Hope that clarifies.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e1f29/e1f29f0f183583647df080f8301c1775470f5860" alt=";) ;)"
Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9
Posts: 246
I'm going to take the side of the OP on this one. I just got WFA on sale and you can see on my player card that my experience with USF has been painful. I'm still provisioning some game types, but I have yet to win a 4v4 LOL. I can't do anything but laugh at that. I'll play soviet and win and I'll play Axis and hardly ever lose. I play USF and the bigger the game gets, the more frustrating it is. The difference is, I'm not playing stupid like the guy in the videos, I'm actually outscoring everyone in the game in damage and often time kills too.
I think there are a few reasons that combine here to make USF such a pain in particular, but overall hard for newbs. We need newbs in this game or it doesn't grow. If it doesn't grow, Relic won't make money and Relic won't be able to make new shit or keep the lights on. So please cast out all that bullshit about how bad this guy played. That's what newbs are supposed to do.
Instead of focus on his bad play(which he acknowledged in the game is partly responsible), listen to what he is saying. I actually kind of like him, because he's very aggressive, which I find is often a problem with newbs. He wants access to more diverse units at the start. I don't think this is too much to ask for. The teching tree for USF is all over the place with a lot of basic shit being locked behind a substantial fuel wall. There is no standard mortar(unless you want to count the pack howitzer, which costs a lot of fuel to get access to), the basic MG is behind a fuel payment that is not given at the start, unlike everyone else. There is no sniper, lol.
The really sad part is that it feels like fixing the USF will actually require design level changes and Relic has yet to ever go back on design. What's here is here.
The other major point I would bring up is the matchmaking logic. I oppose it greatly. The idea of adding up rank and trying to make allies equal axis as close as possible among all players is dumb. This tends to result in extreme skill mixing making for frustrating experiences for ALL players not in 1v1. I feel all the game should try to get players of equal rank as close as possible into the same game, instead of grabbing a newb here and there to complete the addition method. If you join the matchmaking pool for a 3v3 and your prestige 1 rank 1, the game should try to pull you 2 allies and 3 opponents where all those players are also prestige 1 rank 1. If it cannot find an exact match, then it can expand up or down from that point by say 5 or 10 ranks. With this method you will of course still have varying skills in the games, but you will not end up with some that are well versed in gameplay and others that are fumbling around trying to keep up.
Wouldn't it be much better if the noobs play the noobs and the vets play vets? It would make ranking happen perhaps a little slower, since some of these unfair games pay out a tremendous rank increase if you win the handicap, but each individual game would be much more satisfying to play.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1158
Posts: 118
Posts: 1740
Thats absolutely wrong!!! Especially the fett marked part !!!!
I have other Experiences and 1300 Game Hours!!!
Posts: 183
May I ask you if you are the GeneralSteiner from HQ-CoH?
Posts: 118
Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
Posts: 862
Posts: 2070
The problem I think the OP is addressing is multi-fold and I think highlights a flaw in the game, which is worse because the designers have expressed that the current design is not an accident but intentional.
One SHOULD NEVER design balance asymmetrically over time. Just don't. It can't work and it can't be satisfying to the players. If OKW is designed to ROFLstomp the US (only the highest level of play and in 1v1 can US hope to stop this) then the design says that US is stronger early game. But if that is the case then US must will ROFLstomp early, which is unsatisfying to the winner and frustrating to the loser. This will lead to (and has) axis saying US is too OP early, and it will seem that way because their wins will look like early game ROFLstomps. So US gets nerfed a little. Not so bad, still stronger early game, but now you have to know how to win fast or mid game while axis still ROFLstomps in end-game. But end-game stomps won't feel like they were cake walks since you had to get to that point by playing well early on. (you don't need to play THAT well since all you have to do is survive. Few factions can deal a killing blow in early game, they have to attain an adcvantage AND know how to keep and exploit it.)
If USF is so hard to play, don't sell it by itself. Don't sell it without a tutorial that teaches strategies needed for PvP. And since most people join to play with friends, don't design around 1v1 and not 3v3 4v4 since most of the community, particularly new players, play those.
Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21
Posts: 508
I think the biggest problem is late game with vetted LMG grens, big armor(tigers,KTs,Panthers), and elite inf(OKW). Riflemen don't stand up to a lot of the stuff out there, even at vet 3 with lmgs or bars equipped, as well as conscripts and maxims. Not saying we should nerf late game OKW inf and LMG grens, and buff maxims and cons, but I'd like to find a way to balance out the early/mid/late game a little better. It's a problem that certain factions shine early game, suck late game, or rock late game, and are okay early game, etc..
Posts: 1637
I think the biggest problem is late game with vetted LMG grens, big armor(tigers,KTs,Panthers), and elite inf(OKW). Riflemen don't stand up to a lot of the stuff out there, even at vet 3 with lmgs or bars equipped, as well as conscripts and maxims. Not saying we should nerf late game OKW inf and LMG grens, and buff maxims and cons, but I'd like to find a way to balance out the early/mid/late game a little better. It's a problem that certain factions shine early game, suck late game, or rock late game, and are okay early game, etc..
Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2
Guy in the vid fucks up royally, then blames the game.
I don't see anything "enlightening about new players experience" in that at all.
I just see a drunk, rather biased, impatient, annoying, whiney, uncooperative guy ranting at the game and blaming it for his own mistakes.
Posts: 752
I think Allies in big team games are a lot more difficult to play, especially in random teams. Obviously having an arranged team will give you a huge advantage, but i think this is more evident for the allies. Since the allied factions are focused on attacking, it requires a lot more coordination and planning than the Axis factions. This problem is magnified in random-player team games. The coordination and communication isn't there to allow allied players to capitalize on their early-game advantage.
Posts: 170
Posts: 2070
But yet you haven't played even a single match as Axis...
Where are you drawing these conclusions from?
Posts: 862
But yet you haven't played even a single match as Axis...
Where are you drawing these conclusions from?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
290 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
142 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
47 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
20 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
16 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
10 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
8 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
4 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
1 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
20 |