Because a Panzer IV is good against infantry? Oh, wait. Not a single Axis tank except the Tiger does anything to infantry, at all, ever.
Allies play Easy Mode. Armored vehicles early game that can drive around the entire map and allow the Allied player to take the whole map for several minutes. Universal tanks that require no thought or strategy whatsoever due to all having turrets and all being equally viable against infantry and armor. Enough munitions to both upgrade infantry AND lay mines AND build entrenchments (they don't even cost munitions, do they?), etc. etc. etc.
Axis has the worst of absolutely everything, and the Panther doesn't even matter when Axis infantry units STILL bunch up and get instawiped ALL THE TIME. Good luck sending in a Panther when you have one infantry unit left.
Lol p4 bad against infantry. Lol tiger being good at anything.
The kubelwagen is a thing. Jackson is very good against infantry and I really love the aesthetics of the su85s turret. Axis entrenchment cost a ton of munitions, they really need to tone that down. Usf also lays way too many mines all the time.
Axis squad spacing is clearly inferior to allies.
Kappa, just in case. |
It's obvious to meet the reality.
Handled weapon easier to use at target far away from you.
Tell that to panzerfausts, bazookas, at rifles, sniper rifles, lmgs, piats, and panzerschrecks before you talk about riflemen's riflenades lol. An at grenade at the end of a garand is significantly lighter than an 50+ mm shoulder fired at rocket launcher, but they don't have minimum ranges |
Might have something to do with being able to upgrade to bazookas. Maybe they thought they deserved a finnicky snare since they can double-equip zooks, but I agree it's dumb.
You drive straight at the squad it can force-cancel the snare if you get to the minimum range before it fires and that's been possible since WFA launch. Seems like something they should of fixed by now.
Lol if. A kt could make it there before the guy fires off the riflenade its that slow.
Sidenote: I think (I'm not certain, I don't use them often) that the same problem applies to pfusies. |
Thanks for the feedback. "Don't play US" is not what I was looking for in the US Strategy forum, hah.
I've found some success the past few days, but it's a fragile thing and I can't expect to dominate unless the opposing axis are terribad. The elite infantry commanders seem to be somewhat helpful. Many of the US "armor" units are so fragile that they seem to not be worth building since Axis seems to get there faster with better tanks, so most of the time I end up bumming around with a large infantry force, .50 cals, jacksons, and some pack howis or scotts. Occasionally mortars and AT guns are useful.
Like adamircz said, usf just isn't that great in teamgames. They can be good if used properly in 1v1, but either of the other two allied factions are better choices for teamgames.
That being said, I love usf and will still subject myself to playing teamgames with them. In the "armor" department, as you have discovered, usf lack tanks that can stand up to axis at, so I only ever build Jacksons and Scotts in teamgames. You get both functionalities of a sherman in separate units at much longer range, which is really useful for teamgames. I usually arm all my rifles to be anti infantry (double bars) and get a .50, which in combination is usually enough to stand up to any infantry, and with scotts, you will definitely win that engagement. However, I would suggest not building scotts until you have at least to Jacksons. Also, the usf at gun sucks and it'll just get Stukad anyway, so my recommendation is don't build it as the game will move to lategame fast enough that zooks will tide you over until jacksonsin 99% of games. |
Makes sense for balance reasons as it is "only" 145fu, and its armor is on par with a Tiger's, even better if you stack the armor bulletins. I would love a costlier but actually meaty KV-1, but I think it doesn't really change the fact that CE repair speed means your KV-1 will spending the majority of the match sitting in base repairing.
Meh. Meat shields tanks are kind of a joke, as all they are are veterancy vending machines for at, and I see no reason to use them over spotting infantry with snares to shield for your tanks, especially since most of them are pretty toothless for tanks that can't flank. I can't remember the last time I saw a kv-1 or normal Churchill. |
I don't understand the fascination with vet1 abilities and would much prefer that vet level 1-3 all provide a passive bonus to combat or survivability. Squeezing vet bonuses into two levels of vet I think makes for too sharp a curve for balancing.
Me neither but every single EFA unit has an (often uninspired) vet1 ability so I guess that's just the way they designed vet to work at first and scrapped it for some units un WFA and brits. In coh1 IIRC wehr infantry and support vet1 was just passive health regen, no combat bonuses. |
For the amount of rocket artillery/demos and various other deterrents allies have to punish blobs. The ST is one of the few to do the same. It's a pure hit or miss like everything else in the damn axis arsinal.
I'm not gonna deny that it does wipe fully vetted squads, but there are bigger issues that needs to be handled first.
Of the 5 factions, 3 of them are all-in-one infantry unit blobbing, fix that then fix the ST
You make a very good point and until demos don't wipe full squads I think st doing the same is fine. IMO they're pretty even since demos cost per use and have to be pre-set, and can get randomly blown up by a stray mortar shell, but they're a lot more available and don't cost a ton of manpower or fuel. |
Sorry if i wasnt clear, i mean reduce the OHK radius but increase the far AOE a fair bit, making it require a more direct hit on clumped infantry and not fully wiping naturally spaced infantry. The larger far (or maybe even mid) aoe would let the damage reach further meaning that even with the reduced OHK radius its still sending damage towards the target (vs the wipe or nothing thing we have now) it would be less effective vs lone squads by straight up being less lethal, but better vs blobs by hitting more of the blob.
The biggest flaw however with this i think would be magic AOE heals
So basically heavily damaging the entirety of a blob? Still would wipe infantry in cover, like sandbags or fences, which is what it's not supposed to do though, right? And also the AoE heals. |
They already ARE something entirely different from grens, volks, and rifles though. Part of the reason why (in my opinion) people are underrating cons so much is because they treat them as if theyre the same and do direct comparisons. Does anyone mention how much more capping power using a con build gives you than a grenadier build, or even a riflemen build? Cons have hidden/more subtle power in their ability to sprint, build green cover, and reinforce other squads with merge. Conscripts are a support/utility/map control unit and thats how theyre used at the top level (to decent effect). Cons may be slightly weak even in this role and even with this utility, so I really do think they need buffs, but I think that the buffs they need are much more minor than nearly everyone is asking for.
A lot of mainline infantry has those utilities though. Tommies and volks can make sandbags, riflemen can (kind of) sprint, a lot of other inf can sprint, okw has a light vehicle that can cap (so there goes capping power and sprinting), every mainline inf unit and some "elite" inf has a snare except tommies, and volks have a better version of the Molotov, and all of those shit on cons hard in terms of combat effectiveness. The only unique thing cons have is merge, which is admittedly very good for support weapons but still doesn't make them worth it, especially considering how bad maxim and the stock mortar currently are. |
Good points! I have tried the very same things and found that vs volk spam, it just falls apart even when none of the units are vetted. Shock troops do shred everything at higher vet, but they bleed you soo hard. How do you work around the bleed?
The thing with shocks is that they get absolutely ripped to shreds by multiple squads with stgs, which is almost always what they will be facing against okw opponents. Actually, in theory, an m5 with the .50 cal quadmount upgrade and shocks would be pretty effective, as the m5 would suppress and help cut your bleed and the shocks would either force a retreat or abdolutely shred everything with very minimal losses. As long as you back that up with sufficient at and know where theirs is, you should be golden. I got that idea because the m15 with rangers is really scary for any infantry. And then ofc spam smoke nades everywhere, maybe even on normal inf squads you aren't engaging or trying to close with. Maybe oorah your cons and shove them up front to take fire for your shocks but honestly cons trade so badly that IMO they do more harm than good rn, even with ppshs (although they do make it a lot better).
And penals are still dumb. They overperform and are boring to use (IMO anyway) since they have no "flavor", they're just a-move terminators. |
Bleb Feesh
LoopDloop
LoopDloop
Relic Entertainment
