USF was balanced around having smoke on rifleman since Rifles were supposed to be the most versatile mainline in the game. Everything since then has been attempting to bandaid the removal of that along with shitty tech choices.
Mortar is literally a smoke machine, you ask it to bombard a building and there is a good chance that it will miss.
MG was originally designed to be aggressive with fast placement and pick up but bad arc, that was nerfed since it wasn't fair but bad arc was kept.
Pak howi was supposed to be mid/late game bleeder and the aoe was nerfed hard, now you need two and sight for them to pay off which is quite an investment.
Stuart has some of the worst AI performance but it is ok because it has high armor which is high enough against 222/Luchs but useless against snares/Puma/At gun. Its high armor serves no purpose, I would rather have the armor dropped and improve AI performance so that in can actually be used to bleed opponent.
LMG was nerfed to just one since they traded to well, despite the fact that at range most of the Rifleman don't contribute damage. Long range squads literally force Axis out of comfort zone so why wouldn't you pick Paths if they are the only viable option.
Pretty much this. Everything on spot perfectly. It was all cookie-cutting-band-aid balance which led to discrepancies. LMG on Rifles is pretty bad in 2v2+. Well, maybe not "Bad", but definitely not optimal. In 1v1s it can still be used as the fighting there is mostly medium range, where the rest of the rifle squad with carbines will contribute. Generally putting LMGs on rifles in 2v2+ is sub-optimal. You have 4 models that are close range and one model that is long range. Why not have 5 models that are close range and use more micro to close in. This is where pathfinders come in.... less micro for that long range firepower.
People play pathfinders because it's easy, and most Axis players do not invest into LVs besides the 222. Going full paths without rifles is just begging to get pushed back by LV spam. Paths also allow you to scout out the pio/MG42 before they spot you, and on a lot of teamgame maps, that's a Godsend given how the MG42s arc is extremely wide and suppression kicks in instantly in most cases.
And finally it's easier to micro as paths are long range oriented. With rifles you need to micro much more than just put the paths behind some sort of cover and let them slug it out, whereas rifles you need to close, risk MG arcs and whatnot. I mean, 1 in 15 games I play Airborne and it's much much easier than the Heavy Cav which I love the most. MG42 spams? No problem. Grens/volks long range slugfests? No problem. Less micro? Great. I only build one pathfinder though.
All in all, paths are meta in teamgames because they are so much easier to play. I have yet to see a map where infantry engagements begin at close ranges so that Rifles can actually utilize their close range specialty. Not to mention MG42s locking down entire sectors with their arc. (and the USF mortar is beyond sh*t and overlaps with pak howi/scott, so it's actually better to play around the MG42 until you get proper indirects)
The only annoying thing about the USF/UKF sidetech racks is that you have to manually pick them up in base. Otherwise it's a valid sidetech that does not weaken USF in any way. It would be better if you also had the option like captain/lieutenant to upgrade one/two BARs/Zooks (or just pick them up, your choice). Especially with the pizza base where you shift-click to take up the weapon(or two) and go to the frontline, only to notice 20 seconds later that the extremely annoying/fu**ing PIZZA base is blocking you and each other. If only Relic allowed a pizza base re-design. Aneurysm-inducing.
Other than that, the side techs are completely valid and legit for USF/UKF
Stat wise, best TD in the game is Jackson, followed by SU85 if you get them to vet 3. Firefly is actually the weakest on vet3.
Both Jackson and SU85 get insane penetration buffs, while firefly dont. On top of that vet 3 firefly takes 12 seconds to deal 480 damage (2 hits), SU-85 takes ~12 seconds to deal 480 damage (3 hits) and Jackson can deal 4 hits in 12 seconds.
Basically Fireflies are only good at alpha striking, after that they are objectively the weakest ones.
And alpha strikes are what matters most. I know the basic math behind each one points to the FF being the weakest, but in reality, who stays around after two shots in teamgames? (if you play 3v3+) Have you ever seen a chasing Jackson or SU85 in a non-hail-Mary-dive scenario? Most of the times, people tolerate 2 shots on their tanks.
And where did you get that vet3 Jackson deals 4 hits in 12 seconds with a reload time of ~ 4.6 seconds? It's 3 shots, not 4. If it didn't have the wind-up/down time, then it would deal 4 hits in 12 seconds.
So basically all deal the same amount but the FF needs less shots. So needing less shots also means less hits to bounce, but it also has lower penetration..... BUUUT it gets tulips.... So ....it all evens out. Jackson deals the most DPS with AP ammo as far as I know.
All in all: Alpha strike >>> Agility
Jackson gets the nice velocity and all....but I have extremely seldom seen Jacksons used that way in anything beyond 1v1. Most of the time, Jackson behaves like an SU85, sitting still and shooting. Better at running away though... BUT it has a large target size, especially compared to the SU85, and no chance to bounce anything.
So from my experience, and simple math, FF is the best. I really don't remember any game where my or my allied Jackson used the velocity to it's advantage in 3v3s. You usually can't chase as there are always some AT walls. High target size means getting hit most of the time. You can escape much more easily with the Jackson, than you can with the SU85 or the FF, but in reality, if your Jackson needs escaping, you're not really winning the game, are you?
In this game, in modes above 1v1, armour/firepower/alpha strike (Elite level stats) matter much more than being a speedy boy, as you have much less space to maneuver and there are plenty of f*ck more enemies
The tulips are clutch because you can do a bunch of damage before taking any shots from Ele. Even with the 50% chance I think it's still better than other allied TDs. Can always stun it with the 2nd set of rockets if you have to run, but if it's marked that's usually a death sentence
I consider FFs to be the best TDs in the game. The bonus psychological aspect of 240 dmg per shot on vet3 FF is sometimes greater than the fact it becomes 3shot medium.
Jacksons are great in lower modes where it's easier to use their speed. Most 3v3s and 4v4s, TD play is mostly "Park the TD and let it rip". Something that FF is best at.
Soviets are also great at parking the TD. Heck, it's designed to be parked.
FFs are best at killing heavies+
Jacksons are better for mediums generally but with the AP ammo they can take on heavies. Still, tulips stun is better with the 200-240 dmg.
I guess the SU85 is great with veterancy for all, but is casemate. Focused sight though
Hill 400 is stupid map. Right side tend be harder to pushing + defend the fuel/cut off in Northside while Left side is easier.
Absolutely true. However, there is one thing that makes bottom cutoff/VP funny.
First of all, both the VP and the general points are cutoffs, so you need to hold both to have fuel.
Which brings me to another thing I have noticed in my countless games on Hill 400. One thing that the east side has going for it, when defending the bottom fuel/cutoff is the elevation.
My last 10+ games on Hill 400 have all been the same fu*king spawn (3v3): West, bottom-most. Meaning that I had a 1v1.5 on the bottom fuel/VP.
Now when assaulting the VP/cutoff from the west side, there is some sort of an elevation which is not obvious at all. I have noticed it because I only use ground target when using any tank besides the TDs. Last game, my Pershing targeted on the VP a huge ober blob, from the area a bit to the west of the VP (that clearing below the road).... I sh*t you not. The Pershing couldn't ground target on the VP from there. Literally all shots connected with the ground. I think I fired 6 shots on the blob, all connected with the ground. And the skillshot from Pershing connected to the ground countless times from west to east, there
We're getting offtopic here but it changes completely if you mark the elefant as Sovs. I play guard motor or Mechanized support 80% of my team games as soviets. Double FF forces it to back up or die quite often when it's taking 35% more damage
Mark, ram with a 76, and watch the health melt. It's not foolproof, but it works very well especially with voice chat coordination (I rarely play 3s with randoms)
Vet 0 FF does 270 dmg per shot to a marked tank, so it can kill an ele in 4 shots
Well yeah. With mark target, any target is easy. I only play randoms in 3v3s so I know the struggle it can be to kill an elefant/jagd, especially with ~50% chance of penetration on the FF. Sure the tulips help with the stun, but you still need a lot of coordination. Not to mention that on a map like Redball, where the elefant can be safe behind indestructible shot/sight blockers, and there are no real flanking opportunities without being immediately seen, you will have a much tougher time breaking it than on a map like General Mud or Steppes (great maps, but too big for 3v3s.
From my experience (almost every game there is an elefant), ELE/JGDT is unkillable in a typical 3v3 game where you have 4 high rank players and 2 low rank (the brilliancy of the MM -> rank 20 + rank 30 + rank 800 VS rank 20 + rank 40 + rank 700) mainly because you will not be able to coordinate to destroy it. If you have those extremely high rank games, where everyone is top 50 or sth, then you will be able to coordinate, but the opposition will be more fierce (enemies know how to position, defend...).
Most of the time, I saw the elefant get destroyed by:
1) RAM + hammer away
2) Mark target
Without the soviet it's generally really hard. Countless times have I closed in to medium range on a snared elefant/jagd with a Pershing + Jackson only to see 4-5 bounces on it.
Not really sure what you're going for here. Honestly 2 FF are decently threatening against an elefant thanks to tulips, with or without cmd AEC support
Brits have some pretty good recon/spotting themselves, and their tanks can get better FOW tracking. Brits struggle with a lot of things, but they're pretty good at killing heavy TDs. Especially with an ally distracting it
I have rammed many elefants with t34s just to setup a kill from my brit teammate
Tulips work well against Tigers and King tigers. However, super heavies... unless the sole point is to stun, not really worth the drain.
With a 50% chance to penetrate long range, and Elefant having the Hp it's having, you're better off using tulips to help start a dive to kill the ele, followed by a katyusha or some other salvo of indirects around the elefant (paks, raketen... but also trigger mines) and then you dive. Using tulips and just hammering away at the elefant with the FFs is not really advisable, unless the elefant is completely naked.
Also keep in mind that the reload time for the FF is 6 seconds vet3 (8 vet0). To kill an elefant in a decent team you need to invest much more MP/muni/fuel than ele is worth. Same goes with jagd.
Speaking from experience here as I've helped destroy many-a-heavy TD. It's a cancer, especially on 3v3 maps where it can be easily parked and just hammer away at any tank trying to help secure the VP... without risking some flanks.
Your best bet is to have one ally dominate their lane, to open up the flank and then dive it. Biggest mistake people do with the ele is trying to backpedal it to safety. Mostly it's just better to let it hammer away at tanks (unless it's 6 ally TDs and the ele is completely solo)
Fireflies... wrong thread reply
Well duuh. You have 2 vet3 fireflies with tulips, which both fire and connect and all the shots penetrate the 400 units thick armor with their 210 units penetrating shells.. Also the elephant has no support, and is completely abandoned by his/her teammates, playing a 2v1 in one VP lane. You don't need excellent and perfect coordination between a couple of players to completely push back the elefant and then flank it to have a chance of taking it down. Or you don't need to make a perfect push to use some offmap for it. Nah. Just park two fireflies and let them rip.
Hill 400 has very good cut off design.
I you have to hold 2 points; the enemy has counter play, basically making the early game longer, since you can contest the enemy fuel all the time. Even matches will have no fuel connection for like the first 10 minutes.
I don't remember the last time I had fuel connected on Hill 400. Though, it's easier to hold bottom fuel for east than it is top fuel for west. I'd know since last 10 or so games on Hill 400... I got the exact same spawn each time. West-bottom-most. Still, such easy cutoffs means that it's a more dynamic game, so I kind like Hill400 except for the fact that it's a hill and the elevation is amazingly, mindbogglingly, super mega ultra horrible.
Cutoffs in team-games are usually a rare sight. General Mud, Hill 400.... can't think of any map other than those two that has decent cutoffs. Redball and a couple of other have an easier time for the encirclement I win button, but other than that, cutoff is mostly a 1v1 gimmick. Also you should take into consideration that by going for the cutoff, you must go deeper into the enemy territory... God forbid the enemy ally flanks or sth.