Am I the only one getting tired of the new team game meta?

After the latest update, I've found myself enjoying team games less and less as an Allied player.

Before anyone says "skill issue," I'm not claiming these Battlegroups are unbeatable. My issue is that they seem to be shaping the entire meta around themselves.

The new DAK Elite Forces Battlegroup is a good example. The new optics upgrades provide increased accuracy, better performance on the move, and strong combat bonuses that heavily encourage infantry blobs. Instead of rewarding positioning and tactical play, many matches end up revolving around large groups of infantry moving together with very few drawbacks.

The Wehrmacht Siege Breaker Battlegroup creates a similar problem through constant artillery pressure. Increased range, reduced cooldowns, and mortar bunkers spread across the map often force Allied players to spend more time reacting than actually fighting for territory.

Meanwhile, the new Allied Battlegroups don't feel nearly as impactful.

The French Battlegroup relies on defensive positions, but those defenses can be dismantled quickly by the amount of artillery available to the new Axis Battlegroups. In my experience, even a small group of Assault Grenadiers can quickly destroy a French bunker, making the battlegroup's core defensive tools feel unreliable in the current meta.

The British Special Service Battlegroup is an interesting concept, but after several games with it, I still struggle to find situations where it truly shines against the new Axis Battlegroups. The SAS units are useful in specific situations, but the battlegroup as a whole doesn't seem to provide reliable answers to either DAK infantry pressure or Wehrmacht artillery spam.

Another issue is that the United States still lacks long-range artillery options comparable to what other factions have access to.

What frustrates me most is that the answer always seems to be: "Just pick the counter."

Yes, counters exist. The British Polish Armored Battlegroup with Fireflies can perform well against heavy armor, for example.

But that doesn't solve the real problem.

If the solution to most matches is picking the same few Battlegroups because they're the safest counters, then variety starts to disappear.

I don't play Company of Heroes 3 professionally. I play it because it's fun.

Right now, many team games feel like the same Axis Battlegroups, the same infantry blobs, the same artillery pressure, and the same late-game heavy tanks.

My biggest complaint isn't that these Battlegroups are unbeatable.

It's that they're making the game feel repetitive.

A healthy meta rewards experimentation. The current one feels like it punishes it.