Profile of OrionHunter88

Sprint is useful for flanking behind enemy tank and popping AT grenade. That's about all I use it for but it is useful for that.

From what both of you have said seems like the main reason to go armored over rifle is just to counter the current 2.5- early T3 meta axis vehicle push.

Are there other options for dealing with that? 57MM AT gun? Bazookas? Stuart?

Well I don't just mean artillery commanders. But there are some commanders that provide mobile artillery. And there are still some situations in which static artillery can be used to some effect until the opponent builds up enough CP to flatten it.

I'm more talking about artillery in general: p-werfs, walking stuka, katy, Priest, Sexton, etc etc.

How it grinds the game in to slog and while you're killing units you are not necessarily taking ground and "moving the ball forward" so to speak.

Artillery.
The focus of most war documentaries/movies/books etc tends to focus on infantry, tanks, aircraft, ships, cavalry etc. But since the dawn of the industrial age artillery has been the biggest killer on the battlefield by a wide margin.

Back to COH2 - Artillery is in one of the best places its been since launch. Each faction has decent artillery options that can be used to great effect. It can lay waste to infantry, finish of snared tanks, smash emplacements, and deny whole areas.

So here's my question - how much does artillery actually help to win a game?

I've noticed with myself and other players that it's possible to get into an 'artillery rut'. Once you've got 2-3 pieces of whatever artillery you are using + whatever commander abilities you can just cycle from once piece to another and attempt to find the perfect target. All the while steadily ignoring the frontline. While artillery is great and can wrack up the kills it seems to me that it effectively changes the stance of players from aggressive to defensive. And rather than using artillery as an ends to a mean it because a mini-game all on its own while the bigger strategic picture is on the wayside. Sure, you're putting pressure on the enemy but you cease taking territory and moving the front line forward. I am wary of artillery commanders (as much as I enjoy using them) for this reason. Unless you are disciplined to not let the artillery side show derail your play style you should avoid artillery commanders.

I'd like to see how other compare and contrast these two commanders. I feel like there's only room in my roster for one or the other (although this thread may change that belief, perhaps I just need to let go of Airborne...). In any case, this is strictly for team games. 1v1 in CoH just isn't my thing. Armor and Rifle are interesting because they have quite a few similarities, but also several key differences. There are a couple of asymmetrical comparisons below as the companies are a bit asymmetrical.

My questions (also the TLR part if you don't want to read my analysis):
So what do you think. Are the two companies interchangeable? Would you have both in your lineup? What situation(maps, opponents, allies etc) would you rather have one or the other?

My analysis:
AE vs RE with flamethrowers.
They both have the ability to acquire a flamethrower infantry. This is done in different ways and both have the pros and cons. REs are cheaper than AEs and since you start the game with one you do not need to drop MP just to get one unlike AEs which cost a whopping 280MP. The squads have comparable squishiness although RE does get a 5th man at vet 2. AEs of course have the legendary demo charge and the handy AT mine. In terms of needing a flamethrower both squads do the job about the same - sure AE might get a squad wipe due to those nasty grease guns, but the RE will still displace units from a building. AE do have more utility but it comes at a cost. I'd say Armor has the advantage in this category but only if you really use the AEs demo charges and mines. RE's equipped with flamethrowers are adequate building clearers.

Elite vehicle crew, rifleman flares, fire up
Rifle comapny clearly wins in terms of added abilities. Elite vehicle crew is a complete waste. Use those 90 MU on another demo charge or just throw another nade or something. Flares are handy as is the fire up ability. Not saying I use either just a whole ton, but I'd say both are far and away better than elite vehicle crew.

white phosphorus vs 240mm
As much as I enjoy dropping 240mm hell on kraut positions it's a frustratingly RNG and super expensive barrage that is more about potential area denial than actually killing anything (although it can and it is awesome when it does). White phosphorus on the other hand is one of the most useful off map barrages in the USF line up, especially vs Ostheer with all their danged team weapons. It's also incredibly nasty in that it slows down retreating units so if timed and cast properly you can get some pretty devastating squad wipes. WP barrage is also available much sooner.

Easy 8 vs M10 and 105mm Sherman.
This is the meat of the comparison right here I'd say. Easy 8 is one of the best all around tanks in the game. However, it's not exactly cheap, it's not the best tank for killing other tanks, and it's not the best tank for killing infantry, it's also not the best tank for spearheading an assault. But, but... it can do all of those things respectably and it's one of the only ones that can. It also has to be constructed not just called in, but it is available as soon as you get a Major and is not CP dependent like M10 or 105mm sherman.
Contrast that with the M10/M4 105mm. M10 is great, truly great, one of my favorite units in CoH2. Its fast, has good range, and (something often overlooked with tanks) it has a very fast reload. It also has good vet abilities, and even after the price hike it's still a fairly inexpensive vehicle. This is usefully because it's a great 'suicide mission tank' when you know that to kill that germany heavy tank limping away the only thing you can do is sacrifice a tank or let them repair nothing does the job better and dealing a coup-de-gras than M10s. The main thing is that it is very efficient at countering both Ost and OKW midgame tanks. Heck, a small swarm of M10s is on of the best anti-elephant/jagdtiger tactics around if it's executed properly. You'll still need Jacksons though to fend of tigers/king tigers. As an added benefit it's also useful for running infantry over, but it's anti-infantry capabilities stop there.
Now, the 105mm sherman *sigh* it has it's uses. I wouldn't say it's a particularly great tank, it's not bad either. I still think M10 works best with stock M4 set to anti-infantry rounds.

When comparing these three though I'd have to point out - Easy 8 is far better in tight spaces than M10. M10 needs space to move around - especially since m10s are usually run in packs of 2-3. 105mm Sherman is handy against massive OKW blobs and its one of the better tanks at wiping AT guns from the front, but there are other ways to deal with those threats.

They should be called 'Support engineers' rather than 'Assault engineers'.

If German is using garrisons early then get flamethrower. If not then save Mu to plant demos because hes German and will garrison buildings at some point. At which time you get to execute his squad for 90MU. Best thing about AE are those lovely demo charges.