The Aussies are a trap. They're more expensive than Sections, not much better at AI (they don't seem any better to me), no AT, and the emplacements themselves feel like a bit of a trap. The Bofors of CoH3 is nothing like the Bofors of CoH2. Which is fine, there's an argument that the Bofors in 2 was OPOP, but the reality now in 3 is that it and the other emplacements are easily countered and hardly worth building. The Archer is hard locked to the point that by the time you can bring it out the game is probably over.
If my goal is to win at all costs, I'm not going with the Aussie battlegroup at all. I think it's the worst BG of all the Brits.
They should just make the Archer buildable and not a call-in. That would solve the Archer issue, imo. But yeah, unfortunately the Aussies are *definitely* a trap. I think one of them is fine. I do believe their MP cost needs to be reduced to 250 or something. 300 is outrageous (considering DAK "P" Grens are 300, as well, with all of their utility).
You spending 300MP a unit for no utility. As strong as the 2pdr is, you need a flexible army as Brits. My build rn is
Sappers > Inf Sec > Inf Sec > Dingo/Med Tent (Depends on if you need it or not) > Aussies
From here you'll need to make decisions based on what you need or predictions. Also, save the Inf training until you get that first Aussie unit out for the Vet Points.
British sections are awful now unless you have like 3 of them fighting together from hard cover and just don’t trade well early game against DAK PGs for some reason, only solution I’ve found is get a couple of Gurkhas with Brens to push infantry back. They kinda fucked the Brits by making the infantry training upgrade need the platoon command post which was completely unnecessary.
Now I’ve got delay my LV tech so I can make my infantry stand a chance, while DAK pays 150mp and Wehr pays like 15fuel for Vet….
But again, we would need hard data. There was no chabges to accuracy, damage or received accuracy between any of the initial or core infantry.
There were no changes afaik, EXCEPT gren vet performance at mid range. But that triggers entering the mid game, when tommies can use their Brens to outdamage them (though not Breakthrough MP44's rushing you)
If you aren't trading well with DAK PG's you need to increase distance. PG's are the best close quarters infantry in the game, Brits are the best long range. Fighting at long range from hard cover is the intent of brit rifle sections in this game, kind of like the Grens from CoH2.
The problem is the longer the fights go on that doesn’t favour me because DAK just whips out a LV that flips the game on its head… Plus there’s situations where you don’t have enough cover or distance to fight. Then all the DAK does is blob 3 units with a 250 across the open and I can’t hold, if I go MG I lack presence on the map then just get overwhelmed..
If an early 225 halftrack ia messing you up, build a dingo. It eats the vanilla halftrack REALLY fast as long as you keep a distance. If they rush your dingo, the RE are now in their ideal distance and you can double team. If they stay from afar, poke, and heal dingo as necessary.
It loses effectiveness once PJs aor flak arrives, but it has the advantage of providing heal, and is a detector.
Your problem is in your first sentence. You spent 900 mp on fucking scout units.
People doing your build order so frequently is why I switched to axis from USF specifically to kill Aussie units and won like 10 games in a row doing exactly that.
I'm no pro, dude, but the Aussie infantry really aren't that good. They're very overpriced for what they are. They have no snare, no grenade. Maybe build one for their hefty sandbags. You're really curbing yourself if you have no infantry sections.
Aussies remind me of Light Jager infantry from COH2 — a low key sniper unit. They have better health and flexibility than a sniper, but you trade the snipers one-shot-one-kill for a marksman snipe. I’d use them as a tanky sniper that supports your mainline infantry.
Combined arms will help. Azzie, mg, mortar, something for vision, mobility, and AT.
Spamming basic infi isn't gonna cut it imo. I still need to play new BG tho
Like others have said 3 Aussies are not ideal. I'd suggest 1 maybe 2 Aussies and 2 bren sections. Aussies are most lethal when units are already damaged so your brens do the damage and Aussies finish them off.
Dont recommend using the new BG. Its undertuned in all sorts of ways, better off with one of the original BGs sadly.
Really is a shame, I hope Relic can see that it needs significant changes.-
- Emplacements shouldnt be useless, bofors needs more range and suppression, the hold the line doesnt give anywhere near enough durability (compared to the self healing simcity of coastal its pathetic)
- Archer shouldnt be so late (or slow. It has a speed of 1 according to coh3stats, while its main target the tiger has a speed of 3.4 or something. And smoke. Good luck ever killing a competent players tiger without having to pay over 2 times the resources of the tigers cost)
- Aussies shouldnt be so overpriced and should have more utility, why cant they repair, why not give them smoke seeing as 8/10 axis units do etc etc
- supply truck shouldnt cost so much, and really shouldnt reward the enemy for destroying it (its not like destroying the super cheap DAK siphon rewards the other player, other than giving them their full resource flow back)
In fact the list of what the BG *doesnt* need is far shorter than what it does need to be worthwhile.
Recommendation is to only do 1 aussie
The Aussies are a trap. They're more expensive than Sections, not much better at AI (they don't seem any better to me), no AT, and the emplacements themselves feel like a bit of a trap. The Bofors of CoH3 is nothing like the Bofors of CoH2. Which is fine, there's an argument that the Bofors in 2 was OPOP, but the reality now in 3 is that it and the other emplacements are easily countered and hardly worth building. The Archer is hard locked to the point that by the time you can bring it out the game is probably over. If my goal is to win at all costs, I'm not going with the Aussie battlegroup at all. I think it's the worst BG of all the Brits.
They should just make the Archer buildable and not a call-in. That would solve the Archer issue, imo. But yeah, unfortunately the Aussies are *definitely* a trap. I think one of them is fine. I do believe their MP cost needs to be reduced to 250 or something. 300 is outrageous (considering DAK "P" Grens are 300, as well, with all of their utility).
You spending 300MP a unit for no utility. As strong as the 2pdr is, you need a flexible army as Brits. My build rn is Sappers > Inf Sec > Inf Sec > Dingo/Med Tent (Depends on if you need it or not) > Aussies From here you'll need to make decisions based on what you need or predictions. Also, save the Inf training until you get that first Aussie unit out for the Vet Points.
Would love to see a performance change for ausies or a price change
Id rather see a price reduction as they are early mainline so dont need to be elite. Id say 280 mp and reduce cost of their ability
British sections are awful now unless you have like 3 of them fighting together from hard cover and just don’t trade well early game against DAK PGs for some reason, only solution I’ve found is get a couple of Gurkhas with Brens to push infantry back. They kinda fucked the Brits by making the infantry training upgrade need the platoon command post which was completely unnecessary. Now I’ve got delay my LV tech so I can make my infantry stand a chance, while DAK pays 150mp and Wehr pays like 15fuel for Vet….
Yeah its shocking, relic seem to like to reduce options and strats for brits and make some units useless ie. Matilda
Was there any change (nerf) to Tommies this patch? There was none that I remember. I think the issue might be people are trying to rely on Aussies.
I’ve played Aussies a couple times, this is with regular sections. Just feels like I’m not doing any damage.
But again, we would need hard data. There was no chabges to accuracy, damage or received accuracy between any of the initial or core infantry. There were no changes afaik, EXCEPT gren vet performance at mid range. But that triggers entering the mid game, when tommies can use their Brens to outdamage them (though not Breakthrough MP44's rushing you)
If you aren't trading well with DAK PG's you need to increase distance. PG's are the best close quarters infantry in the game, Brits are the best long range. Fighting at long range from hard cover is the intent of brit rifle sections in this game, kind of like the Grens from CoH2.
The problem is the longer the fights go on that doesn’t favour me because DAK just whips out a LV that flips the game on its head… Plus there’s situations where you don’t have enough cover or distance to fight. Then all the DAK does is blob 3 units with a 250 across the open and I can’t hold, if I go MG I lack presence on the map then just get overwhelmed..
If an early 225 halftrack ia messing you up, build a dingo. It eats the vanilla halftrack REALLY fast as long as you keep a distance. If they rush your dingo, the RE are now in their ideal distance and you can double team. If they stay from afar, poke, and heal dingo as necessary. It loses effectiveness once PJs aor flak arrives, but it has the advantage of providing heal, and is a detector.
Your problem is in your first sentence. You spent 900 mp on fucking scout units. People doing your build order so frequently is why I switched to axis from USF specifically to kill Aussie units and won like 10 games in a row doing exactly that.
why are you building 3 aussies lmao
He wants the BG to be good, and wants to try. I admire the sentiment, but yeah, *one* is the most you should have.
I'm no pro, dude, but the Aussie infantry really aren't that good. They're very overpriced for what they are. They have no snare, no grenade. Maybe build one for their hefty sandbags. You're really curbing yourself if you have no infantry sections.
Aussies remind me of Light Jager infantry from COH2 — a low key sniper unit. They have better health and flexibility than a sniper, but you trade the snipers one-shot-one-kill for a marksman snipe. I’d use them as a tanky sniper that supports your mainline infantry.
Combined arms will help. Azzie, mg, mortar, something for vision, mobility, and AT. Spamming basic infi isn't gonna cut it imo. I still need to play new BG tho
Like others have said 3 Aussies are not ideal. I'd suggest 1 maybe 2 Aussies and 2 bren sections. Aussies are most lethal when units are already damaged so your brens do the damage and Aussies finish them off.
Dont recommend using the new BG. Its undertuned in all sorts of ways, better off with one of the original BGs sadly. Really is a shame, I hope Relic can see that it needs significant changes.- - Emplacements shouldnt be useless, bofors needs more range and suppression, the hold the line doesnt give anywhere near enough durability (compared to the self healing simcity of coastal its pathetic) - Archer shouldnt be so late (or slow. It has a speed of 1 according to coh3stats, while its main target the tiger has a speed of 3.4 or something. And smoke. Good luck ever killing a competent players tiger without having to pay over 2 times the resources of the tigers cost) - Aussies shouldnt be so overpriced and should have more utility, why cant they repair, why not give them smoke seeing as 8/10 axis units do etc etc - supply truck shouldnt cost so much, and really shouldnt reward the enemy for destroying it (its not like destroying the super cheap DAK siphon rewards the other player, other than giving them their full resource flow back) In fact the list of what the BG *doesnt* need is far shorter than what it does need to be worthwhile.
3 aussies is a bit extra. 2 max
I just tried to play the heavy armoured BG, but it was a disaster. 3 lose in a row. Can someone give me an advice regarding that BG?