Top-players and what makes the new metas

Again, the game has failed after the patch it seems. Correct me if im wrong - Five grens to SC or P4 to TA. But is it the game that fails?

Imo people are too concerned with the ladders. The game has nice units and preconditions but it has the wrong people playing it. The best players are just looking for a way to get on abusive win-streaks. And in the same moment they make their streams dull and booring to watch. It would be better for the game if people could learn to loose and make some nice strategies instead of killing the game with abuse. Or maybe I am wrong?

New meta being discussed at several places: http://www.coh2.org/post/create/thread_id/16065; http://www.coh2.org/topic/16046/limit-heavy-tanks etc....

The game is definetely dead at the moment, because of the obvious unbalance between the factions. However, it was the lack of viable strategies prepatch what I found boring.

Even if there were no ladders, do you blame people who try to discover/perform the strategy A in order to win?

If the game doesnt allow another BO to counter that, it´s a problem with the game not the players.

Some people just play to win, thats a fact, but the thing that certain strats "can´t be countered" or they lack versatility is a problem with the game.

It´s too quick to talk now if theres a patch which is gonna mess with heavy tanks and i hope adress some of the problems we have now.

well, i still go ppsh + shocks into t-34s with soviets. Just because i kind of like the idea of a soviet army equipped with t-34s,howitzers, and lots of submachine guns.

I know this puts me in a disadvanatage since a tiger which is superior to t-34 in every way and costs less than my first t-34, but I don't care.

I feel like im being pointed at here, HAHA.
Im a competitive player by nature unless i screw around. When i am playing seriously i play with a strategy that i know that is solid and works in pretty much every situation, with no hard-counters against it hence i started going 5 grens because i wanted a very mobile force, and simply because the MG42's in top ranked play might block off an area for some time, but it can also sit there, be stationary and be of barely any use at all, a waste of manpower. And if it does get in the Soviets hands it can fuck my game over so i decide to barely, very very rarely ever build one when Grenadiers can do the same job, but also bleed manpower instead of just forcing a retreat.

Meta-games are ever changing. Remember when 2x MG42's were the standard? Grenadiers are so popular because they are sooo god damn worth the manpower cost. And lets be fair, most people tune in to streams in this community just to chat & interact with the streamer. 80% of my viewers atleast doesnt give a flying fuck about the game usually. The game is being worked on and i wouldn't jump the ship as of yet calling the game "dead" most people are just on a break due to the horrible balance in the game.

If the game doesnt allow another BO to counter that, it´s a problem with the game not the players.

Some people just play to win, thats a fact, but the thing that certain strats "can´t be countered" or they lack versatility is a problem with the game.

The game is not getting played by itself. There is a AI in the game but the game I refered to was the game being played by coh2-gamers. Just because there is an abusive strat that doesnt mean you have to do it. The game doesnt determine you to do it.

I feel like im being pointed at here, HAHA.

Definetely MVGame

...and simply because the MG42's in top ranked play might block off an area for some time, but it can also sit there, be stationary and be of barely any use at all, a waste of manpower. And if it does get in the Soviets hands it can fuck my game over so i decide to barely, very very rarely ever build one when Grenadiers can do the same job, but also bleed manpower instead of just forcing a retreat.

Good point. But. People got nerfed mg42 and its pretty moderate now in coh2. I really wish mg42 to be like it was in coh1 and noone complained about it. But thats another story cause the flanking mechanic was so much better in coh1.

The game is not getting played by itself. There is a AI in the game but the game I refered to was the game being played by coh2-gamers. Just because there is an abusive strat that doesnt mean you have to do it. The game doesnt determine you to do it.

Well you cant blame anyone. All strats are legit even spamms. Im using the strats that fits my playstyle the most and are fun at the same time for me. Thats why im never gonna buy commanders like elite and industry cause i just think they dont fit into this game and into my playstyle.

And one more thing i want to add. Thats actually the reason (referring to 1st post)i dont enjoy top coh2 streams as i enjoyed top coh1 streams. Cause lets be honest, at the current state of the game, honestly its mostly been like that since the release of the game, i cant learn some amazing strats, microes, executions, flanks...but i know its not players' fault its game's.

The game is not getting played by itself. There is a AI in the game but the game I refered to was the game being played by coh2-gamers. Just because there is an abusive strat that doesnt mean you have to do it. The game doesnt determine you to do it.

Depends on the people and the mood. Its not just coh2, its RTS in general, FPS, fighting games. Everywhere anytime people are going to use the "easy" weapons, use the easy combos, easy strats, etc.

and simply because the MG42's in top ranked play might block off an area for some time, but it can also sit there, be stationary and be of barely any use at all, a waste of manpower.

aaaand the the winner who didnot playd coh1 iiiiiss:

meh I don't think you can blame people for wanting to win, you still need to execute whatever strategy you want to use which can define who better plays the game but the core of the problem right now is balancing the two factions.

I know it kind of sucks that we have to wait again but the previous patch was almost there and I'm confident that we will eventually have a balanced game after a couple of patches but with a better game at the core with the improved cover system and weapon profiles.

I just wished that Relic would release a balance only patch every 2 weeks by simply adjusting some numbers, for example, adjusting the LMG DPS vs. waiting 30 to 45 days before a patch with multiple fixes.

aaaand the the winner who didnot playd coh1 iiiiiss:

Not like4 vCoH matters in the slightest for CoH2 gameplay, but I think I'll take #1 ger players opinion on this.

Depends on the people and the mood. Its not just coh2, its RTS in general, FPS, fighting games. Everywhere anytime people are going to use the "easy" weapons, use the easy combos, easy strats, etc.

This. Can't blame people playing to win. Its the game's fault if a player can't choose from various strats that are equally viable or equally difficult to pull off. Even if I lose to gren spam, or some ultra cheese like Piospam into 3 tigers I harbor no animosity towards the player, its the broken game that allows such trivial strats.

The line "Don't hate the player, hate the game" is relevant now more than it ever has been. Unless of course if he bm's you or drops some snide comment then he's a cunt.

Not like4 vCoH matters in the slightest for CoH2 gameplay, but I think I'll take #1 ger players opinion on this.

agree it isnot worth bring more than 1 hmg, but if you can use it, it is pretty good. Btw ladder still doesnot represent the skill.

I did Gren spam before it was cool.

And by "before it was cool" I mean in Closed Beta.

I want the Americans soon, then I might feel some balanced gameplay when I infantry spam.

Anyways, when competition comes into play there is no doubt that people will always try to be optimal. That's how you win, go for the most efficient builds and from there it's microing your units to make sure they come out on top in engagements.

All in all Relic's games have generally discouraged different play styles due to how punishing deviation is(Due to the system of hard counters). I'm not complaining, just stating how it is. I know a lot of players in DoW2(Including myself, though I was far away from "top tier", what little there was there) made a point of going off the wall with their builds towards the end of the game's lifespan, just to try and breathe life into the meta.

It never really worked, because it simply wasn't optimal. Most derivative builds are economically inefficient, require more intensive micro, or are incredibly niche and leave you open to so many different vulnerabilities. The game generally discourages you from moving away from the more efficient builds.

That's why jack-of-all-trades builds that don't make a point of getting too invested into any point of the game tend to come out on top. They are very efficient, they're constantly evolving in the game which allows a player to transition between different stages and keep more inefficient players on the backfoot.

So, if you're asking for people to come up with a new meta, well, odds are you wont see one unless you try and make one up yourself.

And, let me say this from first hand experience, coming up with one yourself is both equally rewarding and frustrating. Once you realize how restricted you are you generally either come to the conclusion there's no point and go back to generic playing, or you keep trying and keep losing with one or two victories along the way.

When the two new armies come out in June, you'll probably see enough variety then, so long as you keep to 2v2 games, which frankly, I think are probably the best way to play, competitively speaking. There's no better measurement of skill than seeing how two players compliment eachother strategically while still being able to appreciate the nuances in tactical play and economic timing.

Imo people are too concerned with the ladders. The game has nice units and preconditions but it has the wrong people playing it. The best players are just looking for a way to get on abusive win-streaks. And in the same moment they make their streams dull and booring to watch. It would be better for the game if people could learn to loose and make some nice strategies instead of killing the game with abuse. Or maybe I am wrong?

OK, you are wrong.

There is really no reason to play 1v1 unless you want to win. Playing 1v1 is more like work than fun(focus, planning, timing, etc)

If you want to have fun and try units out, you play skirmish.
Or if you want to have fun with your friends you play custom team game, with rules and agreements in place with your friends, to achieve level of fun you aim for.


What you are asking for is similar to Miss Universe wishing for World Peace. Commendable but will never happen.
Human nature is big stumbling block there.

OK, you are wrong.

There is really no reason to play 1v1 unless you want to win. Playing 1v1 is more like work than fun(focus, planning, timing, etc)

If you want to have fun and try units out, you play skirmish.
Or if you want to have fun with your friends you play custom team game, with rules and agreements in place with your friends, to achieve level of fun you aim for.


What you are asking for is similar to Miss Universe wishing for World Peace. Commendable but will never happen.
Human nature is big stumbling block there.

That's RTS. If you disagree it is fun, you can just watch streams instead or choose other types of games.

I played extreme Volksspam and PG spam in vCOH, to puma/stugs/hotchkiss spam to the end, this patch just recalling my old habits but in easy mode.

Imo people are too concerned with the ladders. The game has nice units and preconditions but it has the wrong people playing it. The best players are just looking for a way to get on abusive win-streaks. And in the same moment they make their streams dull and booring to watch. It would be better for the game if people could learn to loose and make some nice strategies instead of killing the game with abuse. Or maybe I am wrong?

No, you are entirely right. That is the explanation of excessive soviet whining on this forum after 25 march patch. Changing playing style will ruin the ladders for the faction that was "easy mode" before. That is why they are crying all over the place around here. Now we have something close to a balanced game, still need to be worked at, but not so much.

No, you are entirely right. That is the explanation of excessive soviet whining on this forum after 25 march patch. Changing playing style will ruin the ladders for the faction that was "easy mode" before. That is why they are crying all over the place around here. Now we have something close to a balanced game, still need to be worked at, but not so much.

You still lose? Yeah, Soviets must be still OP then

That's RTS. If you disagree it is fun, you can just watch streams instead or choose other types of games.

I played extreme Volksspam and PG spam in vCOH, to puma/stugs/hotchkiss spam to the end, this patch just recalling my old habits but in easy mode.

I was saying that it's natural that playing 1v1 games, you sort of go for win, more so than in 4v4

You still lose? Yeah, Soviets must be still OP then

No, now I win or loose with germans and soviets just the same. And my post was referring to the fact that some changes still need to be operated, like maybe lowering a little the light german weapons DPS while still letting them superior to soviet ones to compensate the squad size.

So no sarcasm necessary.