4v4 can't be balanced, they said

With all the complaining lately, seems a lot of people haven't noticed that 4v4 is actually really well balanced at the moment.

Crap, I screwed up the title.

The most played gamemode is balanced. Game is finally saved!

Hooray!

As an avid 4v4 player I always scoff when someone looks down on 4v4s. I can imagine these guys giving advice to DotA and LoL developers : "nah man, team games are not popular, 1v1 is where it's at".

Anyway it is my opinion that the game just needs a few changes and 4v4 would be just as easily balanced as 1v1s are (that is to say, not at all easy, but at least it won't be a different planet compared to 1v1s)

- make caches only give bonus to the player who built them. I know this is controversial but it wouldn't change 1v1 mechanics in the slightest and would do much to make teamgames not devolve into armour spam at minute 18. This would shaft OKW somewhat but it might actually open them up for accross the board buffs.
- "onmap artillery pieces being instantly countered by certain offmaps" equation needs fixing. If a single player happens to have Stuka bombing run ability, Allies cannot build stationary howitzers, period. Stuka seems the biggest offender here but for fairness sake Allied offmaps (Time on Target, IL2 bomb run) vs howitzers should also get looked at.
- CAS is a huge problem in 4v4s, and almost single-handedly made me quit large team games on several occasions. It's more difficult to predict the strikes (in smaller games you are pretty much aware what the enemy sees but in 4v4 line of sight is chaotic and there are like 123890 airplanes circling the sky at any given moment), and the commander has incredible utility accross the entire battlefield, especially in the corners. This target rich environment and the insane fuel float combine to make what is otherwise an effective, but not imba, commander in 1v1s a nightmare to deal with in large games.

Fix the above and I guarantee you 4v4 will be almost as balanced as 1v1s.

Aren't these 4v4 win ratios from random games? Where teamwork matters more on the allied side than YOLO mc-swagging vet 5 obers running around soloing entire armies games?

Crap, I screwed up the title.

updated title. assuming this is what you wanted lol.

updated title. assuming this is what you wanted lol.

Yes, thank you

Aren't these 4v4 win ratios from random games? Where teamwork matters more on the allied side than YOLO mc-swagging vet 5 obers running around soloing entire armies games?

Usually if one side needs to constantly 2v1 the other side, that's a good indicator that things are pretty bad.

Only thing which makes it seems balanced is terrible MM, thats all.

Aren't these 4v4 win ratios from random games? Where teamwork matters more on the allied side than YOLO mc-swagging vet 5 obers running around soloing entire armies games?

Because spamming rifles and IS's is hard?

If 1 of your dumb ass teammates gets an MG or pak stolen and it's gg for Axis. And trust me that happens like every game I play where my teammates always have terribly positioned weapon crews. That's not something the Allies have to worry about.

i think allies do definitely have the edge but i do think axis does have one ultimate late game combo that is better than any other allies combo

we never said 4v4 cant be balanced, but it will debalance every other gamemode. but i accept thats the most popular gamemode and you enjoy it, have fun. i hope the community wont take a too big hit if this is the path lelic wants to go

i think allies do definitely have the edge but i do think axis does have one ultimate late game combo that is better than any other allies combo

What is that ultimate combo?

Instead of making caches only benefit the builder, I say make the benefit constant across all modes and just split the earnings between the players in higher modes. That way it still benefits all, even though the actual increase per player gets smaller the more players there are.

What is that ultimate combo?

werfer + stuka (optional) + ele or JT.

if the game makes that far.

i find the only real way to counter this is sacrificial m10 or t34 or even cromwell.

But 1s and 2s...

I don't understand, why they don't just design different game modes for 3s and 4s? It would be a lot easier to balance without affecting 1s and 2s. Different income, unit pricing or even unit performance.

Ironic isn't it. 4v4 is more fun at the moment than 1v1 and 2v2 are.

just wait and watch it will go just the way of 1v1 and 2v2 when the 4v4 players figure out some strats,exploit,and try playing at level close to 1v1 players skill

But 1s and 2s...

I don't understand, why they don't just design different game modes for 3s and 4s? It would be a lot easier to balance without affecting 1s and 2s. Different income, unit pricing or even unit performance.

More variables to balance for devs and numbers to remember for players.
Design anti-pattern IMO.

More variables to balance for devs and numbers to remember for players.
Design anti-pattern IMO.

I don't think so. Right now, the game is a mess. 4v4 is the most played mode, but 1s (and sometime 2s) are considered "e-sports" material ( ). Most 4v4 roflstomp heroes also don't play 1s and 2s, and vice versa.

Besides, the only changes could be unit price and timing, and that's it, you don't have to memorize so many numbers and stats. I don't play 3s and 4s, but I think simply changing price on some units would be a big step towards balance.

Anyway, they've stated that they don't have any plans regarding different game modes so arguing it is pointless.