Stats from the WCS 2019

That would also hurt Wehrmacht hard because the faction has so many Tiger commanders.
T70 nerf is needed. ALL light vehicles were tuned down but the t70 is as lethal as ever.

But i really dont need to post more stuff here because of Farlion's great post which i support 100%.

If you touch the T70, the faction is dead.

Ostheer can easily survive a heavy tank meta nerf, it’s OKW that’s crutching on Grand Offensive atm and will need some doctrine buffs.

I can say with confidence that is almost entirely due to light vehicles.

Faction winrates even follow the tier of light vehicle strats, lol

1. t-70
2. m20 -> stuart
3. Luchs/Puma
4. 222
5. AEC

Oh look it's the same order as the faction winrates.

You see it play out this way because light vehicles are the first unit that can single handily win a match. When you have the best players in the world playing against each other they are all incredibly skilled light vehicle drivers, whomever wins the light vehicle duel that happens in 80% of the matches will win the game. The T-70 especially tips the scales into the Soviets favor significantly.

You don't see these win rates in normal matches with average players because they can't handle the light vehicles as well. A skilled player with an unmatched light vehicle can absolutely trash their opponent. The solution is to revisit light vehicles again to try and make them strong without being able to single handily win a match. I recommend reducing raw power and adding more utility to keep them as high skill units, without being able to wipe the opponents entire army after one mistake.


I wouldn't even say Soviets are that much better than the other factions, it's pretty much entirely the T-70.

IS2 meta > OKW tiger meta > Ost Tiger meta.

375 armor when all your high RoF casemate TDs have <200 pen vs 300 armor with >200 pen TDs with vet boosting pen up to 300 on su85, AP rounds on Jackson, tulips on firefly, etc.

I can say with confidence that is almost entirely due to light vehicles.

Faction winrates even follow the tier of light vehicle strats, lol

1. t-70
2. m20 -> stuart
3. Luchs/Puma
4. 222
5. AEC

Oh look it's the same order as the faction winrates.

You see it play out this way because light vehicles are the first unit that can single handily win a match. When you have the best players in the world playing against each other they are all incredibly skilled light vehicle drivers, whomever wins the light vehicle duel that happens in 80% of the matches will win the game. The T-70 especially tips the scales into the Soviets favor significantly.

You don't see these win rates in normal matches with average players because they can't handle the light vehicles as well. A skilled player with an unmatched light vehicle can absolutely trash their opponent. The solution is to revisit light vehicles again to try and make them strong without being able to single handily win a match. I recommend reducing raw power and adding more utility to keep them as high skill units, without being able to wipe the opponents entire army after one mistake.


I wouldn't even say Soviets are that much better than the other factions, it's pretty much entirely the T-70.

So basically do something to help LV phase Ostheer and UKF and we have balance.

Most of the matches were 3-0. All you can conclude from those was that one player was better than the other. Out of all of the matches, there were only about five that were 3/2 splits. That makes such a small sample size that it isn't possible to make any balance statements.

If anything, the large number of 3-0 matches says that balance for 1v1 is close enough that the better player usually wins.

While at face value this seems like an excellent explanation of what's happening; it's actually very unlikely, especially for the OST/Sov matchup. In fact, provided sufficient randomness in faction selection (it was a coin flip), these stats (although preliminary) essentially exclude this from being a possibility.

If a large portion (or even all, for the sake of argument) games were 3-0, that means that those games must either be 2:1 axis or 2:1 allies. Provided that faction choice was random, that means most players (who progressed) should've played each side an equal number of times - first two games as allies, then moving to the next round with two games as axis, and so on. Given this, that means that each round should assign a 66% win rate for the winning side, and 33% to the losing side.

What's important to note, is that again, those 66/33 win rates should be handed out roughly evenly to each side. 50% of the time the 'significantly better' player should've been playing axis twice, and 50% of the time they should've been allies twice. As a result, on average, the allied:axis win rate should be roughly equal, and any deviation from this would be very unlikely - since deviation means that a 'less skilled' player won against a 'more skilled' one.

What this leaves is essentially a range of likely outcomes. If the match-ups weren't 'close', and there was always a 'much better' player, that 66/33 split should cancel itself out given enough games (there were 32 in brackets, more if we include round-robin), leaving a 50-50 win:loss ratio. However, even given the worst possible case, where the better player always played allies twice, the win:loss ratio could still only be at best 66:33%. However, for the case of Ostov, we're nearly 5% outside of that possibility.

The sample size for those OH vs SU numbers is 14 games (10 W / 4 L). Syphon sample is 18 games (12 W / 6 L).
Then you have to take into account WHO was playing each faction. For example: Luvnest was the one who played the most soviets (11 games) compared to the following players Isildur/Happycat/Jove at 4 each. Luvnest only drop a game against Von Ivan till the finals against Noggano.

Rather than panicking on small sample sizes comparisons i would rather at least take a look at overall performance and even better how most games played out.

For example: i think it's more clear how to tone down SU than doing so with USF or toning up OH.

I did mention that it was a small sample size, and would need more analysis - and also that we shouldn't buff OST. However, even with a small sample size, the stats are still extremely strange. A +/- 5% or even 10% result isn't too surprising, +/- 21.4% is a lot. As I explained above, even in an unlikely scenario of the better player always playing Sov in the Sov/OST matchup, the stats still don't make sense.




For fun, if you calculate the standard deviation for all the match ups, you get almost exactly 11%, with a margin of error around 3.48%. That means all of the matchups are pretty unremarkable, falling within one standard deviation; in fact even the margin of error calculations gives us only a meager 0.95 - 1.3sigma; i.e. very unremarkable. OST/UKF is a bit larger at 2.87sigma, so it's sticking out a fair bit more, but still nothing crazy. Then there's OST/Sov, at nearly 2 standard deviations from normal, and at 6.14 sigma. If CoH2 balance were a scientific field, I could say with around 90% confidence that UKF was UP, but with OVER 99.99966% confidence that Sov is OP.

snip

That would be right, if games were ending before they got into the late game.

So basically do something to help LV phase Ostheer and UKF and we have balance.

Yep. Kinda. That's 1 problem solved.

I did mention that it was a small sample size, and would need more analysis - and also that we shouldn't buff OST. However, even with a small sample size, the stats are still extremely strange. A +/- 5% or even 10% result isn't too surprising, +/- 21.4% is a lot. As I explained above, even in an unlikely scenario of the better player always playing Sov in the Sov/OST matchup, the stats still don't make sense.




For fun, if you calculate the standard deviation for all the match ups, you get almost exactly 11%, with a margin of error around 3.48%. That means all of the matchups are pretty unremarkable, falling within one standard deviation; in fact even the margin of error calculations gives us only a meager 0.95 - 1.3sigma; i.e. very unremarkable. OST/UKF is a bit larger at 2.87sigma, so it's sticking out a fair bit more, but still nothing crazy. Then there's OST/Sov, at nearly 2 standard deviations from normal, and at 6.14 sigma. If CoH2 balance were a scientific field, I could say with around 90% confidence that UKF was UP, but with OVER 99.99966% confidence that Sov is OP.

I was just saying that people shouldn't ALARM and that the stats were incomplete. And while the numbers seems alarming for Soviets, people are probably gonna scream USF OP once the full data set is released.

UKF - need mobile mortar + upgrade option to sapper that makes them more combat effective
SOV- is2's armour should be lowered so its counters can be more effective,
t70 is fine
ost - slight panther acc increase, and MAYBE slight range buff for brumbar to make t4 better
USF - Nerf jackson moving acc to 0.5

UKF - need mobile mortar + upgrade option to sapper that makes them more combat effective + Cromwell speed nerf&combat buff
SOV- is2's SPEED should be lowered so its counters can be more effective,
t70 is fine, T1 needs revamp to be optional WITH current meta, not instead of
ost - slight panther acc increase, and MAYBE slight range buff for brumbar to make t4 better
USF - Nerf jackson moving acc to 0.5

Perfected

UKF - need mobile mortar + upgrade option to sapper that makes them more combat effective
SOV- is2's armour should be lowered so its counters can be more effective,
t70 is fine
ost - slight panther acc increase, and MAYBE slight range buff for brumbar to make t4 better
USF - Nerf jackson moving acc to 0.5

I think all of this is a good starting place, but there's likely more than needs to be looked at. SOV's dominance can't be coming entirely from the IS2, it's likely also coming from either LVs, infantry, other call-ins, or a combination of sources.

Similarly, while adding a mobile mortar to UKF has been long requested, simply buffing Sapper's combat strength isn't necessarily a good idea, since you'd likely end up with a CQC squad with a 23-mp reinforce cost at vet 3, making them incredibly efficient even if they just traded with other mainlines..

While is2 is a kt+ that managed to sneak in uncountered by wehr. I dont think t70, LV, are the big cause.

As farlion said i agree. Sov is patched to point of no clear weak zones.

Because their underperforming points were over highlighted and buff while their strengths remain. We also should stop balancing from pov that wehr is the perfect gold faction. Yes their base mechanics underline coh meta, but performance are clearly not scaling well.

For example cons and grens are equal at stock but cons can build sandbag. Claims of lmg42 power spike is half story. Since the lmg42 can't fire on move, useless against green cover. Means it hardly can wipe and so easy to avoid.

Or mg42 is better mg cos suppression. While true at start, it falls off the cliff against vet units. It hasn't seen a change for awhile but maxim adjust for the better while maintaining its speed and survival.

Then i remember a late unit like brumbar had a good run pre anniversary classic, then its armour AND range got nerfed, it was never seen much again.

The reason people went tiger is because its the only vehicle that you can get that will reliably arrive in the same as other equivalents (disregarding luchs and puma.) meaning you can just get a tiger out which fights everything to duel and is2 and comes out at the same time frame. instead of getting say a p4 which wouldnt even stand a chance.

Honestly I would just look into toning down USF and Soviets primarily, if they are both toned down that is technically a buff for Ostheer and Brits who are struggling at the moment and I think OKW should be the faction the game is currently balanced around for this next patch. Even though I used to hold the belief that Ostheer should be the faction the game is balanced around I feel the powercreep has gotten out of control and I don't want to see any more buffs to OKW, Brits, and Ostheer since USF and Soviets are currently too lethal as it stands. I personally actually preferred the GCS2 meta because USF wasn't too strong and Ostheer was arguably as viable as OKW. Heavies were still the meta but to be honest they weren't as strong performance-wise and while you didn't need to tech to get them, they were weaker in big team games and didn't come as early in 1v1 games due to the increased amount of CP's. Heavy tanks got buffed across the board and that has made them overperform relative to their timing. They either need a CP increase or increased teching costs, or if neither of those changes are implemented at least look at nerfing the scatter on main guns so infantry aren't being nuked in 1-2 shots regardless of vet. This is especially a problem with the IS2 and Pershing but the Tiger can be really nasty at points as well.

Tommy nerf is also a thoughtless wrong patch

What Tommy was strong was a breathtaking push through a fast bolster upgrade, not a strong one in itself

It would have been enough to nerf the trench's durability and move the bolster upgrade to the Company command post

It was a patch that was so ignorant and so little understanding of the faction