Who's more broken: Rachel or Sturm?

[shadow]

I've found Grit to be a dangerous CO in all of the games. He was one of my favourite's in Dual Strike too, even if he wasn't, statistically speaking, one of the best.

[wax]

I did too.
But the team in Wars World News did a real job of finding out which COs are strong and which are not.
Grit is ranked on top of the low tier by them, though their tier list is rather "global". I mean it groups COs by categories (and even classes Andy as a movement-based CO with Koal and Adder, which means low tier too).
I mean in large maps with airports, Grit is outclassed by the Black Bomb tactics.

[Robyn]

I don't like black bombs. they are too expensive for my tastes.

[wax]

Well, infantryspam too gives Grit a hard time, especially since infantries give more stars in AWDS since AW2 (4 times more, no less!).
But, I can say Grit is dangerous. He still annoys me with this "+1 range" thingy...

[keitar0hirochi]

Talkin' back about Sturm, you forget that his SCOP makes all his units 140/150, and this is just quite as dangerous as the meteor itself.

[sonasage]

I have to give this one to Sturm. 1.2/1.2 AND that op terrain advantage is just broken. It basically means you have absolute freedom to position your units however you like. Then there's the matter of his SCOP, which just means any one of your pushes works, no matter what.

On another note, in days of ruin, that Caulder is just plain overpowered...

[viktor]

Playing on predeployed maps against AW2 Kambei is my personal nigthmare. (duh)
Playing on any maps with factories against Colin is even harder.
Playing on small maps aganst Rachel or any other damaging COs (Drake, Olaf, Sturm, Hawke, Kindle) is another good challenge.
And last but not last we have AW2/AWDS Sonja on FoW maps.

My point being...Depending on the map ANY COs is broken.