Profile of GI John 412

Realistically, Obers are not a good choice except as situational troops. In most cases Volks are better because of their versitility and much lower cost. Obers and other long range elite infantry like Guards and Paras are great at locking down a VP Solo because they demand that at least two regular squads or a tank or light vehicle respond to it to force them off. This frees you up to put pressure back on the contested VP, usually the center.

You can also use them as bait. Sweep mines with your Storm Pios and set mines of your own to snare a tank that comes to push off the Obers and finish it off with a cloaked rakettenwerfer.

This is getting silly (as usual) The soviet sniper vs ostheer is far too hard to counter particularly on open maps in the small game modes.

The question is not should it be nerfed/counters buffed but rather is dropping to one model the best solution to achieve this for balance and/or gameplay.

Exactly.

I think that with all the buffs to sniper counters already planned, it would be a bad choice to also completely rework the Soviet sniper into a one man unit. There are a lot of possible second and third order effects that can happen and massively change the meta or break other units. I think the best solution is to tweak some stats and buff the counters, as already planned, and leave the Soviet sniper as a two man team. I fear that trying to do too much all at once will create more problems than it solves.

I’m loving the discussion that this has created, but I want to pump the breaks on some of the historically accurate changes like the 60mm mortar, 1919A4 and other changes. For this to work, it has to be limited in scope and not effect balance. So, no new animations, no new stats, no new weapon models. Just cosmetic changes that better reflect historical use that also serve to indicate the role and effectiveness of troops.

A note on paratroopers with carbines. Yes, they are much handier to jump out of a plane with, but an M1 Garand was actually what the jumped with UNLESS, they were a weapon crew or specialist that would’ve had a carbine anyways. Infantrymen, whether they be paratroopers, Rangers or just in the good old infantry, had M1 Garands. Very few men preferred the carbine as a combat rifle. It just didn’t have the punch that the M1 Garand does.

The M1A1 paratrooper carbine was issued to paratrooper weapon crews and other support personnel like bazooka teams and MG teams, although many of them used standard M1 Carbines as well.

Regular paratroopers get M1 Garands, but switch to Carbines when they upgrade to LMGs or bazookas to show that they are in a weapon crew type situation, and also switch to Carbines when they upgrade to Thompson SMGs to show that they are in a CQB role, that the carbine was preferred for.

Thanks for the positivity in the replies.

The M1 Carbine is a fine weapon. It is lightweight and easy to shoot. It has a detachable box magazine with 15 and later 30 rounds of the potent .30 carbine round. The Carbine, however, is not an infantry rifle. It was always meant to replace the pistol as a self defense weapon for gun crews, machine gunners, officers truck drivers, mortarmen and anyone else who would need a weapon, but who's job was not frontline fighting.

History lesson over, now let’s talk CoH2.

I think the relationship between the various forms of the M1 Garand users (Riflemen vs weapon crews) and M1 Carbine users (REMFs vs Paratroopers and Rangers) is unrealistic, confusing to the new player, but also easily fixed.

Proposed change: Keep all unit stats the same, but give Paratroopers and Rangers M1 Garand models and give all weapon crews M1 Carbine models.

End result: An easy way to tell if a unit is good or bad in direct combat. M1 Garand rifle equipped troops are skilled infantrymen by trade and perform well as such, while troops equipped with M1 Carbines are support troops who are less effective with their individual weapons.

(And before anyone says that Paratroopers should have carbines because they’re Paratroopers, you’re just plain wrong. Paratrooper INFANTRY (as depicted in the game as “Paratrooper” ) almost always carried M1 Garands even on jumps. Read the book, “US infantry weapons in combat” if you would like to hear about what actual WWII and Korean War veterans were issued, trained with and fought with. Seriously, it’s very interesting.


Please respond in the poll and support your opinion with a comment below!

Nerf brens but reduce cost. Keep Vickers K the same. Now you have diversity. If someone really really wants to keep their double upgraded Uber tommies, then go for the halftrack dropped, doctrine specific, Vickers K. It makes it a viable choice due to its power, but offset by its cost and it being locked to a doctrine. Regular Bren guns stay good, but cheaper to avoid Tommy blobs frontally annihilating an MG, but still capable of winning most long range fights that they are supposed to win.

Bren Gun- 45 munitions, non-doctrinal, slightly weaker

Vickers K- 60 munitions, doctrinal/heavy engineers only, current power.

End state: weaker Brens as requested but at a reduced cost to offset. Better distinction between Brens and Vickers K. More reasons to tech to anvil and use heavy engineer upgrade and doctrinal halftrack droppef Vickers Ks in 1v1s, which are both heavily under utilized in favor of simply getting Brens.