Ideas for UKF hotfix

i never heard that sc2 is balanced around low tier players, if we were balancing game around rank >200 okw should be nerfed

Game is balanced around 3v3

Kappa

Game is balanced around 3v3

Kappa

i think panthers should be nerfed cuz they are too op in 4v4

i never heard that sc2 is balanced around low tier players, if we were balancing game around rank >200 okw should be nerfed

So again below Top50 is not equal to low tier. And as you mentioned Starcraft, I played both games sooo much. Yes Protoss was easier to play at low tier levels (because of fewer but stronger units) - and again that level is not below Top50.

But Starcraft was way better balanced - considering that you had three total asymmetric forces. Way more asymmetric than CoH2 even in ressource management. Especially in bigger matches there weren't such balance issues. There was no weird ressourse inflation and the scaling of the maps was way better too. I played at Diamnond level with friends, we stopped some day, because we recognized we hadn't enough time for playing to keep up. In Starcraft you need whole other levels of micro skills to be in the top. That is the reason we turned to CoH2. True Sight and a real cover mechanic were the other two factors that drew us in. CoH2 has so cool basic mechanics, but it has some real big issues Stracraft never had.

coh2 is pretty balanced now, outside okw vs brits matchup

coh2 is pretty balanced now, outside okw vs brits matchup

Sadly it is not, if you are not speaking about Top50 1vs1 again, just some examples:

- timing of CP dependent units/abilities is vastly differnt across game modes from 1vs1 to 4vs4
- length of early/mid/late game phases is vastly differnt across game modes from 1vs1 to 4vs4 too
- at some maps it is better to start at top or bottom
- at some maps a few units are close to be op, while they are next to useless at other maps
- still there are some very obvious unbalanced combos starting with 2vs2 that could be easily corrected
- OKW ressource managment (no caches but salvage) starts to get weird from 2vs2 and up
- still there are uncounterable ability sight tools
- flanking is an integral mechanic of this game - some units depent on it - still there are maps with not enough space for flanking, this is especially true for all the 3vs3 and 4vs4 maps
- too few stratgic/fuel/mun points in bigger game modes

- there is more...

A lot of this is just bad map design, but that is a big part of the balance. Still the game is fun, but I'm all in for correcting some of that flaws.

2v2 is hard to balance, 3v3 and 4v4 is just impossible to balance

Thas wrong without the upgrade iam able to snare vehicles and engage cc against units like grenadiers or osttruppen.
With the upgrade i cant snare since they are to slow and i have to stay back and even then they can't defend themselves against a chasing squad or a long range lmg unit.
And even their repair speed isn't impressively good, since every other pioneer squad get boosted repair speed with mine sweeper.
I would give them just the armor and the repair speed bonus for less munition without the movement penalty

Firstly, the upgrade was designed before the snapper snare. Secondly... Then don't upgrade all your sappers thirdly the repair rate increase is quite good, especially since sappers get a 25% repair speed buff via bolster.

Adding armour to sappers without the debuff would not be a good idea. There is a reason ONLY shocks and heavy sappers have it.

2v2 is hard to balance, 3v3 and 4v4 is just impossible to balance

Okay that is fine, then we don't have to try at all?

A simple but obvious example: In the vanilla version of the game there was an Ostheer commander with a LKW that you could drive on a ressource point to get more income out of it for the whole team. So if you took this commander you and your mates could build the normal caches and in addition you drove the LKW on ressource points. This lead to a huge ressource advantage in the lategame of the Ostheer vs Soviet matchup at 3vs3 and 4vs4 while it was only a small advantage in 2vs2. Obviously it was no problem at all in 1vs1.
The simple patch solution that came shortly before OKW/USF hit the field was only letting the player gain the ressources who build the LKW. Pretty simple but ingenious, no influence at 1vs1 matchup but a huge impact on balance of other modes in the right direction.

This example shows clearly that the sentence "3v3 and 4v4 is just impossible to balance" is just a lazy excuse for not beeing willing to invest anything to make this game better for all players in all game modes. I don't claim this game will be balanced at 4vs4 ever, but yes it could be way better than it is today. There are solutions, some are simple, some need thinking out of the box.

Wow, thats a kind one. I love this forums too, because there are people who seem to think that people outside top50 don't know how the game works. Thx in the name of all of them.

To be in the top50 is a lot more than knowing how the game works, it is about constantly playing and developing micro skills. It is about exploiting map design, about knowing the best spot for building your truck for example. I guess there are a lot of people above top50 that played strategy games as some of the top50 weren't even born. Because of kids and work they don't have the time for constant training. They play just a couple of games with friends once or twice a week. But they may know strategic/tactical basics a lot better becasue of their experience. Imagine, just for a moment, they might be able to understand how the game works. And then imagine they do have a right to play a fair and balanced game too. A good game isn't balanced in the Top50 only. Just consider this from time to time, it will help a lot. With best Regards

Balancing games across different skill levels has always been impossible.

The problem is that there's no clear "target audience" for COH2. Does Relic/balance team care about the fanatical fanbase, semi-regular players, or the casuals? Because it's impossible to balance the game for all of them.

For a substantial length of time (several patches in a row after major KT nerfs), the KT was unusable in 1v1, and was used as a BM token. People like Price (rank 30) used it on stream to show off vs rank 200+ players he was stomping.

Yet at the lower levels of skill, where players simply charged headfirst into the KT, the KT was considered "OP". And to players who didn't play the game, it was considered "decent".

Another example would be MG42 spam. For low elo players, flanking is difficult to execute. Especially in team games, it can often be hard to counter because of narrow maps. For a casual 4v4 player who runs his 3 squads of rifles face-first into an MG42, the game can be a frustrating experience.

But can you seriously expect to balance the game around these players' opinions, just because they "deserve" a fair and balanced game? Well, they're playing it - it's their skills that are not properly balanced.

Okay that is fine, then we don't have to try at all?

A simple but obvious example: In the vanilla version of the game there was an Ostheer commander with a LKW that you could drive on a ressource point to get more income out of it for the whole team. So if you took this commander you and your mates could build the normal caches and in addition you drove the LKW on ressource points. This lead to a huge ressource advantage in the lategame of the Ostheer vs Soviet matchup at 3vs3 and 4vs4 while it was only a small advantage in 2vs2. Obviously it was no problem at all in 1vs1.
The simple patch solution that came shortly before OKW/USF hit the field was only letting the player gain the ressources who build the LKW. Pretty simple but ingenious, no influence at 1vs1 matchup but a huge impact on balance of other modes in the right direction.

This example shows clearly that the sentence "3v3 and 4v4 is just impossible to balance" is just a lazy excuse for not beeing willing to invest anything to make this game better for all players in all game modes. I don't claim this game will be balanced at 4vs4 ever, but yes it could be way better than it is today. There are solutions, some are simple, some need thinking out of the box.

The problem is that the different game modes are fundamentally different games with different parameters altogether.

Perfect balance for 4v4 will be unplayable chaos for 1v1.

As Sander has said, the balance team is happy to pander to team gamers by sacrificing 1v1 gameplay. There's little we can do but co-exist uncomfortably and miserably.

to make it clear, if you talk about balance outside 1v1/2v2 just shut up
there is no garrison heavy maps in the pool besides lost glider and arnhem which you should veto anyways
UC is basically a good LV with insane timing that costs no fuel and litterally noone uses flamer on it cuz Bren upgrade is better upgrade in every department. it ruins earlygame for okw and is just too good for the price, if you ahd to sacrifice your timings for using it it would be far better
kubel is 210 and UC is 260 plus ammo, fair price
USF mortar is shit and noone ever used it, idk how desperate you would have to be to actually build usf mortar
besides that ukf can have 6min AEC to dislodge any garrison

You are either a bad troll or an even worse player. I'm going to go with a mix of both.

2020 and we still have this conversations.

You balance with 1v1 in mind, because you can simplify the amount of elements you have to take into account.

BUT, you take into consideration what the implications might be for teamgames.

For example: if it were only for 1v1, then you would had to buff the ISU/Ele/JT cause they are barely used at all.

The best approach we have atm is having the non doctrinal roster of units mostly balanced so they can tackle down most problems on their own without requiring doctrinal options and then see whether certain commanders are breaking any specific mode.

All factions have enough commanders that you can have a variety of them working for each mode.

Finally skillwise, you NEVER BALANCE taking into account the lowest common denominator. When you dumb the game down, you just kill the game. Be it RTS or FPS.

That doesn't mean that you won't hear what those low rank guys have to say, but your solutions to their issues should come mostly in the form of QOL solutions that ease micro.

I'll give you an example from another game. Age of Empires 2.

You know what it was tedious in the original first versions before the first Conquerors expansion (IIRC or it was only on AoE1)? To have to rebuild each farm after it expired. Later on you could just put in queue several farms to get built automatically once they expired.

Or recently they put an auto scout command. It's more efficient to do it manually so you can look for your resources or your opponents base location. But after certain point in the game, you might not have the micro to do so. They just introduce a command which makes the unit explore the whole map in a predictable way.

Balancing games across different skill levels has always been impossible.

The problem is that there's no clear "target audience" for COH2. Does Relic/balance team care about the fanatical fanbase, semi-regular players, or the casuals? Because it's impossible to balance the game for all of them.

For a substantial length of time (several patches in a row after major KT nerfs), the KT was unusable in 1v1, and was used as a BM token. People like Price (rank 30) used it on stream to show off vs rank 200+ players he was stomping.

Yet at the lower levels of skill, where players simply charged headfirst into the KT, the KT was considered "OP". And to players who didn't play the game, it was considered "decent".

Another example would be MG42 spam. For low elo players, flanking is difficult to execute. Especially in team games, it can often be hard to counter because of narrow maps. For a casual 4v4 player who runs his 3 squads of rifles face-first into an MG42, the game can be a frustrating experience.

But can you seriously expect to balance the game around these players' opinions, just because they "deserve" a fair and balanced game? Well, they're playing it - it's their skills that are not properly balanced.

cuz most of teamgames and low ranks players opinions are l2p issues xD

i think panthers should be nerfed cuz they are too op in 4v4

I honestly laugh at people who actually think that kappa.

Yes my panther is opaf while being outranged the entire match in redball express

I honestly laugh at people who actually think that Jackson is op.

Yes my Jackson is opaf while being outranged in redball express by elefant.