Profile of GiaA

Guides like this aren't for top 1vs1 players, because they know this kind of strategy but rather for players who want to improve and don't know how. You should rather appreciate the work behind it instead of being salty for no reason at all. Seriously what is wrong with you guys coming here and bashing the work of other community members because you seem to hold a grudge against Devm.
Seriously nobody needs salty kids like you.

The way people act in this community is ridiculous. DevM literally proved that USF is a viable tourney faction after everyone mocked them for being "underpowered". All the so called "top players" can learn from this guide.

Imo certain people in this community fear that they might lose their status to people like aimstrong and devm this would explain their behaviour towards them and everyone who doesn't agree with it. I tried to express my opinion once in siberians stream by saying something like "DevM has a point though" and people acted like I insulted their ancestors lmao. The truth is that most coh2 "top players" can learn a LOT from the old vcoh veterans. The only person that has played on a similar level was Jesulin on his peak and maybe to a certain extent luvnest.

"As you ppl make them look"

Have you watched any higher skilled game lately? Any tournament game? No one is making them look strong. They are fucking strong, that's final.

If I'm not mistaken they have been nerfed with the last patch ? I think it was anti building modifier from 1.5 to 1.25 or something. They're only good on urban maps. On Langres and crossing they suck. The problem is that flamers on mainline infantry are just a flawed concept because it essentially means that the opponent won't be able to use any building whatsoever.

Good idea, but someone suggested a dedicated 4 man Rifle squad as a call in which comes with a flamer (or as an upgrade). 4 M1s and a flamer is way too much damage. That would have more control over their balance.

I don't get it. Doesn't a double bar rifleman have more dps ? The only problem with flamers is that they allow USF to dominate every single building on the map. Flamers should not exist on main line infantry but the flamers themselves aren't that strong. Apart from their strength vs buildings ofc.

My opinion:

1) Flamers

1.1 No access to flamethrowers for some factions.

I agree that every faction should have access to flamethrowers because they are some of the most basic tools in CoH2 and as such should not be missed in any factions tech tree.

1.2 Flame damage bonus vs green cover

I think your logic is kinda flawed on that one. It's not the green cover itself that takes skill to utilize it's the way you react to certain weapon types. The necessity to react differently when seeing a flamethrower approaching (eg leaving green cover to avoid the damage bonus) adds more skill than having green cover as sort of a no brainer option. So imo the opposite to what you said is the case. The bonus damage of flamethrowers against green cover expands the thought process that has to go into tactical positioning rather than limiting it.

1.3 Flame tank Damage over Time vs AT Guns

The problem you're describing here really only applies to the Flame Tank vs AT Gun matchup. Schrecks are mobile and only need to stop for a very short moment in order to fire. And in all honesty I do kinda like the new effectiveness of flame tanks vs AT Guns. I don't see why very specialized tanks that can only be accessed through doctrines shouldn't be able to soft counter AT Guns. Especially considering that a frontal assault by a KV8 or Flame Hetzer can easily be stopped by having a snare (Grenfaust) near by. The area denial feature gives flame tanks a very specific role that differentiates them from other Anti Infantry vehicles which is great.
However the new flameweapons on tanks might need some balance tweaking to make them more viable.


2) Indirect Fire

I absolutely love the idea of designing the Pack Howie/ISG as sort of a light howitzer (which they technically both already are by definiton) that has a reasonably strong barrage and no auto fire. The barrage would have to be quite impactful and much more consistent than a SU76 barrage of course to not render them useless. I must say though that I'd limit those changes to the Pack and ISG without touching hte mortars at all. Mortars are just fine in my opinion even though they're not the most skillfull unit I have to admit that. Still keep them the way they are right now for the sake of faction asymmetry which is an extremely important part of the game that has been *** on a lot with some of the recent patch efforts.


3) Weapon upgrades

3.1 No brainer upgrades

Agreed, the ideal solution to this would be global upgrades but those won't be implemented anyways so we'll have to think of a different way.


3.2 Giving cover more importance over sole weapon range.

This sounds like a very valid point however your proposed solution would require extenive testing to make sure it doesn't screw over the entire game because it's a very vast change affecting every single infantry unit in the game.

3.3 Giving weapon upgrades disadvantages

Agreed, but isn't this already the case for some infantry units ? Rangers for example ? How do LMG Grens perform on close range compared to vanilla Grens ?


4)

I agree 100%


5)

Agreed


Overall a very interesting post my dear leader !


Edit:
I think you guys are confusing the Rifle Company balance issue with the overall situation regarding flamers. The problem is not that flamethrowers are too strong it's that they're not supposed to be equipped on main line infantry. Btw I think that flame riflemen are actually kinda overrated. On some maps LMGs are way stronger.

All you mentioned are going to be toned down.

Stronger then what? Like all OKW commanders are stronger then this new one. Maybe Special Operation commander is weaker ... well, not weaker but lets say "on pair", and this commander sucks ass. Here is some fast facts why this commander suck:

1) Insanely muni dependent.
2) Volks already have flame nades to deal with garrisoned units. "its not very cost effective" is questionable, because using this new commander force me to use more then 1 sturmpio AND i'm left without ANY elite inf tanks. Not to mention that "its not cost effective" to pick commander just to counter this maxim in building and then play without any useful stuff ... but hay you countered maxim.
3) I have to rely ONLY on obersoldaten later on, since I wont have effective AI inf (and we saw how much time hetzer need to kill someone). So again I have to spend muni even on obersoldaten (who sucks btw)
4) Hetzer comes too late AND cost hell of a lot fuel AND Pop-cap.
5) Brad said that overall stumpios performance with flame is the same as without flame. And they are even weaker with flames against targets out of cover. And if they are weaker\the same then whats the point? Sturmpios are useless AI inf past first 5 mins.
6) Recoup losses ... well, not like OKW is the lest MP starved faction, but it also cost you 80 muni.
7) Salvage commander already provide Jaegers, arty which destroying howitzers, AI tank (which is cheaper AND more effective then hetzer) AND gives you tough salvage.
8) HEAT shells got fixed and now they are finally useful AND this commander have Sturmtiger - heavy blob counter.
9) Rocket barrage ... mkay, you could save 100 fuel, have a Hetzer and then spend 200 muni per Stuka zu Fuss barrage, with SAME sound, with FLARES, with SAME damage. Fair trade.

So again how this commander is useful sorry? This commander cover only one area - OMG ENEMY IN BUILDING BURN THEM. But there is 10001 way to deal with them using correct OKW. Its not about UP\OP commanders, its about commanders which simply dont worth picking, since there is hell of a lot other commanders which can be effective in different situations, not on 1 out of 10 games.

Uhm, well if this commander is as weak as you think it is it's gonna get changed too wtf is that logic. As I said even if a commander isn't op as fuck at relaese it's still possible that it needs some changes.