Profile of MMX

Does it mean that it deals damage up to 14 models? Could you please elaborate?

Basically this means there is a 4th distance threshold for the AoE of a projectile (AoE n/m/f/max). For some units, such as the AVRE, the far and max AoE radii are the same, for others the max AoE radius is significantly larger (e.g. the ST with an AoE far and max radius of 8 and 14 m, respectively).

The issue is the range, amount of health and VET4 bonuses. With AVRE you atleast will see it most of the time, and it is also still somewhat inconsistent (see screenshots below "Example of undershooting AVRE"). It used to be high risk high reward unit. Seems like the "high risk" part was removed, while high reward part was not adjusted. For example it is still possible to build both ST and KT.

I asked few streamers (The Angry Dutchman, Jibber, Elpern, Siberian and Baoliang) and the answers were ranging from "batsh*t broken" to "extremely strong". I would not have created a thread, if there was an absence of consensus about the unit in the first place.

1. way to tanky (1440 HP at vet 2).
2. is able to shoot from the fog of war with selfspotting at vet4. At least with AVRE you can see where it is shooting.
3. It comes too early and already paired with a great doctrine that counters high hitpoint armor with HEAT rounds, making units like comet, t34-85, E8 etc less effective. And good luck even diving on that thing, considering how the game punishes such moves with mines, fausts and AT guns.

The unit is toxic and nerve racking to play against, especially vs double rax build. Nerve racking and toxic destroys the mood and I'd like to have fun while playing it.
This is similar situation like with ISU, that used to be completely broken (in teamgames including 2v2), except with ST you need to pay 5x attention during a game, or else you have a good chance of losing it.

Units that are in the conflict with the core idea of COH2 as an RTS (unit preservation) should not be highly effective or nowhere near meta, regardless of which faction owns one

Fair point about the range advantage, and I agree this can cause a lot of frustration via basically uncounterable wipes. Obviously the range could go down to 35 again to partially solve this, but that still wouldn't change the 'wipey' nature of either the ST or AVRE. A rework in this area would require a complete overhaul of how these large-caliber weapon systems work in-game, and I'd wager it would prove extremely difficult to tone down the power level of the ST, AVRE, B-4, etc. and keep them relevant at the same time. On top of that I'm not even sure if there's a general consensus that wipey units are strictly against CoH2's core philosophy to begin with.

So pretty much I'm ok with AVRE and ST at any level below OK and hoping a lot of people share my sentiment.

Not sure what you mean by the last sentence?

Great post and comprehensive head-to-head comparison.

All things considered I would say the unit is overall good to very good, depending on the game mode it's used in, but not OP.

In terms of effectiveness the ST is probably on par with the AVRE in most areas, give or take a few.

As you've already pointed out its biggest advantage is the slightly greater range that, in conjunction with the improved projectile collision, allows the ST to engage - and often wipe - units from beyond their range of vision. The AVRE on the other hand can't do the same unless hiding behind a sight blocker. However, this is somewhat remedied by the fact that retreat wipes are a little easier to pull off with the AVRE as a result of the lower aim time and, most importantly, having a turret.

Other than that the lethality of both units is essentially the same; the ST has quite a bit less OHK range than the AVRE but makes up for that with the vastly greater max AoE (14 vs 8 m), which lets it nuke wounded squads a lot easier with more margin for error with regards to aiming.

With respect to the pick rate I'd say the recent spike in popularity is probably more a temporary phenomenon, just as with the new B-4. Not to mention that other parts of the Elite Armored make the doctrine a solid pick regardless of the ST being called in in every game or not. Hence I think it remains to be seen if this surge in popularity will last and if this is truly an indicator for the ST overperforming.

That they could had made the best out of both worlds.

Manual capping is faster, while staying on point is slower. Support weapons caps slower since they can't manual cap.

i like this!

judging by the comments so far i think it's safe to conclude that both systems have their pros and cons and an amalgamation of coh1 & 2' capping mechanism could actually remedy many points of criticism. would really love to see this getting tested at least, but if for whatever reason it turns out to be "either or" i'd probably stick to coh2's capping mechanics.

was having exactly the same issue. thank's a ton for sharing the fix that got it working for you! hope this will resolve my abysmal framerate as well...

Battlefleet Gothic (the first game at least) had tactical "pause" in multiplayer, each player could initiate a "pause" (the game would slow down to around 0.2 speed) and you had a metre would deplete while it was active and very slowly regenerate so you couldn't use it often. The catch is, of course, the opponent can also plan while you're using it and since the game is still running they have time to counter whatever you might be planning. It wasn't a bad feature at all and I wouldn't be adverse to something similar here.

that'd be an awesome feature for coh3 as well honestly. as long as the uses are limited to only 2 or 3 per player/team per match it shouldn't feel to abusive either.