Login

russian armor

A reminder among the BS "balance" threads

14 Oct 2020, 08:58 AM
#1
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



Taken from the Steam page itself.
Why this game is currently pretty well balanced
14 Oct 2020, 09:05 AM
#2
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Soviets being mid game, while they are objectively weakest mid game faction, not counting t70 :snfPeter:

Chart is pretty BS, since its outdated.
14 Oct 2020, 09:21 AM
#3
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515

My point exactly. And if you do count T70, which you should, they do have strong mid game. Just goes to show how much ally/axis fanboys have ruined the original concept of balance. Still, it's well balanced now. Having one faction rely on one unit to hold the mid game firmly is BS but it works.
14 Oct 2020, 09:35 AM
#4
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Outside of army size, nothing else is relevant for at least 3 years.

Design from that graph was abandoned long time ago.
14 Oct 2020, 09:51 AM
#5
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

I wouldn't refer to anything that Relic posted pre-community patch. Lotta things changed since then.

Also the game works better when people abandon excel style sheet classifications.
14 Oct 2020, 09:53 AM
#6
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

My point exactly. And if you do count T70, which you should, they do have strong mid game.

Except when all powerspike is concentrated in 1 thing it means that, faction will be unnecessary hard to play, simply because of the fact that if player is unable to play T70 pefectly, let alone not lose it, then he will be pretty much destoyed by the enemy.

The same way, we cant say if faction is balanced and works, if it relays on commanders to keep it competitive.

Having one faction rely on one unit to hold the mid game firmly is BS but it works.

It works as a bandage and prevent faction from being completly unplable. By that logic we could have had faction with 0 units early, but with the mid game ability which automatically kills all enemy units and grant you controll of the half of the map. This would have still worked because "early game suck". If something is working it doesnt mean it is any good.

The same way USF was given mortar instead of smoke for rifles. Sure smoke worked against support weapons early on and it was playble, and good players were still able to play and win as USF just as good. But it was remade because of the reasons I mentioned before.
14 Oct 2020, 09:59 AM
#7
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

...
Taken from the Steam page itself.
Why this game is currently pretty well balanced

At the time there was a design of how faction worked and what play-style was more effective.

Now factions are homogenized.

That has little to do with balance itself.
14 Oct 2020, 10:01 AM
#8
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

My point exactly. And if you do count T70, which you should, they do have strong mid game. Just goes to show how much ally/axis fanboys have ruined the original concept of balance. Still, it's well balanced now. Having one faction rely on one unit to hold the mid game firmly is BS but it works.


The only thing it actually shows is how much the current game deviates from what Relic conceptualized.
Not sure what you were initially trying to say though
14 Oct 2020, 10:17 AM
#9
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



The only thing it actually shows is how much the current game deviates from what Relic conceptualized.
Not sure what you were initially trying to say though


Initially: What you have just said xD

How the game changed throughout the years (positive thing) and how axis/ally fanboys try to force away some changes (trending 7th conscript, panther buff, major buff, falls nerf -> all of which are not needed -> negative)

I consider the cookie-cutting BS of "...getting more in line with..." to be the biggest BS that happened to this game with the community patches. The homogenization has pretty much killed the need to explore new options as you HAVE to play certain builds to be effective.
14 Oct 2020, 10:30 AM
#10
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


How the game changed throughout the years (positive thing) and how axis/ally fanboys try to force away some changes (trending 7th conscript, panther buff, major buff, falls nerf -> all of which are not needed -> negative)


A lot of people dont see where problem lies. They see how falls rekt stuff and complain, or how 7th conscript are BS to deal with.

And they are BS in some way, but problems exist not with thouse units, but with factions. Falls could be remade into something different, but they cant be, because Obersts timing is just jokingly bad (just like OKW tech in general), and without them or JLI OKW inf play is complete garbage ones vet\upgunned\elite inf hits the field in mid game.

7th gives huge powerspike, but it cant be taken away becuse soviet mid game such ass, and they dont have any upgrades for mainline inf.

If other problematic areas of the factions are ajusted, then frustrating abilities\upgrades\units to play against can be ajusted aswell. But they cant be ajusted in vacuum or as a single entities. Thats the difference between good balance aproach and "it just works and justified".

Peronally my main complain about community balance, and I'il repeat myself. A lot of changes sometimes feel like they are bandage changes. "The Scope™" is the worst approach to balance CoH2. Penals are the best example.
14 Oct 2020, 10:59 AM
#11
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


....
Peronally my main complain about community balance, and I'il repeat myself. A lot of changes sometimes feel like they are bandage changes. "The Scope™" is the worst approach to balance CoH2. Penals are the best example.

Actually it is not the "scope" that is the problem. Scope was is helpful since it allows to make target changes and then adjust.

Imo the problem start with changes that where too ambitious. The first patch attempted to "fix" 3 factions at the same and introduced so massive changes that they where actually redesigning the factions.

When the problems started to appear instead of rolling back some of there changes, they continued down the same path into uncharted break an at least equal number of thing as they where fixing.

It simply the moderation team too long to realize that balancing can not be achieved big changes and number of small changes should be tried. Funny thing is that I have been pointing out this since day one.
14 Oct 2020, 11:06 AM
#12
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273



Initially: What you have just said xD

How the game changed throughout the years (positive thing) and how axis/ally fanboys try to force away some changes (trending 7th conscript, panther buff, major buff, falls nerf -> all of which are not needed -> negative)

I consider the cookie-cutting BS of "...getting more in line with..." to be the biggest BS that happened to this game with the community patches. The homogenization has pretty much killed the need to explore new options as you HAVE to play certain builds to be effective.


I'm actually very glad that the community team is taking decisive, ambitious changes with a blanket approach to considerable changes than sticking to nitpicking and excel stat sheets investigations. It is very risky but it pays off very well. The game has never been more balanced and fun than before. Of course some things won't work out, but they managed to fix them very quickly.
14 Oct 2020, 14:09 PM
#13
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

The homogenization has pretty much killed the need to explore new options as you HAVE to play certain builds to be effective.


Implying things were not that way before and in a more drastic way.

There's a difference between been "effective" and been "forced to". During the first 3 years, if you were not playing meta you will mostly auto lose. The gap in power between meta and non meta has close down quite a lot.
14 Oct 2020, 15:12 PM
#14
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



Implying things were not that way before and in a more drastic way.

There's a difference between been "effective" and been "forced to". During the first 3 years, if you were not playing meta you will mostly auto lose. The gap in power between meta and non meta has close down quite a lot.


While I admit I do not know about anything related to COH2 pre-mid-2014, I do agree that the balance so far is great. However, the current discussions that are trending are quite worrisome, given that it's a constant "THIS OP" or "THAT UP" masqueraded as "intelligent" arguments and "thoughtful" debates.
14 Oct 2020, 18:27 PM
#15
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



While I admit I do not know about anything related to COH2 pre-mid-2014, I do agree that the balance so far is great. However, the current discussions that are trending are quite worrisome, given that it's a constant "THIS OP" or "THAT UP" masqueraded as "intelligent" arguments and "thoughtful" debates.


But that has always been the case. But if you look it from some perspective, it's not as bad as it sounds.

0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

693 users are online: 693 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49876
Welcome our newest member, Lekanterfki
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM