Profile of MetaStable14

I agree with a good amount of what you wrote. Map control isn't worth the manpower risk. You spread yourself thin trying to take more area but if you lose a squad in the process you're set back a minute of resources for the reward of what, +3 fuel and munitions per minute? I was so frustrated when I started playing this game and lost after controlling the entire map save two regular points. Granted I was new then but I felt I should have been more rewarded than I was for driving my opponent off the map. As of right now I feel you are in a better position focusing on holding 2 VP's and your side of the map without bothering to advance. Manpower is the controlling resource by far and you are never rewarded with more.

Cover bonuses are certainly in need of work too.

I've played enough to know the maps well. I'm not confused in the slightest, I have enough 2v2 games under my belt to know that isn't the issue.

Spamming 1v1 games isn't going to make the game play more enjoyable though.

Judging from the lack of response to this thread most people do not share my opinion - meaning the game play won't change. Guess this means the inevitable end of my COH2 gaming will be coming soon rather than later.

Note: This is my first COH game, I have no sense of what the preceding games were like.

I've been meaning to post this for awhile, so it has nothing to do with the state of the current patch minus maybe the 180 degree rotation for infantry patch. That part of the patch increases the likelihood of run and gun play that I'm about to complain about.

1v1 really isn't fun for me. The maps feel far too large (which is the root of many problems I think). Instead of actually having real engagements the entire early game is run and gun. You're too busy sprinting across the map to cap more points than have an actual engagement. I've mostly been playing 2v2 because the maps are now ~split in half. When I only have half the map to really worry about the game feels like it has the proper troops/area ratio. I actually have a need to flank/overwhelm mg42's holding positions because I can't just run around them to the other part of the map.

Next point: cover feels like it doesn't really serve a purpose (excluding buildings). If I build sandbags (which take excruciatingly long amounts of time right now) and set up a lone defensive unit it really doesn't increase it's ability to hold the ground. Once again you are better off continuing to run around capping. A single gren squad can run straight at the sandbag unit, possibly not lose a single model and fire off a rifle grenade that nearly wipes the defending squad. Unless the unit behind green cover is being flanked, I feel like it should be able to put up a fight against 2 ~equivalent squads. I think the cover bonuses/modifiers need significant increases from their current state.

If the core mechanics of this game are supposed to utilize cover and flanking, shouldn't running and gunning be discouraged? Shouldn't units in green cover cut down squads that just blindly run right up to green cover units?

So my main points are that I feel 1v1 maps are about double the size they should be, running and gunning is too prevalent for how this game was allegedly designed and current cover bonuses need significant increasing from their current state. I expected more of battle line that gets pushed back and forth by both sides and less of this running around nonsense.

I wrote this from primarily a soviet perspective but it all basically applies to ostheer too. Does anybody agree with me or do I just have no perspective for how the game should actually be played?

Relevant stats: as of right now I have 17 1v1 games played as soviet (rank 1123) and 11 1v1 played as ostheer (rank 1583) - not great but not terrible. I play far more 2v2 where the troops/area ratio feels more "correct".

MG's aren't useless, they just need supported. When they were OP you could just leave them sitting somewhere to completely deny an area without considerable forces to drive them off. It seems like you are still trying to use them like when they were OP but you can't do that. They need a bit more line of sight now to be effective.

Move them with your infantry and have them set up behind a couple of gren squads to SUPPORT them when you are pushing, or set them somewhere with a long LOS to help deny an area defensively. If you want to try to deny an area you'll need a bunker with the mg upgrade. Those are harder to take down but they only have a window when they are particularly effective.

In a 1v1 I would not build more than a single bunker. They can be good but locking up a bunch of resources in static structures that become easy to take out late game is asking to lose.

No. Each of those turns is still to the right. You've never turned left.
Are you trying to claim Guard are not a light vehicle counter?

Do you really need a diagram for this?.....

I'll sum up the point that the analogy apparently didn't. Yes guards can counter a light vehicle, that doesn't necessarily mean they are effective at doing so.