4v4 can't be balanced, they said

What is that ultimate combo?

command panther, command panzer 4, Elefant, KT

I REALLY hope Relic does not make any drastic changes to balance out the game. At this moment, 4 v 4 feels superbly balanced. I have a tough match when I play BOTH Allies and Axis, instead of Allies uphill battle from before.

PLX make caches only benefit the player itself. Would be so fucking awesome.

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.

I'd say - most of 1v1 and 2v2 roflstomp heroes don't play 4v4. Yeah.

PLX make caches only benefit the player itself. Would be so fucking awesome.

Maybe let's not have people fight over who get's to build caches where and blow each others up?

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

This has always been the case

This has always been the case

For you*
A lot of the players in the community consider it spamfest.

For you*
A lot of the players in the community consider it spamfest.

Their ignorance is not my problem.

If they play it and they don't like it then fine, they can go play 1v1 that doesn't bother me.


It's really only my problem if they start reciting how 1v1 is the One True Game Mode around which all else should resolve

I still think some Axis late game combo's, as Cookie said, are nearly impossible for Allies to stop in these large game modes. However, without those units (if someone didn't pick commanders with them), the Brits are currently dominating after the 30 minute mark because of their insanely good vet scaling.

Soviet and USF feel better. USF still a little weak in the late game because of the need to build up and sacrifice tanks to bleed Axis late game armor.

There actually isn't much of a difference between 1v1s and 4v4 random games. Considering that 99% of the people who play 1v1s right now are at the same skill level as those playing 4v4 random games. With that said, getting more wins than others in 1v1s has more to do with being a meta whore than doing something unorthodox.

Their ignorance is not my problem.

If they play it and they don't like it then fine, they can go play 1v1 that doesn't bother me.


It's really only my problem if they start reciting how 1v1 is the One True Game Mode around which all else should resolve

I agree on that! It's definitely not the only true game mode

I remember all these folks saying how axis was never OP in 4V4 and its because axis is just played more and that skews the demographics... Meanwhile they had 80% winrate.

Maybe let's not have people fight over who get's to build caches where and blow each others up?

You know, I keep seeing this argument pop up but I think this is literally a non-issue and it would not happen literally ever. It's like saying people will fight over best MG / medic truck spots and democharge their teammates' MGs / medic trucks. People are just not that dumb. And trust me, I've had my fair share of griefer teammates over the years. They gun grief when their cookie cutter insane strat fails, and they gun do it no matter what.


That's what team chat and communications are for. I thought 4v4s were supposed to give off a semblance of teamwork, not four separate 1v1s, and the side with the better teamwork deserved to win? If you are playing with someone who is griefing because of not being able to build a cache, you are playing with a baby that would lose you the game anyway.

If your only counterargument to a move that would greatly improve the game (in my opinion) is that there would be griefers who would be mad at that change and would potentially do something stupid in 1 game out of 100. Well, garden them, pissing them off means the game is moving in the right direction.

Balance in 4v4 is a lot better mostly to Allies having a decent late game (Brits) and Rifles not just bleeding a USF player. I would say that in random games its pretty even, though match maker is usually being pretty crap. Thankfully due to brits and a few other buffs, allies have become enjoyable to play in random games in 3v3 / 4v4.

I also think quite a large amount of axis players are stuck in the mentality that if they just camp till late game, they will win. I still don't think its "hard" as axis in 4v4's but it isn't as easy as it was.

"4v4 can't be balanced"

LOL GET REKT MOMO

Win rates don't have a lick to do with game balance.

If anyone gave enough of a fuck to cheese 4v4 properly they absolutely could.

command panther, command panzer 4, Elefant, KT

Combine Tiger Ace with Command panther vet4 ... oh and don't forget 3x tiger ace bulletin

3vs3 lost their fun to me, because in random modes I'm constantly raging because of what my mates do.
And the arranged team mode is simply boring because no match lasts longer than maximally 10-20 minutes, unless you play against 3-4 other very specific teams that play in those modes , which of course are not online when you are.

Balance in those modes comes, as I predicted by the increased Allie playerbase, which means you have equal elo and thus equal teams when fighting, skill wise. Balance never played an important role. It was all about the elo.

That's why a third axis faction can fuck the whole situation up again. Simply because it would increase axis playerbase, especially if it's some Africa korps faction... Since we have so many Rommel fanboys