Login

russian armor

State of 2v2 balance?

27 Jul 2014, 13:39 PM
#1
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

I'm primarily a 2v2 gamer, so I thought I might elicit some opinions on how the 2v2 balance is going from the community. My perspective is limited as since WFA I've been playing double USF consistently. Initially we were getting crushed, after getting some tips we did a bit better and now since the Rifle commander went in rotation and on sale we've been able to win a bit more (Easy 8 is a great tank).

In general, I feel that OKW / Ostheer is a very strong combination. Double OKW is also very good. Double Ostheer doesn't feel very threatening to me, since T4 is under-performing (IMO) and USF has the tools to effectively deal with T3 in a reliable manner. In games against OKW, it seems more like a ticking timebomb. If we can't secure an early-mid advantage, we usually lose. The lack of USF heavies and the fragility of the M36 are part of the reason, and the other half is the way in which infantry evaporates when obersoldaten start to appear.

In 1v1s this is not so much a problem, since the early-mid advantage that USF enjoys thanks to their strong and versatile core infantry + AA halftrack can be exploited to secure a win. In a 2v2 this is much less realistic - the game is more forgiving in general and it's much easier to survive till later on when they can play more to their strengths. It's not like it's totally inevitable to lose late game, but I think it's unambigously tilted towards an axis victory in those circumstances. I'm not very fond of this kind of balancing at all, assuming that is "working as designed".

Now that I've stated my perspective, what are yours?
27 Jul 2014, 13:54 PM
#2
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

As an 2vs2 allied player, I think the same as you. From hardest to easiest:
OKW/Ostheer >> OKW/OKW >> Ostheer/Ostheer.

For map balance I tend to untick all urban maps, as it seems to me that the possibility to garrison as many buildings with mg42s and moving outside my LoS is a great advantatge for the OKW infantry.

Overall, the balance seems fine, now that katyusha can stop stupid OKW blobs and punish Sim City strategies, although I find the early game too blobby since the addition of the WFA factions.
27 Jul 2014, 14:20 PM
#3
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

seems pretty good to me, but it's influenced a little too strongly by the map in my opinion. I think the map is more likely to sway the outcome than the matchup.
27 Jul 2014, 14:42 PM
#4
avatar of broodwarjc

Posts: 824

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2014, 14:20 PMRomeo
seems pretty good to me, but it's influenced a little too strongly by the map in my opinion. I think the map is more likely to sway the outcome than the matchup.


I agree on open maps the allies can really destroy the OKW, on closed maps the OKW can crush allied armor. It really comes down to how much room the allied fast tanks have to maneuver. I really don't like where OKW heavy armor is at, against not very good panicky players it is good. But against experienced calm players it stinks. The King Tiger, Jagdpanzer, and Jagdtiger all move too slowly to effectively micro. The range and turret rotation on the King Tiger is really bad.
27 Jul 2014, 14:45 PM
#5
avatar of armatak

Posts: 170

Balance is very map dependent but I have the feeling SOV/USF combo is the strongest atm.

SOV with Support weapons, guards and heavy tanks.
USF with Heavy infantry focus followed by Sherman spam or Jacksons depending what the SOV player takes.

Both factions complement each other very well.
27 Jul 2014, 14:51 PM
#6
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Imo it's something along the lines of:

Sov/sov > sov/usf > ost/okw > usf/usf > okw/okw > ost/ost
27 Jul 2014, 16:57 PM
#7
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

I feel more confortable playing with a USF teammate than double Soviet.

Sov infantry early game is very feeble unless you spend fuel in all cons upgrades or spam the map with maxims. USF can stop more efficiently a OKW sturmpio spam.
27 Jul 2014, 17:41 PM
#8
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2014, 14:51 PMCieZ
Imo it's something along the lines of:

Sov/sov > sov/usf > ost/okw > usf/usf > okw/okw > ost/ost


+1, though I think double ostheer might be better than double OKW. Soviet t1 + soviet t2 is still a stronger early game opening than anything you can do with mixed allies.
27 Jul 2014, 17:43 PM
#9
avatar of broodwarjc

Posts: 824

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2014, 14:51 PMCieZ
Imo it's something along the lines of:

Sov/sov > sov/usf > ost/okw > usf/usf > okw/okw > ost/ost


I have started playing 2v2 (3v3 was fun but either too easy or too hard and depended too much on teammate's skill level) as the OKW and this is pretty much what I have run into. Although the hardest I think is Sov/USF, only if the USF player has the rifle company doctrine (which is free right now :*( ). It is especially difficult if the Soviet player has either a doctrine that can call in shocks or guard rifle and is-2 or t34/85s. Really hard for double okw to beat. Massed, spamed, doctrine medium tanks from the allies I think is the best strategy in the meta right now. Two E8s and two T34/85s can come out before the OKW players have even one panther.
27 Jul 2014, 17:48 PM
#10
avatar of RunToTheSun

Posts: 158

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2014, 16:57 PMGreeb
I feel more confortable playing with a USF teammate than double Soviet.

Sov infantry early game is very feeble unless you spend fuel in all cons upgrades or spam the map with maxims. USF can stop more efficiently a OKW sturmpio spam.


Sov/sov t1/t2 is like the ultimate counter to okw earlygame.

what do you care about sturms when one player gets 3-4 maxims and the other gets conscripts alongside 1-2 snipers . you might get overrun a bit but you sure gonna win the manpower war
27 Jul 2014, 17:51 PM
#11
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2014, 14:51 PMCieZ
Imo it's something along the lines of:

Sov/sov > sov/usf > ost/okw > usf/usf > okw/okw > ost/ost

exactly why i do not play lower than 3v3. plus not enough veto's to veto crappy allied favored maps.
27 Jul 2014, 18:01 PM
#12
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

I play all factions in 2v2, and I can only second Ciez, although its quite map dependant. The more constrained/urban the map, the stronger the USF early game. On ie. Semois, double US beats mixed any Axis constellation rather easily in my experience, on Crossing mixed Axis is ahead. I say specifically mixed Axis because Ost alone still just doesnt see the light against an early, aggressive double ht play no matter the map.
Oh, and I dont even see how youre gonna get overrun with Soviet combo against OKWs early game - thats what the Maxims are for.
27 Jul 2014, 18:06 PM
#13
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


exactly why i do not play lower than 3v3. plus not enough veto's to veto crappy allied favored maps.


I bet.

After all, with higher player number its all about german armor spam superiority.
27 Jul 2014, 18:07 PM
#14
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2014, 18:06 PMKatitof


I bet.

After all, with higher number counts its all about german armor spam superiority.


well i think that we both can agree that no one side should have a huge advantage over the other at any point in the game right? im sure that it can be done without mirror units?
27 Jul 2014, 18:14 PM
#15
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



well i think that we both can agree that no one side should have a huge advantage over the other at any point in the game right? im sure that it can be done without mirror units?


Was fixed for sov and ost, where better player wins.

Was reintroduced again for USF and OKW, where one got considerable edge in early game and if you loose late game with other, you're simply bad.

And OST OKW synergy with luftwaffe supply drops make OKW batshit OP with no excuses and that only expands to higher player count game modes.
27 Jul 2014, 20:46 PM
#16
avatar of Jinseual

Posts: 598

I have to agree with others that double Soviets is just way more easier then anything else. I'm not saying the US is a bad or weak faction it's just so much easier to play Soviet, the Soviet faction is more powerful and they have access to mines.

Now they have those katyusha that can wipe units while the Americans don't have any kind of equivalent.

As for the Germans I can't say for sure if double ostheer is the weakest. Having those early MGs is necessary to beat back the early infantry spam. Both sides are vulnerable against early allied vehicles but ostheer seem to handle better against maxim spam. Also the Ostheer has an ability to destroy powerful stationary Soviet artillery pieces like Railway arty and Stuka while the OKW has none of that, but maybe the OKW is better at infantry or tank engagement then Ostheer while the Ostheer provides the important abilities I don't know.
27 Jul 2014, 22:08 PM
#17
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

I would say any combination is reliable besides OH/OH. If it struggle before, it is even worst now with americans. Tiger can save the day if you get to that stage.

Sov/Sov is as strong as always.
Sov/US you need good micro of US player but can be strong during whole game.
US/US seems that lacks punch for the late game.
OH/OKW strong but may lack some pucn during midgame
OKW/OKW really annoying on some maps (eventhough now with Katy buff..)
27 Jul 2014, 22:21 PM
#18
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

Very map dependent. Against a OKW/Ost combo that knows what its doing on urban maps, you might as well not bother. On an open map with a US/Sov combo that knows what its doing, the Axis will be in luck if they manage to hold on for dear life against the Rifle/Maxim, and then the T-34/Stuart/Sherman rush.

Since I heavily favor open maps, I thus play allies in 2v2 and have a good time.
27 Jul 2014, 23:39 PM
#19
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

I forget the name of the map but there's one I got recently that is entirely urban. Just city blocks as far as the eye can see with nothing open. Nightmare for armor, luckily I was rifle and I got flamer upgrades.
28 Jul 2014, 01:06 AM
#20
avatar of astro_zombie

Posts: 123

It really is map dependent.

However, Axis still has the late game dominance because of their armor. I mean US has nothing late game frankly once a jagd or KT comes out, you're kind of screwed. Unless you were dominating all game, if you have equal forces and they roll out the heavy shit, US falls apart. VP games tend to last long and the longer it goes the harder it gets for allies, just as in COH1.
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

794 users are online: 794 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49100
Welcome our newest member, Modarov
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM