Profile of Kurobane

I'm not saying they're irrelevant at the role itself, but the fact is I already have 5 Bazookas on 2 squads who can't fight infantry (Rear Echelon (0MP) The Major (Tech Bonus) and have effectively no other purpose in combat, and one squad who needed the Bazooka as an LV deterrent where most of his damage comes from his Thompson anyway. I don't need to be spending 350 Manpower on even more Bazookas on top of that, even if they're superzooks.

It's a matter of the role being filled more efficiently and cheaper by squads you just passively already own rather than having to dedicate tons of resources into a role that you already have fulfilled. The manpower is just better spent elsewhere.

I agree with this. By the time I have enough CP to call in Rangers, I will usually have 2-3 Rifleman already plus Lt/Captain and I don't really need any more infantry on the field especially expensive Rangers which will drain/bleed your MP dry with the high pop/reinforce cost. If I feel like I need AT, I will get a second Rear Echelon for a total of 2 with double bazookas which is enough to soft counter vehicles. Something like Guards/Shock Troops works because you can start off with Maxims and have all of your support weapons ready at the start of the game so you can use those as your main infantry. Unless USF gets the ability to start the match with Machine Guns, I don't really see Rangers being a useful fit in any build. If you end up getting your Rifleman squads wiped, then yeah it would make sense to make Rangers instead of Rifleman as a replacement but by the time they hit the field I already have Rifleman with vet and possibly bars which means I don't need Rangers.

I would probably use Rangers with Bazookas more if they had more range. Pathfinders make rather good Bazooka carriers due to the extra +5 Range that they get with Bazookas once they gain veterancy and they can stealth, which can be more effective at the Bazooka Role than Rangers. Sure rangers will do more damage but if the enemy knows you have rangers with Bazookas they will just run away. While I can bait an enemy tank into over extending just for invis pathfinders to pop out of nowhere and hit them with Bazookas.

Idea for Heavy Cav Commander:

In case the Pershing needs better repair and/or the current repair buff does not work out:
The Field defenses could be swapped out with the Urban assault kit. This way there would be proper benefit in having two REs on the field if one gets the grenade launcher.
However this change implies multiple other changes (less defensive to more offensive layout) that affects the whole commander just to "fix" the Pershing. So not sure overall, just a thought.

I would like to see Rifleman Field Defenses Swapped out with the Urban Assault Kit. It feels kind of shitty to have a commander slot wasted to get something that is baseline with every other faction (being able to drop mines and make sandbags). Personally I think merging Field Defenses into Rangers would be good since it would free up a commander slot for something else that isn't standard with every other faction and at the same time give Rangers some desperate needed utility that would make them worth making since any buff or rework is unlikely.

I love the Hypocrisy of the Balance team, Less expensive squad win when it comes to allies.

Glad to see others are being made aware of the Balance Team's lack of Balance.

I dont understand why everyone suddenly want USF to crutch on Pershing 99% of all 1v1s like it used to be. We finally have good doctrine variety and people want Pershing to 1v1 dedicated tank destroyers and win on top of amazing AI. The only reason why Heavy Cav isnt meta is because people dont want to twiddle their thumbs until CP12 to call in their heavies.

I don't think its about wanting to crutch on the Pershing but more about viable alternatives in the armor department. USF are limited in tank choices and the tanks they do have are lackluster except for the Jackson.

If you are paying the same cost the unit as the Tiger it should be able to hold its own and be even. Its basically a Panther with Anti-Infantry but significantly more expensive.


Also there is a huge discrepancy between abilities and veterancy as well. For example the Tiger just has Blitz and or smoke as abilities which are simple to use. HVAP on the Pershing is a gimmick skill shot ability (which was good back when you could time it to do a double attack) but ever since the nerf its just a gimmick/trick that the Pershin could do without. Basically what im trying to say is that not only is the Tiger just flat out better stat wise but it is less micro intensive and easier to use.


Now if stats were left the same and the Pershing was given a Blitz like ability and instant smoke Axis would be crying all day about how overpowered it is. There is a huge double standard going on when it comes to the balance team.


Also Whermact as a Faction do not lack any holes in their core Roster. They have Brumbar to break up infantry/mg/AT gun walls. Meanwhile US 105 Dozer is doctrinal. Whermact has no doctrinal artillery with the Panzerwerfer. Meanwhile USF must go Calliope or Priest.


If USF had many of the core units that it is missing and was on par with Whermact in that aspect then it would be ok if the Tiger took a huge dump on the Pershing. However considering all the tools at Whermacts disposal, then the fact that the Pershing commander itself is rather lackluster, at the very least the Pershing should be something amazing considering that you are skipping out on core army units found in other commanders for a bootleg Panther that can also damage infantry.


I would start by replacing the HVAP skillshot ability with something else that is less micro intensive and improving the veterancy slightly. A self repair ability would be nice as well without having to touch the stats on the unit.

It's turrent rotation speed & mobility is just way too low. But it will be(I believe?) increased in next patch. But UKF's problem is not the firefly right now...

Agreed, for something built on the Sherman chasis it moves like crap. The damage on the unit is fine and doesn't need to be changed but it needs to be more responsive and less clunky feeling in the way it moves/pathing.

However the Firefly is not really the main issue with UKF.

Ever since they gimped Infantry Sections with its numerous nerfs, you have Subpar Infantry with also subpar support weapons (or lack of since they need a non doctrinal mortar).

Rather than seeing Infantry Sections get buffed and return to cancerous levels where everyone just makes like 5 Infantry Sections and nothing else, UKF needs some buffs to Vickers (allowing Bolster to work on them would be a start) and a mortar that isn't the mortar pit.

Honestly haven't bothered using it in the latest iteration.

But isn't the design flawed to begin with? You get a guy with an StG (close to mid range) yet want to keep the Kar98k Grens at range. Wasn't really that cool on Volks to begin with... and those get more StGs.

Yeah its terrible. Another thing destroyed by the classic double nerf. Don't understand why they go through the effort to destroy something into the ground just to end up buffing it again later on.

The original upgrade if im not mistaken gave an extra man, a recieved accuracy buff, and more damage which is obvious that it was going to be too strong.

The 5th model plus maybe a slight reduction in reinforcement cost would have been enough.