Yay. Axis team game is hopeless now.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 15:22 PMWingZero

Okay Axis stop crying. Relic did a phenomenal job in their "attempt" to balance large team games. The addition of Brits helped bridge the gap between USF and Soviets mid game's. We all know how Axis army had a field day in large game modes before the Brit release.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 16:15 PMGrumpy

Awesome comeback. Good job of keeping it civil.




The only game mode where there is a huge difference in win rates is 2v2. In that mode, the to 200 axis players have less than half of the games played compared to the top 200 allied players (all factions combined). This skews the win rate for the same reason that 3v3+ can get skewed. If synergy was the cause, why don't the 3v3 and 4v4 win rates show the same pattern?

Many of the axis players on this thread were really good at using the platitudes before (l2p, l2adapt, allied units just look cooler, shouldn't play with randoms, people want to be the good guys, search rates don't mean anything, etc). Why aren't you using platitudes now?

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 16:18 PMGdot

Ummm allies have been OP in team games for a while now - not sure what you're talking about; not to mention 'axis had a field day before the brits' is a terrible terrible reason for not balancing something. Its also a reason why fanbois should stay away from balance discussion.

Allies have had the advantage in team games for quite a while now, its only been exacerbated with the release of the UKF.

Axis are too little, too late. You cannot stop the pressure of allied infantry, coupled with light vehicles, with smaller squad sizes and a pak. Axis are simply getting overwhelmed.

I can't help to see flashbacks of coh1. Allies completely dominating every facet of the game. Snipers becoming more and more potent. Allied fanbois still under the impression germans are op. Its 2009 all over again.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 16:18 PMGdot

Ummm allies have been OP in team games for a while now - not sure what you're talking about; not to mention 'axis had a field day before the brits' is a terrible terrible reason for not balancing something. Its also a reason why fanbois should stay away from balance discussion.

Allies have had the advantage in team games for quite a while now, its only been exacerbated with the release of the UKF.

Axis are too little, too late. You cannot stop the pressure of allied infantry, coupled with light vehicles, with smaller squad sizes and a pak. Axis are simply getting overwhelmed.

I can't help to see flashbacks of coh1. Allies completely dominating every facet of the game. Snipers becoming more and more potent. Allied fanbois still under the impression germans are op. Its 2009 all over again.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 02:43 AMPorygon

No one give/gave a fuck in 4v4 balance.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 16:55 PMArclyte

The game is designed for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4. Saying you can't balance one because you have to balance the other is a bullshit lazy excuse.

Besides, they're not capable of balancing 1v1 apparently, so why not put your effort into the game modes people play the most? ignoring 75% of the game modes is pretty stupid.

This game will never be competitive or an esport, so why this tunnel-vision with 1v1?

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 18:38 PMImagelessbean

I care about 3v3 and 4v4 balance, as do, I assume, the half of the player base which plays it. It is not fun to not have 2 game modes available because they are so horribly lop sided that anyone can win just by selecting one faction.

The changes to the game modes have resulted in much better balance in 3v3 and 4v4, although it still has a little way to go. I understand 1v1 and 2v2 are out of whack right now, and I hope that Relic returns to balance them as well. However, disregarding larger team games because you don't play them or because you don't think they require "skill" is silly.

I understand 1v1 and 2v2 are where the most competitive games, are but I dare say that 3v3+ have some serious competitive games if you can find good teams paired up against each other.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 18:38 PMImagelessbean

The changes to the game modes have resulted in much better balance in 3v3 and 4v4, although it still has a little way to go. I understand 1v1 and 2v2 are out of whack right now, and I hope that Relic returns to balance them as well. However, disregarding larger team games because you don't play them or because you don't think they require "skill" is silly.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 18:51 PMGdot

Yes, but I think balancing 1s/2s helps to balance 3s/4s, to a degree. Essentially, especially on maps like city 17, the game is basically broken down to a 2v2 on each respective side, at least the first 20 minutes. Its much easier to balance a 1v1 game than a 4v4 game due to the sheer number of factors.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 00:37 AMRollo

Pretty fun watching you qq on the forums rather than learning to play

6 pounder is a direct clone of the pak fyi, kinda funny to see people get salty over it and call Axis AT crap in the same post.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 15:53 PMZombiFrancis

Ostheer v Soviets in team games is still a good matchup.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 23:50 PMhannibalbarcajr

don't agree with everything by OP but just bc 2 units are equal doesn't mean it isn't IMBA. UKF has superior infantry late game with dual bren possibility plus squad size upgrade. Wehr is supposed to make up for that with superior support weapon teams and ATG as well as slightly better armor. This is still true vs SU and USF but it isn't true vs UKF. So against the UKF, unless you go Ostruppen you are at a disadvantage in every way except for a slightly better sniper although Wehr sniper can't damage armor.

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 06:39 AMatouba

LOL generally speaking the brits has better version units at every way except pwerfer and sexton.Such as cheap 6 pounder AT,vickers, long range mortar pit,sniper can anti vehicles ,5 men basic infantry,dubble brens,medium tank cromwell,fast vet speed on tanks,cheap heavy tier tech cost,better offmap abilities,better elite infantry,etc.

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 06:39 AMatouba

LOL generally speaking the brits has better version units at every way except pwerfer and sexton.Such as cheap 6 pounder AT,vickers, long range mortar pit,sniper can anti vehicles ,5 men basic infantry,dubble brens,medium tank cromwell,fast vet speed on tanks,cheap heavy tier tech cost,better offmap abilities,better elite infantry,etc.