Login

russian armor

Balance by game size

16 Aug 2014, 18:07 PM
#22
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2014, 18:02 PMArclyte
You can't understand why someone would like their own baseline infantry unit that can compete with enemy baseline infantry?

Does your mom tie your shoes in the morning or do you have velcro?


Play US then.

Guards are your LMG Grenadiers and Shocks are your Assault grenadiers but better.
Changing Soviets to have core infantry unit that scales into late game would require complete faction re design.
Giving PPSH as a non doctrinal upgrade or doing something to Conscripts will tweak balance completely in Soviet favor and brake it completely.
You need to think about bigger picture than your own wishes and hopes.
16 Aug 2014, 18:16 PM
#23
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692



Play US then.

Guards are your LMG Grenadiers


Requires 2cp, costs 120mp and 15 munitions more, and has a balanced hand grenade instead of an insta-win rifle grenade.

You guys complain about T-34 "spam". If Guards are the closest we have to competing with LMG Grens/Obers, there's your reason.


Changing Soviets to have core infantry unit that scales into late game would require complete faction re design.


lolwut? why is that? can you give me a reason, or is this just some slippery slope argument you keep throwing out there and hoping it sticks?

Giving PPSH as a non doctrinal upgrade or doing something to Conscripts will tweak balance completely in Soviet favor and brake it completely.


LOL. Yes, we can't have those conscripts doing anything past 5 minutes, it would ruin the game!

Let's ignore the fact that LMG grens are superior to everything except 2x M1919 Riflemen, and even then an accurate rifle grenade will win that fight for you.

Oh, and they cost as much as a Conscript (less if you take into the molotov/at nade that Soviet have to pay for, when OH get faust and rifle nade for free)
16 Aug 2014, 19:21 PM
#24
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976

The problem lie with the American faction in 3vs3 and 4vs4 game, particularly on the largest maps.
They just don't have the tools needed in late game. Either the large map's fuel production is reduced or their anti-tank capabilities are increased. Bazooka should better vs heavy tanks and Jackson a bit more durable vs shrecks.

The Soviet faction is ok. But they don't have that many playing options to win. (same build all the time a.k.a ISU-152)

Conscripts at-nads should have more effect on heavy tank.

The Americans are a fun faction and should be a viable option in 3v3 and 4v4 on the large maps.

I want this game to grow and succeed, this need a fix.

Thank you.
16 Aug 2014, 20:21 PM
#25
avatar of aradim

Posts: 110

Lol at 1v1, judging from the threads on this forum you'd think it would all be "I don't know, I don't play 1v1", suddenly it's full of 1v1 players.
16 Aug 2014, 20:21 PM
#26
avatar of Jinseual

Posts: 598

I think the tools you are talking about is pretty much the only tools people use in late game. Artillery and heavy tanks. Both of which the US lacks. In 3v3s and 4v4s I almost never see players just spamming out more medium tanks unless it's the t3485 or panther, it's always the Tigers, the IS2s, the ISUs and Elefants. And the B4, the katyusha, the stuka.

I think every team is stuck with the same one minded idea "GET ALL THE ARTILLERY AND SAVE FOR THE HEAVIES" no one spams medium tanks when it get's to late game and everyone goes for some short of artillery.

Other than this I don't think the lack of heavy tanks is really the American problem. It's probably the lack of artillery. By late game it's always the same thing people just sitting back and bombing each other. Sending out minesweeper to clear the lane before attacking is suicide and most of the time it's not worth it because of the tendency of heavy tanks wiping out infantry before they could get close to any mine. This is where the artillery comes in. It does pretty much anything weaken defences, forces retreat, removing mines, all of this from a safe distance. This is what the Americans truly lack.

As for voltardarks suggestions I do agree the bazooka needs a damage buff but the Jackson should not be more durable to shrecks.
16 Aug 2014, 21:38 PM
#27
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976

An option would be to have some commanders only playable in 3vs3 and 4vs4.

Those would do the bring the balance more even by having global modifiers affecting the units in need of adjustments for those play mode.

what do you think ?
16 Aug 2014, 21:43 PM
#28
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

An option would be to have some commanders only playable in 3vs3 and 4vs4.

Those would do the bring the balance more even by having global modifiers affecting the units in need of adjustments for those play mode.

what do you think ?


hmm i don't think this is a good idea. the best option is to have freedom of choice within a balanced mode. I can only think of a drastic change that could these problems: balance within the game modes themselves. Stats, buildings, resources. etc will have to be individually adjusted for each different game mode. I think this is the best solution but probably not practical since it would probably take a long time to implement
16 Aug 2014, 23:14 PM
#29
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
Allies need to be more viable in teamgames 3v3 and 4v4. If we want any hope for this game to grow. Especially since the ESL anouncement. Many new people will learn of the game, play it, and realize how bad allies are in 3v3's and 4v4's. Thats where a large amount of the playerbase is at.

Making this game Fun for all factions should be the #1 prioty with balance being 2nd.

Frustration should only happen due to bad play. Not the faulty faction design leaving You usless during the late game.
16 Aug 2014, 23:25 PM
#30
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

1v1: Allies
2v2: Balanced
3v3: Sorta Balanced(Both allies and axis are great in this mode, allies with mass tanks/arty, axis with heavy tanks/arty)
4v4: Axis

This is a generalization, some maps in certain game modes favor one side over the other.
16 Aug 2014, 23:41 PM
#31
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

in my opinion all game modes favors allies because soviets in 3v3 or 4v4 can troll so much with their epic doctrines like winustry or cunterattack B-4 spam while ostheer doesnt have anything great like dat, in 1v1 soviets dominate all the time and 2v2 is simple, one guy spam maxims or snipers while other spam conscripts and its gg
16 Aug 2014, 23:43 PM
#32
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2014, 18:16 PMArclyte


Requires 2cp, costs 120mp and 15 munitions more, and has a balanced hand grenade instead of an insta-win rifle grenade.

You guys complain about T-34 "spam". If Guards are the closest we have to competing with LMG Grens/Obers, there's your reason.




lolwut? why is that? can you give me a reason, or is this just some slippery slope argument you keep throwing out there and hoping it sticks?



LOL. Yes, we can't have those conscripts doing anything past 5 minutes, it would ruin the game!

Let's ignore the fact that LMG grens are superior to everything except 2x M1919 Riflemen, and even then an accurate rifle grenade will win that fight for you.

Oh, and they cost as much as a Conscript (less if you take into the molotov/at nade that Soviet have to pay for, when OH get faust and rifle nade for free)


Again, Soviets are designed in a way that Conscripts are good utility unit that looses its effectivness in the late game and for this reason they have access to doctrinal Elite infantry togetherwith good AI vehicles to do the job. That's how this faction was designed.

Base on that knowledge can you please give me a valid argument how would a change proposed by you work without braking the balance of the game?
17 Aug 2014, 00:23 AM
#33
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

in my opinion all game modes favors allies because soviets in 3v3 or 4v4 can troll so much with their epic doctrines like winustry or cunterattack B-4 spam while ostheer doesnt have anything great like dat, in 1v1 soviets dominate all the time and 2v2 is simple, one guy spam maxims or snipers while other spam conscripts and its gg

+1 so many people dont know how to play, but, if you do soviets are the most powerful by far.
17 Aug 2014, 00:31 AM
#34
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1


+1 so many people dont know how to play, but, if you do soviets are the most powerful by far.


dont tell me that with 718 german 4v4 games played.
17 Aug 2014, 00:39 AM
#35
avatar of broodwarjc

Posts: 824

Allies need to be more viable in teamgames 3v3 and 4v4. If we want any hope for this game to grow. Especially since the ESL anouncement. Many new people will learn of the game, play it, and realize how bad allies are in 3v3's and 4v4's. Thats where a large amount of the playerbase is at.

Making this game Fun for all factions should be the #1 prioty with balance being 2nd.

Frustration should only happen due to bad play. Not the faulty faction design leaving You usless during the late game.


If the game is going competitive then they need to focus on 1v1 which is where competitive play is at. Right now because of the lack of competitive support the majority are casual players who play 3v3 and 4v4. If the game goes competitive then expect 1v1 and 2v2 to become a lot more popular.

So no, they don't need to balance the game for 3v3 and 4v4, they need to balance the game for 1v1 and 2v2. I hate to be nasty about it, but people asking them to balance 4 factions across 4 modes and make it "fun" it just unrealistic. The game being "fun" is purely objective and some players think fun is playing as the Germans and others as the Allies. You can have fun in 3v3 and 4v4 playing as the Allies. You just will have a harder time winning.

If you think winning as the Allies is fun then you should play 1v1 and 2v2 which is more skewed towards those factions.
17 Aug 2014, 02:21 AM
#36
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

in my opinion all game modes favors allies because soviets in 3v3 or 4v4 can troll so much with their epic doctrines like winustry or cunterattack B-4 spam while ostheer doesnt have anything great like dat, in 1v1 soviets dominate all the time and 2v2 is simple, one guy spam maxims or snipers while other spam conscripts and its gg


If your micro is not pro level as it is in the case of most players, is not so easy to play maxim/snipers strats. One single mistake and all your army is gone.

Even so, says a lot about the current state of the game that for winning as soviet you must spam support units without using infantry.

What will be the next soviet meta? A 6 mortars start? <444>_<444>
17 Aug 2014, 02:25 AM
#37
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976



If the game is going competitive then they need to focus on 1v1 which is where competitive play is at. Right now because of the lack of competitive support the majority are casual players who play 3v3 and 4v4. If the game goes competitive then expect 1v1 and 2v2 to become a lot more popular.

So no, they don't need to balance the game for 3v3 and 4v4, they need to balance the game for 1v1 and 2v2. I hate to be nasty about it, but people asking them to balance 4 factions across 4 modes and make it "fun" it just unrealistic. The game being "fun" is purely objective and some players think fun is playing as the Germans and others as the Allies. You can have fun in 3v3 and 4v4 playing as the Allies. You just will have a harder time winning.

If you think winning as the Allies is fun then you should play 1v1 and 2v2 which is more skewed towards those factions.[/quote

This game need as much balance in 3vs3 and 4vs4 as the other modes.

Clans need those larger modes of play to have fun. We paid for this game as much as the others and we are also numerous.
They should not have put those modes of play if they don't want to support it. They just have to tell us that they will do nothing, and we will drop the game.

Play you games and let us have our balance. This is the way we like to play the game. If the game lose our support, it won't go anywhere.

It's that kind of comment that kill a game.

Thank you.
17 Aug 2014, 04:59 AM
#38
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned


If the game is going competitive then they need to focus on 1v1 which is where competitive play is at. Right now because of the lack of competitive support the majority are casual players who play 3v3 and 4v4. If the game goes competitive then expect 1v1 and 2v2 to become a lot more popular.

So no, they don't need to balance the game for 3v3 and 4v4, they need to balance the game for 1v1 and 2v2. I hate to be nasty about it, but people asking them to balance 4 factions across 4 modes and make it "fun" it just unrealistic. The game being "fun" is purely objective and some players think fun is playing as the Germans and others as the Allies. You can have fun in 3v3 and 4v4 playing as the Allies. You just will have a harder time winning.

If you think winning as the Allies is fun then you should play 1v1 and 2v2 which is more skewed towards those factions.


Your basically saying that relic doesn't have to support the game modes the add into the game!?!?!

Im sorry But a games fun factor should be above ALL.
17 Aug 2014, 14:41 PM
#39
avatar of JohnThomas

Posts: 19

Allies in 1v1 and especially in 2v2 with double Soviets. OKW in 1v1 and 2v2 are pretty unfavorable. Rifle squad in a jeep is easy stomp mode against OKW, and then soviets have their maxims, or snipers and m3s.

Double soviets have the best unit(/bullshit) synergy - For example; 2 man sniper squad spam + maxim spam, transition into B4s and isu152s (then abuse the B4 bug to fire it constantly).

Then OKW is weak to snipers, maxims, or m3s/jeeps, hence can suffer alot early on.
19 Aug 2014, 14:53 PM
#40
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

in my opinion all game modes favors allies because soviets in 3v3 or 4v4 can troll so much with their epic doctrines like winustry or cunterattack B-4 spam while ostheer doesnt have anything great like dat, in 1v1 soviets dominate all the time and 2v2 is simple, one guy spam maxims or snipers while other spam conscripts and its gg


This post reeks of cheese. A horde of T34/76's will not save you from the Axis super tanks entering mid-late game. Try playing like a normal human with a "combined arms" army and let me know how that works out for you.*

In 4v4 game mode.
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

850 users are online: 850 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49120
Welcome our newest member, truvioll94
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM