What should Relic do to increase allies-players?
- This thread is locked
24 Aug 2014, 21:57 PM
#121
2 
Posts: 2181
Change permission to play as axis into a war spoil
24 Aug 2014, 22:11 PM
#122
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Change permission to play as axis into a war spoil
That would probably be the only way to have somewhat balanced numbers on matchmaking
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
24 Aug 2014, 22:59 PM
#123
Posts: 59
Its the culture of the fans don't stress things will continue.
24 Aug 2014, 23:36 PM
#124
Posts: 2742
I can't speak for OKW or the Americans, but the problems facing the Soviet faction are core design issues, and if Relic was interested in redesigning their factions, they'd've done it a long time ago, let alone before releasing two more factions to make the task of balancing a complete and heinous mess.
The Soviet tier buildings have been a problematic transplant of the Panzer Elite since the start, and their reliance on commander choice early game to field a basic army has been an issue since beta.
Compare this to the Axis, or at least Ostheer, who have available everything they need to be competent (depending on map design) with teller mines and their t1. The road to panthers always provides the choice to go t2, t3, or even to forgo them completely for commander call-in heavy tanks like elefants or tigers.
The Soviets, on the other hand, have to choose their weakness. They have to decide how their army will be incomplete or inadequate, which is often very frustrating against either of the Axis factions.
The Soviet tier buildings have been a problematic transplant of the Panzer Elite since the start, and their reliance on commander choice early game to field a basic army has been an issue since beta.
Compare this to the Axis, or at least Ostheer, who have available everything they need to be competent (depending on map design) with teller mines and their t1. The road to panthers always provides the choice to go t2, t3, or even to forgo them completely for commander call-in heavy tanks like elefants or tigers.
The Soviets, on the other hand, have to choose their weakness. They have to decide how their army will be incomplete or inadequate, which is often very frustrating against either of the Axis factions.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
25 Aug 2014, 00:02 AM
#125
Posts: 440
I like it the way it is right now. OKW is proverbial "noob faction" as going random 4v4 or 3v3 as Axis is asking to get idiots and children as your teammates.
Allies are 1337 right now and generally yield better random teams so that's where I am for the moment.
Allies are 1337 right now and generally yield better random teams so that's where I am for the moment.
25 Aug 2014, 00:13 AM
#126
Posts: 2070
I like it the way it is right now. OKW is proverbial "noob faction" as going random 4v4 or 3v3 as Axis is asking to get idiots and children as your teammates.
Allies are 1337 right now and generally yield better random teams so that's where I am for the moment.
but you might have an easier time as axis in 3v3 and 4v4
Axis doesn't have the best AT options in the game
25 Aug 2014, 01:58 AM
#127
Posts: 122
Fix the cheese strats/units of Soviets, make combined arms of them more rewarding. Otherwise there's less sense of accomplishment/challenge when playing them.
Feels like Soviets are the easiest faction in 1v1.
US feel lacking compared to vcoh (no calliope, Pershing, sniper or mortar inf). Their T1 / T2 Tech system doesn't feel intuitive. I'd prefer them to be like Ostheer and vcoh with linear teching.
Ostheer (and less so OKW) feel like underdogs historically and gameplay wise and that's why they will always be a popular choice. And there's a reputation of them for being "elite", the same way Spartans or Romans are in ancient warfare.
Feels like Soviets are the easiest faction in 1v1.
US feel lacking compared to vcoh (no calliope, Pershing, sniper or mortar inf). Their T1 / T2 Tech system doesn't feel intuitive. I'd prefer them to be like Ostheer and vcoh with linear teching.
Ostheer (and less so OKW) feel like underdogs historically and gameplay wise and that's why they will always be a popular choice. And there's a reputation of them for being "elite", the same way Spartans or Romans are in ancient warfare.
76561198140861243
25 Aug 2014, 02:14 AM
#128
Posts: 2053
Better Warspoils chance when playing Allies. Changes in balance dont really change the numbers.
25 Aug 2014, 05:13 AM
#129
Posts: 915
Never do I see this type of split. Usually 60-40 or maybe sometimes 70-30. Enough with these damn threads. I have tons of fun playing soviets, only reason I don't play Americans is because I suck at them. You say there are not many choices as allies? Wtf... What do you see as OST? It's usually tigers, for OKW it's KT and fusiliers or defensive doctrine. God it goes both ways, people use what works, please just shut up with your stupid fallacies.
25 Aug 2014, 07:36 AM
#130
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
I have been playing some games this week, only ticking 1vs1/2vs2 as USF and the ratio never barely went under 70/30 each time.
In fact, ticking only 2vs2 make the ratio going really high between 80/20 90/10 while 1vs1 is almost always around 60/40.
I never play with more players but 2vs2 match-up already shows the gap in faction preference.
In fact, ticking only 2vs2 make the ratio going really high between 80/20 90/10 while 1vs1 is almost always around 60/40.
I never play with more players but 2vs2 match-up already shows the gap in faction preference.
25 Aug 2014, 09:21 AM
#131
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
The answer is this: would you still play a faction that grants you the victory in 80% of situation? You won't, unless you are a very bad looser and have an orgasm while in seeing only "victory" on your screen. That is why people are playing more Axis than Allied. It's more challanging. It's quite simple to figure it out. Oh, and Relic, making more and more difficult to play with Axis, won't balance the situation, on the contrary 
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
25 Aug 2014, 09:33 AM
#132
Posts: 209
Playing Axis is more challenging? Maybe on 1vs1 but in team games and on equal skill levels Allies have a bad time.
25 Aug 2014, 09:51 AM
#133
Posts: 2819
I think bringing in heavies in the US would help.
Also decreasing t1 cost of US would help a lot.
Just riflespam is not attractive, and soviets inferior units against elite and well-trained units? I think the choice is made fast.
Allies strats are just soooo cheezy and repetitive, it really makes them boring.
Also decreasing t1 cost of US would help a lot.
Just riflespam is not attractive, and soviets inferior units against elite and well-trained units? I think the choice is made fast.
Allies strats are just soooo cheezy and repetitive, it really makes them boring.
All posts made are about situations in 2v2's. Not a 1v1 player.
25 Aug 2014, 09:52 AM
#134
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
The answer is this: would you still play a faction that grants you the victory in 80% of situation? You won't, unless you are a very bad looser and have an orgasm while in seeing only "victory" on your screen. That is why people are playing more Axis than Allied. It's more challanging. It's quite simple to figure it out. Oh, and Relic, making more and more difficult to play with Axis, won't balance the situation, on the contrary
This is the answer. Has everybody forgotten the march deployment patch? Axis were so under powered back then that nobody wanted to play as Soviets anymore!
25 Aug 2014, 09:59 AM
#135
Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21
PERSHING(And Calliopes). That is all. Though the amount of ISU/Elefant players is never in shortage.
On a moar serious note I honestly think the amount of allied and axis players are even atm.
On a moar serious note I honestly think the amount of allied and axis players are even atm.
25 Aug 2014, 10:22 AM
#136
Posts: 752
Perhaps more Soviet propaganda would help?
"You are competitive if play to win and make efforts to improve." -Basilone
25 Aug 2014, 10:28 AM
#137
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Last time it helped to achieve anything was 70 years ago.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
25 Aug 2014, 10:29 AM
#138
Posts: 752
Last time it helped to achieve anything was 70 years ago.
I think you might want to revise your history a bit as to when the USSR finally fell.
Protip: It wasn't 70 years ago.
"You are competitive if play to win and make efforts to improve." -Basilone
25 Aug 2014, 11:07 AM
#139
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
Ya in team games maybe even when both axis partners are ostheer. But Okw... mmh.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
25 Aug 2014, 11:39 AM
#140
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
I dont know why so many people are asking for a Pershing commander. You do realize that you wouldnt see the other commanders ever again? Because..Pershing? Pershing!!1 oh mai gawd!
not.
It wont happen. What US needs is a redesign, even if only a slight one, they desperately need more non doctrinal early game options.
not.
It wont happen. What US needs is a redesign, even if only a slight one, they desperately need more non doctrinal early game options.
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
57 | ||
 |
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
169 | ||
 |
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
11 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265
Board Info
683 users are online:
683 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
9 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50029
Welcome our newest member, muzology
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, muzology
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM