Profile of Pip

I assume the reasoning for that is that USFs hmg is the least accessible. It's not as true anymore but at launch it was locked behind a 50 fuel officer. That's my assumption just because I have no idea why else they would get FPs, doesn't fit their theme as you said

That works both ways though. Like it's kinda weird to me that Ost has bunkers when they already have by far the best hmg, and it's available in their HQ. Sure it's in their theme, but it's a little redundant

Making them cost pop for everyone seems fair imo

I think if they were to cost population it might be nice if you can salvage them for a minor refund, or at the very least just scuttle them for no refund, otherwise you might well have population sitting on the field you have no way to recover. The former is more in-line with how UKF emplacement works, I believe.

did you know Pathfinder easier to kill than jaeger ? they also lack of counter sniper ( only got damage buff in current patch).
Not to mention Jaeger has higher Crit rate + accuracy.

Uh, what? OKW doesn't have a counter-sniper either. Are you confusing JLI and the Jaeger Command Squad?

Also: I am reasonably certain that "spamming" pathfinders is not a genuinely effective tactic. They're all but unable to assault, are rather squishy, and their main damage output relies on them plinking at people from max range while immobile. They also lack a snare.

Neither Paths nor Jaegers are effective as "mainline" infantry, you're looking to get murdered trying to force them to work like that. Both are support infantry, best used with a screen of Volks/Paras/Riflemen.

I might agree that Bunkers should cost population, but the difference in strength between OST and USF "bunkers" isnt something I think you can totally fairly compare directly.

They're on very different factions, USF being a very "aggressive" faction, and OST being a very "defensive" one, which not to mention the utility of the Rifle Grenades.

I honestly always found it a bit strange that USF have the Fighting Position at all, while SOV and especially UKF do not. UKF in particular is a much more "defensive" faction in design. Is there some design goal here I'm missing?

Admittedly I don't know for sure, but I'd also assume the Fighting Position is using the same profile for its 50 cal as the teamweapon version, and the Bunker is using the teamweapon MG42 profile, other than arc in both cases. If this is true, the Fighting Position is pretty well advantaged in that aspect.

All I'm saying here is that I don't think that the FP being more vulnerable is necessarily bad. I will also state that static defences in general are historically not a great fit for CoH.

EDIT: It is definitely absurd that the OST bunker can fail to be penetrated by explosives, however. That's certainly something that should be changed, even if nothing else is.

It isnt a case of small arms having "projectiles". I should imagine there's merely a raycast between the firing unit and the unit being shot at, with objects being "damaged" if the cast intersects with them along its path. There's no need for projectiles to be involved.

I assume there's a certain distance the object needs to be from the firing unit, as well, as to my knowledge MGs don't obliterate the cover they're sitting behind, even if all their shots appear to be embedding themselves into that object.

Only in 1v1. If anything, the E8 can be useful in 1v1s. I'd still take OKW P4 with better armour and non doctrinal than E8 any time of day. Getting E8 to fight P4s is one of the worst investments one can make in anything above 1v1. Reliably beating P4s means nothing. There will never be a scenario where your E8 and P4 will go mano-a-mano on some wide open space without any supporting stuff. So yeah, in a vacuum, E8 beats both P4s.. but only in a vacuum. In my opinion, E8 should have been a doctrinal premium brawler, not a retarded Jackson that it is currently or just a retarded M4 that it used to be before the patch. And don't give me all that "faction flavour" BS you constantly spill about USF being mobile and whatnot. Those things went away ages ago, in favour of 1v1 symmetrical balance

Disregarding everything else: USF still have the advantage in armoured mobility. The improved on-the-move performance still exists (though in my opinion it isnt really the biggest deal), but the main part of this is the fact that US vehicles almost universally self-repair, which makes them much more mobile than axis counterparts.

Being able to patch oneself up without having to meet up with an engineer unit means that US vehicles can be pretty much wherever they like, without having to waste time finding an engineer to fix them. It also means they can recover from snares on their own (though this is often of niche use, you often won't have the time to repair before your opponent attempts to capitalise on the snare)