Profile of ZombiFrancis

The best way it was put to me when I first started getting into vCoH was "Americans fight for VPs and to deny fuel. Wehrmacht fights for fuel and to slow the VP tick." Each side had different goals. With different goals that could ultimately win them the game, there was actually room for asymmetrical balance.

The Churchill gets mainly offensive bonuses as well. More importantly the Churchill gains no defensive or health bonuses with its vet. It's ability to act as a meatshield is still quite solid.

Although I guess it does have that weird vet 3 engine self-repair thing.

But the whole pseudo-command tank aura would be such a massive change to the unit, not to mention the aura itself would have crazy impact on infantry combat. The impact on team games I won't even bother to get into either. I mean, the B-4 commander was already a pretty troll commander in team games to begin with.

A vet 1 hulldown wouldn't be too crazy though. But IMO vet 1 abilities need to set aside altogether. Crams the pacing of vet bonuses into only 2 steps.

I don't think you need to dissect my argument since again, I'm not saying that USF doesn't have stuff to spend munitions on. I'm saying that spending munitions on weapon racks is a primary expenditure, and everything else tends to come after or in addition to arming up. M20 mines requires you to tech and show your cards pretty early on, and the Major abilities are on a tech unit themselves, the final one no less. They're not inaccessible at all, but their availability and usage depends heavily on how the actual game plays out, whereas three of the other factions starting units can lay mines.

Before the mortar there was a bit more strain on grenade usage because it delayed weapons. Now grenades aren't as necessary. That has really freed up munition usage for USF, especially early game. That's my argument, if you can call it that. Also, by 'unreliable' I don't mean the abilities themselves are unreliable, but their availability to a player is, depending on their choices. (No flamethrowers if they went calliope doc, LT tier being LT tier, etc.)

And as for the Soviets, well, that's a whole other issue that's entirely unrelated.

Honestly, I think a major component of this is that USF doesn't have a whole lot of things to dump their munitions into except for weapon racks, especially now that they have the t0 mortar option to save a bundle on throwing grenades.

IMO, the 1919 functions best on Paratroopers. The x4 tommyguns v 1919s choice is probably one of the better ones in the game. I wonder if the 1919 doctrines would be able to function properly if it unlocked an individual squad upgrade. (Or hell, even a global one that gives rifles one by default.)

I've got to say though, I think ultimately all my suggestions will fall into cloning the original vCoH matchup. Not because I want CoH2 to be CoH1, but because the faction design, all WW2 and franchise components removed, works out so well.

It's hard to make any real suggestions or analysis of game balance because of how rickety and restrictive the overall design is to begin with.

What can you really do in a game that doesn't have strat points for cutoffs?

I think 4v4 maps as a result have to utilize points like the repair/medic points, the maphax towers, and such or else the maps end up being big empty territory points with little to no strategic value. The only map that has really succeeded in avoided those points without sacrificing map playability is Steppes.

For instance, I think Steppes is pretty much the skeleton, the empty canvas, to what most 4v4s should be designed around. So the best we've got is something that looks like a placeholder for alpha testing. (Protip, that's what Steppes was.)