Profile of aerafield

Why do people play Coh2? Is it to have fun? Or is it to get completely smashed by meme strats against people way better than you because the match making sucks the pubes off a tick on a goats ass?

So now it's suddenly about having fun only? Because if your understanding of fun is "If I win the match I had fun, if I lose then I did not", then GiaA is right. You cannot possibly tell me that you are playing with full rank 5000 teammates against full top 500 allllll the time. Basically most other types of matches in 4v4 are winable if you play good enough, but it feels like some people expect the game to hand them a 3-digit rank and 60% winrate with ease, even when said people openly admit that they are not good at CoH2.


On the other hand if your meaning of fun is to have good, long games then I dont see the issue either. I see a lot of 30+ minute games in your history.

Wait until you find out about the sight range of Kubels, M3s, Pathfinders and snipers who all have essentially the same timing

Is it even possible to get out of elo hell?

First of all it's important to know what your goal is. Let's say top 200 and staying there for example.

Because the only way that is possible is if you play sweaty with a super tryhard build, capable of carrying trash teammates. Here's the deal: in the ELO hell, most of the times you should get enemies that are bad enough that you should be capable of winning against 1.5 players on your complete own without any help from your teammate... IF you play sweaty & optimal. 2 players if the enemies are super bad.

Your army composition must be capable of countering (almost) anything the enemy can build, e. g. never skip AT guns or HMGs in the hopes that your teammate builds it for you.

This is the stuff I am talking about. Barely winning and holding your side isn't enough to get out of these ranks. You need to be capable of completely smashing your side and then flank the other side if you play against bad enemies and matchmaking isn't too fucked. The 3 Western Front armies have it much easier here to pull off these aggressive plays with their strong mainline inf and forward retreat mechanic.

On the other hand, if someone is having a bad understanding of the tryhard meta or slow micro or bad unit preservation etc etc, then it's not possible to escape ELO hell ofc unless you are lucky with matchmaking over a longer period.

Only viable strategy for USF is using pathfinders.But dont worry guys "balance team" will nerf pathfinders to dirt.

In 2v2? Absolutely.
I've said it before but this is the direct result from this terrible map pool, I mean just look at it. You have 2 or 3 wider maps with sightblockers (Elst and Winnekendonk), and the rest are narrow super camper maps or maps with 0 sightblockers.

Riflemen cost 280 and suck donkey shit when the engagement starts at maxrange against anything that isnt a pioneer, and they also suck hard at cover vs cover battles to boot. You go riflemen vs a sweaty gren or ober blobber on Road to Kharkov, Crossing in the Woods and the other usual braindead maps and you will lose the match with terrible K/D most likely.


If the 2v2 competitive auto match map pool would be like it SHOULD be, meaning every map is based on competitive design such as Elst Outskirts, Winnekendonk and Stadtschutt (that got removed for no good reason imo), then this pathfinder meta would not exist!


Btw no more patches are planned so no, pathfinders most likely won't get nerfed

Where is Paula?