To me the worst is the fact they can't really pick team weapons + are terrible at finishing off retreating AT guns etc. Also they are too dependent on cover. They should be able to buid cover themselves. Its quite funny to give really strong tommies the ability to build sandbags and not to give it to a relatively weak unit which is terrible at fighting without it. The worst is how mapcover dependendent and predictable you become because of it. |
Tbh I'd love relic to introduce the possibility to play same fractions against each other. This would give real satisfaction in winning and cut all usually biased discussions. Players could play eg us vs us and then ost vs ost. This way there would be no impolite and ridiculous dicussions about balance and real skills of the players. I don't think it would stop ppl playing different fractions against one another. It would complement coh nicely I'm. |
I also see no appeal to it - I have the same opinion as the author of the post. With many ost units its similar. Legends about them make them strong, but when you look at real stats and battlefield performance they are usually worse than their allied counterparts. The thing is that very often they are used by really skilled players and that may make an impression of good equipment. |
I play 1v1 only. I'm not an ost fanboy to make it clear. I like all fractions. I haven't bought the brits yet but played against them a few times. The conclusions are that you have to be much better skilled that your opponent to win. Another option is they make some super mistakes. You can't lose almost any units/manpower cause then you're doomed. Even if you win a few skirmishes in a row and use some really clever tactics and micro, one granade from your opponent and the game may be over for you. Ost units are sooooo much more fragile and really expensive to tech and buy. Its bad with inf. but even worse with vehicles. If your opponent is patient and doesn't overextend there's no way you can win. Only really bad players will let you destroy their tanks. Instead they will piecemeally kill your grens or panzergrens, mgs and so on. As coh 1 veteran, having played the game from when it was first released i have to say that ost/wehr balance has never been worse in 1v1. I have a feeling the game is biased against ost, which is a shame. That's why you shouldn't worry if you lose playing as wehr in 1v1. Its just difficult to win. |
True. He also had an AT gun. I lost my armor piecemealy. First I lost my scoutcar but it more than paid for itself. Then I lost PIV as well and was a bit surprised how quick it was (maybe due to su76 buff). Than I lost a tiger but it was almost game over because of VP when it came so it doesn't count. Anyway it was was my first game against soviets in the new patch and my impression is that they are extremaly durable (their inf.); the seem to hold quite long under fire before they start losing models. Anyway now I played a few more games and got used to it. It seems that a shrecked gren squad is a must and they should be built earlier than before. Also now I use 2 paks as a rule against soviets and delay tech to build stronger tier 2. I don't have too many commanders but it seems that cas or puma commander seem to be my best options. Generally tiger seems to be much weaker relatively and it doesn't seem to be cost effective. These are my impression - unfortunately I have no replay. |
Hi. Today I faced 2 kv8 flame + 2 su76 combined with conscripts and shocks. What would be the best counter? I had 2 paks and 1 squad of shreck panzergrens. Real problems on an urban map.I'd like to ask for some suggestions.
|
Hi,
I'd just like to say I can't agree with the statement that USF is the worst fraction in coh history. In my opinion, it is actually the best. I'm wrtiting from 1v1 perspective. It is most flexible, most forgiving, and simply the best. I don't find the last patch changes bad. On the contrary, I feel relic did a god job moving the game in the right direction. Some of the ways in which USF could win were absolutely ridiculous and required almost no skll at all. Still I believe USF is a bit OP. The difference is that now you basically can't afford to lose that many units and win. One also has to think about resources before using abilities such as, for example, throwing a nade (do I want to throw a few nades or maybe save for a call in arty or p47, or maybe I'll plant some mines, or buy some bazooka or mg upgrades?) etc - something other fractions always had to do. I believe that still some usf abilities are too cheap. I'd advise everybody to play more patiently and look for ways to counter your opponents once you come across better players rather than complain about imbalance. Try other fractions for a change and see how difficult it is to counter a skilled USF player. Also experiment with other stratgies - try to look for cover more - something other fractions had to do to confront USF. Many USF players were used to beating opponents who were better skilled than them just because they threw rifles in the face of mgs and lost less manpower tha eg ostheer and despite wasting a lot o munitions on missed barrages and nades. Now it is a bit different but not too much. |
Hi
Coming back to the topic. For me saying whether mg42 is OP or not is a bit too soon. In 1v1 USF could attack it frontally and win and it was a serious problem. One thing I could never understand is why all balance changes revolve around making mgs stronger or weaker. To me if it turns out it's too powerful they should consider making it more expensive (say 280 manpower maybe even 300 or more) rather than reduce its impact. What do you think? |
Maybe the game was different. Jeep could scout, Rifles were cheaper and had more models, weapons teams came out earlier, and the USF had snipers. Plus global BAR upgrade, plus Motor Pool. USF was way more spammy in vCoH. Not the case here.
But wehr had volks which supplemented mgs. Still back in coh 1 US was easier to play with than wehr - I has always been the tendency in this game. I still remember a pershing supported by callipe sherman (wow) |
Hi
I used to play ost a lot as I like playing the weakest fraction in the game. Very often it meant one mistake and you lose. I was criticized here on the forum and started playing the USF more. I keep winning a lot of games even not yet being able to utilize units to their full potential (for this you need some feel of them which comes with time). Mostly I use just stock units without doctrine units. To me it is the easiest fraction to play with - forgiving a lot with huge manpower and munitions float potential. Abilities are cheap and the flexibility is great. Usually I'm able to outnumber my opponent in infantry on the field by 1/3 and and have twice more tanks/vehicles on the field. Actually I even feel sorry for my opponents when I have a sherman with HE + 2 jacksons and face a lonely panther from okw. I'm not a funboy of any fraction but I really feel that relic did a good job with the last patch - at least they moved the balance in the right direction, but still I feel USF are a much better fraction than ost. I play 1v1. |