Balance of power has shifted to Allies in 4v4AT (imo)

OKW Has always been up shits creek against soviets. I never denied that or said otherwise,ever.
I just never played OKW a lot before because it was stupidly easy vs USF.
But even back then I said VS USF is easy, vs soviets is a bullshit joke. Because all my OKW Losses back then were to soviets, they STILL ARE. I hate the soviets.

Ost vs USF I always said favored USF on certain maps.
I got very happy for Ostheer when they got their buffs last patch, then started playing them again this patch with lessons learned from playing as USF vs them for 6 months. I no longer struggle with USF unless it's my fault( not a balance fault) or its allied favored map.

SOV vs OST I hate the soviets. Would rather play USF 10/10.

If they're even or better you're not winning. If its allies map,They will make you look stupid almost every time. They're just flat out better.

I was never really fixated on nerfing anything but the USF OKW matchup with volk oBER I win LoveBlob.

now that the EZ I win blob is gone is gone the game is much balanced and enjoyable for that matchup in all modes,simple as that. If you can't beat a rifle blob as OKW right now it's a bad map or bad play by you...really... Just take responsibility for your fails.
Or you're playing Sprice with that zooka flame blob.

while Soviets VS OKW is just even more than a joke now because of call ins and new guards and PTRS cons,and other annoying soviet things. On top of resource penalty. Soviets never run out of steam VS OKW.

I'm not some rabid USF Fanboy, If anything, I'm now joining the Anti communist movement.

USF was just the faction that appealed with me during that 6 month patch cycle,so I ended up playing them the most. Probably gonna be OKW this time around if it takes them 6 months to release another patch.

That's just the thing though, you and many others like you dismissed me as some rabid OKW or Axis Fanboy. Personally I'm a proponent of true balance. Something that these patches actually lack.

The writing has been on the wall for years with more take than there is give for the Axis in the patch notes. It's consistently there for years of patch notes, nobody can deny that.


Personally, I play Ostheer more and enjoy them more, better quotes than OKW anyway. That said, you still get shitrolled by American Rifleblobs into M15 God-mode halftracks and/or M20's (less trouble with 222) and then into a Sherman with HE rounds that wipe squads more consistently than the bloody Brumbaar.


I've been trying to make doctrines other than CAS work. So far I've found Jaeger Infantry Doctrine, Lightning War, and Joint Ops with the PaK-43 to be worth while in 2v2's. I don't even bother with 4's anymore, and I haven't even had the stomach to face 1's for so damn long.


I think I know where the underlying problem is though. Axis don't really have any good close range infantry, nothing deadly like Shocks or Assault Engineers. They had Pioneers with realistic MP-40's, those were nerfed. They had Sturmpioneers, nerfed... twice.. They had Panzergrens, nerfed several times. They had Fallschirmjaeger (had an armor stat) nerfed.

To those who say received accuracy is better than armor, I don't quite agree with that. Especially since Shocktroops are practically invincible to most conventional units and weapons. Nothing shot of explosives and vehicles can kill them.


Being stuck with little more than long range and mediocre at best, rifle based infantry squads, they are at a severe disadvantage in the early game. Conscripts need only "Oorah" charge to close range and they instantly have advantage on Grenadiers and Volksgrens. American Rifles do the same, BUT they have more accurate shooting. On the move, while stationary, they have a faster rate of fire because they have Semi-Auto rifles as a stock weapon, and the M1 Garands hit like trucks. Add M1919's or 2x M1919's and they are practically Pre-Nerf Obersoldaten at half the cost.


These same rifles come with smoke grenades, AT grenades, and frag grenades. They can be upgraded with BARs for Mid-Range firepower increase, and M1919's for long range firepower increase, and flamethrowers for close-range firepower increase. Then you also have Bazookas as a counter to most medium armor. (Panzershreks don't even pen most heavies consistently, so please no whine on how Bazookas don't blow up Tigers or frontally penetrate panthers.)

These things can have their drawbacks, like pricing. But overall they are kinda no-brainers.

In the basest infantry, the USF has superiority to both Axis factions and can counter almost every situation that they encounter on the field. My suggesting; spread out their abilities, make their other infantry more necessary, Rear Echelons and Assault Engineers or even Paratroopers can take on some of the extra abilities that American Riflemen are swollen with.




But I agree, most of all that Soviets are batshit insane right now in their power.

In the basest infantry, the USF has superiority to both Axis factions and can counter almost every situation that they encounter on the field..

everything besides

scout car

flak HT

obers

fussies

p4

brummbar

tiger

king tiger

stug G

stug E

panther

okw t4

mgs

snipers

bunkers

elephant

JT

tiger ace

vet 3 lmg grens

ostwind

mines

yup, they counter everything

anymore bullshit u care to spread?

Just wanted to jump in here briefly as someone who deals with interpreting of stats and data as part of my job.

The OP had a number of methodological problems with their data collection. I would not trust that their data produces a "biased" (using technical definition here) estimate of the true mean.

The following data set brought to light by another user addressed many of these problems and produced, I believe, a better estimate of the true win ratios. Remember here we are trying to estimate a true mean without being able to see every match up.

However, all data presented in this thread suffer the same problem, they have no estimate of the error. In no case does anyone report the uncertainity (which must exist because they are estimates) around their values. The win ratios are ESTIMATES of the true mean, as such we have some error around them. Without knowing the error both estimates cannot be compared and give only a limited insight into the current balance.

In any case do we really need to refer to people as fanboys as soon as the thread opens?

These data mean little, we need Relic to tell us what is really going on.

That's just the thing though, you and many others like you dismissed me as some rabid OKW or Axis Fanboy. Personally I'm a proponent of true balance. Something that these patches actually lack.

i've never dismissed anyone,not even alexzandvar,especially not you,ive never even quoted or posted to you or about you before. you got me mistaken with Katitof or something.

I understand people like their certain faction. blah blah. that doesnt bother me. Fanboying is not a bad thing. Why should you play a faction you dont like. play your favourite the most. Its a game after all,you're supposed to be having fun.


But if you're gonna complain about or defend your side of balance,and this is to everyone,then be balanced yourself,and play all the factions a decent amount first.

you cant understand balance until you've seen it from all perspectives. Simple as that.

i've never dismissed anyone,not even alexzandvar,especially not you,ive never even quoted or posted to you or about you before. you got me mistaken with Katitof or something.

I understand people like their certain faction. blah blah. that doesnt bother me. Fanboying is not a bad thing. Why should you play a faction you dont like. play your favourite the most. Its a game after all,you're supposed to be having fun.


But if you're gonna complain about or defend your side of balance,and this is to everyone,then be balanced yourself,and play all the factions a decent amount first.

you cant understand balance until you've seen it from all perspectives. Simple as that.

Pretty much, but you need to also be self critical, I like OKW the most and Soviets second but I know both currently and in the past of their fair share of bullshit.

Honestly people get to angry about shit on these forums. Me and Comm argue like a married couple and we play a lot, and Cookiez and me have made up despite arguing all the time as well.

what the flying FUCK is going on, you guys know better than this don't you? call each other up over skype and call eachother names but can we not do it here.

in other related news:
Show Spoiler

back on topic (you don't have to agree you do have to follow the rules.)

what the flying FUCK is going on, you guys know better than this don't you? call each other up over skype and call eachother names but can we not do it here.

in other related news:
Show Spoiler

back on topic (you don't have to agree you do have to follow the rules.)

Yes back to the topic. So a lot of people scoffed at my parameters for this post (which was win streak) to show some general data for 4v4 since recent changes. Naturally, allied fan boys argued that this was inconclusive data because streaks are changing every minute and it could be different one day to the next (basically anything to minimize the point). Well its been a few weeks now so here's another update:

Allied winstreaks increased to an average of 26.2 from 23.1
Axis winstreaks decreased to an average of 12.1 from 12.7

Allies have slowly increased.
Axis have slowly decreased week by week.

People will defend their faction but for those who enjoy all aspects of 4v4, there is clearly a change in the landscape.

Yes back to the topic. So a lot of people scoffed at my parameters for this post (which was win streak) to show some general data for 4v4 since recent changes. Naturally, allied fan boys argued that this was inconclusive data because streaks are changing every minute and it could be different one day to the next (basically anything to minimize the point). Well its been a few weeks now so here's another update:

Allied winstreaks increased to an average of 26.2 from 23.1
Axis winstreaks decreased to an average of 12.1 from 12.7

Allies have slowly increased.
Axis have slowly decreased week by week.

People will defend their faction but for those who enjoy all aspects of 4v4, there is clearly a change in the landscape.

This deals with one of the serious methods flaws in the original but fails to address the larger overall problem. You have no control groups. You are assuming that Allies player = Axis player, you have no way to test this. You are also assuming that win streaks = Ability to win games, which again is not logical.

I agree win streaks provide insight into a faction, but in larger team games you need the data Relic collect or it means very little.

And what are the parameters once again ? Did you compare number of won games from previous week to now or you just took out their actual streak?

What group of players? Top10, Top50, Top200 ?

And what are the parameters once again ? Did you compare number of won games from previous week to now or you just took out their actual streak?

What group of players? Top10, Top50, Top200 ?

Top 10.

Top 10 teams typically lose to other top 10 teams, not always, but for the most part. I watched some of the games that broke the axis streaks and they were certainly broken by other top 10 allied teams.

Its been concurrent testing since I first posted this back in April 29th. People snapped back that this was a poor indicator because win streaks change 'by the minute' and 'day by day'. Point being, its been about a month, data has stayed relatively the same - the allies have continually increased their streak average while the axis streak average has declined. This is over about a month.

Does this imply Allies unit are over performing in large scale games or people that play Allies more now improved over time?

Does this imply Allies unit are over performing in large scale games or people that play Allies more now improved over time?

This is actually a good point, I would say both. Allied teams have certainly got better but there is no concrete objective data to prove that. Also balance patches have been favoring allies lately, one would think this has also contributed to some degree.

I think many veteran players from coh1 stuck with axis due to familiarity. I think with this and the early balance issues (axis being op) of coh2 contributed to an overwhelming axis advantage. As allied players progressed it helped even the playing field; coupled with recent balance patches you are starting to see the tide being turned.

Whether or not some of the balance changes were warranted is a separate issue.

top 10 is an awfully small amount of players. especially seeing many same ppl are in two or more ranks in top 10.

streaks can swing vastly. you can get lucky and never get a worthy match and get your streak up 30+. happen to me for like two months at least. multiple times.

and how many top teams play same strat every time. if anything, the ranks represent how strong certain strats that are used by top teams than overall factions strengths.

honestly, because there is no 4v4 tourney, i think only most unbiased/objective view of 4v4 balance can come from massive sample of 4v4 games where only top teams battle each other.

You're still on win streaks?
For real?

OKW and Wehr got biggest winstreaks for your 4v4.

Nerf OKW and wehr I guess?

I can at least rest smug the melt downs when the [NDA intensifies] drops will be glorious.

Imagine a Jadgtiger crushing a bear under it's treads; forever.