OKW, the root of most balance issues?

...

FYI a single M20 can wipe a 5 vet volks squad without taking a single hit from shreks, just with micro - and it's not that hard. T-70, T-34, and Shermans can do the same with their agility. In order to fend of mediums with volks, volks need to be massed. Massed means moving together. If they're moving together, they're not capping everything on the map. If they send lone squads to fend off that engineer, a light tank will wipe it. If OKW sends two squads, the demo is waiting for them by the fuel they just lost.

OKW main weaknesses are useless IF the enemy has no strategic thinking of how the game will flow. And to be honest, removing that "necessity of strategic thinking" will pretty much kill the game.

Maybe between 4 digit rankers, they probably both blob and OKW will easily come out victorious due to their versatility and ober dps. But just because new players can't dribble doesn't mean we should allow everyone to hold the ball with their hands in football(soccer). It's a fucking RTS. Strategy involves out-playing the opponent.

M20 wiping a vet5 Volk with Panzerschreck, both controlled by 3 and 2 digit rankers? As in the M20 killing the Volk in cover before the Schreck hits twice? Come on.

In the same league with trying to split the okw fores would be sending a minesweeper with that Volk(s), after hitting the first mine/demo.

Is that how football(football)was developed? Still seems like a pretty tactical game to me... (joking).

You went hard on a thread which went in a questionable direction and have chosen a unit which is considered problematic by good players (see the thread for schrecked volks compared to other at inf). To take your soccer example, volks are the only ones beeing allowed to carry the ball. You can change the mechanics so the game indeed gets more tactical. Not by buffing/nerfing but by adjusting stuff. Verhicle snares instead of Schrecks on volks and faster first shot for puppchen would go a long way for example.

On topic: OKW is not the root of most balance issues. Its the complexitiy of balance in this wonderfull game which could not get anticipated was not mastered yet by the developers. Our job is to educate the crowd about the tactical gameplay possible with the tools at hand. And provide reasonable feedback on problematic entitites, kudos to Romeo.

I wouldn't say OKW is the root of most balance issues, it's the way most factions are designed atm. Each faction has strengths and weaknesses depending on the early-mid-and late game. The problem is the way certain factions can have a strong advantage over the other either early on or later on that causes things to become problematic. Like USF late game at times. I'm speaking for 1v1 specifically.

Rupert, you are assuming too much things and your only answer is L2P.

Assuming about as much as someone who assumes that pumas are immortal. Fair enough?

And that's precisely what I'm complaining about. An average player shouldn't learn to play until mastering all lame strategies to be able to win a match again a equally skilled enemy. When you can't win a match against someone of equal skill following the proper teching tree of your faction and using stock units, then balance is fucked up.

"lame strategies?" Define lame please. In any RTS, knowing the most efficient tactics/build order IS part of skill in becoming a better player. So when you say "an average player who does not know these 'lame strategies'", automatically translates to "below average player who has yet to understand the game".

I mean "lame"? Right. Whatever moral/ethical standards you have does not translate to the game very well. Unless the player is abusing an obvious flaw or bug (inb4 katitof claims volkshreks are massive flaw!), no strategy is "lame" by definition. You have no right pushing your arbitrary code of conduct to others in deciding what is efficient and effective.

Instead, the game forces you to read forums, see replays and learn which commander and what combination of units work together. That's fine in high level games, but the average player doesn't see replays, and doesn't register in forums.

What is wrong with being a part of a community in a frigging MULTIPLAYER GAME????

Hell, the most popular game on the face of the earth such as World of Warcraft, League of Legends, DotA, Starcraft2 - all require extensive knowledge of the game meta and community-provided build order/strategy/tactics in order to perform as somebody who isn't a detriment "in an average level."

You seem to misunderstand "Average" and "below average players". Multiplayer ranked games are by DEFINITION competitive. Hence it's "ranked". You are required to do your own research, replay analysis, stream-viewing or whatever that you may need to understand the game better and play in the competitive scene.

Now Im not saying everyone should do so, but if you want to win you need to put in the effort. Hello? Am I asking for too much? If you want to win, you need to deserve it! Am I back in 1950's Soviet Russia or something?

switch to axis with which is easier to play and win at low skill games (which happens too)

And I highly doubt that they will be suddenly climbing the ladder just by switching to Axis. I have yet to see anyone prove me after they go on claiming that "I am better skilled but only lost because the other faction is better".

Soviets being the most powerful faction in 1vs1 and 2vs2?? Yes, I can believe that. What I don't believe is that they managed to do that without abusing stupid strats like no-teching and wait for call-ins, spamming B4s, or sniper starts.

"abusing stupid strats" - here we go again with your moral code on strats. I've dealt with the logical flaw here so moving on.

Well it seems that in your fantasy world balance is perfect and everyone who loses a game is because he got outplayed, and stupid units like ISU152, JT, Obers, King Tigers, etc, doesn't mean anything in the outcome of a game.

Way to shove stuff I didn't say up my fricking mouth man. Again your arbitrary moral judgement on units do not add to the discussion, so pleas use a diary or a priest to rant moral issues with pixellated data.
On the other hand, the "stupid units" only come for a certain price in a certain time - which makes you, the opponent - obligated to outplay the opponent to delay and punish such units as much as possible.

This is the logic I see in these posts : None of the defenders in Soccer mark the opponent's forward only to have him score. And you blame the rules and say "one goalkeeper is not enough to block a ball coming to the net! We need 2 or 3 goalies!"

By the way, in team games is perfectly possible for a player to blob mercilessly and still not losing cap power.

In larger team games, I see many soviets go T2-T4 and go Katusha as the first vehicle to punish that. And it works really well especially since the last buff to katushas and infantry behavior patch.

And more often than not, USF bar blob beats volk blob through smoke and sheer firepower until obers are out, but by then allies should have katushas as well.

M20 wiping a vet5 Volk with Panzerschreck, both controlled by 3 and 2 digit rankers? As in the M20 killing the Volk in cover before the Schreck hits twice? Come on.

In the same league with trying to split the okw fores would be sending a minesweeper with that Volk(s), after hitting the first mine/demo.

Which isn't too far off as the poster that I replied to assumes that pumas are "immortal" - which would require a lot more macro/micro skill to avoid shrek fire by manually charging at infantry with vehicles.

Keeping a puma alive means guessing where enemy mines are,and kiting to avoid AT nades that dmg engine.... a lot harder than running m20 into a volks squad and pushing it around.

Assuming about as much as someone who assumes that pumas are immortal. Fair enough?




"lame strategies?" Define lame please. In any RTS, knowing the most efficient tactics/build order IS part of skill in becoming a better player. So when you say "an average player who does not know these 'lame strategies'", automatically translates to "below average player who has yet to understand the game".

I mean "lame"? Right. Whatever moral/ethical standards you have does not translate to the game very well. Unless the player is abusing an obvious flaw or bug (inb4 katitof claims volkshreks are massive flaw!), no strategy is "lame" by definition. You have no right pushing your arbitrary code of conduct to others in deciding what is efficient and effective.



What is wrong with being a part of a community in a frigging MULTIPLAYER GAME????

Hell, the most popular game on the face of the earth such as World of Warcraft, League of Legends, DotA, Starcraft2 - all require extensive knowledge of the game meta and community-provided build order/strategy/tactics in order to perform as somebody who isn't a detriment "in an average level."

You seem to misunderstand "Average" and "below average players". Multiplayer ranked games are by DEFINITION competitive. Hence it's "ranked". You are required to do your own research, replay analysis, stream-viewing or whatever that you may need to understand the game better and play in the competitive scene.

Now Im not saying everyone should do so, but if you want to win you need to put in the effort. Hello? Am I asking for too much? If you want to win, you need to deserve it! Am I back in 1950's Soviet Russia or something?




And I highly doubt that they will be suddenly climbing the ladder just by switching to Axis. I have yet to see anyone prove me after they go on claiming that "I am better skilled but only lost because the other faction is better".



"abusing stupid strats" - here we go again with your moral code on strats. I've dealt with the logical flaw here so moving on.



Way to shove stuff I didn't say up my fricking mouth man. Again your arbitrary moral judgement on units do not add to the discussion, so pleas use a diary or a priest to rant moral issues with pixellated data.
On the other hand, the "stupid units" only come for a certain price in a certain time - which makes you, the opponent - obligated to outplay the opponent to delay and punish such units as much as possible.

This is the logic I see in these posts : None of the defenders in Soccer mark the opponent's forward only to have him score. And you blame the rules and say "one goalkeeper is not enough to block a ball coming to the net! We need 2 or 3 goalies!"



In larger team games, I see many soviets go T2-T4 and go Katusha as the first vehicle to punish that. And it works really well especially since the last buff to katushas and infantry behavior patch.

And more often than not, USF bar blob beats volk blob through smoke and sheer firepower until obers are out, but by then allies should have katushas as well.



Which isn't too far off as the poster that I replied to assumes that pumas are "immortal" - which would require a lot more macro/micro skill to avoid shrek fire by manually charging at infantry with vehicles.

Keeping a puma alive means guessing where enemy mines are,and kiting to avoid AT nades that dmg engine.... a lot harder than running m20 into a volks squad and pushing it around.

I see a lot of ppl does not know the meaning of "fairplay".

I wouldn't say OKW is the root of most balance issues, it's the way most factions are designed atm. Each faction has strengths and weaknesses depending on the early-mid-and late game. The problem is the way certain factions can have a strong advantage over the other either early on or later on that causes things to become problematic. Like USF late game at times. I'm speaking for 1v1 specifically.

The same for teamgames, but in there the factions with stronger lategame have the upper hand.

Soviets and Ost were not mirrored factions but their game stages were pretty balanced overall. WFA instead destroyed that balance, being OKW the most easy scapegoat being the faction strongest at the lategame and thus giving the most trouble in teamgames, the most popular game modes.

I see a lot of ppl does not know the meaning of "fairplay".

I stopped discussing with him after reading that, as soviet, being forced to use sniper spam or being unable to tech is a fair a fun strategy to use. Not lame at all.

I see a lot of ppl does not know the meaning of "fairplay".

Yeah, because what is fair and what is not fair purely depends on someone's arbitrary ideals, right?

Please.

Pitcher throwing 4 balls to avoid a hard-hitter is obviously foul play in your terms, Maybe we should ban base-stealing?

I stopped discussing with him after reading that, as soviet, being forced to use sniper spam or being unable to tech is a fair a fun strategy to use. Not lame at all.

You might be interested to know that you are never "forced" to play such strats. Lenny wins games with 7 conscripts build using NKVD rifle tactics (no call-ins, fyi).

As I've mentioned above, Fast T4 katusha is a effective anti-blob strat which requires teching. Is that a call-in strat? I don't think so.


In fact, I'm doubtful that you are even capable to a successful sniper spam in 1v1 while you call it "lame".

Stop putting stuff I haven't said in my mouth please. It won't work. You are just avoiding the repercussions of your failing logic like a slippery eel.

Yeah, because what is fair and what is not fair purely depends on someone's arbitrary ideals, right?

Please.

Pitcher throwing 4 balls to avoid a hard-hitter is obviously foul play in your terms, Maybe we should ban base-stealing?



You might be interested to know that you are never "forced" to play such strats. Lenny wins games with 7 conscripts build using NKVD rifle tactics (no call-ins, fyi).

As I've mentioned above, Fast T4 katusha is a effective anti-blob strat which requires teching. Is that a call-in strat? I don't think so.


In fact, I'm doubtful that you are even capable to a successful sniper spam in 1v1 while you call it "lame".

Stop putting stuff I haven't said in my mouth please. It won't work. You are just avoiding the repercussions of your failing logic like a slippery eel.

If you do not get enough brain to know what is fair, I can't help you.

Yeah, because what is fair and what is not fair purely depends on someone's arbitrary ideals, right?

Please.

Pitcher throwing 4 balls to avoid a hard-hitter is obviously foul play in your terms, Maybe we should ban base-stealing?



You might be interested to know that you are never "forced" to play such strats. Lenny wins games with 7 conscripts build using NKVD rifle tactics (no call-ins, fyi).

As I've mentioned above, Fast T4 katusha is a effective anti-blob strat which requires teching. Is that a call-in strat? I don't think so.


In fact, I'm doubtful that you are even capable to a successful sniper spam in 1v1 while you call it "lame".

Stop putting stuff I haven't said in my mouth please. It won't work. You are just avoiding the repercussions of your failing logic like a slippery eel.

Ok Rupert I ask you this, do you consider 2 snipers + m3 -> guards -> callins vs. OKW (and even ostheer partly) a fair and balanced strategy, or would you consider it exploiting a hole in faction design? There is a difference between using units in an effective way that allows you to gain an upper hand, and using a few units that are meant to support your core army as a mainline infantry unit because your enemies have no counters to said units. If you assume that this is a fair strategy, that throws out just about every argument against units that are/were obviously overperforming for cost in the meta, such as the ISU and the Jagdtiger.

As for your second point about lenny, he does a great job and more people should watch his twitch channel. However, to use his 7 conscript build, he is frequently forced to spam sandbags to disrupt vehicle pathing and generally have an extremely micro-intensive playstyle that most of the playerbase will not be able to pull-off. Even with his love of conscripts, lenny still falls back on more regular tactics (conspam into callins) when he is having a hard time winning.

Ok Rupert I ask you this, do you consider 2 snipers + m3 -> guards -> callins vs. OKW (and even ostheer partly) a fair and balanced strategy, or would you consider it exploiting a hole in faction design? There is a difference between using units in an effective way that allows you to gain an upper hand, and using a few units that are meant to support your core army as a mainline infantry unit because your enemies have no counters to said units. If you assume that this is a fair strategy, that throws out just about every argument against units that are/were obviously overperforming for cost in the meta, such as the ISU and the Jagdtiger.

As for your second point about lenny, he does a great job and more people should watch his twitch channel. However, to use his 7 conscript build, he is frequently forced to spam sandbags to disrupt vehicle pathing and generally have an extremely micro-intensive playstyle that most of the playerbase will not be able to pull-off. Even with his love of conscripts, lenny still falls back on more regular tactics (conspam into callins) when he is having a hard time winning.

100% agree

And as VonIvan said, I don't think that nerfing OKW should fix anything, as the imbalance issues are a problem of game design.
I think that making all factions equally competitive in all game stages (early/mid/late) should be the first step to take.

Ok Rupert I ask you this, do you consider 2 snipers + m3 -> guards -> callins vs. OKW (and even ostheer partly) a fair and balanced strategy, or would you consider it exploiting a hole in faction design? There is a difference between using units in an effective way that allows you to gain an upper hand, and using a few units that are meant to support your core army as a mainline infantry unit because your enemies have no counters to said units. If you assume that this is a fair strategy, that throws out just about every argument against units that are/were obviously overperforming for cost in the meta, such as the ISU and the Jagdtiger.

Other than 2-man snipers not making sense(just because its soviet shoudln't mean its double number of its counterpart axis), its a valid strat that requires a lot of micro and eats up a lot of popcap. And a single stuka/fallschrm spawn can wipe snipers, which is likely a gg for SU if that happens.

Unless you are the dev, how can you call it a exploited hole? What you envision of a faction can be entirely different from what the devs want to make it out to be. In that case, there is little to argue as the devs will not make any drastic changes.

Of course, like our previous argument above, players who lack the skill for squad preservation may feel cheated as they find their obers dropping as soon as they are in sniper range. But then again, if at equal skill, the SU player may make tactical blunders and lose snipers too.

Now, whats mean to support and whats meant to be core is purely dependant on how the player uses the said units. Its Relic's fault for nerfing Guards to oblivion and leaving snipers as they are [to nerf the sniper+guard tactic], but unless Relic decides to do anything about it, tough luck changing anything.

As for your second point about lenny, he does a great job and more people should watch his twitch channel. However, to use his 7 conscript build, he is frequently forced to spam sandbags to disrupt vehicle pathing and generally have an extremely micro-intensive playstyle that most of the playerbase will not be able to pull-off. Even with his love of conscripts, lenny still falls back on more regular tactics (conspam into callins) when he is having a hard time winning.

I'm glad we share the admiration for Lenny, but once again, the whole call-in meta is probably what Relic wanted at this point. Otherwise there would be no reason for SU stock units to be so subpar while having great call-ins.

If that's the case, I believe the player should be exercising pragmatic decision-making to utilize what is given to win the game while the others make moral judgements on how "fair" the call-in meta is.

Exact same logic can be applied to OKW. OKW can field raketens, kubels, le18 ISG and call it combined arms. But all of those units are pretty much crap for its price or don't work well after a certain time period (M20, M3), so OKW has no choice but to mass the most efficient option - volksgranadiers.

Bad design? Maybe.

Intended? Dunno. Likely.

Other options? Huh.

Fair? Well, what else do you want the OKW player to do - just quit game?
If you want to call that sportsmanship, be my guest to exercise it by all means.

So I'm not going to call guards-snipers "lame" or "Cheese" because I know that's an effective strat. It's up to me to counter it instead of crying about it.

If you do not get enough brain to know what is fair, I can't help you.

I don't need your help to know that "fair" does not mean "catering to your whining".

At the moment, any tactic has a counter to it in 1v1. And Relic has left it for so long, which is likely evidence that this is what Relic intended (2 man snipers, call-in meta).




One more thing, Bad Faction/Meta design does NOT automatically scream Imbalance, nor are they the same thing.

Bad faction design is more internal to a faction while balance is a external comparison of factions.

TBH the faction that suffers the most from faction design is the OST and their tech/building costs. At leasts SU gets to skip a tier without huge repercussions.


**I'm not saying this game is perfectly balanced. But so far what this thread has brought up as "imbalanced" are not really balance issues at all.

The bigger issue should be OST tech price/build times, Su-76's intended role, greyhound(buff vehicle nerf skill), and the likes. Check out Romeo's issue tracker.

Ok Rupert I ask you this, do you consider 2 snipers + m3 -> guards -> callins vs. OKW (and even ostheer partly) a fair and balanced strategy, or would you consider it exploiting a hole in faction design? There is a difference between using units in an effective way that allows you to gain an upper hand, and using a few units that are meant to support your core army as a mainline infantry unit because your enemies have no counters to said units. If you assume that this is a fair strategy, that throws out just about every argument against units that are/were obviously overperforming for cost in the meta, such as the ISU and the Jagdtiger.

As for your second point about lenny, he does a great job and more people should watch his twitch channel. However, to use his 7 conscript build, he is frequently forced to spam sandbags to disrupt vehicle pathing and generally have an extremely micro-intensive playstyle that most of the playerbase will not be able to pull-off. Even with his love of conscripts, lenny still falls back on more regular tactics (conspam into callins) when he is having a hard time winning.

just because people play the game differently than you would want them to doesnt make it unfair or an exploit. soviet t1 + callins has been a tried and tested strategy, and its one of the many viable strategies that the soviets can play. competitive games are all about min/max, so you really shouldnt bash people for using strategies that are most optimal to the way they play.

while its true okw have a really tough time countering snipers, there are a variety of really soft counters that they can use to maybe kill them. luchs, obers, stuka, JLI/Falls, and most importantly using line of sight and flanking. however it really is up to the player to use game sense, their own personal skill in executing an operation, and a little bit of luck.

i would hate to see this game turn into a game where theres only 1 or 2 builds that really work because people expect that kind of game. its always good to have a variety of options available even if the player base may think it 'cheese'.

just because people play the game differently than you would want them to doesnt make it unfair or an exploit. soviet t1 + callins has been a tried and tested strategy, and its one of the many viable strategies that the soviets can play. competitive games are all about min/max, so you really shouldnt bash people for using strategies that are most optimal to the way they play.

while its true okw have a really tough time countering snipers, there are a variety of really soft counters that they can use to maybe kill them. luchs, obers, stuka, JLI/Falls, and most importantly using line of sight and flanking. however it really is up to the player to use game sense, their own personal skill in executing an operation, and a little bit of luck.

i would hate to see this game turn into a game where theres only 1 or 2 builds that really work because people expect that kind of game. its always good to have a variety of options available even if the player base may think it 'cheese'.

Funny how everyone cries that "we want variety in builds" and yet once presented with options they call it "lame" or "cheese".

This is why devs should never make changes based on majority opinion - Tekken 4 was an infamous example.

As for your second point about lenny, he does a great job and more people should watch his twitch channel. However, to use his 7 conscript build, he is frequently forced to spam sandbags to disrupt vehicle pathing and generally have an extremely micro-intensive playstyle that most of the playerbase will not be able to pull-off. Even with his love of conscripts, lenny still falls back on more regular tactics (conspam into callins) when he is having a hard time winning.

Or truckpushing with OKW

Theres a difference between being a higher skill player using non conventional strats to beat lower skill players or ceading advantages to play in a non conventional way AND playing to win. In this case, i would throw Stephen in this group also.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
It's good to have cheese, but you still need "conventional" play to be reliable.

Or truckpushing with OKW

Theres a difference between being a higher skill player using non conventional strats to beat lower skill players or ceading advantages to play in a non conventional way AND playing to win. In this case, i would throw Stephen in this group also.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
It's good to have cheese, but you still need "conventional" play to be reliable.

SU t2-t3 to call in has been around long enough to be conventional I think...

This game wasn't and never will be competitive. So, if you insist in balancing it for the 100 guys in the top of the ladder, then only those 100 guys will be the ones playing and having fun.

This game is unforgiving and hard to grasp for the average player. Being OKW a terrible faction to play against, specially in teamgames.

Obers and volks+schreck blobs are an issue for most allied players, and personally I hate the stupid survivality that Puma has, making it a pain to destroy one if it's well microed.
I don't care if for high level players the game is well balanced if the number of average players decrease instead.

Let me help you there. I highly doubt if most high level players- or experienced Observers who consider the game - think it is balanced.

BTW - do not consider this a crit of the Dev Balance team, OK? But when you introduce 2 new armies, the thing becomes a nightmare (IMO) It was always sadly predictable that annexing AA (MP)onto the Eastern Front (MP) would produce a near nightmare scenario, and so it has proved.

People shouting for yet another army to be introduced into this hotchpotch must be delusional.

My 2 cents

It's good to have cheese, but you still need "conventional" play to be reliable.

That resumes all for me.

I like cheese and original strats, but currently "conventional" play is just a sure loss against odd strats that doesn't require any kind of micro.

@MajorBloodnok, just before I conceded that the game was pretty balanced before WFA. Is WFA what screwed all balance giving us factions with discutible design.
I was told that OKW was remade from scratch just weeks before the release date, so it's not strange the current state of the game.

I like cheese and original strats, but currently "conventional" play is just a sure loss against odd strats that doesn't require any kind of micro.

this is wrong

if the game can't be balanced for all, i rather see it balanced for top 100 rather than middle 10 000.

if the game feels perfectly balanced for the top 100, but not to lower ranked players, it means the game has depth and you need to learn it.



as to exploits, although i wouldnt call sniper m3 guards - call ins an exploit, there were and are obvious exploits in the game.

for e.g. m3 and dodge combo when m3 and t1 was cheaper and dodge was 0cp in 2v2s. and i consider okw early truck pushing an exploit that gives a free valuable intelligence and delay enemy for no cost at all. i am surprised not everybody use the tactic it. i guess just about everybody thinks it is too low even it gives a huge advantage.

........

@MajorBloodnok, just before I conceded that the game was pretty balanced before WFA. Is WFA what screwed all balance giving us factions with discutible design.
I was told that OKW was remade from scratch just weeks before the release date, so it's not strange the current state of the game.

We do not disagree

SU t2-t3 to call in has been around long enough to be conventional I think...

Remove the call in part or just add T4 into the mix