Profile of rumartinez89

Lots of back and forth. Trying to make this commissar doctrine work. I'm still not very good at using his abilities - seems I should be getting penals since conscripts feel too squishy to be aggressive with.

All in all though this features lots of fun tank play, and as far as I could see from my own vantage point, this game could've gone either way up the very end.

Got of couple issues with your build based on my personal experience using it.

You made 3 engineers, why did you do this? Your early build of 2 cons and 3 engis doesn't provide you with much combat power and if it weren't for his lack of unit preservation he could have closed you out fairly quickly. You also didn't upgrade any of them so you could take advantage of flamer+merge or sweep for mines.

My suggestion is to go 4 conscripts or 3 cons/then 2nd engi, I like 4 cons with 2 going PPSH and 2 with 7 man for late game durability/utility. Late-game if you lose a PPSH squad do not replace it, make a 7man con instead.

You could make an assault squad of 2 PPSH Cons and Commissar, when your out of battle the commissar can heal you and any engagement that looks tough use fear propaganda. I don't think you used any of the commissar abilities now that I think about it. It has ok DPS but is shines as a support unit it just requires a bit of micro.

As to the penals, they do work better with the commissar but don't really work that well with this commander, if you want to do that go with NKVD. However, getting 3 cons and then a sniper has worked well for me since the cons can screen for the sniper and commissar can control the battle. IF you try this get the nades as fast as possible to snare LV counter.

One thing I will mention is that you seem to have been fairly passive despite the amount of units had compared to him. At some points, you literally had twice as many inf/mg/engi as he had units but you were not capping at all. This circles back to the 3 engi opening which might have made you a bit hesitant, if you want to stick with that opening you need to be spamming mines so that your opponent pays for caping when your unable to contest.

I am pretty sure the IS2 used to have a stun mechnaic where even if it didn't penetrate the shot could cause a stun. Made up for the shitty ROF and with VET made it better than the tiger which was also strong as hell.

Stuka dive bomb could be used in base sector, you could be losing the entire match but one good retreat along with stuka dive bomb to opponent base would at minimum get you back in the game at best get you a rage quit.

Where I agree is that USF is fairly weak early on. The weak Echelon starting squad combined with relatively expensive Riflemen and long build times on the officer basically ensures that you're at the very best on par with Axis for the first 4-5 minutes, but probably behind. Even compared with Ostheer.


.

This is what used to kill me about playing USF. They are a snowball faction but the snowball is intentionally stalled by Officer timing. The build time is 55 seconds for your 4th mainline which is insane when compared to every other faction. Soviets don't even need to tech molotovs because they can just swarm OST, USF on the other hand cannot unless the MG was caught out of position. It wouldn't be so bad if if Rear echelon were actually useful in combat or the Elite units came in at CP2. As it stands it gives OST a chance to dig in which is where USF bleed starts to set in and get worse as the game goes on.

While on the topic of Officer tech, I still don't understand why everything takes so long to build. Several patches ago the LT build was dropped from 70 to 55s, but the MG had 10s added to the build time. The M20 takes almost a minute to build so at best it is out around 4m~30s. That gives it almost no time to pay itself off compared to the soviet flame car which can actually wipe units starting at the 3 min mark.

Only Thompson (tommy gun) Ranger have good DPS even at MID range.

They have around 93% DPS of LMG obers at range 20 and up to 138% higher DPS closer.

But is that is not really related to Riflemen.

Where did these numbers come from? Based off serelia the LMG does 12 DPS at 20 range while the Thompson do 5.8 DPS. At VET3 LMG does 20 while the Thompson do 7.7. There damage is good if they had a way to close in.

Agreed with this. Its not like Soviets where I can go Maxims, hit 2CP and then start pumping out Elite Infantry all day. The way USF is set up currently with its Tech Structure doesn't allow for Rangers or Airborne. If I already have Two-Three Rifleman Squads, a Rear Echelon, and an Officer I am pretty much good in the infantry department.

Rangers will bleed your MP dry, they were much more useful when they had 10% damage reduction as they didn't bleed as much. They are essentially more expensive Rifleman now with some gimmicks on them that aren't needed.

This is also one of the reasons why you see Pathfinder spam, even though they are worse than Rifleman, you could use them as a Rifle replacement. For Rangers to work they would have to be available at T0 and designed specifically around that like Panzerfusiliers. For example starting as a 4 man squad, Thompson upgrade would add 5th man to the squad or Unlocking Major would add 5th man to the Ranger Squad.

What about making the Ranger squad an upgrade to rifleman similar to the dozer for the sherman. It could unlock at CP2/3 and would be a straight improvement to the squad in rec acc and damage while maintaining 5man squad. It would probably be better to switch back to the Para Carbine profile so the upgrade causes the Ranger-Rifleman to play the same. Would be easier for user and enemy to understand how and where to engage.