Thoughts on the Stale 2v2 Meta (ISU v Ele)

I certainly don't speak for everyone, but it seems to me that every competitive 2v2 comes down to an elefant v ISU-152. If either team lacks either of these linchpin units, its an extreme uphill battle to compete with the massive range. I would like to see some opinions on what can be done to diversify the meta without simply nerfing the two units outright, as I see this issue stemming from more than the units imbalance itself.


IMO the elefant is in a good spot as a unit, it only becomes game breaking in 2v2 situations where the critical mass of units and the relatively small map size make any sort of maneuvering to try and take it out not worth the risk. If you throw everything at the elefant in a giant push, and fail, then its GG WP. If you sit back and play passive, you are playing to the elefants strengths. This same situation applies to the ISU-152, and is even more magnified by its back breaking squad wipe potential. This has created a really stagnant 2v2 meta of ISU-152 v Elefant EVERY SINGLE GAME. It's extremely boring and I hope something is done about it. I think the issue has as much to do with issues like 2v2 map size, and armor pushes being extremely risky due to the effectiveness of mines and AT guns, as it does with the units themselves.

Here is a short list of casual observations about the 2v2s I have played this patch. Feel free to comment on them, post your own, and in general try to give constructive feedback about the state of 2v2 as a whole. Lets try to stay away from the blatant bias and/or L2P posts.

- Maps like Semoisky and Crossing in the woods feel too small for 2v2s by the time armor rolls out

Show Spoiler


- Mines
Mines punish armor pushes super hard, and lets be honest, if you have an elefant or an ISU, your going to be putting some mines down, as the only real counter outside of arty (which as of the most recent patch is no longer viable) is being flanked. Obviously mines aren't going anywhere, and are a viable part of many strategies, but they add to the frustration of trying to counter a 100 range unit, as you can lay them deep in your lines where they are less likely to get triggered by a random infantry unit, or get swept by a lowly pio/engie.

-One shot squad wipes
This only applies to the 152, but its a big one.

-The strength of the ISU makes it a nobrainer every game, which it turn means that every german player must carry an elefant doctrine, and will likely be forced to go w/ it in order to deal with the ISU.

Agreed.

Units that can do massive damage in one shot is not good for balance. It is the reason i do not like the ISU-152 and the elefant. They just dont fit in. I would not mind if both of them were replaced with something more conventional. The only other option is the nerfing, and no one likes that.

Which means i dont like any off-map artillery/air strikes. It is the click and remove button that does not function symmetrically with your army.

I am still anticipating static and mobile artillery changes. Currently, i rarely ever see them, despite them being the backbone of assault and defense on the eastern front. Static artillery should not be able to fire at base territory, and should be made tougher. There should also be more actual counters with units against static artillery. (There should also be mobile SPG's like the Wespe, Hummel, Su-122, the likes). ONCE i saw a great artillery battle between 3 Lefh artillery (teammates) and 3 overextended ML-20's and an ISU-152 partner. We flanked their overextension, and we destroyed all 3 of the howitzers and the ISU-152. Static artillery puts a lot of extra-needed life into battles imo, but now it is a feature that isn't worth considering. I hate having to click on an artillery piece to destroy it. That is not quality gameplay.

Anyways, it is all part of the idea that i do not like large amounts of damage dealt in one shot (but it somewhat excludes howitzers because of their scatter and predictability, as opposed to uber accurate elefants and ISU-152's, as well as precision strikes and bombings)

"Static artillery promotes camping," well, ISU-152 and elefant also promote camping because you set down and lay your army around it, and you will not get pushed back. You have every tank instantly destroyed, and in the case of the ISU-152, all infantry destroyed. In fact, long range artillery is the best option to fire against these camping positions, but artillery can be countered by the press of a click without the need of any unit, and there is absolutely nothing the artillery piece can do to survive.

ISU just needs to go back to being how it was before with a penetration increase. It was rarely seen before because of its ok performance and massive cost. It was only ok at combat because it bounced so often vs Panthers and tigers which allowed them to pretty much hard counter the ISU. Currently it hits small targets too often, but I think the direction they went with in terms of a pen buff was the right call.

As for the elephant it is a 25 population monster at killing tanks, but It is pretty terrible at killing infantry. Enough Zis guns walking forward while supported will push the elephant off of guarding victory points. You will still need tanks, but keep them out on the flanks where the elephant is not pushing back attacks or breaking open attack avenues and pulling back before the elephant can get in position to do anything about it.

In my opinion, the elephant isnt that bad to deal with, but the ISU is too good at killing everything to be balanced.

Also if they buffed artillery in some fashion (Personally I think they should just be cheaper ) the counters to these long range beasts will come back. Now I will say that a quick easy hot fix of the problem would be taking out the bombing strikes for each of the doctrines that have the ISU and the elephant. Right now they come stock with the counter to artillery and a way to liven up the combat would be able to safely (relatively) going for artillery.

Also if they buffed artillery in some fashion (Personally I think they should just be cheaper ) the counters to these long range beasts will come back. Now I will say that a quick easy hot fix of the problem would be taking out the bombing strikes for each of the doctrines that have the ISU and the elephant. Right now they come stock with the counter to artillery and a way to liven up the combat would be able to safely (relatively) going for artillery.

I agree that it is a little silly that the one of the elefant docs comes stock with recon run + stuka. IMO that combo should never have been introduced to the game, as it single handedly counters any arty piece with enough munis saved. How is that in any way fun or interesting game design? It would be interesting to hear from Relic how they feel about changing commander trees that people have paid for. I'm sure there would be some sort of "bait and switch" issue here, with people being offered one thing for their service, and then having it retroactively changed seems slightly immoral. They really painted themselves into a corner with this whole paid commander system...

Totally agree!
In any 2v2 game I feel myself obliged to choose the jaeger armor commander, whether I like it or not (my team mate would this not - of course).
And even though I know that you can win without ele, it is only just the fear to encounter an isu later and hard to make then live - permanently wipe ^ ^

spontaneously I have no solution ... but relic, please take this "isu vs ele" forced out of the game! Gladly they can continue to be the top of the food chain, but should scale better with the rest was. (similar to how you can now simply the Tiger ass counter)...

I agree that it is a little silly that the one of the elefant docs comes stock with recon run + stuka. IMO that combo should never have been introduced to the game, as it single handedly counters any arty piece with enough munis saved. How is that in any way fun or interesting game design? It would be interesting to hear from Relic how they feel about changing commander trees that people have paid for. I'm sure there would be some sort of "bait and switch" issue here, with people being offered one thing for their service, and then having it retroactively changed seems slightly immoral. They really painted themselves into a corner with this whole paid commander system...

Yup they devolved the game in that area just to make more money. As for the ISU yes it is too strong right now and artillery could be the solution but it's not useful at this stage because of plane bombing.

Exactly my feeling here. The 2v2 game is really borring now, everytime soviets are doing the same thing: player no1 - penals sniper guards Su-85 ISu 152, player no2 - maxim/mortar spam, zis, t34.

I only met 2 exceptions, meaning both players were doing maxim/mortar spam with the same finality.

This "balance" created a really dull game. Problem is, I don't know if Relic will fix anything before June. Then we will have 2 brand new armies ready to ruin the balance completely and indefeasibly.

You are not alone, this meta is REALLY boring.

You guys make very good points. I agree completely that super-long range units just don't feel right in COH, particularly when you have these 2v2s on hybrid maps that were really designed for 1v1 (Semoskiy, Crossing, Kharkov). Also, in the hands of good players, super-long range mobile units are just unkillable, and that's bad game design when a unit cannot be countered.

I also agree that the Jaeger Armor Commander, which has the Elephant, plus offmap Recon & Stuka Bomb, is just stupid good, as the recon/stukabomb is perfect synergy with the Elephant, which can eliminate most of it's natural counters.

So possible solutions are adding more appropriately sized maps for 2v2, so that such units can't cover 2 VPs at once, or slightly nerfing the range of these supertanks.

I also agree that the Jaeger Armor Commander, which has the Elephant, plus offmap Recon & Stuka Bomb, is just stupid good, as the recon/stukabomb is perfect synergy with the Elephant, which can eliminate most of it's natural counters.

Have we ever received a comment from Relic regarding the possibility of reworking existing commanders?

What I think it's needed:

Balance changes:
nerf both tanks HP
Allow 100 range only when Hull down
Switch HE/Piercing rounds for ISU-152
Reduce AOE of Isu-152 and increase rate of fire
Decrease both tanks rear armor.

Call in modifications:
Limit heavy tanks on the field by 1.
Remove fuel on heavy tank call ins (this will favour tanks from tiers)

Fancy commander system modification:
remove auto CP unlock in favour to manual unlock.
atm you unlock this way: 5 abilities: [2cp] [3cp] [6cp] [12cp] [12cp].
New system: [unlock arty abilities/upgrades] <--[0cp]--> [unlock units/tanks abilities]
The new system will remind me to Left hand side and right hand side on Vcoh which was very balanced. If you priorize heavy tanks you won't have arty.

I think it all starts with mistakes in game design.
This game should have never been allowed to become "Company of Call-ins". Call-in units - especially tanks should come late and be bloody expensive, so that there is no real option to avoid teching.
Nowadays going tier 3 is a gamble that has to pay off within 5-8 minutes. If you fail to take advantage of a quick tank you will get eaten by heavies.
For me there could be no teching at all - just calling in units you have resources for. Now this would really favour using combined arms which we all love.

I totally agree with everything that has been said above and I hope Relic visits this forum as well.

Adding to elefant I noticed that in 3v3+ games it's insane when combined with the new "Air" commander. The abillity to constantly spam all kinds of air support hardcounters AT guns - the otherwise natural elefant hunters...

I agree that it is a little silly that the one of the elefant docs comes stock with recon run + stuka. IMO that combo should never have been introduced to the game, as it single handedly counters any arty piece with enough munis saved. How is that in any way fun or interesting game design? It would be interesting to hear from Relic how they feel about changing commander trees that people have paid for. I'm sure there would be some sort of "bait and switch" issue here, with people being offered one thing for their service, and then having it retroactively changed seems slightly immoral. They really painted themselves into a corner with this whole paid commander system...

Jaeger Armor Doctrine is a free commander. In fact, I think it's one of the ones you have straight off the bat.
I can't remember (and don't feel like looking up) if Shock Motor Heavy and/or Mechanized Support are premium items.
Good points.

I'd like to see isu penetration nerfed and Elefant damage nerfed - from 320 to 240, because it kills medium tanks with 2 shots and heavies with 3 shots, you catch the first shot and you just cant react before it fires for the second time and kills your tank. And maybe range nerfed to 75-80 for both, its still very long range

Make the Isu and the Ele harder to manouver (more retarded and problem is fixed). They should be so retarded that flanks are possible. Manouvering these giants good should be decided by some skill. Hull down could also be the solution.

And for ffs make artillery a viable option in this game.

Very good points here and exactly my thoughts too.
Every game it's like 'ok I'm going ele' or 'ok I'm going ISU'.
It's not like there is much choice to go now, because if you don't go for ele or ISU, you'll get it hard.

The range is just ridiculous, and I think that's the exact problem.
the squad wipe is also ridiculous, BUT i think that such a big costly tank can do some serious damage to inf. Like, killing 2 or 3 units but never a squadwipe.
Wips should be a 1% chance, not a 90 like it is now.
Also, call-ins should be restricted. 2 ELE on the field should NOT be possible.
Just as 2 tigers from 1 player should NOT be possible, that's just not good design.
Make them slower, retarded as the unshaved guy above me says.

Yesterday I played against a Tiger Ace and 2 ELE on the field.
That makes me want to stop playing, that's just so sad.

Also, call-ins should be restricted.

this can be a quick solution

+1 to the OP.

I play mainly 2v2 AT and see Elephant vs. ISU every single game, even on congested maps like Semoisky Summer, Road to Kharkov etc.

ccar is the bren in bren...without axis early counter, "Dude, where's my bike ?"

2 sov snipers : which is totally ridiculous...a good player will never lose them (hmm, *scratch scratch* axis have 4 men units, so, i build 2 snipers or more...)

the 30 ammo sov mine, like ISU is able to wipe one squad, it also works great versus tanks (this is called the swissknife mine), "i sent my grenadiers somewhere..." Is 30 ammo the cost of a panzerfaust shot that is not able to destroy a ccar ?!?

I dont talk about unit pathing...tanks areblocked by the grass or points (ammo, fuel, victory....), i don't talk about the "auto changing selected target", well, i could have destroyed your tank, but unfortunately, my tank decided to fire on the engie...

the problem with manpower : in vcoh : no map control-no army, the game is actually rewarding campy-style and pak blobing (i seen this, i swear...), No map-control, No-chocolate !


ISU is really annoying wiping everything but it's just a kind of detail....Eli is pretty fine, it's just an anti-tank...