Damn this balance

well, almost nobody is here to have a debate. most here never gets convinced. most are here to shove their opinion/view down others' throat like it is a fact while using hyperbole and just pure nit picking to bolster their claims.

i sound very arrogant and will sound like a hypocrite in the next sentences.

axis's been OP in 3v3+ since launch. that is like... got it from the freakin burning bush itself, engraved in stone fact. sometimes stupidly op, sometimes just moderately. doesn't matter if it is early game, mid game or late game. axis is never on the back foot unless they let it happen.

i would explain more, but what is the point.

They are on the back foot early game because they have worse starting infantry? I mean this is something you can figure out by just looking at unit values/dps/production times. It IS really stupid that each side has a set game time were they over preform, and a set game time they under preform.

Axis are ~OP~ in the sense they have better natural synergy, Ostheer supports, OKW fights. Problem between USF and Soviets is that USF has better basic units, but almost shittier everything else.

IS2 backed by Jackson is deadly, and so is maxims backed up by rifles, it just requires a higher level of coordination.

3v3+ AND SPECIALLY 4v4, has been Axis land since launch.

axis's been OP in 3v3+ since launch. that is like... got it from the freakin burning bush itself, engraved in stone fact. sometimes stupidly op, sometimes just moderately. doesn't matter if it is early game, mid game or late game. axis is never on the back foot unless they let it happen.

Why is this like this? Well there are several factors:

-Theres more people SEARCHING as Axis...
-This results in a HIGHER ELO ranking on the axis team.
-Prior to WFA, the most OP thing was OPELS but that got fixed but then we receive WFA...
-AND we have stupid OKW. KT, shreck blobs and shit. Synergizes perfectly with OH. On the other hand you don't want 2 or more USF players on your team composition, most of the time.
-It's easier to play with 2 heavies, than to do it with 6 medium. :captainobvious:

IS2 backed by Jackson is deadly, and so is maxims backed up by rifles, it just requires a higher level of coordination.

And here we also have another problem.
http://www.coh2.org/ladders/index/3/4/0
http://www.coh2.org/ladders/index/2/4/0

ONLY at HIGH LEVEL AT theres some kind of "balance", but at "noob" level and random, it's just easy to play OKW.

Yeah, those things are going to do a lot of good against 8 rifle squads and 10 con squads, oh wait they aren't because the design of this game makes zero sense. Allies have the early game advantage, thing is, you need to be aggressive to take advantage of that strength and most players don't.

So, you gonna counter my reasonable arguments by modelling situation where Allies through some heavy wizardry have got army worth 3 times more manpower than Axis?

Are you really THAT bad that we need to discuss why in real game there can't be situation where 1 kubel fights vs 10 squads or 10 squads fight vs 20 squads?

Why do you avoid every reasonable discussion by turning it into hyperbole fest? Ran out of arguments to defend your favorite faction?

I play 4vs4 USF because its funniest to play to me actually. I don't ask people to share my feeling anyway.

I don't really care who I'm facing and seeing the top25 OKW shows me I probably didn't met them yet because I'm winning more than often and when I don't it is more because of a map issue or an Allied plauer doing dumb thinks than unbalanced armies.

My two last defeats:
1- A Sov player trolling the game, he didn't build anything else than cons for 20 minutes.
2- Karkoff north position start. it was challenging and we lost. But I'm not going to veto the map because the challenge is interesting.

I only veto City17.

My last victory was again 3 okw + 1 ost, and we beat their blob early with a really nice move.

Honestly the small pool of Allied players make it easier some times - at least when you go up in rank. I'm more confident in my random mates, many times they know what to do where to go etc.

I was about to write a kind of guide/ personal comments on how to play USF faction in 4vs4. But I'm not sure to be good enough to do that, or at least to reach the rank I'am.

You only need to look at the win % at the top of the random 4v4 ladders to see axis are much stronger.

I have to micro like no tomorrow to keep up with the no-micro-needed OKW players with the OP T0 units

Imho 3v3,4v4 is more about having /using the right strategy than micro.

You only need to look at the win % at the top of the random 4v4 ladders to see axis are much stronger.

Better check those win streaks and compare them to allied ones.

You only need to look at the win % at the top of the random 4v4 ladders to see axis are much stronger.

I really dont care about 4 vs 4 or 3 vs 3 and should really not be included into balance. yeah ost economy + okw is powerhouse. but you cannot nerf the okw on basis of that. and at the same time you cannot nerf the ost's economy buffs. even 2 vs 2 is should not be included into balance. the only thing that matters is 1vs 1 where personal skill between 2 players is and how to best use the strengths and weaknesses of the played faction.

1 vs 1 should be the only mode how to balance things. teamgames should be a purely casual design affair.

Better check those win streaks and compare them to allied ones.

Better check the matchmaking

Show Spoiler

I really dont care about 4 vs 4 or 3 vs 3 and should really not be included into balance. yeah ost economy + okw is powerhouse. but you cannot nerf the okw on basis of that. and at the same time you cannot nerf the ost's economy buffs. even 2 vs 2 is should not be included into balance. the only thing that matters is 1vs 1 where personal skill between 2 players is and how to best use the strengths and weaknesses of the played faction.

1 vs 1 should be the only mode how to balance things. teamgames should be a purely casual design affair.

Most of the recent posts have been about 3v3 and 4v4. If you don't care then don't read the thread. Personally I don't care about anything you post because 5 digit axis heroes have no clue about balance

Your problem is that you're just another typical US shitter that jumped on board when WFA released that can't even use his own faction properly. If you weren't you would see that balance is a hell of a lot better now than it was in the past.

Allies are anything but UP in teamgames, I'm yet to see a counter for quad rifle company cheese that can completely engulf the map and end the game in under 10 minutes in 4vs4.



I suggest you either git gud or buy homeworld and leave. No one wants to read your blog on the balancing forums.

No point of getting "gud" if the talent pool for Allies dries up. Won't matter how "gud" you are if your ally can't play for squat. Enjoy being Axis, noob bashing and waiting forever as 100 Axis players wait in the que to play only 4 Allied players.


And what blog? If you're referring to this post, you read it and it's gotten 2K+ views of agreeing and opposing views. I, obviously, am not the only one thinking this topic.

OKW is bullshit. They didn't get nerfed because they were Peter's love child faction. Funnily the most improvements that got made to the faction was when he was on holiday.

Maybe with a new designer things might get changed.

The job posting was closed for a balancer. Lets see which Lamb they bring to coh2.org for a sacrifice.

The job posting was closed for a balancer. Lets see which Lamb they bring to coh2.org for a sacrifice.

I wonder if this new balancer plays the game or if he knows what kind of shit storm he is about to get into.

OKW is bullshit. They didn't get nerfed because they were Peter's love child faction. Funnily the most improvements that got made to the faction was when he was on holiday.

Maybe with a new designer things might get changed.

what happened to your praise peter boo relic tune

what happened to your praise peter boo relic tune

That was two weeks ago. Get with the times Sarantini. GOSH!

So, you gonna counter my reasonable arguments by modelling situation where Allies through some heavy wizardry have got army worth 3 times more manpower than Axis?

Are you really THAT bad that we need to discuss why in real game there can't be situation where 1 kubel fights vs 10 squads or 10 squads fight vs 20 squads?

Why do you avoid every reasonable discussion by turning it into hyperbole fest? Ran out of arguments to defend your favorite faction?

What? I'm not trying to defend it, I have stated multiple times that balance in 4's is not existent. And you are the one using hyperbole, I said a Kubel/mg42 is going to have a hard ass time suppression such a large number of infantry (especially if they know how you use smoke and go early nades), and your basic Axis infantry are worse off at the start compared to your basic Allied infantry.

Pretty much you have the ability to overrun most of the map early on, but if you let axis get 1 fuel for to long they are going to lock it down and your bad times will begin unless you went IS2's/ISU's/Jackons for the late game.

OKW is bullshit. They didn't get nerfed because they were Peter's love child faction. Funnily the most improvements that got made to the faction was when he was on holiday.

OKW before it got changed before release would have probably been bullshit, but the most insanely designed faction at the moment is probably a competition between USF and Soviets.

USF: Excellent stock units (with some exceptions), useful immensely in early to mid game. But utterly falls off late game unless you have god tier micro or spam p47's like it's the end times. Also only has 1 infantry unit not counting Officers, who thought this was a good idea was smoking dope. Best side is doesn't rely on commanders as much as Ostheer and Soviets do to keep competitive early to mid game. Commanders for USF flesh out the faction and fill holes in your unit list, only 1 just gives you a better tank.

Soviets: Stock units viability falls off in the extreme late game, ZiS, maxim (with some micro) and mortar remain useful, need excellent micro to keep snipers alive when the vehicles come out. Faction is basically forcing you to possibly commit to a loss because if you build t3 you have to end the game quickly before he can blow away your t34's and what not with Panthers. T4 remains viable but the SU-76 is shockingly bad. Basically requires relying entirely on commanders by design, limiting your options significantly because call in units are just better tanks, not things to fill holes in your unit list.

Ostheer: Good stock units in t1 (except sniper jfc), Good Stock units in t2 (scout car could use some love tho, Pgrens need a little more survivability), t3 is currently rotting in a box due to the Jackson, and t4 is stuck behind insane teching costs/mp drain. This faction makes the most sense design wise, commanders giving you alternate play styles and more options instead of just "better" tanks (Tiger is a heavy generalist, and the panther is a pseudo heavy tank but is mostly only good for hunting enemy armor so nothing is really being replaced). Problem is you can't get to stock units due to teching costs and resource drain thanks to very fragile infantry. 4 man squads made sense on release, now in WFA they do not. Really only glaring issue with this faction is it under preforms thanks to making sense design wise compared to the others which are just ???.

OKW: Excellent stock units similar to USF, but with better scaling resulting in nicer late game power. Units come from destructible trucks meaning you need to weigh risk and reward when setting down your HQ's, each HQ still limits you similar to how you have to pick between tiers in USF and Soviets. Fast teching, but low fuel income. Largest issues are the fact that due to the reduced fuel income you can only spend MP on infantry, and there are no support teams resulting in just massive hordes of infantry roaming the map. Iv suggested before reducing the fuel cost of OKW units but drastically increasing the MP cost forcing you to chose between infantry spam and actually having tanks. Commanders fill "holes" similar to the USF ones, but suffer from the fact your best AI infantry are stock anyway. Overall this faction is probably better designed than it could have been, and makes more sense than Soviets and about as much as USF.

Conclusion: Why didn't relic re do the vanilla factions when WFA came out? We have one that's just crap, and another that's callinmeta.jpg.

what happened to your praise peter boo relic tune

if you can find posts that support that I said that then cool but post WFA launch he didn't really give a shit about the game.

So according to some of our "inside" members from coh2.org most Relic developers don't give a shit about their own game... I think you guys should back up your accusations with some proofs instead of us just trusting your word on it. My guess is you had your own personal wishlist that relic did not agree with 100% and then you come to the forum and cry about "this and this person at relic don't give a shit about the game".

When was the last balance patch between WFA launch and now? October. I think that's proof enough.

One of the big issues was that LMG profiles needed to be reworked again because having super high damage at max range just promoted blobby play, exacerbated by M1919A6 rifles and Obers. That was in June and the issue still hasn't been addressed it was also a talking point Brad mentioned in his pinned post.