Balance Data Since The Patch

Alright, perhaps the meta will settle more and call in's will be a lot less of a problem over time. But it would still be nice if Soviets didn't have to rely on call in's as much no?

Really I just wish commanders informed strategy and changed it rather than just being a uniform standard of call in buggery. Ostheer is very fun to play because you have a good stock army and you can work off of that to vary your play style, USF and OKW are kinda similar but still have big holes in their unit lists.

ive just grown to accept that soviets are the 'callin' faction. im totally OK with infantry callins, and medium call ins because tank destroyers and AT guns do a good enough job of countering them. call ins are just the flavor of the soviet army. each faction relies on their doctrine to varying degrees. id say its probably soviets > usf/ostheer > okw

idk how well it works in 1v1s with RGs but maxims still hardcounter MG42s. in team games i'll just build 4-5 of them are move them around as a loose blob supporting each other.

people not being to deal with maxim blobs is honestly just a player issue, and not a balance one.

yes its fine. why? because there is a window of opportunity for you to exploit the lack of enemies armor with your own armor. you have plenty of time to prepare by laying mines, purchasing at guns, etc. its actually super hard for soviets to play on just t1 t2 with no fuel purchases because mg42s are ownage right now. they need some sort of fuel purchase to help break through the lines. the benefit of waiting for call ins is that individually the call in tanks are stronger than their counterparts, because guess what, they cost more. but at the same time, it doesnt make mediums invincible. also holding 2/3 of the map really doesnt fucking matter unless youre holding both fuels.

Just played a game as double Soviets and Ost locked down 2/3 of the map with MG42s and PAKs, and even T34/85 and MC Shermans couldn't break through that line. And all I could do was wait for more T34/85s because we were bleeding VPs due to us being unable to gain enough early due to those damn MG42s (map was Lierneux). I was stuck with only T2 built and even 2 120mm mortars couldn't dislodge the wall of Ost BS. Also TWP is lame, so cheaty lame.

This thread

Personal Conclusion:

1v1 remains relatively balanced, despite HMG buffs. Interestingly, USF seem to be winning more games, whilst Ost seem to be winning even less 1v1 than they were before, despite HMG buff...odd (double tiger effect?). Heavy changes don't really seem to have effected it thus far.

Allies have become even weaker in team games. Probably due to the Double heavies crutch being taken away.

Looks like Axis stock tanks have taken up that burden far more efficiently (dat Krupp).

That will probably change when U.S. gets Pershing. But on topic: sometimes even top players have REALLY bad ideas, like the one top 10 guy that two or three months ago called for the return of OKW truck pushing. Get that shit out of here.

This thread is hilarious.

Any idea that a game can be balanced from "the top", i.e. looking only at how the top 1% of players interact with the game, and using this knowledge to modify the game in a way that meaningfully affects everybody, is complete and utter bullshit.

"OMG Dpfarce, post your sources!!"

No, I'm not going to post sources. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to support your argument

• posting sources that state your argument for you = strawman appeal to authority
  
• posting sources that provide statistics, facts, or supporting arguments upon which your argument lies = good history, referencing, academic work
  
  

E.g. Saying that "The French Revolution was caused by popular discontent" then citing John Merriman's book, in which he says those exact words = strawman argument.
Saying that "Revolution X is caused by popular discontent, because it is very similar to the French Revolution" then citing John Merriman's work on the French Revolution when you wish to compare events between the two revolution = proper use of references. YOUR ARGUMENT is being supported by an expert's opinion, i.e. his opinion being true adds weight to your argument, but his opinion being false doesnt automatically nullify your argument. YOUR ARGUMENT is not the same as the expert's opinion; John Merriman never drew a link between the French Revolution and Revolution X, I'm the historian who wishes to make this claim.


99% of the arguments in this thread sound like this.

Riot games/Blizzard/Ubihard/etc balances to the top 1%, therefore all companies should balance to the top1%
The American Civil War was caused by a disagreement about slavery, therefore all civil wars are caused by disagreements about slavery.

This is complete strawmanning and appealing to authority, with absolutely no actual evidence given to support your facts.


There are many games in the world where the simple thought of balancing something to the top 1% would make absolutely no sense at all.


Can you balance soccer/football to only the world cup?
- It's too easy to kick a penalty in world cup level football, so let's make the goal box smaller for everyone.

Can you balance baseball only to the superbowl?
- It's too hard to hit a home run in the superbowl, so let's make the field smaller.

None of this even makes any sense - unless you make two sets of rules, any balance changes you make will have an affect on all players. (Which is why 99% of sports have multiple rule sets to cater for skill level, age, physical development, etc)


These are also terrible metrics by which to compare coh2. While both teams are identical in soccer, and in baseball, both teams have a turn at striking and pitching, in coh2 one team must be allies, and one team must be axis.
- Think of this like in baseball, where one team is only allowed to pitch for the whole game, and whehter they win or not is depepdant purely on how few runs they concede.
- This will of course have a completely different balance mechanic than regular baseball, where things like the size of the field, the distance between the pitcher/hitter don't really matter as much, because it affects both teams equally.

Our closest point of comparison in the e-sports world is probably league of legends. we are similar, in that both teams can't be axis, and both teams can't have a Master Yi.

A look at league of legends statistics shows there are serious differences in win-rates between different tiers of players.

http://www.lolking.net/charts?region=all&type=champion-winrate&range=daily&map=sr&queue=1x1&league=ranked

For example:
The highest win-rate champion in Bronze Tier (lowest) is Ahri. Over 50% of players are in bronze tier.
The highest win-rate champion in Diamond Tier is Karthus. About 250 players per region (NA/EU/OCE/etc) can be in diamond tier (i.e. 0.0X%)

Karthus doesn't even show up on the bronze tier win% chart, nor does ahri show up on the diamond tier win% chart. Ahri does, however, make some entries in some of the other charts, just not at position #1


"Right," said Morello, who doesn't actually even have a college degree yet helped start one of the most successful startups of all time. "We must buff Ahri."

"Are you sure?" said Phreak, who probably has a degree in something like Library Studies but is now lead champion designer of one of the most successful games of all time. "Ahri has a 55% win rate in Bronze tier, and 50% of our players are bronze!"

Morello adjusted his glasses. "No, Phreak. We don't give two fucks about them. Balance to the top 0.0x%"

This sounds completely absurd, and is a terrible way to balance a video game.


Overall % data like provided in this thread is a great place to start. However, saying "axis has a 90% win rate in 4v4s" is like saying "champions with blue hair have a 90% win rate in Diamond Tier" - there is absolutely nothing obliging players to play all champions with blue hair equally. IN coh2, while CAS may be propping up the OST win rate, this does not necessarily mean the faction is overpowered, anymore than just because Vi (blue hair champion) has a 90% win rate, we should nerf Irelia (who also has blue hair).

Win% data allows us a broad window into the general vacinity that a problem lies in (OST 4v4). We need to look closer, however, to identify exactly what the problems are (CAS doctrine? Tiger Ace?)


tl;dr
this thread is filled with people who are appealing to authority by citing sources like a 49/100 first year history student instead of giving proper arguments as to the how the game could be balanced based on the data available. I, on the other hand, have presented a coherent argument that doesn't rely on opinions from those of authority, instead of statistics and logic, and have offered a suggestion about how we can use this data to balance the game, and which pitfalls to be aware of.

Nerf kubelwagen.

Wall of text

On the other hand, lots of low ranked players lose games due to mistakes. Fundamental quality of life things can be introduced to make the game better for everyone but when it comes to determining the effectiveness of units those best at using them should be the voice of reason.

Like shout about appeal to authority all you want but good balance comes from listening to top players because they know the most about the game (usually).

people not being to deal with maxim blobs is honestly just a player issue, and not a balance one.

i'm not saying that it's a balance issue, i'm just saying that they still work well against MG42s. grens with RGs are what maxims have issues with but you can still mitigate that by paying attention and moving the maxims.

Like shout about appeal to authority all you want but good balance comes from listening to top players because they know the most about the game (usually).

You are either intentionally misreading my argument or those painkillers should be illegal

So what you're saying, is that because people literally can't get good, we should make the game easier?
Are you really trying to the do whole "everyone gets a medal" mentality bullshit that is making schoolchildren into entitled, lazy slackoffs?
Jesus, get a grip..

Oh boy here we go.
I'm going to be very, very frank since you feel the need to bring up the Brad crap again.
All you Angry Bears are the ones that got extremely butthurt over the whole thing, solely because Aerohank, someone who is reknowned for being an extremely poor sport and BMer in 1v1s, got his ass handed to him and felt the need to moan on the forums about it. Not only was it extremely hypocritical, but the reaction the rest of his clanmates had over it by jumping on the train was childish. TAB complains about the transparency of Relic, so what better way to get the only balance dev that interacted with the community banned?

Its not like Brad, Jason, and Matt are the only devs at Relic that can actually play this game at a high level. Fantastic, you just eliminated 1 of them. And you all continue to post the same garbage on the forums, even though all of you are just mediocre 4v4 allied only players that vocally complain about the most asinine things.

Thats what "you lot" are all about.
....

Oh, the irony......

You're trying to act all grown up by being "very, very frank" in the middle of a really long immature rant, bordering on a temper tantrum. On behalf of the Bears that I play with, who don't know you or anyone at Relic and vice versa, I would like to wish you good luck with that grown up thing.

You are either intentionally misreading my argument or those painkillers should be illegal

This is complete strawmanning and appealing to authority, with absolutely no actual evidence given to support your facts.

Company of Heroes 2 is an RTS. The most balanced CoH1 was ever at was when a patch was developed with the top players input. That's what people mean when they talk about balancing around the 1%.

It's not exactly unheard of for RTS's to be balanced around the top tier of skill because most losses for people at lower levels tend to result from mistakes.

Oh, the irony......

You're trying to act all grown up by being "very, very frank" in the middle of a really long immature rant, bordering on a temper tantrum. On behalf of the Bears that I play with, who don't know you or anyone at Relic and vice versa, I would like to wish you good luck with that grown up thing.

.....what? How was he being immature? The dude literally brought up multiple situations were Aerohank had BM'd but Dusty still said he respected Aero's opinion...

Oh, the irony......

You're trying to act all grown up by being "very, very frank" in the middle of a really long immature rant, bordering on a temper tantrum. On behalf of the Bears that I play with, who don't know you or anyone at Relic and vice versa, I would like to wish you good luck with that grown up thing.

Because bringing up an 8 month old scandal was the shining beacon of maturity huh?

Because bringing up an 8 month old scandal was the shining beacon of maturity huh?

You sure ain't the first person to be harassed by TAB let me tell you

Company of Heroes 2 is an RTS. The most balanced CoH1 was ever at was when a patch was developed with the top players input. That's what people mean when they talk about balancing around the 1%.

It's not exactly unheard of for RTS's to be balanced around the top tier of skill because most losses for people at lower levels tend to result from mistakes.

Appeal to authority has nothing to do with the top 1% of COH2 players. It has nothing to do with coh2 players at all, or even coh2.

Because bringing up an 8 month old scandal was the shining beacon of maturity huh?

I genuinely had no idea about that until this thread. All I knew was that you were friends with Brad. I've since talked to others about it, and had the full story.

If I caused offence, I apologise. It wasn't my intention.


REQUEST TO MODS: I'd like this topic to continue about the subject it's intended for, from this point on. If it degenerates again, please close.

I find it funny when people compare coh's top 1% to starcraft and the like's top 1%. Those games' "top 1 %" ranges in the 1000s while ours is only probably ranges in the 100s if not less. Much bigger sample size.

Besides coh2s biggest struggle is attempting is becoming popular, not creating a competitive playerbase. A competitive playerbase will naturally arise when there are enough players. It's not going to magically appear by pandering to the already dedicated players.

Can you balance baseball only to the superbowl?
- It's too hard to hit a home run in the superbowl, so let's make the field smaller.

Dpfarce, your post was a great read but you fail at freedom son.

#Murica

Also, regarding game balance and how it relates to skill, this is a fascinating watch:

Also, regarding game balance and how it relates to skill, this is a fascinating watch:

That video perfectly describes some of the issues with coh2.