Profile of Protos Angelus

Not the first time you've patronized people for a faction you don't play. I find a faction that doesn't have nondoc flamers and no mortar to have serious problems on urban maps. And that's what Grim mentioned. Non doc.

Lack of mortar, you are not wrong. Flamer, meh, here and there. USF has no flamer and I've managed to win on urban maps. Well, map, only ettelbruck is urban and non vetoed.
Would be a major problem, if any faction had T0 wide arc MG. If maxim, for example, was T0 and had the arc of the MG42/34, then OKW would be seriously underpowered and would have to fight an uphill battle from minute one.

OKW on urban maps, before the Leig hits the field goes against:

USF: Rifles + echelon -> OKW should win all engagements without much of a hassle
SOV: Depends. T1 or T0. Penals on small maps are not as great, probably against maxims. Still, given how poor maxims are against anything but blobs (Great AOE suppression), you can easily be extremely aggressive with spios.
BRIT: Even worse unless you have assault sections. No stock mortar, no stock rocket arty, nothing. On urban maps, brits are dependent on two things: Extreme luck and commander choice. I've seen vickers fail to suppress on the mid VP, whilst being in the building, a running volk squad which just ran across the VP to molly the building the vickers was in. So there's that.

So in reality, OKW somewhat struggles only against soviets, which is not surprising given in what great spot they are. Both OST and SOV.

And I could say the same for you. You don't play allies, which is fine. But you do play against them. You know what works and what doesn't work. I do not play axis, that is the full truth, but I do play against them and I know what I hate and what I love; seeing. I've never ever had, nor seen an ally completely dominate OKW as USF or brits on Ettlebruck in 3v3. I will say that ettelbruck is extremely unbalanced in terms of spawn side. As OKW, you would have a harder time playing around mid/bottom ettel, than you would playing around the enclosed top VP. Top VP on a map like ettelbruck, for OKW is Spio heaven. Shot/sight blockers which allow spios to literally spawn on top of you. You can't push inside, you can't really shoot from outside as the range is still low enough for SPIOS to be effective at most angles. Best you can do as USF is just make 3 rifles, and charge in. You will bleed a lot, but 3 rifles + echelon should push back 2 spio + volks (+ maybe kubel). I won't comment on other urban maps as I veto all urban maps as USF, mainly because I hate being forced to go for a mortar (which will end up in 50 minutes doing 500 dmg or so). I do love it when I get a soviet ally which builds a mortar and we cooperate well. Then it's gg.

EDIT: And I wasn't being patronizing. I literally cannot fathom how axis can struggle on any map. Especially with the stock roster. I don't mean that axis are OP, but their stock roster is complete for all occasions, same as soviets. USF was nerfed in some of their OP ways, without actually giving anything back, so their roster is meh. I can testify to that. Brits I won't even comment on.
So, on all maps, they can adjust to fit the map. You won't go for double spio on a map like steppes. Suicide. You go for fussies, upgrade them fast and win. You won't go for fussies on ettlebruck top spawn.

I've made this test as I've literally watched my rifles and rear echelon semi-behind green cover get decimated by pioneers which turned the corner near the fence on Winnekendonk, as you'll see from the pictures. So this was the first fight, ally capped the fuel, and I held the cutoff with my first units. Basically the first fight dictates whether I can get an AAHT at minute 5.45 or at minute 7 (if the cutoff happens).

So... the setup was: Rear echelon and rifle squad behind green cover. Since those are tank traps, not the best kind of heavy cover but oh well. Beggars can't be choosers. So 280 + 200 = 480 manpower squads, against cheaper to reinforce and build, double Pioneers.
Now, I'm fully aware that the real scenario fight, in a real game I've had (2-3 games ago, something like that), was extreme RNG. In that fight, pioneers just refused to drop. First squad that retreated was 10% hp and 4 models, and the 2nd pio squd forced my retreat (I focused one squad at a time). So I've went on to test the double pio charging vs rifle and rear echelon holding ground.

Setup to mimic the fight that actually did occur in a game:


Pioneers charged from behind the cover, while I was waiting with rear echelon and rifle, while the 2nd rifle squad was going around to flank the incoming MG42 which would, I presume focus down the echelon and rifle behind cover.

First test:

With the pios, I focused down the rifle squad first. I'm guessing this was another example of RNG because pios should in no way-shape-or-form win with 5 models left alive. And due to the angle of approach, the cover was inconsequential. Also, what contributed to such overwhelming victory is the fact that for some reason, rifles got buggy. They were not firing as fast as they usually fire, I presume due to targeting issues. It seemed like they constantly were switching which model to target. So I'm guessing this is just one of those RNG moments.

Second test:
This time less RNG, I actually did win, but at the expanse of losing a rifle squad. Now, how the fight would have gone in a ranked game... I don't know. I'd probably retreat rifles at 2 models, and he would retreat the pioneers at 1 model. Still would be somewhat of a win for him, because on my frontline it would be the useless rear echelon, and on his frontline, it would be an MG42 with the incoming gren. So this is a Pyrrhic victory.

Third test:
Focused Rear Echelon first. Another Pyrrhic victory.

Fourth test:
Focused rifles first. Also a Pyrrhic victory.

So this was done with the squads behind somewhat of a cover. I don't know how a cheap squad can gun down a semi-elite close range squad and another squad in their price range.
Pioneers should not really be combative enough to force such Pyrrhic victories.


Now, I'm fully aware that their combat strenght falls down hard. But in teamgames, such fights dictate A LOT. The first few fights, where the RNG can swing in each direction, there should be some certainties. Like 480 MP with more reinforce beating 420 with less reinforce. Sure, pioneers can stay relevant up to minute 8 with the flamer, whereas echelon can stay relevant up to minute 15 with the zooks.... but still. Pioneers should get a buff somewhere else, and a nerf in their close range firepower.

EDIT/UPDATE: While I think that pio vision should be 40, not 42 (the only nerf they deserve)... after further testing, it's not that pios are strong, but that REs are dogs*it. I've placed REs behind green cover, on neutral terrain (sandbags on TestMap), and made PIOs charge them over said terrain... Pios won.
If you put Combat engineers behind green cover and let pios charge them, Pios lose hard.
So this is mainly that whatever squad you pair up with rear echelon, you can for all intents and purposes disregard the RE squad. It's like they are not even there.

I hear you. The trouble is a vocal minority (usual competitive players) gets more attention.
This happens to the detriment of CoHs financial success and casuals leaving the game.

Hardcore 1vs1 players simply do not make RTS financially successful. In short, casual/average players make the RTS money.

CoH teamplay is far superior to Starcraft 2.
SC 2 devs have been pretty transparent in interviews about their mistakes to focus solely on 1vs1. The info is out there for those who do the research.
Personally, I enjoy 1vs1 tournaments but I also recognize it's kinda a dying dinosaur outside Starcraft.

Silver lining?
A wise man said; an error does not become a mistake until one refuse to correct it. With that in mind, perhaps there is still hope for CoH3.

StarCraft 2's Rollercoaster Decade, As Remembered By Its Developers;
https://www.usgamer.net/articles/starcraft-2-anniversary-interview-blizzard

Well written. I never understood why people balance around 1v1s. Sure, it's the easiest and most linear, with the least factors. But it's also the most boring and serves as a deterrent to most players. You could easily balance it out just by listening to the community as a whole. And mind you that there were many good advices on how to balance it out. By players that play axis mostly, or allies mostly, or both. Plenty of good advices.
You get the perspective of an allied player, of an axis player, and then you see what's what.
I mean, a simple unit such as grens went through so many changes, and ended up being absolutely solid and good at start, and becoming great with the LMG. Pair it with an MG that has such a wide arc, and a mortar that is the best in it's class, you'd think that for those pros, they'd have a weaker mechanical arsenal. But nope, stock tanks are great as well. Mix up the fact that on most maps, a single MG42 can deny a whole area... you get the current balance that revolves around Sov vs Ost.

Nope. Was wrong. Luchs VS M8 Greyhound wins easily. Tested it out 4 times, at usual combat ranges that occur in games. Only time when Luchs didn't beat an M8 easily was when it somehow bounced constantly. It was a draw actually. The last shot from the M8 killed the Luchs, and the last shot from the Luchs, killed the M8. Spooky stuff.

First fight. Luchs won easily.

Second fight, Luchs won easily.

Third fight. A stalemate.

Fourth fight, luchs won easily.

FlakHT, 222 and FlameHT can all be dealt with using a snare and a couple of lucky shots. Luchs is more oppressive sure,.

You serious? This is next level low IQ play here.