AT guns should ward off Stug, and Stuart a Puma.
I've been experimenting with no Major builds that aren't Rifle or Armor. Beginning to realize that playing the USF as an infantry heavy, AT gun army isn't that build. Also beginning to realize the power of the Stuart.
Yes I know, but 2 Priests looks like 1 too much imo. It is better to invest the mp and fuel in other areas. They are really fragile and the trade off Stug/Puma/Pz4 vs 1 or 2 Priest down is not in USF favor.
Just saying BTW. If it works, good. |
It should never be a thing of brute force and numbers applied to a position. This is a real time tactical strategy. If you are careless in your command and pit your group of units into a machine gun's line of fire, it should be punishing. The entire point is that the MG controls those crowds and careless movements.
The onus is on you to be tactical with your large investment in infantry. You think all the Americans and Soviets pinned down by MG-42's in the war said "No fair, MG is OP!" No, they figured out how to blind them and get around them so that they didn't have as many bullets flying at their heads!
Recon and then commit to a plan of action, don't just group together that many units and rush blindly into the fog of war and expect to not have to worry about anything.
What are you talking about? Calling blobb noober anybody who's not saying the MG is fine becomes a really boring argumentation. |
|
2 Priests is a bit expensive and vulnerable to Puma/Stug flank imo.
I usually deploy a mobile mortar when I go Infantry doctrine, it works well vs OKW aggressive healing truck deployment or MG nest. It shouldn't be hard to keep it till you can also deploy a priest, both together scale well. |
Yes, MGs + Grens should beat riflemen when used properly. USF has access to bars/nades/M20 in order to tip the balance in their favour. If americans could win the early game relying completely on vanilla rifles that would be really unfortunate for ostheer. And if he had the second MG I would have just shot smoke at it. The riflemen were positioned so only 1 could get suppressed by 1 Mg, not two. There would still been 2 free squads running around tossing nades if there were 2 mgs supressing.
I'm glad to read 4 280mp cost vanilla unit should always been beaten by 240mp HMG and 240mp grenadiers.
Now everything is cristal clear, Ostheer is designed to be the strongest faction early game while having cheapest dedicated units.
1270mp + 25fu invested, probably 30 or 60 ammo used to counter a 240mp unit in a building. And the best, the 240mp unit wasn't even supported. 
Made my day |
|
2xRE start is really map dependent and you have to make sure your opponent open with MGs otherwise you can´t do much vs an early gren blob. And if he has mechanized commanders, 2xRE start vs a assault gren squad start is going to make your life a lot harder.
Usually I go 2xRE on LaGleise to send them to cap both side to fuel points. On Stalingrad to secure the houses and cap in priority munitions points.
I think your capping order is more than important now, and to not engage before having 1xRE 3xRifle covering a line so you can flank faster.
You have to developp a capping order that makes you having all your squads available mid map to push a first time.
With the new stug, fast T3 is not anymore an objective if you are not already dominating, it is far better to go T1/T2 2xAtgun + zook or only if you badly need a Scott.
Pak + stug is beast vs sherman, its completely shutdown you.
Actually I use to not go grenade but reco commander and a fast IRpathfinder squad. I build a fast munition cache and use the IRpathinder arty. Imo it is more rewarding than grenades and in many cases just obliterates houses and MG bunkers. For example I think it is good to always erase strategic church or house when the Ostheer player put his Mgs.
I cannot guaranty the success since the doctrine is soso, but it is interesting to play. |
If the two players are of equal skill it's never a roflstomp. But the axis factions are designed to be weaker early game. That's why both OKW and Ostheer infantry is weaker than USFs. That's why Ostheer has MG42s to combine with their Grenadiers to win riflemen by using positioning and baiting tactics. That's why OKW has a resource deficit and 5 levels of vet. Allies have always had strong infantry and controlled the pace of the early game with their manoeuvrable squads. It just so happens that before the MG42 buff, an american player could run 4 riflemen at an MG42 and kill it. That shouldn't happen and is rewarding slopping noob play. Have you ever tried running 4 riflemen directly at an MG42 in CoH1? Let me tell you, they won't even kill the gunner of the gun, let alone wipe the crew. As I said before, if americans could survive against the strong MG42s of CoH1, then they most certainly will in CoH2 with riflegrenade smoke and fast M20s. People just need to give this patch some more time and both learn how to play effectively against MG42s and become better players overall. We can't simply nerf the MG42 simply because a few allied fanboys find the game too difficult now.
Arc of fire smaller, HMG cost higher volks squads weaker than gren and with MP40 upgrade not LMG, BAR general upgrade for rifles scaling better with grenade (no fuel/ammo double cost), Jeep available fuel free, possibility to go T2 and have mortar + sniper, engineer squad stronger than RE squads + flamer upgrade etc... make your comparison completely irrelevant.
What rifles do have in exchange, smoke... WHOOOOOO, I can't see you anymore, you can reposition your MG as fast as I run into the smoke! so great
|
You sound upset. You must be, to jump to that conclusion so quickly. I never suggested I would advise you, nor have I advocated my USF advisory skills either. However there is always something to be learnt from getting other people perspective.
Providing replays also add context, proof of argument so to speak, but they also allow for faults to be found in a persons play-style and I suspect you don't take care for views that don't correlate with your own.
For the record, i have supported reducing the capping rate.
PS : Your sarcasm could do with some more work..
So it is too difficult for you to show how to flank a MG42 and show us. I guess it is easier to say L2P than practicing.
If I was providing replays, it would only show that I'm already flanking. Flanking itself is not an issue, Its cost is. As USF its cost you a lot of resources for a low reward price since game mechanisms allow fast come back while the risk and cost of failing a flank is really high for USF. |
Maybe you should upload a replay showing how mgs are unflankable and how they counter T1 so easily.
There is always people willing to review games. May also add context to your posts cause most people I watch on stream seem to be adapting ok.
How to show us how to youself? If you are so confident in your skills to advice people, you're probably good enough to make us a nice guide How to. |
You have spent almost this entire thread just throwing insults at people and I have a sneaking suspicion a lot of the problems your having as USF is because you don't play other factions.
Playing one faction and only one cripples you.
Are you commenting youself? seriously you telling that, the one in the forum calling anything OP Allied have better than Axis and L2P when Axis have better than Allied. priceless.
HMG42 is a masterpiece that hard counter anything USF can field T0 and T1. In that way, yes it is too strong vs USF. That have been my only argument over the unit so far. But you'll probably tell me its a L2P, I have to deal with blablabla... until next patch and Relic releases proper adjustment for USF. And here crying babies will probably change side... |
You have no games as OKW and almost none in Soviets or Ostheer lol. Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house.
I'm glad you are mentioning it, I let you search now for my OKW, Sov or Ostheer super advises L2P in the forum 
On the other hand you... not hard to found them.  |
Relic Entertainment
