Winrates indicate horrible balance

How is it acceptable to have these WR% in 2v2 3v3 4v4 over several months?

Considering how matchmaking works these WR% are pretty incredible. Despite the matchmaker trying to even out every game by matching players of similar elo Allies somehow manage to get 40-45% WR in 2v2 3v3 4v4 over hundreds of thousands of games. There were almost 42000 4v4s played in the month of May alone.


UKF 2v2

March April May

43.1 41.5 41.5


UKF 3v3

March April May
42.7 43.8 46.6


UKF 4v4

March April May
43.1 43 42.9




Soviet 2v2

March April May
47.4 45.5 46


Soviet 3v3

March April May
44.1 43 46


Soviet 4v4

March April May
43.1 43.9 43.3




USF 2v2

March April May
45.9 44.9 45.3


USF 3v3

March April May
45.9 46.1 49.5


USF 4v4

March April May
44.8 45.2 44.1

Mainly because most of the balance team prefers axis, with a few exceptions like aera. Buff allies in teamgames, axis gets weaker in 1v1. Buff axis in 1v1, axis gets broken in teamgames.
But mostly because axis have all the tools they need stock, plus the stock heavies and heavy tanks in a lot of good doctrines.
Why they don't rework the ally doctrines to add some teamgame power (like making E8 a true late-game brawler, instead of the retarded Jackson that it's going to be now).

Nobody will do shit and Sander will probably defend it by saying "WE ARE DOING A GREAT JOB. I played allies in last 10 games and won 12 times so it's all fine".

Can you post the Axis win rates for comparison please?

Can you post the Axis win rates for comparison?

Ok.

March/April/May

OKW 2v2
54.6 55.8 55.2

OKW 3v3
55.8 56.5 53.4

OKW 4v4
56.5 56.1 57.3


Ost 2v2
54.6 55.5 55.3

Ost 3v3
55.3 54.7 52.3

Ost 4v4
56 55 55.9

Sample sizes are: (number of games played during the whole month)

March/April/May

2v2
18312/23396/25088

3v3
11358/14009/14434

4v4
33032/42438/41736

This is what happens when axis has complete tech trees while allies need doctrines to access basic tools

This is what happens when axis has complete tech trees while allies need doctrines to access basic tools

I am noob but would argue OKW has the worst tools in team games. No MGs, no smoke, no arty counter, etc

I am noob but would argue OKW has the worst tools in team games. No MGs, no smoke, no arty counter, etc

But... they... do have these.

This is what happens when axis has complete tech trees while allies need doctrines to access basic tools

You can't really do a correlation with that, We've seen each Allied faction dominating meta in the past.

The balance team has nothing of balance in them, they're just a group of people that have skill in modding but definitively a bad approach in balance perspective. This result just shows it.

interesting, let's wait to see what the new patch does to the winrate, as the axis late-game is getting changed/nerfed

I think those statistics are a bit flawed because they include all matches, rather than the top-200 only. Why do I say that? Because there is no question that Axis are far easier to play at a lower skill level.

If you include all games, the win ratios for 2v2 look like this:
UKF: 41.5 %
Soviet: 46.0 %
USF: 45.3 %
Wehrmacht: 55.3 %
OKW: 55.2 %

Once you look at the Top 200 win rates, things change because people have an understanding of how the game works.

UKF: 48.2 %
Soviets: 53.4 %
USF: 47.4 %
Wehrmacht: 50 %
OKW: 49.4 %

That's a drastic shift in percentages. Why? Because people have an understanding of how the game works. Take the MG42. At the lower levels, most people would argue its the most oppressive unit in the game. At higher levels, people know how to counter it, and most people think the Dshk or the .50 cal is the far superior MG.

Now, having said that I do believe Axis are currently better than Allies, but I would caution about using statistics that include players who have little to no understanding of how the game works, which makes any argument about balance difficult.

I think those statistics are a bit flawed because they include all matches, rather than the top-200 only. Why do I say that? Because there is no question that Axis are far easier to play at a lower skill level.

If you include all games, the win ratios for 2v2 look like this:
UKF: 41.5 %
Soviet: 46.0 %
USF: 45.3 %
Wehrmacht: 55.3 %
OKW: 55.2 %

Once you look at the Top 200 win rates, things change because people have an understanding of how the game works.

UKF: 48.2 %
Soviets: 53.4 %
USF: 47.4 %
Wehrmacht: 50 %
OKW: 49.4 %

That's a drastic shift in percentages. Why? Because people have an understanding of how the game works. Take the MG42. At the lower levels, most people would argue its the most oppressive unit in the game. At higher levels, people know how to counter it, and most people think the Dshk or the .50 cal is the far superior MG.

Now, having said that I do believe Axis are currently better than Allies, but I would caution about using statistics that include players who have little to no understanding of how the game works, which makes any argument about balance difficult.

That's only for one month though.

For march, the numbers for Top 200 2v2 are UKF 40.3 Soviets 49.2 USF 48.7
For april, UKF 41.9 Soviets 50 USF 49.

Sample sizes are: (number of games played during the whole month)

March/April/May

2v2
18312/23396/25088

3v3
11358/14009/14434

4v4
33032/42438/41736

Thank you for the data! Having got back home I would post something but others have already beaten me to it. On the surface it looks horrendous but I don't have much experience with using the WR of each category as a metric for balance. I had thought the game was mainly balanced towards the top few hundred players though certainly this explains a lot of the Axis OP comments I've been getting from lower rank players lately.

UKF balancing does seem forever troubled hmm. Show Spoiler

Thank you for the data! Having got back home I would post something but others have already beaten me to it. On the surface it looks horrendous but I don't have much experience with using the WR of each category as a metric for balance. I had thought the game was mainly balanced towards the top few hundred players though certainly this explains a lot of the Axis OP comments I've been getting from lower rank players lately.

Well Top 200 4v4 is even worse for example:

For May: UKF 36.6 Soviets 43 USF 40.8
April: UKF 45.2 Soviets 38.5 USF 43
March: UKF 43.9 Soviets 45.6 USF 48.8

The Top 200 WR% are not that meaningful though because the sample size is very small.

Well Top 200 4v4 is even worse for example:

For May: UKF 36.6 Soviets 43 USF 40.8
April: UKF 45.2 Soviets 38.5 USF 43
March: UKF 43.9 Soviets 45.6 USF 48.8

The Top 200 WR% are not that meaningful though because the sample size is very small.

That's only for one month though.

For march, the numbers for Top 200 2v2 are UKF 40.3 Soviets 49.2 USF 48.7
For april, UKF 41.9 Soviets 50 USF 49.

Yes, but as the most recent one its the most relevant. For March, I would almost completely ignore the data because that is when the data started being recorded, so there are a number of variables we can't really account for, be that small data size or technical issues.

And even in the April numbers you can see the trend that's confirmed in the May ones.

Well Top 200 4v4 is even worse for example:

For May: UKF 36.6 Soviets 43 USF 40.8
April: UKF 45.2 Soviets 38.5 USF 43
March: UKF 43.9 Soviets 45.6 USF 48.8

The Top 200 WR% are not that meaningful though because the sample size is very small.

You have to go with the Top 200 though, especially in 3v3 and 4v4 because the average player in those game modes is significantly worse quality than in 2v2 or 1v1. In other words, the issue there is not always balance, but the fact that a lot of players outside the top 200 especially in 3v3 and 4v4 are just braindead and don't understand game mechanics.

Case in point, look at the most recent 1v1 statistics. All matches, the stats look like this:

UKF: 52.9 %
Soviet: 51.1 %
USF: 51.6 %
Wehrmacht: 49.9 %
OKW: 46.8 %

You don't need me to tell you those are nonsense. In no world are Brits the best 1v1 faction right now. In fact, the without a doubt best 1v1 faction, Wehrmacht, sits at a pitiful 49.9 percent.

Now, let's only check top 200.

UKF: 47.4 %
Soviet: 53.4 %
USF: 49.5 %
Wehrmacht: 50.7 %
OKW: 46.8 %

Looks far more accurate, doesn't it?

In other words, the issue there is not always balance, but the fact that a lot of players outside the top 200 especially in 3v3 and 4v4 are just braindead and don't understand game mechanics.

That doesn't explain why there's a specific pattern. Or why the gap is THAT large, which it shouldn't be

You need to use both. One has players who know the game better, but it's a tiny sample in comparison. Both are useful

That doesn't explain why there's a specific pattern. Or why the gap is THAT large, which it shouldn't be

You need to use both. One has players who know the game better, but it's a tiny sample in comparison. Both are useful

Fair point. However, it is difficult to then make judgments on balance when a lack of game understanding plays a huge role in the making of those statistics. For reference, I edited my previous post. Have a look at the 1v1 statistics to illustrate my concern about non-top 200 matches.

Fair point. However, it is difficult to then make judgments on balance when a lack of game understanding plays a huge role in the making of those statistics.

That's true too, and it's difficult regardless to make any judgements on overall faction balance from winrates anyway. A specific commander/meta could be inflating the numbers when the faction itself isn't actually dominant

For reference, I edited my previous post. Have a look at the 1v1 statistics to illustrate my concern about non-top 200 matches.

I think OP was focusing on team games, given their choice of data. 1v1 is the easiest to balance so I'm not sure that means much for OPs point

How is it acceptable to have these WR% in 2v2 3v3 4v4 over several months?

Sry man these winrates are my fault, I spammed a lot of axis games and REKTED all enemies

Ok and now on a serious note, I think these winrates have nothing to do with imbalance really, axis are just a bit easier to play for the average casual.

Since the start of coh2 I always thought playing random allies is harder than random axis. And that's for 2 main reasons

1) many allies randoms are not good and have no answers for some axis units. Example are heavy tanks. Usually you need a lot coordination to take out Brummbar + KT + Elefant just sitting there.

Or wehr puts 1 MG42 + gren at fuel and teammates want to surrender after 5min because they dont know how to kill the MG

2) punishing tech trees. Axis always have everything available basically and dont need to back tech. They always have an important HMG no matter what.

But now if you have an allies teammate who went soviet t1 or USF captain for example, they often get rekt vs OKW blob or lmg42 blob. Because they have no MG

Or someone who went Lieut. or penals and doesnt have AT guns vs enemy tank rush.