buffing. Or at least given more options.

Pwefers are pretty much confetti bombs, that kill maybe a few guys, and draw circles around the target.

Stukkas are good but fuel expensive which leaves you with no armor until mid-late game.

LeFE isnt bad, but still seems to be abit lack luster...



Where as the Land mattress is just... ugh, ridiculous for how cheap it is and is easily better than a Pwerfer. Infact its 1 volly is nearly the equivelant to 3 pwerfers after eachother.

The Callipoe is a decent unit. I wouldn't say it needs to be nerfed or buffed... would just be nice if the axis had a similar unit.

Katyusha... Now alot of people say the pwerfer is better because of its alpha strike... But i disagree, The katy's AOE per shell is alot bigger. and even if you retreat as soon as you hear it fire, its second volly will plink your guys in the back of the head as the 2nd volly always seems to slightly overfire. (weapon teams have no chance). I wipe more squads using this than i ever have using a pwerfer except from the vanilla days when the pwerfer was worth its fuel cost.

To those who say the Pwerfer's alpha strike is better, what would you prefer? a quick slap in the face? or someone punching it 4 times? Its the same thing, especially when its fired at base trucks ect



I dont know the whole set up doesnt make sense... Axis having smaller squad sizes. Then Allies having the better artillery and squad wiping capabilities. As if the demo charges wernt enough to worry about. + the fact that the ostheer especially rely on weapon teams to fight rifle/penal blobs ect. Then to be hard-countered midgame by superior artillery options.

Montargis Region....

Map balance...

Ok so those who start south have a major disadvantage... (No matter what faction)

- Due to the fact that the whole side wall is an inscaleabe cliff.
- North side has a nice easy destructible wall...


Faction balance... (Now here it gets abit stupid).

So the USF is the only faction that starts with tank traps... and this map has BOTH fuel points right next to eachother. So the USF can basically wall this area off early game guaranteeing them 100% fuel income for the early-mid game.

The Allies also have UKF emplacements... again gives them a huge advantage.

For anyone who knows how this game works... If Axis cannot secure at least one fuel point in the early-mid... theyre fucked.

Basically... if allies start on the north of this map. they win. Unless they are really new to the game, theyre gonna have a field day.

Not good way. This mean faster unit dying and wiping.

-% received accuracy from vetterancy is reward for unit overseeing and good micro.

Which Axis are not given....


-% accuracy rewards the USF mostly... Followed by the UKF....


It gives them the equivalent damage reduction of light cover... while stood in a bloody road. You cannot tell me this is right or balanced. It promotes skilless blob play and is what drives decent players away from the game because honestly? its a fkin joke...



If i was to suggest.... and if it actually happened.... that volks/grens were given 5 man squads 270MP cost, 2 LMG's and at vet 3 -50% received accuracy AND given nades, AND given smoke AND given an officer that can unsuppress them.... These forums would explode in allied fanboy rage...

Yet all im doing is describing Rifle squads lol.