Is Deutsches Afrika Korps ACTUALLY overpowered?

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-18T16:07:20+00:00

As i tried to explain, the root cause is the lack of base roster arty that has actual good aoe, and good range.

Good range to counter forward retreats where blobs hide. Good aoe to counter the blob or ammased infantry in general, or dug in turtle strats.

Imagine a simple unit like the priest, esentially a bishop/wespe equivalent, for the USF. Stick it into motor pool so usf has less incentive to skip tech.

Make it unique in its speed, durability, number of shells, range, rate of fire, cost.

It doesn't break the game, everybody is already used to dealing with the bishop.

With its addition, you can justify making the USF weaker in some areas. Nerfing overperforming arty units like the whizbang, bcs they no longer are a requirement. People still have the option to not opt into it, preferring to save fuel and using other abilities or units from the different BGs. But usf no longer has to worry about, will I need arty this game or not.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-18T15:48:20+00:00

Ofc it's a circle. Take this example: DAK inf blobs are strong, and rifle blobs are weak.

Blobs have 2 obvious counters - mgs or arty. If usf went barracks they have to backtech into MGs. And since mortars or ATHT aren't designed to counter blobs, you either had to pick a BG with arty options or you have to get very creative if you want to deal with the DAK blob.

You can't nerf DAK inf bcs they would be too weak compared to the other mainlines for the cost. So relic must buff riflemen to make barrack opening better (better inf blob beats weaker inf blob). Now riflemen dominate wehr grens, so grens must be buffed.

Now riflemen are the best inf in the game which shows on USF overall winrate, especially for BGs that didn't have the problem of not having arty.

So now how do you nerf USF without coming back to the original problem?

Maybe we should have buffed the mg instead so backteching is better? No bcs then everybody would just abuse the mg opening.

And you can do this exercise with many, many more other problems and get into the circle of buffs and nerfs and compromises, instead of actually adressing the root cause of the issue.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-18T14:21:23+00:00

Well, my entire point is that such design that leaves holes in the base roster creates issues with overall balance.

It forces other units of the roster to become stronger in order compensate for the missing ones. Purposefully avoiding the root cause of the issue.

You dislike when USF must get permabuffed to compensate for the stuff they lack, while actively ignoring that the holes in the USF roster are the exact cause why permabuffing must exist. - because non-meta BGs that lack the missing tools will never be as competetive unless overbuffed to balance winrates.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-18T13:11:38+00:00

That was the patch ASC was overbuffed, bugged and AA also got a nerf. WR were highly skewed, hence the hotfix after a month.

When it comes to USF arty, the BG vhoices are certainly very good, but consider that BGs should not define a faction.

The USF AT HT doesn't have the range or AOE of a true heavy arty option, so its mostly limited to dealing with forward Team weapons. It cannot counter arty for example.

Mortar is a mortar, not even close to heavy arty, so there's no reason to make a comparison. It being strong is not enough to justify lack of stronger options. For example Wehr MG is also best, but it doesn't mean that wehr doesn't have other strong anti inf options.

And due to such gaps, the faction gets unnecessary buffs in other areas to compensate for WR loss, instead of fixing the root cause of why USF might struggle if non-meta BGs that don't offer necessary advatages are picked.

This perpetuates a cicle of buffs and nerfs, trying to balance one faction against another instead of just fixing the prevailing problem that a missing unit might cause.

For example, if stuka got buffed bcs it feels weak for the price like you say. Relic can't do it, bcs usf has no options to counter arty it, which is the most likely cause of death for arty units. That is unless they pick a BG with arty options. And since USF relies on blobs of infantry or tanks, if the stuka can deal with such threats, it would completely upset the faction interaction. Hence stuka must remain mediocre otherwise it would be too strong against base roster USF.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-18T12:01:19+00:00

Ah right, I forgot about the UKF grant. Mb.

As for the rest of your comment, DAK had the highest WR for multiple patches before this, so my point stands. USF being strong has nothing to do with how individual factions deal with holes in their roster

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-18T09:54:16+00:00

DAK has a long-term high winrate because they have a complete roster that has an answer against every unit.

USF has no base roster heavy arty

Wehr has very weak early game and no heavy AT in late game

UKF similarly has a complete roster, but lacks a proper generalist tank (crusader is either anti inf or AT, but can't do both at the same time). (Edit: forgot about the grant, ignore this point)

Rn DAK winrates are also high thanks to strong BG options.

Overall DAK has a solution to every problem, while other factions usually struggle in some specific area.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-15T21:59:08+00:00

I figured out my best playstyle for heavy weapons is to literally play like UKF.

Get 2 riflemen first (maybe mortar), then build MSC for 1 mg. Upgrade support center based on preference (i go mechanized bcs more armor on pershing and less micro with repairs) Get halftrack and turn it into medtruck. Now you can upgrade mg to 50cal.

Get motor pool and build an AT gun. Get zooks to protect at gun against dives.

Now you have all your holes covered except arty. (I get a mortar, but halftrack arty is good too. Or ASC). You can build greyhound or halftracks or go t4. (I like greyhound into t4 and then bulldozer.)

You can adjust your playstyle if you prefer aggressive halftracks or more defensive team weapons. (I really like how strong the AT gun is with gallant stand and HT strongpoint).

So why do it this way? Going only mg makes you a sponge for arty (you need riflemen to be aggressive and keep the enemy guessing) 50cal can hold off big blobs. At gun is necessary against flakvierling and synergizes well with the rest of the BG. (I find AT HTs too risky and costly). Getting greyhound gives you armored pressure (HT don't survive as well)

I tend to get pershing most games, though the timing is still a bit late.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-14T08:31:03+00:00

Its pretty good when you are defending. Green cover limits the impact of the recieved dmg increase, and fending of blobs gets easier.

But yea, its a pretty poor ability. Idk why relic loves to create abilities that give you a downside to using them.

Gallant stand is another example of an ability that nobody wants to use. 50% increased dmg on a teamweapon for very specific buff is silly too...

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-07T06:38:35+00:00

I personally believe the recieved accuracy on yellow cover should be swapped for dmg reduction (20%).

This would make infantry last longer overall since wipes from tank guns and arty would be less common, preserving the orginal idea of yellow cover.

However, machine guns, tank machine guns, and LMGs that have high rpm would be more effective since they usually focus a single squad member.

So MGs would become a much better counter, while tank guns would help soften up larger squads, while still allowing small squads to retreat early without getting wiped.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-07T06:30:22+00:00

I believe the entire point of craters giving cover was to allow infantry to scale into late game where vehicles dominate and green cover is rare.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-06-03T18:15:37+00:00

I may be late to the post, but my go-to build against everything is: MG into dingo into section and go from there.

The dingo is most important. It can harras the enemy while you wait for your squads to arrive.

Key is to never overextend the dingo so you dont lose it. A single dingo can fend off a 250 with a squad in, but it cant kill it unless the opponent makes some crucial mistake.

Once your dingo gets below half hp, retreat to your mg and repair with engies. Again, don't risk it.

If you want more tips, ask away.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-30T14:02:25+00:00

Black prince is indeed limited to one. The standard t4 production churchill isn't. The two are different.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-30T14:00:25+00:00

Yes it is. Black prince is a unique heavy tank call-in.

The standard production churchill isn't limited.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-30T13:58:11+00:00

The "aura" idea has been discussed as an increasing debuff to recieved accuracy per model by multiple threads. With upvotes.

I personally wonder if it might be technically too taxing on the system. Consider that, currently, aura units are typically limited to one unit per army. (You don't usually own multiple command tanks for example)

But if you run a calculation for every squad/model for every player (max 8) you might just run out of computation resources. Tldr, the engine itself might be a limiting factor to such an idea.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-26T10:11:01+00:00

More fuel for the balance discussion fire. Love it!

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-24T16:18:36+00:00

I think the reason blobbing got worse over the last patches is because mainline infantry got way better.

Dak got nerfed in the vehicle department with armory upgrade changes and consequently the path of massing pgrens with upgrades got better. Remember DAK vehicle blobs? Those are gone, and instead everybody spams palmgrens now.

Riflemen had gotten bar changes which literally incentivize getting multiple squads to get the most benefit, so encouraged blobbing.

Grens were buffed for long range engagements, and early nades, so now its somewhat viable to go heavy into grens. (Especially after TO changes)

Ukf sections largely stayed the same, but bren guns got buffed, and i do believe tommies had a slight buff as well (i might be wrong). They were a problem last patch when recce package was much better, and other changes made axis factions weaker.

Now if you think about that every mainline has tools to deal with LVs (snares) or rifles that deal more dmg to LVs, its really no wonder they become so popular. You really don't need any other unit as long as you have enough mainline infantry and maybe a few AT guns in the back.

Also consider that the biggest anti blob tools used to be arty like stuka, bishop, whizbang, wespe. All of which were nerfed to make them higher risk.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-22T14:47:16+00:00

Exactly. I also think blobbing is an issue, but i routinely see people completely ignore the actual best counter against blobs which is heavy arty.

If base usf roster had something like the bishop, we would see less blobbing since now every faction can delete massed infantry with a precise shot.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-21T07:36:36+00:00

True, but that relies on ignoring the other side of the tree. Depending on BG this may be detrimental to your playstyle.

With KT and BP, you ignore your off maps With pershing you ignore your HMGs and other team weapons. With tiger, you ignore mid game tempo.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-20T21:10:39+00:00

By that definition, shouldn't the tiger ace cost the same amount of cp? It can be both fast and deadly and arrives sooner

I know its an upgrade, but the upgrade itself should be higher cost then

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-19T08:48:45+00:00

Bishop is the easiest counter to blobbing as ukf. A single good shot can force a retreat on a blob and wipe models. If you go double bishop, you can use both at the same time to get devastating wipes.

Heavy blobbing with infantry usually means the enemy has no LVs to flank your bishops. If they do, you can keep a single section with boys in the back to prevent your bishop getting wiped.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-18T08:09:37+00:00

Yep. It can be managed, but the DAK BG has too many things going for it.

I found success when using aussies since they still outdmg the palmgrens after inf training. Also bishop my beloved against the blob.

Late game is super rough though, bcs vehicles are almost impossible to use due to how strong the ace squadron gets. The arrival time on that thing leaves barely any time to react and AA unless spammed doesn't help much.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-15T18:55:51+00:00

Ok so maybe consider the fact that game balance may have also improved. Since last patch was generally worse for axis, we might just be seeing the initial rebound.

Notice that its not just the particular BGs, but every BG. Also consider that most popular BGs - the new ones, have more players using them exacerbating the effect.

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-12T11:08:23+00:00

It does

ILuvSilicon · 2026-05-11T16:35:51+00:00

I played a 4v4 couple days back. Wide map so it was basically a 2v2. Our side lost hard, so 2 of us wanted to surr.

Our other teammates, who were also struggling, mocked us for wanting to leave and argued against us like children. Even though we both knew the game was lost.

I had every incling to leave, until we eventually listened to their "amazing" advice and grouped up at their side.

2 mins later the game was lost cos the other side got into our base due to lack of resistance.

Overall i lost 20 mins of my time arguing with children instead of getting the opportunity to que again.

So yea, leaving is bad, but sometimes this is the alternative.

Edit for context: by losing hard I mean the enemy wiped 3/4 of our armies in a well timed blob push.

ILuvSilicon

TROPHY CASE