Profile of GiaA

I'm not sure what you mean here. As far as I know Soviets have always needed to build T1/2 + T3 + T4 tech structures since the beginning of the game. Nothing changed there, at least nothing that the current team changed. Ostheer can skip whatever tier they want, now more than ever with recent changes to PGrens (Pschrecks allow skipping T2), T0 call-in infantry (allows skipping T1), the viability of T3 (allows "skipping" T4) which actually makes them the most versatile in terms of tech decisions.



I do think symmetrical balance is a valid criticism. The big problem however is having to deal with Relic's core design decisions that have left gaping holes in faction line-ups, such as WFA not having stock flamethrowers or indirect fire options. We/Relic can't add any new units or mechanics, so we have to work with what we got. And usually that means that the only option that remains is toning down some radical asymmetrical design (like USF's previous non-lineair tech routes) to a more conventional standard in order to make factions versatile enough to compete.

Personally I think Relic should have designed all factions with stock access to all the basic tools (ATG, HMG, flamethrowers, indirect, etc.) and only then put some asymmetrical designs around that.

T3 was not required in order to get T4 for the majority of the games lifespan.

When it comes to Ostheer I mostly meant the shift of fuel cost from buildigns to tech. There's little rearson not to go T2 before T3 and T3 before T4 because the buildings are so cheap.

I shouldn't have said criticism of the balance team. I just mean the balancing itself. Idk who was responsible for these changes.

1. Asymmetrical balance is good but only within the boundaries of the games core design. Some of relics original attempts to create innovative faction design just broke up the games core mechanics too much. (Sim City killing all the dynamic gameplay that makes coh so good, Fuel/Ammo conversion taking away the importance of fuel/ammo points because you can just adjust your conversion depending on what point you're holding, the competely non linear OKW tech messing with race for tech progression, lack of certain basic tools in factions making certain maps unplayable for certain factions, excessive OKW vet bonuses just letting OKW scale beyond all the other factions, smoke grenades on mainline completely negating suppression etc.)

2. Even when asymmetrical balance is within those bounds it complicates balancing. So a balance team with limited ressources and scope may have to think pragmatically and get rid of it for the good of evenly matched factions.

3. One Criticism I have of the balance team that pretty much falls in line with what you say is the increasing linearity and similarity of tech. It takes away decision making and leads to a very one sided meta when tech is just a linear progression without possibility or reason of skipping a building. This has happened to both Wehr and Soviets. It seems like the goal is to make the game more "convenient" to the player by giving him all the options without any trade off.

I use the tactical map, watch streams, I used to memorize build orders (now more flexible and adapting to what my opponent builds), but control groups? I have barely ever used control groups in all the times I played CoH2. Any tips for making effective use of this? Also, I know you can use tab to cycle through selected units, but does anyone actually use this? I barely do. I will say, I do not take the time to reflect too much. That is probably one of my biggest problems in trying to improve at this game. Thank you for such a good response.

This is just my personal take on control groups. I use them for the key units in each game stage. For example when playing Wehr I will assign my MG to "2" early on. If I play a sniper it's "1" throughout the entire game. My Paks are always on "3". Once I get my first light vehicle the MG gets overwritten and the Vehicle becomes "2". Indirect Fire is on "4". Engineers are on "5" just to make selecting them for repairs late gmae less annoying. Once again I don't really feel qualified to comment on what the best use of ctrl groups is but I'm fairly certain they should be used in some way or another.

I use tab extensively. Imagine having two rifles selected and you suspect theres an mg in front of them in the FOW. Now you press tab once and right click to one side of teh suspected MG posistion and tab again and right click to the other side of it. That's just one example of its applications. Basically it allows you to jsut select a blob of units send it out of base as a whole and then rifle through them and give them precise orders while they're exiting. This can be done very smoothly and efficiently.

Btw can you link your stat page? It'd be interesting to see how many games you've played. As I said 90% of imrpovement is done by practicing. There's really no magic to it. Ofc not everyone who plays a lot becomes good but everyone who becomes good has played a lot.

Hello,

Is it ever really worth putting team weapons in green or yellow cover, or is it too big of a risk for clumping and squad wipes from grenades?

I usually do not put them in cover and prefer they stay spread out, but I wonder if using cover is more logical and effective for keeping team crews alive and getting them more veterancy over the course of a match?

Maybe people only use green cover and not yellow cover due to explosive doing full damage to squads in yellow cover?

Bonus question, when AT guns are set up, do they get a green cover bonus? I heard people say this, but I never really noticed during matches.

I'd say it's never worth it to have a mortar crew clump up. When it comes to MG crews I'd say most of the time yellow cover is not worth it. There could be exceptions like an opponent who blobs high dps infantry frontally into the mg but against a regular player I think spreading out should be prioritized over yellow cover.

Green cover I feel like I can't make general statments about. Depends on the position/army compositions.

It’s a 110 fuel T34/76 without ram and with slightly better pen.

Go hammer and you get a Panther with P4 wipe potential.
It’s not very complicated.

Which means it's a balanced T34/76. Your problem with using the T34 as a comparison is that you misjudge the strength of your reference point.