The overbearing balance of 4's

Hello internet strangers,

Welcome to hard dose of reality. Today I'd like to talk about a the black swan of balancing issues and that is the 4v4 game mode.

The problem

Axis are simply better at 4's than Allies. The only hard data (publicly available) to support this is the win/loss ratios. Hats off to community member Legends for putting this data together. You can read more about his assembled data here.

- Soviet OKW US Ostheer
4vs4 0.543 0.854 0.576 0.832

Compare this to the 1v1 game mode and you'll see that the gap has closed substantially. One could almost say that 1v1 is rather balanced.

- Soviet OKW US Ostheer
1vs1 0.709 0.698 0.664 0.667

If you are a fan of data and having hard numbers available, please consider supporting my numbers are sexy thread on the official forums. Ultimately, Relic holds the key to that beautiful data.

What cannot be done

What could Relic do to close the gap for that win/loss ratio in 4's? Could they hammer the OKW units with a series of nerfs? Sure. Could we remove some commanders away from the OST? Yep. Could we limit super call in units? I don't see why not. The catch to all of these things is that in reality, they cannot be done without affecting the balance of 1's. Relic has stated the following about the matter:

To be clear the team still works on balancing the larger games, but they start by building up from 1v1 upwards. If 1v1 isn't balanced it's unlikely that 4v4 will.

It's a building block, the base. - Noun

In my opinion, ignoring 1's for a moment, doing the above would just kind of make the game a little more boring and stale. How many times have you had an Axis opponent drop because they lost their precious Tiger Ace?

The real issue

What is the real reason why Axis are so damn good at 4's? I've given this a lot of thought and I can say it is three things.

• Better armor. In 1's the better armor is managed by Allied players through combined arms. In 4's it is not as easy as the combined arms counter is countered by the Axis combined army. For example, a JadTiger with King Tiger and regular Panther's as support are better than an Allied combined army of Sherman's supported by a Jackson and an ISU. Some of the Axis armor also has high survivability with smoke and blitz being available. Because of the inability to kill the armor it contributes to the "critical mass" theory presented by ohme. At some point in time the Axis armor will out number the Allied armor and a comeback will be highly improbable.
  
• Doctrines that work well together. Luftwaffe Supply, Elite Troops, Breakthrough and a commander with a 'halo bonus' unit. Not much needs to be said about this combo as it really speaks for itself. You have a doctrine that can provide resources, training, excellent late game armor, and a 'halo bonus' to the already good armor. This is just an example team composition but others exist. Over time I suspect Axis players will start to run with both the Command Panther and Command PiV as their halo bonus's apply to all team members armor.
  
• Resource starvation is less of a hindrance in 4's as the OKW can allow their team members to do the heavy lifting early and mid game and bring out the unlimited King Tigers in late game. Because this unit is non-doctrinal every OKW player poses a late game threat.
  

What could be done

I like this game. I want to keep it interesting and dynamic. I feel the best way to solve the problem is through the introduction of additional Doctrines. These Doctrines would have a very specific gap to fill.

• USF needs its version of the IS2/Tiger/and to a lesser extent a King Tiger.
  
• Both Soviet and USF need doctrines that provide units with a 'halo' style bonus.
  
• USF needs its version of Soviet fuel drops/OST fuel and munition drops/OKW munitions to fuel ability.
  

I believe if the doctrines are well thought out it would have no harm on the balance of 1's.

The challenge

This community will have to come to terms that this requires DLC of some sort. Relic will also have to acknowledge that this is indeed a problem that needs resources dedicated to it to fix.

Much rawr

In before the hate train comes in to say that nobody should care about 3v3/4v4 balance.

It depresses me that a lot of solutions seem to involve more DLC commanders. Which won't be available to people who don't buy them. If something exists to make the team game balanced better it needs to be freely available to people.

I feel like part of the problem is not only that Axis fuel is more secure in team games (esp. larger ones) but also that pop-cap not being tied to territory means that there's no real problem with them loading up on heavies and no way to prevent their replacement by being aggressive with territory. It's purely a matter of stalling until they get the resources.

• Better armor. In 1's the better armor is managed by Allied players through combined arms. In 4's it is not as easy as the combined arms counter is countered by the Axis combined army. For example, a JadTiger with King Tiger and regular Panther's as support are better than an Allied combined army of Sherman's supported by a Jackson and an ISU. Some of the Axis armor also has high survivability with smoke and blitz being available. Because of the inability to kill the armor it contributes to the "critical mass" theory presented by ohme. At some point in time the Axis armor will out number the Allied armor and a comeback will be highly improbable.
  
• Doctrines that work well together. Luftwaffe Supply, Elite Troops, Breakthrough and a commander with a 'halo bonus' unit. Not much needs to be said about this combo as it really speaks for itself. You have a doctrine that can provide resources, training, excellent late game armor, and a 'halo bonus' to the already good armor. This is just an example team composition but others exist. Over time I suspect Axis players will start to run with both the Command Panther and Command PiV as their halo bonus's apply to all team members armor.
  
  

+1

completely agree

as Sov I used to play Terror Tactic, Anti-Infantry, Advance Warfare with my mate go partisan or irregular. and then when we got reckt by horde of Tiger with supply truck (before they nerf it to what you see now) me and my mate decide to go all heavies only IS-2 and ISU-152 almost every match up until now and that damn thing is a pain to micro and so boring to choose only 2 heavies commander.

good read. one thing though.

more versions of is 2/ tiger for usf wouldn't help with jagdtiger aka death to all allies vehicles.

just hate how unless allies are leading handsomely, thye have to risk everything to get rid of jagdtiger just to stay in the game.

^A soviet doc with a super heavy tank destroyer might help.

Though I don't like the idea of fixing balance problems through paid DLC and I doubt Relic has the spare resources to add a new unit for free.

Napalm, i agree on why 4v4 is unbalanced, but i disagree with your solution.

I would also like to add on why the state of 4v4 is so unbalanced:

1. Axis have better AT (paks, schrecks, fausts, tanks)
2. Axis have better AI units (Obersoldaten, LMG Grens, Pz4, a whole range of OKW infantyr..)
3. Axis have heavier armor
4. Maps are smaller which negate proper flanking by Allied mediums
5. Axis late game has low risk but high reward whereas ALlies really have to gamble on their attacks.

The ALlies are supposed to have the advantage in numbers, especially tanks such as Sherman and T34. However, the state of the game and 4v4 basically nullifies this theoretical advantage.


These are all very important points. Once the Panthers, Obersoldaten, AT guns, etc roll out, there isn't enough room for the ALlied mediums to maneuver. Allies have to risk so much just to push back the Axis tanks and superior infantry.

Why do ALlies have more risk and Axis less? The AT advantage is on Axis' side. Flanking with medium tanks is a gamble because Schreck blobs, superior AT guns, and heavy German armor nullify the "advantage". Germans on the other hand, have the luxury of defense or offense. Their superior infantry are long-range units that can wipe out other Allied infantry in the defense and offense. Axis tanks are heavily armored and deadly. They can shrug off most Allied AT while attacking or defending.

In short, Axis units overperform in the late game. THis is magnified even further when 4v4 brings even more of these units into the field. In addition, the 4v4 maps are not big enough for Allied players to use their speedy mediums to flank the enemy.


SOLUTION?

As i said earlier, i have to disagree with your remedy. Personally, i am very biased against adding more DLC (The DLC concept is just a piece of money-grabbing shit that destroys games). It would be wrong to say that adding DLCs won't solve anything because you can theoretically, flood the game with viable commanders. However, from an ethical perspective, would rather not go there...

I really think the solution is to tone down the "asymmetric balance" (basically means Axis are better at everything). Of course, the game would be boring if the units were the same, so some variety is definitely good. My wish is that all factions, regardless if you are in the early game, mid, or late, have a chance to win REGARDLESS OF WHAT COMMANDER YOU CHOSE. This means having a solid set of VIABLE NON-DOCTRINAL UNITS. If each faction were given the proper tools to reliably counter what the opponent has, then it would lead to a less frustrating game. This would reduce the asymmetric nature of the factions, yet keep the faction differences.


The above solution will take a long time to implement, so i think there are other stopgap remedies to solve the 4v4 imbalances. THese are:

1. Nerfs to Axis late game units (yes, controversial i know).
2. Buffs to Allied AT (difficult, because we can only work with existing units who are already inadequate)

Like Napalm said, these are difficult to do because Relic must identify changes that won't ruin 1v1.


Anyways..... we will see what happens

Good thread and some valuable points.

However, I do feel there is a way to stop the over bearing advantage the axis have, when they have those commanders that synergize so well, without making counter part DLC commanders for the Allies. Relic has to stop the mutual benefits received.

-Caches should only provide benefit for the person who made them. This provides a problem in and of itself. If someone builds a cache, why should another member of the team be penalised, if they want to make a cache on the same point? Relic needs to find a way so that other players can invest their own 200mp into that same cache, without adding durability to the cache. Perhaps each player could have his or her own supply crate on a point, to signify they have one there? If so, it should be visible to all players (when the point is in viewing range of the opposing team). It also makes that point strategically very interesting, if a team has invested 800mp into that cache, and all of a sudden it becomes undefended...

-Aura's or Halo's should only apply to the players own units.

-Unit training should only be applied to the users own units.

-Supply/medical drops should only be able to be picked up by the player who dropped them or any opposing player. This goes for allies and axis.

-Opal trucks should only benefit the player who makes them.


Of course there should be exceptions to that kind of thinking. Things like Community repair bays (OKW truck/Industry bay) or community healing centres, should be accessible to all friendly players.




I also feel you forgot to mention map design. In larger team games, I find the narrower maps highly favour the Axis team, as they are so easy to defend and bottle up the allied forces. These type of maps appear to be more predominant in larger games modes. Some of the maps also make it very hard for the Allies to play to their advantage, offering little or very few opportunities to out manoeuvre the Axis, and cut them off from their supplies. I'd sat that the map designs account for about 15-20% of the Axis domination problem in larger team games.

I'll just leave it here.

•  
  

  0

  VS

  Hellk0 Slayer Miratrix09 EmoTossel

  GER-Killo |503 $F\/\/F. Superimmunsystemmann [ EvoG ]-DMWjoni1

  Heavy-armor-arty-fest_countered_by_tonns_of_meat

  by: ElSlayer map: Steppes

  1

  -

good read. one thing though.

more versions of is 2/ tiger for usf wouldn't help with jagdtiger aka death to all allies vehicles.

just hate how unless allies are leading handsomely, thye have to risk everything to get rid of jagdtiger just to stay in the game.

USF has an easy enough time vs JTs & Elefants due to their ability to swarm with shermans. Get 3 Shermans and swam the JT/ele. You may lose 1-2 Shermans but the german tank destroyer will die.

I don't understand why people claim Axis is OP 3v3/4v4s. Allies have the superior early game, especially USSR with their T1(sniper and scout cars) & T2 (Maxim spam LOLOOLOL). If you have the stronger early game, you should beat Axis to armor, cementing your advantage further. USSR calls in ISU, which can only be effectively countered by JT & elefant or USF/USSR tank spam out numbers Axis armor.

USF has an easy enough time vs JTs & Elefants due to their ability to swarm with shermans. Get 3 Shermans and swam the JT/ele. You may lose 1-2 Shermans but the german tank destroyer will die.

I don't understand why people claim Axis is OP 3v3/4v4s. Allies have the superior early game, especially USSR with their T1(sniper and scout cars) & T2 (Maxim spam LOLOOLOL). If you have the stronger early game, you should beat Axis to armor, cementing your advantage further. USSR calls in ISU, which can only be effectively countered by JT & elefant or USF/USSR tank spam out numbers Axis armor.

Not viable. okw has shrek blobs and reketen. wermacht have faust and paks

Not viable. okw has shrek blobs and reketen. wermacht have faust and paks

Cut that off with your imaginary schreck blobs and PAK 43 style raketen. That little AT gun is close to good for nothing. And there is no schreck blob anymore, after this patch that gave you a nice present related to OKW economy. You should realy play all factions, as I do.

Cut that off with your imaginary schreck blobs and PAK 43 style raketen. That little AT gun is close to good for nothing. And there is no schreck blob anymore, after this patch that gave you a nice present related to OKW economy. You should realy play all factions, as I do.

This happened to mee today..

Dont tell me to play all factions.

Im pretty sure everyone plays all factions

This happened to mee today..

Dont tell me to play all factions.

Im pretty sure everyone plays all factions

If you can't counter a schreck blob, than L2P. Is as simple as that. I had enough with your senseless whinings.

I think Relic accuratley assumes that 1v1 balance will mirror 4v4 balance. When 1v1s were balanced to an acceptable degree before WFA so were 4v4s IMO with the exception of the Tiger being OP and Blitz trucks being broken.

Presently i think the issues that plague the game mode are twofold and they extend to the 1v1 landscape

AT- Axis anti tank weapons are vastly superior to the allied ones With no real benifit or advantage to the allied weaponry. Additionally the Axis tanks are generally better armored. Most allied tanks fail to bounce Shrecks or Pak fire where as even medium Axis tanks will consistently bounce Bazooka, PTRS, and 57mm AT fire. This makes it highly dangerous to manuever and flank with allied armor, but much easier with axis armor because The axis support weapons are far more deadly than the much less reliable Allied ones.

The infantry advantage-Generally speaking Axis infantry units at this time greatly outperform all soviet units(except for shock troops who are effective in certain situations) and most American Options cost for cost, especially in the late game. This makes It necessary for the allies to devote more fuel resources and support weapons towards dealing with Infantry when they already have inferior AT support to begin with.

Veterancy- Axis units have better vet in many cases. Grens outperform other infantry primarily because of their Vet, Volks get 5 levels of combat bonuses where as most infantry get 2 bonuses and Armored skirts and blitz is far better than secure mode and an increased rate of fire. These are Just some examples, But i think many would agree that veterancy equally distributed seems to favor axis units in many cases(though precision strike is clearly better than counterbarrage)

And there is no schreck blob anymore, after this patch that gave you a nice present related to OKW economy.

Oh come off it. It was a 20% nerf not a 66% one, Shrecks are still easily affordable.

Good read.
And indeed, people who deny that axis late game is simply stronger by design are nuts and should see a psychiatrist. Flanking a KT or Jagd in 1v1 is maybe ok, but throw 2 panthers , a jagd & a stuka in the mix and it's nearly impossible.

e: Also, I don't agree with the fact that 1v1 needs to be balanced before going over to larger teamgames.
Simple things can be done to make teamgames more enjoyable.

Restricting the amount of call-ins is a good example of that.

my stats are available for everyone to see.

Your stats are not available for everyone to see, and there was no need to throw in an insult. I'm invising because you also threw in an insult.