Profile of AvNY

Please pick one of the following as a form response:

<random brit unit> is....

Fine - not fine, because....

- This was historically how the unit functioned.
- It did not show up in any significant numbers.
- While historical it breaks game balance
- I hate the allied/axis fanbois who made whatever argumetn was prior to this.
- L2P noob!
- only fanbois like/hate this unit
- The unit is totally useless. You would know if you ever played the faction.
- Please halve/double the fuel cost on it.
- Relic please!

sry. this is not meant as insult!!! However you would never tell me to use the so called dual role of the sov pack, if you knew what good players know. the barrage deals less dmg to bunkers then normal shots of the pack.!!! you failed with you're L2p.
Axis forces are not more forgiving if you lose one mg you normally lose the game.

by the way 2v2 is completely different from 1v1.
Axis forces are not more forgiving.

just look the fucking mg bunker at t2. in vcoh it was the same way if i remember correctly
and pak means one les unit inf dps (shoks-Guards)

dont forget the 100 fuel stuka witch kills the pak.

YOu missed the point. The point wasn't to use barrage. The point was that allies are not less powerful or prone to having spam used on them, but their responses to situations aren't as clear cut as for axis (build vet blob and super tanks and then steamroll, repeat as needed). So you have to learn the various skills, new ones to you and your mate, and use them in conjunctions with each other.

Bunkers mean mp used in a fixed point. Not only that but you get to kill the bunker, which is a destruction of mp the same way as a squad wipe. You have an opponent who is using a counterable tactic and expending resources to do it. be happy. learn to counter it and you will bless it in the future when you see it.

Then you are playing the wrong game. This is how it was in CoH 1 and people seemed to think it worked fine there, it is also what made it special.

Perhaps you are reading it wrong; to me it means that you have a window which you have to capitalize on in order to compensate for your weaker period. In CoH 1 it meant that Americans had to be agressive early and get enough of a VP lead to win the late game during which the Wehrmacht had their window. As the Wehrmacht you did the opposite; you hade to hamper, and not lose, the Americans enough in the early game so you could win in the late game.

It made for beautiful games in my honest opinion.

It made for a game that took years to balance because of it. The original automatch maps probably didn't help either. (Achelous, Lyons, Scheldt, Beaux lowlands with a destructible bridge, etc.)

you missed a part of the game possibly. If it went on long enough and you used your late game army properly then it was possible for US to "come back". Vet3 US Rifles made up for a lot of sins, and a well vetted US force was something a Wehr could fear. I think vet3 on armor should have had a survivability reward too, but other opinions may differ.

No faction should have a point in the game were it's better than other factions.

O M G

I 100% agree with something Alex said.

I have said it many times since USF came out... It is an absolutely f-cked game design concept.

Early strength means that given equal skills you should be able to dominate (if not every time then most of the time). Of course if you do you have an unsatisfying 5-10 minute game that felt like you were always winning. Unsatisfying for you, frustrating for the opponent, and when the tears flow the "strong early faction" will get nerfed.

The mirror image is that the opponent gets to feel like he survived and outplayed when all he did was last until his forces were "OP" (yes, for most of us equally powered forces are not equal if the micro required to make that happen is ratcheted up really high). That implied skill early on, and they get a "satisfying" victory because they made the "come back" when really the game was just to survive long enough. Of course nerfing the "strong early" factino helped, didn't it?

The strengths should absolutely NOT be asymmetric over time! They can be different, but they should not be asymmetric. This chart just shows there is a fetish at Relic for difference for difference's sake.

But... But.... Difference!

If USF is to be the harder and powerful-though-more-micro-intensive faction then their mines should be more powerful and micro intensive too. Assymetrical balance.... or something.