Back in the days I was playing 2vs2 Age of empires 3 Asian Dynasties. Me and my brother as europeans (Holland and England) our two friends both Japanaese. They stomped us 5 times in a row although they were poor players. I didnt bicht about balance i was trying to counter their tactics but with no success. Only after sometime I got to understand that it was the Japanese beign a little OP but really i came to that conclusion after trying everything, still it is irrelevant becuause it was fun.
But now in the dawn of "competitive games" where nearly every game is made for ESL some people loose the fun factor, they dont play for fun but they play to win because what matters most is the rank not fun. Many times on this forums people wrote stuff like "he abused the bug and inflated his rank" well why do you care it is still a game made for fun not for ESL. And the META garbage. I understand that META means "a game in the game" people not only play think what to do next but also what will the enemy do next and try to counter that. But nowadays META means "the way its ment to be played" as if either you play meta builds, meta units, meta strats or looseeeee. The fun factor disappears. Sorry for a long rant
in my opinion when u are playing as okw if your opponents are medium players (ignore noobs) yeah okw may be OP ,or transfer to the beast.
But ! if ur opponents are good enough players (not pro) who knows okw weak points.... okw will as weak as ost(gruntee),i meant 1v1 2v2
What is up everyone, I have decided to write this post as an attempt to explain my view on what I read on these forums almost daily since I have played enough games of the USF faction to have an opinion on it, if you are a 2v2, 3v3, 4v4 player take this with a grain of salt since I haven't experienced team games with USF, albeit theoretically they shouldn't be bad even in them.
Let me start by adressing three main points that are often made about USF:
First, the lack of a super tank, which isn't a must for a faction to be good, I think many of the players expressing their opinion here fail to see that USF isn't supposed to be played as any other faction in the game. In CoH1 US had the pershing but it was even barely used, the US faction could completely play around the fact that they had no kind of a super strong tank. USF requires more strategical though to be effective, and that's a a point Im going to make a lot through this post.
Second, riflemen falling behind other infantry units veterancy wise, this is the point that in my opinion might have more truth to it but it's not the veterancy that is the problem (although a buff on it even if small would help) it's how useless the BARs are, In all my USF games I have purchased BARs maybe in 5% of them. They are basically a worse version of the flamer you can get in the Elite infantry commander, flamers are the equivalent of what BARs were in CoH1, they allow for agressive play with riflemen. If I were to make a big change it would be in them, make them cost more but have a much bigger impact.
Third, USF having too much MP drain, this is again revolved around what I have said before, USF is a different faction, you have to play around the riflemen losses and make your offensives as effective as possible, USF even if it doesn't appear isn't a noob faction, it's actually probably the hardest faction to handle. Mistakes in USF get punished MUCH more, but the fact that the units themselves offer so much diversity in gameplay pays off, IF you know how to use it.
Now that I have made those points I wanted to clarify what makes USF strong and what people fail to do as USF. So if you are a CoH1 player and have watched high competitive games in which a player played US then you know that flanking was a MUST, if you blobbed up you lost. If your flanking failed it could lead to big losses and snowball to a loss rapidly, HOWEVER US were always a two-edged sword, because if you master the flanking and managing how much MP you can lose on an engage in order to keep teching then you could beat opponents in 10 minutes. USF from CoH2 is a bit different though but the thinking behind it is the same, flanking is your biggest weapon, and with the addition of things like smoke grenades it makes things even easier to pull flanks off. That's the USF strength and at the same time what people fail to do with this faction, it's actually pretty annoying to see these posts saying USF is super UP just because you can't use the faction effectively since they are not the same as the others and require other levels of attention. Sometimes I feel like Im going through the endless posts ranting about champions that have no problems over on League of legends.
To conclude if I had to point problems to USF as why they are slightly weaker ( not meaning they have a super big gap as people make seem) is that BARs are pratically useless, riflemen might need a SMALL buff on the veterancy and some units like the howietzer need a slight buff. Other than that I hope that in this coming torney me and simon (aka aimstrong) can show people that USF is not weak.
I understand that the Pak howie is great at hitting squads close by and running straight at it, however, my biggest gripe with the pak howie is that it goes against USF faction design.
The USF faction was designed as a high DPS faction that is meant to be constantly on the move and attacking enemy positions. All USF support weapons support this fact. The .50 is capable of setting up quickly, making it a viable support unit for attacking infantry. The M1 57mm AT gun has a fast ROF with low pen, making it a unit that is meant to be used on the flanks of engagements and quickly re-positioned. All USF armor has low survivability, but instead rely on their mobility to make up for their weaknesses.
The USF indirect support weapon should be a fast moving weapon that is meant to constantly reposition to keep up with rapidly moving forces. It should be a lighter mortar or a mortar HT, capable of quickly moving into range, doing its job, and pulling back.
This is the main reason why I find the Pak Howitzer underwhelming. It is a good support weapon in the wrong army. As such it suffers from not having other units adept to doing the same job it does (holding territory), whilst not particularly aiding the mobile tactics required for the use of literally every other USF unit.
Stop using veterancy as an argument because the okw trades fuel and ammo income just for that. also vet 4 takes ages to get and basing obers around their vet is pointless.
Also take not that VG have no AI at all and are just a shrek platform.
OK lets lower the cost of Obers to 350MP and reinforcement to 35MP. DO you think it would be fair to keep that awesome veterancy?
Dont bring Soviets into this and Sherman its not even near the PIV. The Sherman ammo switch can be a blessing and a curse when PIV doesnt really care at whom it fires.
Most of the time I don't agree with JohnnyB but now he is Goddamn right. If you want to take away everything that makes Coh unique go ahead, but you will turn the game into a Starcraft WW2 ripoff.
Poland
0
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
