Is it just me, or do a lot of American vehicles have too short of range?

[Gofa Kierself]

I've played the Americans the most so far, and it seems to me that all of their vehicles have terrible range. I'm thinking of the Hellcat, the Scott, and the M3 75mm specifically. All of these are vehicles that a longer range makes sense as part of their role, yet they are all PITIFULLY short ranged, especially the Scott. I've found that Shermans are just terrible, especially against P4s, so far. Naturally, I thought the answer was the Hellcat, but it needs to get so damn close to the enemy tank that it brings it well within range of infantry and AT support, to the point where they can get off two or three shots on the fragile Hellcat before it can escape. So, it doesn't have great armor or health, it doesn't have great pen for a TD, and it doesn't have great range, so what's the point of this thing? The Scott is equally confusing. How am I supposed to provide fire support with this squishy cannon on a Stuart chassis, if its range is half that of an AT gun, even on barrage? I honestly like the 75mm halftrack due to how it can provide solid early AT support against light vehicles, as well as its great barrage ability that DOES have good range, but against anything heavier than an armored car it struggles for the same reason as the others here: it has bad health and armor, but it has to get within range of reprisal to use its weapons.

I'd love some advice here as I've only just started playing CoH3 MP after years of doing so on CoH2, and feel free to tell me if I'm just dead wrong. Thanks guys

[Cheslock]

its not just you they (mostly hellcat) should have range more in line with AT guns like they did in previous games

[DoDonPachi]

Originally posted by Cheslock:

its not just you they (mostly hellcat) should have range more in line with AT guns like they did in previous games

errr.... with a few exceptions, tanks in all CoH entries have had a range of 40-50, AT guns are range 60-80.

they are the same in this game

also the point of the Hellcat i that it can actually move around

[Gofa Kierself]

Originally posted by gloomycoin:

Originally posted by Cheslock:

its not just you they (mostly hellcat) should have range more in line with AT guns like they did in previous games

errr.... with a few exceptions, tanks in all CoH entries have had a range of 40-50, AT guns are range 60-80.

they are the same in this game

also the point of the Hellcat i that it can actually move around

For most regular tanks, yes, but tank destroyers have always had longer range so that they could effectively snipe enemy tanks. This made sense as part of their role and since they had bad health and armor that couldn't stand up to sustained fire if they had to get in close. Even if they were technically within AT gun range, they could at least escape easily with proper micro while also getting a shot or two off. With the Hellcat's short range, it makes this much more difficult. I understand that they tried to replace range with mobility, but I just don't find this to be a viable strategy if you're basically required to sacrifice your TD to get a flanking P4 kill, which should always happen if your enemy properly supports his tanks.

[DoDonPachi]

Originally posted by Gofa Kierself:

Originally posted by gloomycoin:

errr.... with a few exceptions, tanks in all CoH entries have had a range of 40-50, AT guns are range 60-80.

they are the same in this game

also the point of the Hellcat i that it can actually move around

For most regular tanks, yes, but tank destroyers have always had longer range so that they could effectively snipe enemy tanks. This made sense as part of their role and since they had bad health and armor that couldn't stand up to sustained fire if they had to get in close. Even if they were technically within AT gun range, they could at least escape easily with proper micro while also getting a shot or two off. With the Hellcat's short range, it makes this much more difficult. I understand that they tried to replace range with mobility, but I just don't find this to be a viable strategy if you're basically required to sacrifice your TD to get a flanking P4 kill, which should always happen if your enemy properly supports his tanks.

The m18 has the exact same range as it had in tales of valor

[Gofa Kierself]

Originally posted by gloomycoin:

Originally posted by Gofa Kierself:

For most regular tanks, yes, but tank destroyers have always had longer range so that they could effectively snipe enemy tanks. This made sense as part of their role and since they had bad health and armor that couldn't stand up to sustained fire if they had to get in close. Even if they were technically within AT gun range, they could at least escape easily with proper micro while also getting a shot or two off. With the Hellcat's short range, it makes this much more difficult. I understand that they tried to replace range with mobility, but I just don't find this to be a viable strategy if you're basically required to sacrifice your TD to get a flanking P4 kill, which should always happen if your enemy properly supports his tanks.

The m18 has the exact same range as it had in tales of valor

I should have clarified, but I was referring to CoH2 since it was the most recent entry in the series, where all tank destroyers had increased range compared to regular tanks, meaning that your comment about tanks in all CoH entries having the same range with few exceptions is just not true. Also, where are you getting these stats might I ask, as I'm curious myself and could have sworn TD's also had more range in CoH1.

[DUI_Stryfe]

Yea the Scott is completely unusable in its current state. It's the US's only source of reliable indirect fire that can be deployed around the battlefield and it's range is god awful. It's not you the range used to be almost double that in CoH2 but now you have to barrage from right in front of the target. It's so bad its almost hilarious. The only unit in the roster as bad as the Scott is the Weasel which for the life of me I can't figure out why anyone would build considering there's a scout car that comes standard and is already armed.

When it comes to the Hellcat its only barely usable and frankly I'd only get to deal with Tigers. But yea its a total suicide mission. The AI is terrible and the Hellcat with literally try to almost ram the enemy tank half the time. And the range is standard tank range. So its squishier than the Sherman, has the same range, but does more damage. It boils down to take your 2 Hellcats and suicide them at the enemy tiger to kill it.

Overall I'd avoid those units entirely if I could. The obvious choice for ALL US endgames is the Sherman 76mm. It "can" kill anything and essentially has no weaknesses. And thank god it doesn't because its the US's only option to kill just about everything past the 20min mark.

[Realm]

A few tanks that should have much better range are forced into spitting distance for any kind of barrage, it's weird how much they hate self-propelled guns. Semovente barrage is just as terrible with it's range.