no... but it will lose to a P4 GUARANTEED at any range and so will 3 T-34s lose against 2 P4s despite costing more fuel and significantly more manpower.... that is not the definition of "cost efficient"....
Hahaha. Another gbem post. Not understanding what the word "guaranteed" means.
This isn't true. Last time I checked the stats when comparing a 4man gren and 4man tommy squad, the grens had better stats with most things. Better damage, better accuracy, better reload times, rate of fire (out of cover) This is why I said, the UKF player has to get the bolster squad, or else struggle with weaker infantry. True they're better when in cover, but it's easy to counter that with things like grenades, assault inf, arty, ect
Grens have like what, 4 to 5% better dps against out of cover tommies, which already makes Grens worse cos their RA is 6% worse and they have a higher reinforce cost per model.
That's against out-of-cover tommies
. I don't know how bad you guys must be to keep using the basis of comparison as out-of-cover Tommies, as if using cover was the hardest thing to do in the game and was somehow accessible only to world-class players. I learnt that in the tutorial and used it to beat the Normal AI. If your Tommies are out-of-cover every engagement, that's on you. The whole map is filled with cover for you to use.
Tommies are only a little better than grens when both are out of cover, but since you can literally build sandbags even if you don't want to use the 200+ pieces of terrain or map objects available, the massive cooldown bonus means that stock Tommies stomp stock Grens virtually all the time.
It's the rest of Ost (and doctrines) that can make it difficult for Brits to play vs Ost. Good MG42 play and fast Pgrens are what swing the advantage to Ost imo, but the ridiculous fake news that vanilla Grens can even compete with Tommies really needs to get stomped out.
wrong wrong and wrong again
1. 4 man grens even with 4 man IS... 4 man grens have 7% larger target size and have 8% less DPS but grens 12% cheaper and more importantly dont have their DPS halved while outside cover... this means IS have to stay in cover when fighting against grenaders which leaves them vulnerable to riflenades...
4 man grens > 4 man IS
2. 5 man grens are superior to IS despite their lower target size... same arguments from the 4 man case but this is because grenadiers get a G43 rifle which not only has significanly higher DPS than a normal grenadier KAR98 but also has the chance to proxy crit models... granted the upgrade is technically more expensive since it is done per squad and costs more than insignificant amount of munitions but grens still take the cake...
5 man grens > 5 man IS
3. the panther outclasses the comet in terms of anti armor... the panther has more HP penetration accuracy and ROF in exchange for slightly more armor more AOE and a bit of speed...
the comet normally outclasses the base panther in terms of anti infantry but the panther can equip the pintle MG42 which increases its anti infantry DPS dramatically pushing its DPS to around that of a comet
TLDR; panther outclasses comet in terms of anti armor and is even with the comet...
panther > comet
4. the stats for the cromwell are bugged and cannot be opened in https://coh2.serealia.ca/ but i am sure the panzer 4 can 1v1 the cromwell quite comfortably while still packing anti infantry power
panzer 4 > cromwell
5. if you think ost teching is horrible wait till you see SOV and OKW... OST actually has one of the cheapest tech costs in the game especially after its numerous buffs... you will find OST T3 to be quite a bit cheaper than SOV or OKW T3 by quite a margin
Wow. This rank 5000 analysis is beyond crazy. Fits the theme of a CODGUY thread I suppose.
1) The whole reason Ost sniper opener vs Brits is meta is cos Grens are so hopelessly outclassed by IS in terms of DPS, target size, and cost-efficiency. It's hilarious how ultra-bad players always talk about "needing to use cover" as if it's some horrible game-losing weakness. Erm no, you're SUPPOSED to use cover in the majority of situations.
2) 5 man Grens are OP cos you don't need to pay bolster to have 5 man, and you get a crazy RA buff + 1 G43 + free medkit. Most good players agree that 5 man Grens are OP, but that's a doctrine issue and not a faction issue.
3) Panther dps is "around that of a Comet" only if you intentionally attack ground somewhere else with your main cannon and refuse to use any abilities. Comet's main cannon + WP + nade vs Panther's pintle upgrade....yeah sure, "equal".
Fair enough, I've been playing long enough to where I should be top 10, but I'm not. However, when I play axis and other allied factions, I don't have these problems. I spent about a month not long ago playing soviets and didn't have a problem. The units were effective. Sniper is kind of slow to pull the trigger, but still got the job done. Still can't really do lol panther stuff, but tank battles were fine.
If you've tried Soviets (which are good in their own way, to be fair), you'll find that Riflemen are really obscenely good compared to pre-7 man Conscripts. Riflemen are the best mainline in the game and stomp grens and volks in a vacuum.
My biggest complaint with USF is that the roster isn't complete - no non-doc flamers, need to go m20 or use a doctrine just to lay "real" mines, no rocket artillery, no sniper counter. If your complaint had been that USF has restrictive teching and lacks many tactical options due to not having certain units, I'd have wholeheartedly agreed with you.
Tldr: USF units are very powerful, but the faction as a whole has plenty of weaknesses, some of which are irritating (retreating units getting stuck in the bloody pizza base) and some of which are way too painful, like not having flamers on a garrison-heavy map or having to rely on pack howie RNG to counter snipers.
By the way, in your initial post, you mentioned you kept REs at mid range. When flanking an MG you should run up to knife-range always. Especially with REs, who're practically only able to do damage when bayoneting people.
obers are actually powerful squads once they get the LMG34... no stock squad can stand up to the firepower of an LMG34 ober for too long and it takes doctrinal elites to survive it... granted there are some doctrinal elites that outclass them like falls and paratroopers... but falls and paras may be considered OP
Wait, you're saying that an upgraded elite infantry unit (which hits the field so late it's basically past the LV-phase) can defeat stock unvetted mainlines, assuming the enemy squad takes an engagement at a range which is optimal for the Obers?
It's not about I suck at USF. It's that ANYONE who plays USF will have to work harder than their opponent. If you are a 7/10 skill with other armies, you are a 5/10 skill with USF.
I've been winning games with USF even with 3 second input lag. In fact it's the only faction that can survive playing with so much lag. USF is literally the most forgiving faction to play. WC51 just sniping enemy infantry at obscene range. A-move 50 cals that win engagements by themselves. Free squads to buffer the ones you lose due to lag. Pack Howie auto-deleting enemies without me needing to micro it at all. Single Jackson zoning out a Tiger with ease even with significant input lag.
Well it certainly is the case that you suck at USF, and since you only play USF, you have a skewed perspective of it being "bad". If you decided to only play Ost or Soviets from now on, and continued being this bad, you would still be coming back to this forum and crying that Ost or Soviets were unplayable, with all their units "weaker than other factions".
He means assault engineers from armour company.
Codguy is right for once, there’s so many garbage tier and overpriced units in the USF roster that it’s ridiculous.
Paths cost 290mp and 30mp reinforce. They should lose one of the two sniper rifles to actually be able to equip weapons and get their vet 3 camo at vet 0 so that they can be an option vs snipers.
Rear Echelons are bad, which is a huge issue in the OKW matchup since they have Spios and can upgrade Volks early without upgrading racks, so ypu’re basically behind 1 combat squad and upgrades right from the get go.
Assault engineers are awful. They need to lose their 5th man and become cheaper and more durable.
The 75mm M4A3 should lose its switchable shells and become a competent medium tank.
I don't really agree entirely. I like assault engies but there simply isn't enough else in that doctrine to make them enticing. The problem doesn't lie with ass engies, which function pretty well as an early game assault squad. It's just a doctrine that's gotten overshadowed by far better ones.
Pathfinders aren't a viable combat squad by themselves, but they're amazing paired with a rifle squad since they have 2 scoped rifles. They're also pretty much a perfect fit for the doctrine they come in, giving you self-spotting 50 cals which I'm happy to pay the premium for.
RETs are really bad for their 25mp reinforce cost - that I agree. They're basically CEs without flamethrowers but can build green cover. I pretty much exclusively make them zook boys. Wouldn't mind their cost or reinforce cost being lowered.
USF has been the most difficult faction play in this game.
The problems USF have come from several overpriced/underpreforming units (RETs, Pathfinders, Combat Engineers for example) and a terrible and inflexible tech tree that greatly constrains the player in the early game.
Indeed. USF Combat Engineers are so bad, I literally can't even build them.
To me it's just as simple as everyone should have rocket arty stock. The blobbing in this game is too ridiculous, and rocket arty is one of the only reliable ways to punish that in the late game
You shouldn't have to choose a commander to counter something you see almost every game
Agreed on principle as well as for this case, every little bit counts towards making the game more balanced for all factions.
Hope COH3 doesn't follow the same stupid path of "glaring factional holes in basic functionality = faction flavour, herderrrr....."
Uhh no that's not even close to what I'm saying... It's not that the game will be over it's that if you get one AFTER a t70 (????) you're gonna have this thing called a p4 to deal with...
What? Well now you've lost me cause the AAHT is way better at fighting ground units than the quad. Can suppress on the move, and has the flak cannon to help against light tanks. It also arrives earlier...
Unintuitive in terms of having to reverse to go forward and to right click to reverse, and to constantly handbrake to maximise damage output. I'm not sure about the DPS vs infantry tbh, feels like quad does a lot better, but main point was ease of use and its resulting survivability. I like the quad - and I'm defending it against people who describe it as if it's "only good for AA".
I mean, if you could somehow build T70 and Luchs, no one would ever build Luchs. If you could somehow build both P4J and Cromwell, you'd pretty much never build the Cromwell. Quad is in an awkward spot because of Soviet T3 cost and because its rival for Anti-Infantry duty is the T70. That doesn't make it a bad unit "only having value as an AA unit".