Login

russian armor

Why USF so bad in tournaments?

PAGES (9)down
7 Aug 2019, 22:39 PM
#1
avatar of Riley

Posts: 230

In Anniversary classic tournament the USF was worse and had zero wins.

In the 2vs2 Masters Cup was a similar situation. I do not know the exact statistics, we are waiting for it from the organizers. But the closer the tournament approached the final, the less we saw the usf. Why so? After all, everyone yells about Jackson, Scott, and Pack Howitzer.

Why didn’t anyone choose the USF in the final?
7 Aug 2019, 23:31 PM
#2
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3697 | Subs: 1

Soviets + brits offer a much better combination of power and lategame. The pak howi may be too strong and so may be the jackson, but early game USF is always rifleman rifleman rifleman etc. Why do that when you can just buy the same amount of sections/penals and they roll everything far better.

Furthermore the USF doctrines are pretty meh outside of priest. There isn't anything there that matches the hilarious power levels of Jaegar armor/Spec ops/Guardrifle combined.

TL : DR Units may be too strong, faction overall still lacking certain things other factions have.
8 Aug 2019, 04:18 AM
#3
avatar of blancat

Posts: 788

Because rifleman is so cost-ineffective unit

Soviet and UKF have cost-effrctive long range unit but USF dont have it

And USF have few commander choice
Without priest and m1919, USF is just trash in team game
8 Aug 2019, 04:29 AM
#4
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 817

They are really good mid game, but can fall apart late game easily. If you don't go pershing to battle infantry you don't have a durable tank to push off infantry. Without a calliope good luck vs at gun spam or multiple mgs. Jacksons, scotts and shermans can all die if mismanged due to their low armor despite each having high damage potential.

They really need a doctrine to give them something game winning late game or it's tough to come back from a deficit or close out a tight game, sometimes you can choose wrong. I don't think top players who win ~70-90% of games want to use a faction that presents the risks it does.
8 Aug 2019, 05:39 AM
#5
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Because we saw the same games, with the same strats on the same maps every single game...

Because almost all of the maps played on this tourney were maps that do not really suit USF play. You only have riflemen hordes in the beginning and they bleed you bad. Most maps played were not viable for usf flanking play either, most maps were too narrow. Most doctrines are OK but they melt compared to late game Elefant and command p5. On other pool maps, usf does very well...

Now that we are on the subject, ukf didn't do too well on this tourney either. What we saw were players bolstering but not giving weapon upgrades, stalling for avre call-in without getting mobile at or tanks in the form of mediums or even fireflies first. Much of the UKF strength wasn't even used by these players...

Seen some really strange play I must say.
8 Aug 2019, 06:33 AM
#6
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1545

Because rifleman is so cost-ineffective unit

Soviet and UKF have cost-effrctive long range unit but USF dont have it

And USF have few commander choice
Without priest and m1919, USF is just trash in team game


Mostly this. Riflemen were nerfed in a couple of balance patches and USF hasn't been the same since.

I think it was the December Balance Patch that stuck a fork in this pig:

USF Riflemen now lose access to smoke grenades. This change will ensure that players continue fostering a mixed-squad army well into the late-game, and will also reward players more for using USF's elite infantry.
It must have been someone's attempt at humor after screwing USF over. There were no buff's to any of USF's "elite infantry", and nerfs for several USF crutch units like the HE Sherman and 50 cal.

The RA for most USF infantry seems too high for the price, maybe too high even regardless of price. Pairing up glass cannon tanks with glass infantry is a bad combination.

8 Aug 2019, 06:40 AM
#7
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4343

Glass infantry lol, they have around 0.66 ra, volks have 0.77 both at max vet (they even start with 0.97 at vet 0)

They are not bad in tournaments, they were just used less in the 2 vs 2 as they are high risk high reward there

On 1 vs 1 they are still top tier
8 Aug 2019, 06:52 AM
#8
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2845 | Subs: 1

but early game USF is always rifleman rifleman rifleman etc. Why do that when you can just buy the same amount of sections/penals and they roll everything far better.


Why not simply say riflemen are cost ineffective cuz as far as I see all 5 factions are "spamming" 4 mainline infantry squads on early game.
8 Aug 2019, 06:54 AM
#9
avatar of Maret

Posts: 693



USF Riflemen now lose access to smoke grenades. This change will ensure that players continue fostering a mixed-squad army well into the late-game, and will also reward players more for using USF's elite infantry.

Because long-range non-doc smoke for regular infantry srew any HMG? Ye, you are still need gren upgrade for this, but let's count non-doc smoke for factions:

USF: RE (after gren upgrade), officers(3), m20, sherman, scoty, mortar, pak howi(?) - total 8(9) units with smoke
UKF: AEC, cromwell, churchill or comet (you could choose only one unit), mortar pit. - total 4
OKW: Puma, Leig - total 2
OST: Mortar - total 1
SU: Mortar - total 1

You still think USF lack of smoke in their army? Don't forget that USF got t0 mortar to have counter early HMG.
8 Aug 2019, 07:15 AM
#10
avatar of petal

Posts: 21

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2019, 06:52 AMEsxile


Why not simply say riflemen are cost ineffective cuz as far as I see all 5 factions are "spamming" 4 mainline infantry squads on early game.


I am not sure about if it is cost effective or not. But i think they go three rifle because their tech is inf.
8 Aug 2019, 08:27 AM
#11
avatar of Riley

Posts: 230

Because rifleman is so cost-ineffective unit

Soviet and UKF have cost-effrctive long range unit but USF dont have it

And USF have few commander choice
Without priest and m1919, USF is just trash in team game


Exactly.
8 Aug 2019, 08:38 AM
#12
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2161 | Subs: 1

There were plenty of UKF/USF combos used. Just not in the final. One thing that really holds USF back in tournaments is that many games are played on either Crossing or Rails, both maps are terrible for USF.
8 Aug 2019, 09:13 AM
#13
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2845 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2019, 07:15 AMpetal


I am not sure about if it is cost effective or not. But i think they go three rifle because their tech is inf.


Point is not there, ShadowLink mentioned that USF can only spam riflemen early on but all factions do that as well with much better results.
8 Aug 2019, 09:23 AM
#14
avatar of petal

Posts: 21

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2019, 09:13 AMEsxile


Point is not there, ShadowLink mentioned that USF can only spam riflemen early on but all factions do that as well with much better results.


Got your point.
8 Aug 2019, 09:26 AM
#15
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4343

Are guys sucking at each other ? U all say the rifle man are cost ineffective or glass canon, but u didn’t post a single stats
8 Aug 2019, 11:00 AM
#16
avatar of Riley

Posts: 230

Soviets + brits offer a much better combination of power and lategame. The pak howi may be too strong and so may be the jackson, but early game USF is always rifleman rifleman rifleman etc. Why do that when you can just buy the same amount of sections/penals and they roll everything far better.

Furthermore the USF doctrines are pretty meh outside of priest. There isn't anything there that matches the hilarious power levels of Jaegar armor/Spec ops/Guardrifle combined.

TL : DR Units may be too strong, faction overall still lacking certain things other factions have.


And what do you think the USA lacks?

Your words are strange, a faction can have very strong units, but at the same time its still lose.
8 Aug 2019, 11:21 AM
#17
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 643

There were plenty of UKF/USF combos used. Just not in the final. One thing that really holds USF back in tournaments is that many games are played on either Crossing or Rails, both maps are terrible for USF.


+1
People should also keep in mind that some games with USF were close, its not that the faction got steamrolled. And one of the best teamplay actions came from USF players who gave tanks to their mate. No other faction can do that.
8 Aug 2019, 12:06 PM
#18
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3228

USF thrives on mobility and maneuver and the tournament was played mostly on tight, laney grindfest maps.

Therefore, the factions better suited to slow attrition were chosen.
8 Aug 2019, 12:28 PM
#19
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2446 | Subs: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2019, 12:06 PMLago
USF thrives on mobility and maneuver and the tournament was played mostly on tight, laney grindfest maps.

Therefore, the factions better suited to slow attrition were chosen.


Also, with the need for rocket artillery in high level games on lane maps, the Soviets are an obvious pick for their stock Katyusha. And with Brits arguably being the best Allied faction right now, especially on those lane maps, it's only logical these two factions get picked over USF. Despite how well USF can perform on a regular basis. If the tourney had been played on the bigger maps, like Vaux Farmlands or Fields of Winnekendonk, I'm quite sure we would've seen more USF.
8 Aug 2019, 13:48 PM
#20
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3697 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2019, 11:00 AMRiley


And what do you think the USA lacks?

Your words are strange, a faction can have very strong units, but at the same time its still lose.


I don't like the fact that USF is essentially required to build riflemen until they tech, and when they tech they also get infantry squads. It's simply too much infantry and leaves very little room for alternate infantry (pathfinders/ass engies) or elite infantry (paras/rangers). By the time you actually get to major, you've got roughly 6 infantry squads. Typically OKW builds only ever run 5 infantry and try and fill up with support teams, but you're basically required to build 6 with USF. And then you don't get 1 of your support teams with tech.

Basically I don't like being required to play with infantry I don't want and your support teams are locked behind heavier paywalls than all other factions. The units within said paywalls are very strong and nice, but getting to them takes a lot.

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2019, 06:52 AMEsxile


Why not simply say riflemen are cost ineffective cuz as far as I see all 5 factions are "spamming" 4 mainline infantry squads on early game.


Because I don't think they're cost ineffective. The unit isn't designed like all other mainlines in the game i.e. to fight at long range, which all our maps are centered around. It's part of the reason why USF get ultra dumpstered on heavy longrange maps like langreskaya and crossing in the woods. Too say their cost ineffective would be to say they're garbage at all ranges for price, when infact they're only marginally close to volks at long.
PAGES (9)down
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
  • Oberkommando West flag |Zeva| The Angry Dutchman
  • U.S. Forces flag Nicko
uploaded by Stijndee

Board Info

151 users are online: 2 members and 149 guests
Panther, RollingStone
66 posts in the last 24h
588 posts in the last week
2969 posts in the last month
Registered members: 27972
Welcome our newest member, plumba333hf
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM