Login

russian armor

What is your opinion on the current meta?

What is your opinion on the current meta?
Option Distribution Votes
1%
52%
26%
11%
8%
2%
Total votes: 101
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
9 Jun 2014, 08:27 AM
#1
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

Personally, I think the current meta needs some slight tweaks here and there. Changes for t4, artillery, m3s, Ostheer scout cars, mines, and heavy tanks are needed(specifically ISU, Elefant, 85s.) Feel free to share your opinion on the matter. No insults are needed(I'm lookin' at you "fanbois"),just decent responses.
9 Jun 2014, 08:33 AM
#2
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Not sure if trolling..
There are like 100 topics about the current meta.

OT:

I think 1v1 is pretty balanced from what I can see in streams.
I don't play 1v1 so I can only base my opinion on streams and replays.

2v2, horrible.
The tigerspam / ISU / ELE is horrible in the late game.

3v3, horrible.
Tigerspam, elespam, isuspam, is2-spam, 6 t34/85 on the field of 1 player, ...

4v4, see above.

I play 2v2 and up, but most of the time I don't enjoy it.
e: Fanbois, this is my opinion so no need to attack me like; LATE GAME HEAVIES IS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T PLAY GOOD IN THE EARLY AND MID GAME.
That argument is invalid. When playing good and having half of the map or even a bit more, tigers can still be called in and ele's will still roll off. This pushes soviet a bit back, which means more tigers and more ele's.

Fek dis current meta.
9 Jun 2014, 08:33 AM
#3
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

Not sure if trolling..
There are like 100 topics about the current meta.

OT:

I think 1v1 is pretty balanced from what I can see in streams.
I don't play 1v1 so I can only base my opinion on streams and replays.

2v2, horrible.
The tigerspam / ISU / ELE is horrible in the late game.

3v3, horrible.
Tigerspam, elespam, isuspam, is2-spam, 6 t34/85 on the field of 1 player, ...

4v4, see above.

I play 2v2 and up, but most of the time I don't enjoy it.

This is meant to be a general opinion on the matter as a whole, rather than a specific thing concerning the meta.
9 Jun 2014, 09:53 AM
#4
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779

1v1 is fine but teamgame is a pile of deershit.
I rather play the alpha or Watchdog.
9 Jun 2014, 10:11 AM
#5
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2

3v3 and up are fine.

Feel pretty even these days.


152s are counterable without a Phant there because of space and options. It's preferable to have someone on your side with one, but it's not essential.

Most of the complaints about 152s come from 2v2

+++++++++++++++++++

Artillery either needs to be useful and survivable or relegated to off board call ins.

+++++++++++++++++++

People complain about Call In tanks needing tech but I think that's a terrible idea. Change something else but not that.

+++++++++++++++++++

Germans will always get squad wiped so long as they have 4 man squads and people will always complain about it. All that can get changed is how often it happens
9 Jun 2014, 11:04 AM
#6
avatar of Brichals

Posts: 85

The game is fun and balanced but too many units are underused which is a pity. Maybe even stats don't need to be changed for the most part, just tech costs and pacing could fix most things.

I don't like to see tanks killing units so easily with the main gun. Tiger, ISU152 and to a lesser extent T34/76 (I know T34/76 needs some AI but 1 shotting full health PGren squads should never happen). This is a similar problem with mines i.e. AoE and bunching.

9 Jun 2014, 11:42 AM
#7
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

The game is balanced in most aspects, but not all.

1v1's are dominated by call - ins, because its often cheaper and more reasonable to wait for those doctrinal tanks. Teching needs to be more viable again and/or call ins need to be changed slightly.

2v2's are dominated by Ele's and ISU's, i think its the gamemode that suffers the most.

I dont play much 3v3 and 4v4 except when im in the mood for laidback games or just for trolling so i cant comment much. But it feels relatively even, and that must mean something considering the fact that 3v3's and 4v4's will never be completely balanced.

TL;DR : 1v1 is call - in dominated, 2v2 is 100 range tank dominated, cant really comment on 3v3 / 4v4, but they feel even.
9 Jun 2014, 11:51 AM
#8
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

I play mostly 1v1.

The game is extremely fun when you play against someone like StephennJF who uses combined arms and regular T3/T4 units. This allows you to use sub-optimal commanders or units and can lead to some very fun and varied matches.

The game is extremely boring when you play against people who spam 1 unit, don't tech and spam call-in tanks when they reach 6/8/9/11/12 CPs.

Sadly, in the current meta roughly 80% of the matches fall into the latter category.
9 Jun 2014, 12:07 PM
#9
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12

"metagame" does not equal "balance." I don't understand who you think should "tweak" the metagame... Relic? Relic tweaks balance. Players develop the metagame. Confusing poll.
9 Jun 2014, 13:30 PM
#10
avatar of The_Riddler

Posts: 336

The assumption there even is a metagame is false, as there will be a debate about what the exact metagame is. There are still various playstyles around, which implies the current balance leaves room for players to succesfully apply various strategies. The underlying assumption of this poll is false, therefore the outcome of the poll is impossible to interpret.
9 Jun 2014, 13:36 PM
#11
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Ummm, players define meta.

If you don't like current meta, step up and come up with a strat that will change it.

Don't count on top 10 players to invent something and follow it up like blind chickens, experiment and try new stuff.

Meta is as stale as players imagination, especially with the current balance.
9 Jun 2014, 14:21 PM
#12
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

1 vs 1 is near balanced but often boring due to same german strategies and m3 car rampage.

2 vs 2 and above soviet advantage.Too many effective combos(guard/sniper,maxim/cars),too many squadwipes from mine/explosion.ISU broke-ending games alone.Lack of german T4.Maxim spam and cars pretty problematic in team games,especially in urban map.German answer is either elfant or lame opel tigerspam.Lack of credible towed artillery along with kat/werfer encouraging blobbing at guns in 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4.Too much overdependance on call -ins on both sides.Tanks killing infantry too fast.

Overall better balanced than before but with some glaring issues thats making it one dimensional.
9 Jun 2014, 16:09 PM
#13
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 879

The meta is just boring, really. I don't enjoy 1v1 much because I know I have to do it. Making unpopular commanders work against callins is quite rough, and harder than it needs to be, so it's easier just to follow the meta. For me that means T3485s and Tigers because I know how to make them work.

Right now, PPSH doctrines remain weak because they only do damage at point blank range.. HTD is actually the best thing about them, but try making T4 work on Semois or Kholodny to fight Tigers.

I do find Wehr slightly stronger overall because you can still make noncall-in docs work, but the Pak43 is still essentially good for only one shot, and the howies are all nearly useless.

2v2 as Soviet is probably the most boring. Tristan and I have tried not following the meta, not using snipers and ISUs and varying things, and lost about 50 spots. Back to sniper spam backed up by cons and Maxims for us...

Wehr T4 is also unviable in 1v1 and too risky in most 2v2 situations when two Tigers can solve the same tactical problems sooner and at less cost.



9 Jun 2014, 17:24 PM
#14
avatar of J1N6666

Posts: 306

Meta is bad but not unbalanced...

Too many extinct units.
9 Jun 2014, 17:31 PM
#15
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

Mostly predictable and boring...due to limited viable options.Not necessarily very unbalanced.
9 Jun 2014, 17:40 PM
#16
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Mostly predictable and boring...due to limited viable options.Not necessarily very unbalanced.


That's actually true, the balance between the units is ok, there are just some joenits that make it boring to play.
9 Jun 2014, 17:44 PM
#17
avatar of FestiveLongJohns
Patrion 15

Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2

I feel like heavy tanks need their CPs pushed back. The tiger and T3485 are soo effective for their cost and the time frame they arrive. Players should be forced to stall longer to call them in if they decide to forego teching.

If the earliest a Tiger could arrive was ~25 minute mark (what do you guys think is a reasonable time frame for this?) there would be no way you could survive against a player that decided to pressure you with armor before that point, and it would still be possible to call in a Tiger in games that go long enough to warrant one. The unit is an absolute beast, and it should feel special when you get one. At the moment, they are called in every game, and it makes them feel vanilla. I'd like to see heavy call ins be reserved strictly for the late game. This would also extend the window of opportunity for T3 play, because it gives T34/76s, an early T70, or an ostwind/p4, time to utilize the fuel spent to put some pressure down before a heavy rolls out and laughs at you for teching.
9 Jun 2014, 17:49 PM
#18
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

Its too dull and repitive to play anything for either faction. Im just waiting for WFA; the core factions have been exhausted by the lack of options to play.
9 Jun 2014, 18:05 PM
#19
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Meta is awful, Soviet T1 counters German T1 pretty effectively. Soviet Meta is M3 / Sniper / Maxim spam into T-34/85's. German Meta is Grenadier Spam into T2 Scout Car and then to Tiger or StuGs.

Potential causes:

German T1:
SU T1 counters most of OH T1 effectively. MG's, Mortars, and Snipers are obvious targets for M3's and SU Snipers, which leaves just Grenadiers, leading to Grenadier spam. Against SU T2 it's more viable, but OH MG's are still extremely immobile yet are expected to constantly reposition and reface themselves. Sniper has very low health and is threatened by everything under the sun.

German T2:
Panzergrenadiers don't perform in any defined role, not as Attackers (low durability) or Flankers (low speed). PG's high cost are also off-putting with a 40MP reinforce cost, the highest in the game. Flame Half-Track upgrade comes too late and is too big an investment when Tanks are entering the field.

German T3:
Panzer IV's accuracy is too low, making it awful against Infantry and even miss vs Tanks. Ostwind is okay I guess, still no T-70/Quad/KV-8. Often skipped in favour of Tiger Tanks due to T3's high cost, and the high durability and power of a single Tiger being worth more than 2 Panzer IV's while also being much cheaper.

German T4:
Panther is seldom used now due to it's high cost, when a Tiger and a StuG can do the same job and more for much much cheaper. Panzerwerfer is in an odd spot, don't like 'em being useless, but didn't like the days when the guy with the most panzerwerfers / katyushas won the game.

Soviet T1:
M3 Scout Cars are spammable, durable (against OH T1 units), and often carry Flamer Engineers for easy repairs. The only counter is the Panzerfaust, which has limited range, only does half health damage, and does not slow them very much, and drains munitions. SU Snipers in pairs can force-retreat any OH unit except Osttruppen, and effectively nullify any support unit due to that.

Soviet T2:
Maxim Guns are highly mobile with a very short setup time and a large crew. Like many 'spammable' SU units, alone they are vulnerable, but in groups they are extremely difficult to deal with. Crew is cheap and replaceable, and a vigilant player can reface the gun in 2 seconds to cover it's own flank. No other problems.

Soviet T3:
T-70 has a limited window of effectiveness before StuG's or Panzer IV's hit the field, otherwise is a great unit. No other issue.

Soviet T4:
SU-85's mobility penalty for 'zoom' is no longer necessary imo. SU-76 is seldom used due to it's low health and armour, although it is not a bad unit, but requires lots of support or babysitting. Katyusha suffers the same problems as the Panzerwerfer.

Overall:
Call-in tanks are more accessible than T3/T4 for both factions, although this seems to be a much bigger deal on the Germans. Soviets can beat a Tiger with T2/T3 combo or T4, but dual T-34/85's is very difficult to fight with OH T3 and T4 is seldom used due to pricing.

Oh dear I've written a small essay.
9 Jun 2014, 18:12 PM
#20
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I feel like heavy tanks need their CPs pushed back. The tiger and T3485 are soo effective for their cost and the time frame they arrive. Players should be forced to stall longer to call them in if they decide to forego teching.


You contradict yourself.

You say they are too cost efficient and then say that getting them later will fix them.
It won't.

If a unit is too cost efficient it needs a price increase, putting it back in CP only means that 2nd/another pair will come that much faster after the first one due to stacked fuel.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

978 users are online: 978 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM