Time to shake it up relic!

I play Soviets most of the time because otherwise it means interminable waiting otherwise for some senseless slaughter of some poor sucker who's crazy enough to choose Soviets instead of me.

I despise the need to cheese Soviets as much as you do, which is why I always make sure to play something different every single game if I can. I was probably one of the first guys in open beta to spam maxims, but I soon got sick of it (no late game oomph) and went over to something more inspiring (with predictable results for my winrate).

Yeah, most of my allied games came from "don't wanna wait". But I don't thikn Axis are OP. Soviets aren't OP now, neither are Amis as a whole.

All factions have some OP units. And Axis tanks are definitely the best (Which I guess is the reason for the high search %)

Big tanks are fun, Sovs have only 1, Wehr has 1.5 (Tiger, Panther is .5) OKW have KT and Jagd and Sturmtiger, which are all vey fun.

Amis have stuart mortar thing () It's actually very useful but it's not a KT or Tiger.


PERSHING PLS!

Please, good sirs, stop drowning this thread in your "this-OP-no-that-OP" crap. Thank you and have a nice day.

Hmm... so if anything the allies should err on the OP side to make their side more appealing. As opposed to what it is currently where we have the Axis being both OP and having the sex appeal...

That is nonsensical. The only sensible business and balance model is to strive for each side/ faction to be roughly equal.

(Please note, most of my points relate to the "average" player, not anyone who can get to the top tiers.)

A) Most people don't actually want a real challenge. For most people the ultimate is to have the feel that they were challenged and yet still won.

This explains part of the unfunness of the USF and any Axis fanbois whine... because if the US has strong early game, it feels like you stomped the other guy. Not really all that satisfying.

For the Axis, surviving the early game feels like you are now accomplished and a good player. That you can win the late game with less micro and stomping super tanks is just your "just reward".

So the question about OP and balance is really more of how it FEELS when you play. If USF has a slightly better edge in the beginning, it will feel challenging to the Axis when they win any game over 15 minutes. That would be the case even if the late game gives them a huge edge. For the USF a strong early edge will feel a bit empty but the closer they get to early balance, even while maintaining the edge, the more unfair it will feel because the more they get into mid-game the more they know they have no chance. So they get empty feeling victories and hopeless feeling losses.

It is no wonder people don't want to play USF. And that argument will apply whether their early game is OP or not.

B) Super tanks...

For anyone who defends Axis with the "German tanks WERE the best in the war" argument and then counters any other argument with a "this isn't supposed to be historically accurate" argument, just don't. The same person should never use both of those arguments. Not even if you do it separately in different threads.

If it there is a semblance of historical accuracy then there is a random chance your Tiger will breakdown or run out of fuel in enemy territory. You would then have to repair it with special engineers (and maybe use fuel to repair?) in the midst of the battle. You would also have to have some limit on how many you could ever call it, etc. etc. (you also wouldn't be able to cross any bridge.)

If it isn't historically accurate but just some sort of veneer put on an RTS then anyone can add anything to any faction for the sake of balance, fun, and an equal number of players on each side.

It is not impossible that Relic has chased off many players who aren't German fanbois. So his statement might even be true.

Heck, it might even be the business plan (consciously or unconsciously) to make a game that appeals to the fanbois fantasy of what the German army was during WWII (hint, it was not what you see in COH).

AvNY has made many great points. Well done sir.


Also loved this:

Well, it does sound truer, with all those big letters.

Nice

B) Super tanks...

For anyone who defends Axis with the "German tanks WERE the best in the war" argument and then counters any other argument with a "this isn't supposed to be historically accurate" argument, just don't. The same person should never use both of those arguments. Not even if you do it separately in different threads.

If it there is a semblance of historical accuracy then there is a random chance your Tiger will breakdown or run out of fuel in enemy territory. You would then have to repair it with special engineers (and maybe use fuel to repair?) in the midst of the battle. You would also have to have some limit on how many you could ever call it, etc. etc. (you also wouldn't be able to cross any bridge.)

If it isn't historically accurate but just some sort of veneer put on an RTS then anyone can add anything to any faction for the sake of balance, fun, and an equal number of players on each side.

Lol i only used historical accuracy in the american bit. This is a game not life and i just fealt the mortar halftrank should switch it out. But i do think we can use cool things presented in the war to this game.....like infantry on tanks. But really changes do need to be made and overal i think the soviets have lots of cool fun things i would like to fight and play against as axis. That the players should get every time not with commanders.

Also how do i post my player card just to clear the air because i have played many many more games Germans. And not so many as americans.

I enjoyed reading your post. It made me laugh but I agree with all your points

Bu...but...butttt

VetlolCake told me Sovs were OP and Axis sucked. Are you telling me he might be.... *wrong*

*sobs*

People don't want realism but they do want verisimilitude. Fact - the Americans only fielded a tiny handful of Pershings (although I'm not troubled by them as a call-in unit eventually) but the problem is the general crappiness of the US tanks that *do* exist. Make the Sherman slightly cheaper and the Jackson slightly meatier and half the problem might disappear.

People don't want realism but they do want verisimilitude. Fact - the Americans only fielded a tiny handful of Pershings (although I'm not troubled by them as a call-in unit eventually) but the problem is the general crappiness of the US tanks that *do* exist. Make the Sherman slightly cheaper and the Jackson slightly meatier and half the problem might disappear.

Or just nerf axis AT, vetted PAKs eat every tank for breakfast.

pershng, u forgot the pershing. it makes not sense that okw can get a jt and kt. yet usf cant get a SINGLE heavy tank!!!

92%-8% in Axis favour regularly. :/

Really unimpressed with how the game is balanced, have been since its release. (got me banned from the CoH2 forums all in one go)

That was my thread you earned your ban in. I honor you everyday to the RNG gods.

Or let the automatcher balance the faction out automatically.
With a message like "sorry , we can't allow you to play Axis at the moment. We want this to be balanced our way."

...wait...what a stupid idea....

Bringing up percentages does NOT support your argument that Axis are OP. Bringing it up is just argument from ignorance. If you want to bring up why Axis are OP and Allies are UP talk about the units the game but NOT the auto match percentages. I am feel compelled to remove posts that just mentions automatch percentages.

Bringing up percentages does NOT support your argument that Axis are OP. Bringing it up is just argument from ignorance. If you want to bring up why Axis are OP and Allies are UP talk about the units the game but NOT the auto match percentages. I am feel compelled to remove posts that just mentions automatch percentages.

Oh, please, do it, for the sake of all of us that know that the percentages are relative to time/place/elo and other parameters that I ocasionally forgot.