You have the right to disagree, but they some can be said for USF they can also play defensively/passively if they want, so there is something wrong with that theory.
As I have ready pointed out the more flexible someone is the easier it is to "dictate the fight".
i have to disagree with the later bit as well, in the past soviet where also more flexible and utility oriented and ost was specialized. They struggled even more in big games vs ost to the point that certain doctrines where mandatory to even stand a chance. Usf is in a simaler situation now.
|
Playing passively is a defensive position does not describe "dictating the fight" on the contrary.
if you cant go around or flank they set the terms. So i have to disagree here
Seriously...
please read for once. Did i say only because of self heal? Or did i mention other factors?
|
They do not have a harder time to defend positions because Ostheer are bad at attacking.
Try attacking with grenadiers from out of cover vs riflemen in cover and see what happens.
there is more then one axis faction. Try to broaden your approach or use context and see what happens
But that is besides the point riflemen are much more flexible when it comes to fighting having decent DPS at all ranges and thus it is not "the enemy dictates the fight in by far most cases"
the larger the maps are the bigger the problem as they are laney and open, sandbags plus long range mainlines dont agree, as its quite easy to hunker down and bleed inf on appraoch from behind cover when there is limited to no flanking available. Even then mg's or sturms can cover that. In bigger modes going around is not a real option.
USF mortar is in line with other mortars and it will bleed the enemy unless he can fire back.
wich is a bit easier to do as as it has shorter range, again not sayings its bad. Just imho the usf stock opening line-up isent suited for bigger modes. Getting bled out is a big problem. This happens because they dont get things i mentioned before as stock unlike other factions
Destroying a ambulance in a 3vs3 or 4vs4 in the early game is not easy at all.
never said it was, mobility is a great strength but if threatend it is the easiest to destroy. Even in base its the easiest to destroy
OKW float mp only when/if they are starving for fuel (and even then mostly because they can not build cashes like other factions).
that explains 200 to 400 mp float. The rest (in bigger modes) comes from no bleed kubel with good sight, inf that can deploy their own cover, selfheal and having mostly long range inf. All of wich usf needs doctrines for.
|
Why?
rilfes are not the best at long range,
their best preformance is close to mid range. They dont have sandbags stock. They either need to close in or avoid the engagement. They have a harder time defending a position because of these. And before you start i am not saying rifle are up. The maps are to open for them to shine.
Does mortar have HE explosive shell to bleed the enemy?
Does the USF have access to early ambulance to greatly reduce bleed?
releying on a mortar to bleed is quite a bit unreliable. As usf you get rifles (midrange)rear echelons and a mortar and ambu at t0. Other factions get mg's scout cars/transport, at gun, long range and cqc inf or sprint. So using doctrines as usf and pathfinders in paticular to fill gaps so early on makes sense imo. Neither paths or scott imo are op.
Ambu comes early but not so early, its also the most vunerable imo esp if used as forward healing.
Also if what your implying is true about mortar and ambu why is usf usualy more mp starved then most faction when not using paths? They cant seem to float mp such as okw for example.
|
What cringes me out is more the fact that people pretend that riflemen suck, to try dodging their guilt and shame when spamming pathfinders.
Also, while the argument can be made in 4v4, riflemen in 2v2, which is the topic here, are very good, the only actual issue you can face being a sniper, but snipers are obviously a more global issue, this is not just an issue regarding USF
It not at least mostly not that rifles suck, its that most maps by far are way to open. Back when rifles had smoke this was not an issue. (Not saying they need it back) They always need to close in and the enemy dictates the fight in by far most cases.
Imo rifles currently bleed you way to much esp in 3s and 4s. To much to be viable long term. They have no stock early options for long range inf to counteract the bleeding. They only have mortar smoke or rear echelons smoke with nade tech. They should have gotten stock sandbags just like okw and ukf did to reduce bleeding. Imho these should notvhave gotten them on mainlines but on other units. |
How can that happens exactly?
Haha i wonderd that as well. At every stage and every range is quite a stretch. |
Are going to try the "easy" way out by playing the usual "run out of arguments derailing card" or are you going to admit that your description of Stuart performance is false?
(Actually is simpler to admit you got something wrong.)
This post was not directed at me, but i have to say this about it.
The sheer nerve of the last few posts.
You should really follow what you posted here yourself. Admitting when wrong is something you cant grasp apperantly. You are absolutly in no position to accuse some one else of derailing threads or going on about "their" narrative at all. Esp when you clearly have your own, and your track record of derailing threads is very long to say it mildly.
A large dose off self reflection is long overdue in your case.
|
Since the Moderators do not like where this debate is going I close it by simply saying that if in your opinion the scouting capability of the Stuart is trivial issue, you should point that to Kurobane who bought up the issue and use it an to support his claim that Stuart is UP instead of trying to prove to me that Luch is a better scout that Stuart.
Again if in your opinion USF have sufficient scouting option you should be pointing that out to Kurobane according to whom USF need Stuart as scout because they are lacking scouting option, instead of trying to argue with me that axis have stronger scouting options.
Finally if in your opinion Stuart is UP and sees little action I suggest you debate the issue with other people who point out the exact opposite from the first pages of this thread.
(check post #15 for instance)
As for the performance of T-70 it is not simply "my" view but it is a commonly accepted view, T-70 is considered power spike in the Soviet faction.
There are a few posts stating the stuart is perfect or in good spot. Most are either negative or meh. So what you say that most agree that its fine doesnt show here imo.
I see what i did regarding kurobanes comments, my bad. i ended up taking it up with you because of the way you post. You zoom in on tiny snippits of others posts and go out of your way to prove them wrong. Then you dodge questions and insert stuff barely or not related.
Please stop derailing threads over small things. Same goes for me.
So yeah we should leave it here.
|
50% moving penatly and 35 sight does not make a better scout than 44 sight no penalties.
Luch is simply not a better scout.
this is what you get for dodging questions. I said scouting is a minor/trivial part of the issue. Yet you keep mentioning this, i did bite and here we are.
being able to creep forward and get more then standard sight with vet is plenty usefull. This makes ambushing it harder (with other cloaked units) harder.
Its only requires a bit more input. Shame you cant see that. We have to disagree here, and i will leave it at that
Jager are not stronger scouts than Pathfinders. i mixed them up with falls. Jagers still get very good sight adding to what i said earlier about more numerous of options for axis
Regardless the argument was that USF lack scouting option so they need Stuart to be a good scout. Think we have established that they do not lack scouting options.
Even if you want to argue that the grass is greener on the other side of the fence, that does change the fact that USF have adequate scouting options.
how does one side having more scout options translate into one side not having enough? I never said usf was lacking there just that axis in general have more options.
There are no core problem with Stuart and the unit is in good place.
it being a situational unit with a 2 stage ability as its main relevant factor doesnt put it in a good place. The t70 costs the same yet is far easier to use and has more impact. And dont go on about t70 being op bye design, i know your view on that
|
Glad that see that acknowledge that your original argument that "luch also a more usefull scout unit then the stuart." does really hold much water.
you able to read? I didnt say that. But interpit it as you will. Cloaking helps scouting a lot and the stuart cant. And unless the luchs lost cloak the luch is a better scout.
What do you mean by "readely available"?
What is "stronger" than pathfinders when it comes to scouting?
spotting scopes, the 222, jeagers, map hack vet abilities on certain units.
You know full well what readely available means.
Just answer the questions that doesnt allign with your views for once. It would be good for a change
Why do you claim that "no one else use it" do you have anything to back the claim?
You claimed "yet the top players use it to try and prove its a well balanced unit" you go provide proof its a unit everybody uses it beyond the pro's.
The proof that it is balanced you failed to show because you wont answer when asked, just insert minute details that barely touch the core of the issue or questions asked to dedlect or dodge the questions.
If you dont answer with a real answer, then your view doesnt hold much or any water. And then i am done. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
