Login

russian armor

USA is f****g broken

19 Nov 2014, 22:50 PM
#21
avatar of Gdot

Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1



Thats not goot advice...Theres ovbisouly a point in the game where you have to somewhat camp....like the guy who spammed 4 mgs early game

What is the reward for having to micro and try so hard for allies....nothing....i think ill just play axis....less work...EZ win


EZ win? According to Legends' numbers, allies have had the advantage in 1v1/2v2. That was before the October and November patches. Chances are they are skewed even more in allies favor.
19 Nov 2014, 22:52 PM
#22
avatar of ilGetUSomDay

Posts: 612

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Nov 2014, 22:50 PMGdot


EZ win? According to Legends' numbers, allies have had the advantage in 1v1/2v2. That was before the October and November patches. Chances are they are skewed even more in allies favor.


what?? go look at the win loss statistics thread from a little bit ago with the win loss ratios of the top 200 players were mapped out.
19 Nov 2014, 23:07 PM
#23
avatar of nukmasta

Posts: 23

Okay, I will do my best.


Before going into the list point by point I will preface it with this: Every faction has holes in its tech structure. Ostheer has no light tank, OKW has no generalist medium tank, Soviets have so many bad core units that they have to rely almost entirely on call-ins. As for your specific complaints...


Well technically USF does have the mortar halftrack and pack howitzer. Both are definitely under performing at the moment but that's not an error in faction design, just balance. I suggest voting for those units here and here. Furthermore, OKW has no mortar AT ALL.

-The mortar is for infantry company...thats not viable....OKW does have a mortar/howister whatever it is...assault cannon..whatever.. and you can build it t2 and the pack is T3 and very expensive and very RNG based and very slow.

It doesn't come that late. Again, OKW is somewhat lacking in this area too. However I certainly think it should perform better for a unit with such a high price tag and tech requirements. You can vote for it here.

-It does come late, and it costs 280, and sucks pretty bad. You have to chose between if you want MG or AT okw does have kubel which is better than any MG early game (where mgs are needed)

I'm pretty sure USF can get grenades faster than any other faction. Airborne can also throw cooked nades without doing the research at all. Plus grenade research gives USF the extremely useful smoke rifle nade. I think this is arguably one of the areas in which USF actually excels compared to other factions.

-The nades are ok....but they just cost too much to throw and tech...its ok but doesnt fit into the meta. Airborne doesnt count unless you want to remove that mortar statement above, again, its a doctrine

Well, neither axis faction has demo charges at all and USF does have access to them through armor company or mechanized, later on. So really I don't think this argument holds much water.

-Neither allied faction has anything to demo why would they need them?(please dont say RE bunker)...and again you need assault engines or para....both doctrinal


Paratroopers are excellent late game infantry.

-Doctrinal

The american AT Gun is definitely lacking. The Jackson could probably use a boost to its AP rounds ability and acceleration but otherwise I think it's fine.
-I can agree

Pathfinder and Mechanized artillery are arguably the best off-map artillery abilities in the game. The priest performs well in its role in my opinion, which is rare for mobile artillery so I am in no hurry to go changing it. Other USF indirect fire units have already been discussed.

-Where are you getting the ammo for this if you have to use ammo for everything? to take out one MG you have to spend for smoke and nade....then they just come back and get it with engy...rinse and repeat


I certainly don't play defensively at all, and I have had my share of success.


Defending against waves and waves of allied assaults is not really sitting back and doing nothing if you ask me.

-Maneuvering at guns and mgs isnt that hard

I completely disagree but since these complaints really have nothing to do with USF at all I won't even bother to address them. The coh1 vs coh2 debate is pointless in my opinion. Play the game you like the best, nobody is forcing your hand.

-It does, it changes the whole meta...along with the true sight thing....It makes turtling easier to do..also i was mainly talking in comparison to wher, but i am talking about both factions
19 Nov 2014, 23:08 PM
#24
avatar of nukmasta

Posts: 23



what?? go look at the win loss statistics thread from a little bit ago with the win loss ratios of the top 200 players were mapped out.


Hahah....what was it?

Top 200 were axis or what? :p
19 Nov 2014, 23:18 PM
#25
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

-Maneuvering at guns and mgs isnt that hard

I think you should tread carefully making statements like that. If it's so easy, you obviously have had no problem climbing the leaderboard then right? Are you in the top ten by now? I'd love to 1v1 so you can show me, I'll go USF and you will stomp me no problem.

As for the rest of your post, you make some decent points. USF does rely rather heavily on doctrinal features to remain viable in the mid to late game, and is quite munitions expensive as well. But I'd also argue that soviets suffer from the former, and ostheer from the latter.

I'm all for changes to USF to give them a fighting chance, but it's important to articulate that in a reasonable and constructive way.
19 Nov 2014, 23:20 PM
#26
avatar of CasTroy

Posts: 559

Theres ovbisouly a point in the game where you have to somewhat camp....like the guy who spammed 4 mgs early game


That´s why I advised you to read the U.S.-Forces Guides to learn something about the right counters. In case of MG42/MG34 for example M20 Utility Car or M15A1 AA Half-track.

...i think ill just play axis....less work...EZ win


But you will have to have the courage to improve your skills of your own accord.
19 Nov 2014, 23:58 PM
#27
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

Snip


I don't know why you think that all units that are doctrinal should be discounted. The doctrinal choices Romeo suggested were all from the basic three commanders that every player has. I'm sure you would still count the Tiger as a useful unit for wehr even though it is doctrinal too, and doesn't come standard to new players anymore since the warspoil changes AFAIK.
Vaz
20 Nov 2014, 00:07 AM
#28
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158

I mostly agree with Romeo. The design for USF tools are sufficient, just some of them need some tweaks to fully fit in to the multiplayer environment. Other problems are issues with other factions efficiency just being too damned good. Riflemen work well throughout the game, but since okw's obers are broken (which I'm sure that comment about lategame infantry came from), it seems like there are no viable late game infantry. That's a problem with OKW, not USF. You really need to amass a lot of experience with USF to fully understand it, they have the highest micro tax, but there is usually an answer to all problems.
20 Nov 2014, 06:13 AM
#29
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Rifles should scale slightly better with vet, .50 cal needs a buff, and Jackson needs a pen buff.

Stuart could use some love, too.
20 Nov 2014, 06:39 AM
#30
avatar of Flamee

Posts: 710

Funny how OP doesn't even want to see any other opinions. You have made your own opinion and even with valid arguments you refuse to see otherwise.

I ask what's the point of this thread if OP refuses to accept any help? Also one thing missing here is that where do you face these difficulties, in which games? 1vs1 or team games?

In my own opinion: USF is in quite good place now. It can be really strong faction but it requires a lot of micro. I only have experience lately from 1vs1 and 2vs2 with USF.
20 Nov 2014, 14:52 PM
#31
avatar of Gdot

Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Nov 2014, 06:39 AMFlamee
Funny how OP doesn't even want to see any other opinions. You have made your own opinion and even with valid arguments you refuse to see otherwise.

I ask what's the point of this thread if OP refuses to accept any help? Also one thing missing here is that where do you face these difficulties, in which games? 1vs1 or team games?

In my own opinion: USF is in quite good place now. It can be really strong faction but it requires a lot of micro. I only have experience lately from 1vs1 and 2vs2 with USF.



Yes. Everyone gets so up in arms when you say 'post you're playercard'. I don't see what the big deal is, it gives perspective. No one is saying that your opinion isn't valued but it certainly does shed light onto the 'big picture'.
20 Nov 2014, 14:59 PM
#32
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395

The problem is axis can hold 20% of the map, throw down a fuel cache, and lock down with mgs. You cannot break the last bastion of axis, especially not above 1v1!
20 Nov 2014, 15:00 PM
#33
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

The problem is axis can hold 20% of the map, throw down a fuel cache, and lock down with mgs. You cannot break the last bastion of axis, especially not above 1v1!


How come allies win too?
20 Nov 2014, 15:03 PM
#34
avatar of Gdot

Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1

The problem is axis can hold 20% of the map, throw down a fuel cache, and lock down with mgs. You cannot break the last bastion of axis, especially not above 1v1!


These blanket statements are not helpful. Also, OKW has no cache or doctrinal mg.
20 Nov 2014, 15:14 PM
#35
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

If you would just post a replay instead...
BTW play axis and move up to top 10 if it's that easy.
20 Nov 2014, 16:13 PM
#36
avatar of sneakking

Posts: 655

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post20 Nov 2014, 15:03 PMGdot
Also, OKW has no cache or doctrinal mg.


Luckily both doctrines that have MG34s are pretty strong.
20 Nov 2014, 16:44 PM
#37
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647

i think they are at a very good spot now, USF, apart from zooks being mostly useless and capt tier being rather awkward, they are still a very capable force.

the broken ones are mostly, on the axis side. from a 2v2 perspective, jadgtiger ends all anti tank advantage that USF has which is range and firepower on jacksons. moreover, okw/ost has panthers that are armoured to the point to resist other anti tank options quite reliably. meaning to say, axis can effectively nullify jacksons which are the real AT in usf, then roll you with more mobile armour like panthers.

if that isnt enough, there's also obers that shits on all infantry, stukas for indirect fire supremacy.

not saying that allies dont have their fair share of tricks, they do with double snipers, p47s, b4s and isu152, but they are nothing compared to amount of firepower okw teams can field with jagd, obers and/or stukas when they are reign supreme in their own respective departments.
20 Nov 2014, 16:54 PM
#38
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

I'm still stuck with the base 3 commanders for USF, and I must say, I am getting bored with having to play Airborne every time to have a fighting chance. Stupid War Spoils gives me nothing 90% of the time, and maybe a light tank reload bulletin for that other 10%. As such, anything other than the base three commanders is a suggestion to spend money to have a better time playing. Otherwise USF has to play those until War Spoils gives them an alternative.

OKW is probably the only faction I struggle against as Allies, since they've got a vehicle MG, they've got Obers, non-doc KTs, and Pumas AND Luchs.

There is little to no units with any kind of shock value as USF. Assault engies are so far the closest thing in that they can sometimes throw off the standard starting sturmpio-and-kubel-on-fuel combo. Every other unit the USF fields comes in time with, or after, when Axis has access to their hard counters.

Pumas alone nullify just about every USF unit except for the Jackson.

And this is why USF has to rely on overwhelming force. They simply can't counter anything directly AND reliably. As such they have to just win by sheer overwhelming force. Anything else is kind of a loss for USF.
20 Nov 2014, 17:28 PM
#39
avatar of keithsboredom

Posts: 117

From my albeit limited experience with USF like other people have said you have to play them <b><u>VERY aggressively!!</u></b> and try to effectively win the game as quickly as possible.

As for the lack of some core units, first off this is very typical of asymmetrically balanced games. Apart from that fact Romeo's post really nailed all the points very well.

USF indirect fire units (besides the priest IMO) and USF late game armor answers need some fine tuning.
20 Nov 2014, 18:49 PM
#40
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

I REALLY enjoy playing with USF. I think they have an answer to almost everything Krauts can throw at them. You just have to tech properly, choose the appropriate commander and anticipate your opponent's actions. In teams games especially, USF late game can keep up with Jacksons, Bulldozer Shermans, Paratroopers, Howitzers, .50cal and off course your veteran rifles with bars and smokes grenade upgrades. The faction just requires more micro and timely retreats and not meant for click and attack like the German armies.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

464 users are online: 464 guests
9 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
151 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45061
Welcome our newest member, karsovan85
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM