Free for all weapon racks (americans)

Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2014, 06:39 AMAirborne

they is no balance in team games I gues. it can also make american lease bad in 2vs2.
I don´t think allies will be uber OP in team games if soviet can pick up 1 american weapen from ranks.
Win-Lose-Ratio from time span 27.8 - 7.9.2014.
Notice that numbers are rounded to 3 decimals and data is collect from top 200 players.

- Soviet OKW US Ostheer
2vs2 0.612 0.755 0.566 0.683
3vs3 0.563 0.821 0.547 0.737
4vs4 0.543 0.854 0.576 0.832

Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2014, 07:42 AMCabreza

Allowing units that were never meant to receive weapon upgrades to purchase weapon upgrades because they are partnered with a USF player is simply unbalancing. The soviet army is designed to play a specific way. Their tech, units, and commanders take into account (or at least should) the lack of upgradable infantry. This is how they are balanced. When you introduce weapon upgrades into the mix the entire balance of the faction gets thrown out of order. Having access to bazookas alone would completely change soviet early game by giving them reasonably good infantry based AT. Even if it could be balanced somehow it would require balancing for two different scenarios; those in which soviets have access to weapon upgrades and those times they don't. I agree that team games, particularly 3v3 and up, need better balance but conscripts with bars or bazookas is not the way to fix it.

Jump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 23:56 PMCabreza

No, sorry but shared weapon racks would destroy balance in team games.

Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2014, 07:29 AMPorygon

Shocks with 1919, you gonna be serious?

Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2014, 08:59 AMKatitof

What balance in team games?
Caches, supply drops and well before that opels, coupled with inequality in late game already destroyed balance long time ago.