Profile of Leepriest

Jump back to quoted post29 Sep 2014, 06:36 AMSexualSalamanca

No one said the US only faces OKW. But if you're acting like OST would have much more trouble countering a T0 .50 cal then you're sadly mistaken.

Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2014, 04:20 AMbutterfingers158

That's all well and good, but it kind of feels that USF is missing more "stuff" than the other factions.

No stock "elite" infantry (I know Penals are meh but they fit the bill)
*Kinda sorta countered by Rifles being the best stock infantry, but Rifles can't stand up to Axis elites outside of doctrinal LMGs.

No heavy tank
* Obvious. Jacksons are strong, but whether that is enough is up for debate.

Lack of mines
*Only faction with mines locked behind a tech choice and no anti-infantry mine at all. The doctrinal light AT mines are bad, and I think bugged as well. Could counter by saying USF is only faction with non-doctrinal tank traps. I'd trade any day.

No Rocket Artillery
* No real mortar either, just the overpriced Pack Howie and the terrible doctrinal Halftrack. Priest is supposed to fill this gap I guess, but is doctrinal and in my opinion worse than the Katyusha and Stuka (but better than the Panzerwerfer).

Lack of flamers, snipers, fast mg's, and the list goes on.

Jump back to quoted post22 Sep 2014, 13:30 PMAvNY

I used to joke that it was a business plan to make a game that gives Wehrmacht/Nazi fanbois a hardon. Weirdly I am now actually starting to believe it.

When one argues about capability disparities the response is "historically this was the case!" When one wants to point out the historical deficiencies of German super-material the response is "this is a game!"

By late 1944 there were no such thing as ubersoldaten. A green US unit would outperform a green German unit, and in the case of US troops who had been in combat they would outperform better equipped green Wehrmacht troops.

If they wanted difference, there would be more similarities in the faction cores (though small differences would definitely stand out) and much bigger differences in the commanders. Artillery is a good example. The German artillery was relatively fast to respond, very accurate, but pretty lightweight in hitting. Russian artillery was very slow to respond (though when timed with an offensive quite timely), not very accurate, but devastating in quantity and damage when it did come. British artillery was quite fast to respond, not as accurate as German artillery, but much more powerful. And US artillery was almost as fast to respond as the British and slightly faster than the German, very accurate (IF maps were available to the troops, which they usually were) and very powerful

(Historical note: The US had ample 105s and 155s attached at the divisional and regimental level as well as some 203mm guns at the corps level. The fire missions and the artillery structure were such that anyone who had heard the fire mission (given in map coordinates and time for it to land) was able to quickly join in regardless of their caliber and position. All they needed was to be in range and have available tubes and ammunition.

"Time on Target" Meant you could have multiple tubes worth of 105, 155, 203, 120mm mortar, 80mm mortar, etc all landing in the same place pretty much AT THE SAME TIME.)

Jump back to quoted post22 Sep 2014, 06:39 AMWhySooSerious

Like the mobile artillery gun. It comes with the 50 cal top gunner.