Place your bets

Snip

That's a story for another thread as you said, but:

I mostly agree with you. The concept of teamwork and teamplay is very attractive, both for the players and the viewers. Through the miracle of internet gaming, people play together, win together and rape each others mothers together. This is a fact, but things are a little different in CoH2.

As I said, the concept is very interesting, but the practice isn't especially in CoH2. I myself exclusively play 2s. Used to play 3s and 4s but haven't played those modes for a long time. The amount of people playing 2s+ is stunning as you mentioned, which also means the "number" (not the percentage) of noobs and scrubs is a lot more, which might lead people to deduce that "K DEN, TEAM PLAYERS ARE ALL N00Bz". This is the major reason-in my humble opinion-why people are picking on team players.

But there is another major issue. In practice, CoH2 is not suitable for team games. Now don't get me wrong. Yes, a lot of people play team games and they are content. If you enjoy something, good for you, no one has the right to pick on you. But still, CoH2 has major flaws regarding team games.

First, the game is not "Team Game Friendly" by today's standards. No dedicated servers (Disconnect and GG) and not report system (although in process) are two examples. The performance is also... Sigh...

Maps are not balance. I still wonder, how did we endure Face Off in 3s+? The amount of variety in content is also very limited. Look at C&C General, a lot of factions with different strats, Dota and LoL have literally tens of champions with different play styles. In coh we have 5 factions with stale meta. All these aside, we have these Relik moments when they release a patch and give a faction the chance to hit 100% win rate...

I'm not really sure why I'm writing all of this, but these are just my two cents on why people talk down to team players. TL;DR : Team games in CoH2 are mostly tutrle/arty fest, without any tactical value since most people play four 1v1s in a single map. And you have to exploit the balance to win. This frustration is the reason why people disregard team players.

game is meant to be balanced around all modes whether you like it or not

you're goddamn right XD

Game is meant to be balanced for 1vs1 and 2vs2. Please dont take 4vs4 win charts so serious , these game modes are for fun

Really? There are maybe 1000 1v1 or 2v2 players total. When I search for 1v1's, there are often less than 10 people searching. On top of that, most of those players don't buy DLC. If you take the 1000 (which is a generous estimate) times an average $0, you get $0 to pay for continued development and support (slightly less in Canadian dollars). You're a strategist. Do you really think that is a business model that Relic can sustain?

The last patch had win rates that were balanced across all factions within 10-12% across all game sizes. Axis players whined hard because 2v2's were around +12% for allies. Somehow, a 70% differential is okay when it favors Axis.

That's a story for another thread as you said, but:
....

You're theory crafting and clearly haven't played any medium or high level team games. If 4v4 was a RNG arty-fest, do you really think that there would be win streaks like Jadame, GDot, Skabink, 102 game (or whatever current) win streak? Do you think they build arty better than anyone else and that's how they win?

My allied brethren are so salty right now. I on the other hand welcome back our overlords.

Really? There are maybe 1000 1v1 or 2v2 players total. When I search for 1v1's, there are often less than 10 people searching. On top of that, most of those players don't buy DLC. If you take the 1000 (which is a generous estimate) times an average $0, you get $0 to pay for continued development and support (slightly less in Canadian dollars). You're a strategist. Do you really think that is a business model that Relic can sustain?

The last patch had win rates that were balanced across all factions within 10-12% across all game sizes. Axis players whined hard because 2v2's were around +12% for allies. Somehow, a 70% differential is okay when it favors Axis.

It's been proven as absolute fact that 4v4s pay the bills. There is no argument to be made that 1v1s are more important than 4v4s.

The Elitists need to understand that even though 1v1s are fun to watch it is not the game-mode that needs to be used as the balancing point.

If someone can prove that 1v1s are played more than 4v4s by the community I'll happily retract my comment, but that won't happen.

Can't fight fact.

I wonder if its even possible to hit a 100% win ratio.

it's funny how some people argue that most played faction = higher win ratio. well, soviet has been most played faction and allies definitely have been played more than axis in 4v4.

yet only OKW win ratio rockets.

guess we just gotta get used to it and wait for meta to settle. somehow the new okw is so much easier to play but much harder to counter.

just gotta wait, let the meta settle. Let's wait four months and we'll be ready for a patch.

Perhaps we need new game restrictions on higher player game modes...

I for one would like to see 5 VP maps make an appearance in 2v2.

CoH done in the style of Total War Arena anyone?

You're theory crafting and clearly haven't played any medium or high level team games. If 4v4 was a RNG arty-fest, do you really think that there would be win streaks like Jadame, GDot, Skabink, 102 game (or whatever current) win streak? Do you think they build arty better than anyone else and that's how they win?

You didn't get the point mate. I'm talking about 90% of team players. True, I don't play 3s and 4s so I might be wrong. But as I said, more people play team games thus there are more noobs in that player base (again, the number is more but the percentage of scrubs might be the same between game modes). These people infest the forums while talking out of their asses. You've probably been to official forums. I was just stating my opinion on "why do people pick on team players?" not if team games are good or not in general.

Where is the "who gives a fuck" option?

Seriously. Anything above 2v2 the balance is a joke.

Where is the "who gives a fuck" option?

Seriously. Anything above 2v2 the balance is a joke.

It's shit like this which just shows how stupid the 1v1 only elitists can be. 4v4 balance was better then 1v1 last patch. Or do you guys just have the memory of a goldfish.

It's shit like this which just shows how stupid the 1v1 only elitists can be. 4v4 balance was better then 1v1 last patch. Or do you guys just have the memory of a goldfish.

You don't have to be an elitist to realize that team games are practically unbalance able. It's stupid to even try. Short having 2 different clients for 1v1 and for team games - which is a stupid idea.

Play some 1s and you'll understand.

All heil the OKW and Obecember patch.

Really? There are maybe 1000 1v1 or 2v2 players total. When I search for 1v1's, there are often less than 10 people searching. On top of that, most of those players don't buy DLC. If you take the 1000 (which is a generous estimate) times an average $0, you get $0 to pay for continued development and support (slightly less in Canadian dollars). You're a strategist. Do you really think that is a business model that Relic can sustain?

The last patch had win rates that were balanced across all factions within 10-12% across all game sizes. Axis players whined hard because 2v2's were around +12% for allies. Somehow, a 70% differential is okay when it favors Axis.

they dont balance dota on your standard pub players the balance it off the pro's, that doesnt mean all 4vs4 players are trash or that they should be ignored but the focus should be on balancing 1vs1 thats hard enough as it is.

resources, cut offs placement hardly matter it team games its fun but thats it.

You don't have to be an elitist to realize that team games are practically unbalance able. It's stupid to even try. Short having 2 different clients for 1v1 and for team games - which is a stupid idea.

Play some 1s and you'll understand.

Mind explaining more why it is so hard to balance?

You don't have to be an elitist to realize that team games are practically unbalance able. It's stupid to even try. Short having 2 different clients for 1v1 and for team games - which is a stupid idea.

Play some 1s and you'll understand.

I play all modes. that's why I actually know what I'm talking about. The only problems in team games that are different then 1v1 is caches and jagdtigers. None of which is anywhere near unfixable or will even effect 1v1 all that much. Everything else is just the escalation of the same problems in 1v1 and 2v2.

You didn't get the point mate. I'm talking about 90% of team players. True, I don't play 3s and 4s so I might be wrong. But as I said, more people play team games thus there are more noobs in that player base (again, the number is more but the percentage of scrubs might be the same between game modes). These people infest the forums while talking out of their asses. You've probably been to official forums. I was just stating my opinion on "why do people pick on team players?" not if team games are good or not in general.

I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but the group that I most commonly play with are currently ranked in the 100-150 range, which probably puts me in that bottom 90%. Even at my "noob" level, your comments aren't true. Coordination wins team games, and rarely do they turn into arty-fests. Arty can't hold ground, and decent players counter it.

Random 4v4's aren't fun, but AT can be, especially when matched against a good team.

Ever saw games between real teams? probably you didnt. This is way more coordination, intensity and everything you could ever have in 1v1.

I refused to comment on this for a long time, because i thought it was irony. But after watching your streams for some hours in the last month (because nobody else is streaming regulary anymore) I guess this was your honest opinion. You saw HelpingHans vs Jove in the recent tourny? THAT was intense. That was coordinated. That was everything that 4v4 lacks. You always forget positioning of your units, you always forget cover and run blind into hmg positions without any flanking. You lose your stukas/catys/you name it for whatever reason because you forget to pull them back after a volley. Do that in 1v1 and the game is basicly over if you dont achieve anything anywhere else. In 3v3/4v4 you just sit back, keep cool and let the arty spam of the others compensate your mistakes. It's stupid and by no means competitive. Ever.

(ofc this is just my opinion, and i am by no means a top player. also i enjoy your stream as a fellow german. but one has to comment on this, 'cause freedom of speech and opinions...but maybe its not just mine opinion.)

I refused to comment on this for a long time, because i thought it was irony. But after watching your streams for some hours in the last month (because nobody else is streaming regulary anymore) I guess this was your honest opinion. You saw HelpingHans vs Jove in the recent tourny? THAT was intense. That was coordinated. That was everything that 4v4 lacks. You always forget positioning of your units, you always forget cover and run blind into hmg positions without any flanking. You lose your stukas/catys/you name it for whatever reason because you forget to pull them back after a volley. Do that in 1v1 and the game is basicly over if you dont achieve anything anywhere else. In 3v3/4v4 you just sit back, keep cool and let the arty spam of the others compensate your mistakes. It's stupid and by no means competitive. Ever.

(ofc this is just my opinion, and i am by no means a top player. also i enjoy your stream as a fellow german. but one has to comment on this, 'cause freedom of speech and opinions...but maybe its not just mine opinion.)

you looked me playing 2v2 too? MVGame

Why did you exclude a 50-60% option?