4v4 balance improvement

as a 4v4 wehrboo and usf player, imo

-it is right, random allies team without sov is harder because of katy and strong KV/IS tank commanders. likewise, random all okw is harder because no cache and pwafer against blob

-okw early stuka helps against maxim/mortar and usf early aggressive forward camping in lane maps. wehr will struggle until pwafer is out or chose a mht commander.

-late game infantry favors vet allies blob with upgraded guns in mid-to-close range. not long range lmg grens who cant close in. obers are too expensive, late to vet and 4 man too.

-late game arty spam may happen, but is both sides that are abusing, dont single out left. spg/priests are easier to kill though.

-panthers spam is not common or an issue. they are too expensive and worthless against infantry blob. most i see is 2 panthers per player, to counter KV1 meme and Churchills. mostly is 1 panther + 1 heavy call-in. i love using 3 jacksons + bulletins buff to hunt panthers.

-allies forward retreat points are super useful in 4v4

to deal with SPGs?

The normal answer to mobile Arty spam. Flank, dive, or cheese.

I meant b4s/ml20.

Answer: same shit everyone else has to do

if you ask me, random 4v4 is not conclusive

arranged 4v4, axis probably can edge it in late game of attrition.
because of tankier tanks and various useful bulletins and commanders.

but allies can close the games faster with coordinated push en-masse, wiping and draining mp and resoure cutoffs

this is the core asymmetrical design. I dont see the problem.

You simply switch to main the faction according to your play preference, late game, turtling, blobbing, micro heavy tanks, arty spamming, 60TD sniping etc.

No reason to make units perform similarly across factions.

I meant b4s/ml20.

Answer: same shit everyone else has to do

By that logic ML-20/Lefh are the problem because there only exists doctrine counters, or gross income sinks to counter them. Rocket artillery should counter them in a perfect world by say having a barrage with a long fire time but hits far range on the map. Then, the ML-20/LEfh should be reduced in cost just to be a constant harass unit one could build.

If I recall, the Lefh costs 400MP and 40-60 fuel correct? Comes in at 8 CP? So if it's against USF one of them is FORCED, not encouraged but forced to go a doctrine to deal with it? I feel like that's the biggest issue with USF/Brits in that since they don't have complete tools, having to go commanders to deal with casual things locks them out of options.

Furthermore If you used little fuel to force out a big purchase such as the priest, mission accomplished time to get tanks out faster then your opponent. Or as you say spend 250 USF munitions to counter it (Guess USF doesn't need bars or AT rounds). I'd like to see a 4v4 player actually buy some anti air to see if it could snipe the majors planes and others before revealing the Lefh.

I don't think this is a Lefh problem, I just think it's more of a damning decision to deprive Two allied factions of tools to deal with simple things.

LEFH is 50 fuel iirc.

The calculation is not 180-250 muni for LEFH or more BARs than San Diego has bars. It's kill the LEFH or get the frontline turned into the moon under bombardment and light arty teams flattened. I trust there's no need for me to elaborate how losing all that manpower makes any saved muni pointless? Or somehow, apparently HQ sector targeted but I can only see that happening with vet III LEFH or just bad team commander picks. (Major is somewhere between 100-120 muni).

Bear in mind there is a long build time for LEFH (unless OST and using that bulletin), so engineers are not repairing vehicles or laying deathtraps on the flanks. Particularly long for OKW as they can't get a 2nd SP realistically. This is fine and part of the design and cost too imho.

It's an 8CP unit which typically is unlocked after medium tanks in my experience, esp if rushed. Hell, I've had games where I've been staring at a Crom and there's only one AT gun between two players nvm an LEFH. (Shouldn't have assumed teammate had an AT gun). Typically by the time the gun is built, I've reached 9 CP often because of how long it takes to build. SPG is out on the field with one click. The med tank vs heavy arty timing issue is not a problem imho esp in such a cache heavy mode. A very big issue with a fuel calculation is the fact that the gun can't move, so you always know where it is, rather than risk huge resources on an easily dodged arty call in/tank dive.

Major gets +1 recon plane at vet I so it's extremely extremely unlikely you'll shoot down both in time unless the Axis frontline is giving 1944 Berlin a run for its money with AA defences.

And oh yes, BGroup HQ will get targeted by SPGs but you don't hear me complaining that a fwd retreat point (with injured squads) is being barraged by a clever opponent. I've done it to many OKW players over the years. Very satisfying I'll admit.

By that logic ML-20/Lefh are the problem because there only exists doctrine counters, or gross income sinks to counter them. Rocket artillery should counter them in a perfect world by say having a barrage with a long fire time but hits far range on the map. Then, the ML-20/LEfh should be reduced in cost just to be a constant harass unit one could build.

Well right now, everyone has to get doctrine counters to deal with fixed artillery guns, just how it is. 4v4 has them far too well defended to do anything non-doc except suicide dives as an AT/TD wall will swiss cheese you. B-4 in live and current patch preview still can one-shot your LEFHs as well. Ie: destroy the gun, not just crew knock out, with 3 shots instead of the usual 1 mega-RNG roll. ML-20 is commonly mocked, even by me, but believe me it'll turn into your worst nightmare if no one has brought a counter to it.

Only your doc counters don't really work vs SPGs or you're required to use some extreme tactics like attrition dives on Hill 400, praying that there's not 10 mines between you (Puma/Pz iv/Panther and your target . Last time I did this I got quizzed on where my armor was, after about 6 dead pumas and maybe 3-5 dead SPGs + ambo. That guy didn't lay mines.

If I recall, the Lefh costs 400MP and 40-60 fuel correct? Comes in at 8 CP? So if it's against USF one of them is FORCED, not encouraged but forced to go a doctrine to deal with it? I feel like that's the biggest issue with USF/Brits in that since they don't have complete tools, having to go commanders to deal with casual things locks them out of options.

Furthermore If you used little fuel to force out a big purchase such as the priest, mission accomplished time to get tanks out faster then your opponent. Or as you say spend 250 USF munitions to counter it (Guess USF doesn't need bars or AT rounds). I'd like to see a 4v4 player actually buy some anti air to see if it could snipe the majors planes and others before revealing the Lefh.

I don't think this is a Lefh problem, I just think it's more of a damning decision to deprive Two allied factions of tools to deal with simple things.

There is a problem with LEFH's in 4v4, but they are not THE problem with 4v4. Otherwise, at least someone gets it... I've seen so many Allies getting spg's/arty out with nothing to take and hold ground and nothing to defend their arty pieces with from Panther dives.

Is COH2 teamgame even fixable. We can make as many changes as we want but in order for the game to be balanced in 1v1 it can't be balanced in 4v4. Thats a real shame if true as I bet most people play this game casualhardcore and play teamgames.

Snip

That's absolutely not true. An entire array of toolsnot massively used in 1v1, and can be used to balance 4v4. The classic is all indirect fire. Building 2 mortars in 1v1 is death, as is building early arty; exception is vs UKF emplacement spam.

SHTDs are also just not used in 1v1, its a team tool only. 1v1 only sees 1 heavy tank destroyer generally.

Also, and this is gonna really hammer WhiteFlash and the maps guys, a huge amount of 4v4 issues is due to map design. This one is stupid hard to get right. Redball is the most played map and HIGHLY incentizes massive MG play due to the value in forcing super long retreats and the small frontline minimizing required MG count. You can see opposite design attempted with Hill 400, which would be amazing if the fuels weren't problematically far away and relatively easy to lock down. Removing caches and either removing or moving dedicated fuel behind the lines would help mitigate instant 4v4 loses and incentivize pushing as safely holding the fuel is no longer worth more than taking another control point. People seem to enjoy the massive laney arty fests and its stupid time and energy intensive to fix, so probably not worth fixing.

Sanders wrote up the necessary changes (at least for UKF). Its just a LOT of work and massive revamping. We've marched towards this more perfect game patch by patch over the years, you can see the arch of progress.

Sometimes I wonder how different factions from different game versions would fare against each other. For example, it'd be cool to be able to play UKF as when it was on its release against the most recent versions of OST and OKW just to see how all the balancing attempts have done over time.

Heck, I'd love to (re) play a 2on2 with only SOV/OST using the version of the game right before WFA came out just to see and remember how balance was back then.

That's absolutely not true. An entire array of toolsnot massively used in 1v1, and can be used to balance 4v4. The classic is all indirect fire. Building 2 mortars in 1v1 is death, as is building early arty; exception is vs UKF emplacement spam.

SHTDs are also just not used in 1v1, its a team tool only. 1v1 only sees 1 heavy tank destroyer generally.

Also, and this is gonna really hammer WhiteFlash and the maps guys, a huge amount of 4v4 issues is due to map design. This one is stupid hard to get right. Redball is the most played map and HIGHLY incentizes massive MG play due to the value in forcing super long retreats and the small frontline minimizing required MG count. You can see opposite design attempted with Hill 400, which would be amazing if the fuels weren't problematically far away and relatively easy to lock down. Removing caches and either removing or moving dedicated fuel behind the lines would help mitigate instant 4v4 loses and incentivize pushing as safely holding the fuel is no longer worth more than taking another control point. People seem to enjoy the massive laney arty fests and its stupid time and energy intensive to fix, so probably not worth fixing.

Sanders wrote up the necessary changes (at least for UKF). Its just a LOT of work and massive revamping. We've marched towards this more perfect game patch by patch over the years, you can see the arch of progress.

I Agree with all that except the 'perfect balance' part already

Sometimes I wonder how different factions from different game versions would fare against each other. For example, it'd be cool to be able to play UKF as when it was on its release against the most recent versions of OST and OKW just to see how all the balancing attempts have done over time.

Heck, I'd love to (re) play a 2on2 with only SOV/OST using the version of the game right before WFA came out just to see and remember how balance was back then.

CoH2 "classic", I'd play it. It's things like that that make you wonder. if every faction was released as it was and balance was never touched, would everything be balanced because everything is OP?

Sometimes I wonder how different factions from different game versions would fare against each other. For example, it'd be cool to be able to play UKF as when it was on its release against the most recent versions of OST and OKW just to see how all the balancing attempts have done over time.

Heck, I'd love to (re) play a 2on2 with only SOV/OST using the version of the game right before WFA came out just to see and remember how balance was back then.

Days of the Grenadier and Penal terminators. Sometimes I miss them.

There isn't any arty imbalance, I don't know why that's in here. Aside from the non-doc rocket arty issue, the other stuff works. The panzerwerfer causes a tremendous bleed and is an excellent blob control tool. Honestly, as axis it's 100% your skill if you have difficulty in 4v4. There isn't a situation that you'll face as axis and not have an efficient and effective tool for the job.

There isn't any arty imbalance, I don't know why that's in here. Aside from the non-doc rocket arty issue, the other stuff works. The panzerwerfer causes a tremendous bleed and is an excellent blob control tool. Honestly, as axis it's 100% your skill if you have difficulty in 4v4. There isn't a situation that you'll face as axis and not have an efficient and effective tool for the job.

Ain't that the truth. It's funny, the difference playing vs good players and bad ones, is that they don't utilize all stock axis units. I mean, the biggest turnoff, when in 3v3 you're playing in the same lane as OKW, is when OKW goes for kubel/spios. Absolutely cancerous.

Good players will use kubel to:
drive up to your rifles and displace them from cover by trying to run them over at the same time that the sturmpios are closing in on your cover position (echelons are useless in combat early).
By the time your 2nd squad of rifles is coming, you've already been displaced and need to retreat. Absolutely no counter play vs such kubel openings as USF.

On the other hand, bad players usually just leave the kubel to fire from a distance, deal little damage while you use rifles to mow down incoming sturmpios.
OST has early faust.

OKW has the same struggle against bren carriers but they do get their fausts online quite quickly.

As I play OKW and USF only (mostly USF), that's the most cancerous thing. OKW vs UC and USF vs kubel (or sniper)

the problem is heavy TDs and map pool. 4v4 map pool is extremely laney that makes flaking hard and Heavy TD can just lock down a valuable chunk of map and make allied armor almost useless. AT guns do not bother them, because of abundance of rocket arty and huge armor of ele/jt and ram+offmap was nerfed last patch. So pretty much there is very few things you can do to deal with them, the few things that work are hard to pull off and are in realm of outplay or armor spam.
I think if heavy TDs to be made less efficient, winrates might look more fair.

I haven't struggled against heavy tank destroyers in a while. I think the changes done to them have been pretty good. They are still strong in the right situation. With the elimination of spotting scopes on the elefant, I think it will be more even. The units don't really need to be changed, but they need to be re-evaluated on subtle areas like cost, upkeep, and population. These things don't make waves in 1v1 and 2v2, but will be felt in 3v3 and 4v4.

CoH2 "classic", I'd play it. It's things like that that make you wonder. if every faction was released as it was and balance was never touched, would everything be balanced because everything is OP?

The newer factions wouldn't be able to compete with release Soviets/OH, specially if we consider their release state DLC commanders.

OKW: even for how broken this faction was, they don't have the tools to deal with clowncars or even worse, original maxim spam combined with crushing T70. It would be trivial facing them using Soviet Industry or HTD PPSH.

UKF: is in a similar position to OKW, that they only shined at late game (remember they sucked hard on 1v1). They will probable get over run by release Osttruppen/Assault Grenadier commander with FHT hitting the field soon after.

USF: if they don't face AssG/Osttruppen they should do more than fine, specially with Rifle Company or Greyhound cheese.


What it would be interesting to play is Soviets vs OH and USF vs OKW exclusively.

So no one knows about the server？sometimes connecting lost when the game loading.
i think this problem is important than balance.

So no one knows about the server？sometimes connecting lost when the game loading.
i think this problem is important than balance.

agreed, but it's completely off topic. Just make a different thread to talk about the connection issues.

The idea of splitting 1v1,2v2 and 3v3,4v4 is interesting and would probably make for a more balanced experience. I don't think that will happen at this stage in the game when its 10 years old and the player base is so small. Best advice I can give you for 4v4 as Allies is to spam artillery. Axis has no great way to respond to that. Lefh 18s are all but useless in that situation since they can't move and will be erased by Sextons or Priests, not to mention they are losing counter barrage soon. Calis are tanky and not easily killed by a diving P4 like Katys are. Stuka close air is a good solution unless one or two of you invests in AA. The best solution so far for Axis is the new Jaeger armor strafe, but that relies on the ally player not paying attention. Allies spamming artillery in 4v4 gives me and every other Axis player I know a headache. The only way to stop it is to prevent the Allies from getting it in the first place so winning the early game for Axis is key.

CoH2 "classic", I'd play it. It's things like that that make you wonder. if every faction was released as it was and balance was never touched, would everything be balanced because everything is OP?

You just made me remember the horror of Soviet sniper in scout car...