Not just you, terrible faction design IMO. You're basically in mid game before you can build anything but riflemen. I feel they tried to solve this by giving you some 0 CP commander options (Assault Engineers, Jeep) but being that they are 0 CP units they are marginally effective early game and ineffective mid-late game. This also makes most of the only 6 US commanders lackluster at best.
US is so boring to play maybe just for me... |
|
Hey now! I use g+ for exactly things like this. Twitter sucks and who wants their FB wall covered with all sorts of random hobbies and interests. g+ is great for following said hobbies and interests. |
The single strongest aspect of this unit are the Assault Engies with their abilities to plant demos. Squad wipes for 90 munis a pop, and afterwards demo paranoia.
Wasn't the Assault Engineers's demo charge significantly nerfed in the latest patch. I wonder if they are still worth the munitions investment. |
|
Long Range Combat:
The original move to make cover more important is correct and should not be reverted. Short range infantry should be used on flanks and preferably not on frontal assault. If you do attack head on in an attempt to close the distance over open terrain then you deserve to take losses as a penalty. If you have to make some changes to the LMG then so be it but cover is an essential part of this game and it's role should not be decreased.
In an effort to discourage blobbing, I'm an advocate for penalizing infantry with negative cover when moving in groups of 3 or more squads over open ground. |
Yes, finish the job by putting COH2 on sale for 75% while announcing the shutting down of vCOH servers.  |
I actually thought it was passive. Which would have been good.
If anything, the ability should unlock a Thompson weapon rack in place of the LMG that's normally only for the Infantry commander and otherwise entirely useless. This third "doctrinal" weapon rack would serve the purpose of being able to outfit your troops with whatever third weapon a doctrine allows. The only other doctrine besides Infantry that uses LMG are paratroopers' LMG upgrade, which is not dependent on the rack anyways.
For 60 or even 90 munitions you can turn every weapon slot-free unit you got into a Sturmpionier.
I think this idea or making the ability passive. |
|
My suggestion would be to classify blobbing as 3 or more infantry squads moving together either in a particular radius or in one command. The penalty would be that those squads moving together out in the open should have negative cover similar to when moving on an open street. The red shield would be displayed next to the infantry icon letting both the players know that blobbing incurs extra damage. |
|
I agree with OP. There is no way to stop people from using blobbing as a tactic but there is a way to discourage it in a fair way.
My suggestion would be to classify blobbing as 3 or more infantry squads moving together in one command. The penalty would be that those squads moving together out in the open should have negative cover similar to when moving on an open street. The red shield by the infantry icons lets both the players know that blobbing incurs extra damage. |
|
TL;DR: US army tier structure strongly encourages blobbing of infantry to the detriment of strategy and diverse unit compositions. I don’t like to point out a problem without providing a solution so I outlined a new tier structure that I feel would correct this issue.
It has been previously noted on these forums that the USF faction routinely devolves into mass blobbing of infantry. I have found this to be true in my experiences playing alongside and against this faction as well. In a way, the player is forced into fielding basically a single composition of troops (infantry fitted with BARS and Bazookas) and at a certain point it even becomes more effective to just attack move in mass rather than microing flanks. Frankly, I’m surprised this lack of diversity was allowed to pass through the Alpha phase.
The problem is that the unit composition of the Tiers is set up so that support units are fielded past the point where they would have a greater effect than the already vetted and upgraded infantry squads that are fielded basically on a mandatory basis. This is what is detracting from the strategic feel of the game and decreases variation in gameplay. What I believe would solve this issue of limited strategic diversity is a re-adjustment to the composition of the Tier structure in the following way (changes are bolded):
Tiers would unlock like the battle phases of the Wehrmacht except they could be done in any order. Tier 1 would basically have to be built right away. I can’t figure out why they made officers mandatory to unlocking tiers other than for the sake of being faction unique. I feel they typically just add to the blobbing issue without offering anything particularly interesting to gameplay (aside from Major). By having them as an option to be built you could choose not upgrade to BARS but field a more expensive unit that will already have them equipped (same with bazookas).
Tier 0:
Tier unlock options
Upgrades to riflemen
Rear Echelon
Ambulance
Tier 1:
Riflemen
Lieutenant (not mandatory)
.50 MG team
M1 75mm Pack Howitzer
Reasons for change: To provide any type of variation whatsoever to US opening. US has no early game indirect fire corrected by the howitzer. The volley fire ability of RE as the only means of early game suppression has turned out to be cheesy and requires no set up or placement strategy, MG corrects this.
Tier 2:
Captain (not mandatory)
M1 57 AT gun
M20 Utility car
Reasons for change: The US AT gun is less effective than German Pak or Soviet ZiS but comes at a higher Tier than all other factions in the game. Better placed in Tier 2.
Tier 3:
Major
Stuart light tank
AA half-track
Sherman Medium Tank
Reasons for change: The Sherman runs along the line of a P4 or T34 and I’ve even seen Pumas handle them quite well. This makes it a T3 tank. It really doesn’t have the firepower or armor to warrant deferral into another Tier.
Tier 4:
M36 Jackson
M8A1 Howitzer Motor Carriage
Firefly Sherman
Reasons for change: the M36 and M8 do belong in T4 as long as there is another heavy tank included. There is currently no US heavy tank. I know they are waiting to include them in future Commanders but why on earth would anyone ever choose a Commander without the new heavy tank when the US is usually doomed in late game with their standard tank composition? It’s best to allow them to build 1 non-doctrinal heavy tank.
Without the inclusion of a non-doctrinal heavy tank then I feel as though Tier 4 should be eliminated and the US should just be given a large Tier 3. It is my understand that the US tank strategy up until the Battle of the Bulge was to use Shermans and Tank Destroyers in larger numbers to make up for their clear weaknesses. At their current Tier level and cost and player cannot perform this strategy. Instead the player is typically equally numbered but outgunned in terms of armor. The fuel saved by eliminating the need to upgrade to T4 allows you to build an extra tank or TD to balance out their weaknesses.
Balance:
My issue with the US faction is not in terms of Balance, just diversity of gameplay. I realize that moving these units around with their current stats would probably cause major balancing problems so it would take a lot of work to nerf or buff certain units to regain equilibrium but in the end the game as a whole would be richer strategically for it.
TL;DR: US army tier structure strongly encourages blobbing of infantry to the detriment of strategy and diverse unit compositions. I don’t like to point out a problem without providing a solution so I outlined a new tier structure that I feel would correct this issue. |
COH2 is better for the following reasons:
- Snipers wars are over. No more having snipers cloaked in the middle of an open field.
- PE and Brits were just awful factions that had terribly gimmickry mechanics.
- Veterancy can no longer be bought.
- COH2 gets constant patching where as balance issues and bugs just remained for years in COH1
- Match making system is much quicker and streamlined in COH2.
[/b][/b]
COH2 has it's problems but no worse then those that still exist in COH1. I'm not too terribly happy with the about of unit diversity that is actually being fielded in the US faction. I think most of the complaints are just looking through nostalgic rose colored glasses. Especially now that it seems they are moving away from paid commanders because of all the negative feedback.
|
United States
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
