I mainly play 3v3+ with 2v2 trailing closely behind. I don't play 1v1. I also enjoy watching casts and because most casts are 1v1, I mainly watch 1v1 casts.
I can help but notice various improvements on maps like Langraskya, Kholodny, Kharkov, Minsk and I am pretty sure I am missing more. I also cannot help but notice some serious attention to balance issues that afflict anything but 3v3+.
With ESL 1v1 tourney bestowed upon us, my question is this:
When can 3v3+ players expect some love? no map fixes, which is unbelievably easy to implement is nowhere to be seen and obviously other glaring issues.
When should I start to expect something from you Relic in regards to 3v3+?
[Relic][3v3+] Some Love When?
28 Dec 2015, 19:16 PM
#1
4 
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
 | Playercard of Bo-Bobby Lion | |||||||||||||||
|
28 Dec 2015, 19:27 PM
#2
Posts: 1166 | Subs: 1
I mainly play 3v3+ with 2v2 trailing closely behind. I don't play 1v1. I also enjoy watching casts and because most casts are 1v1, I mainly watch 1v1 casts.
I can help but notice various improvements on maps like Langraskya, Kholodny, Kharkov, Minsk and I am pretty sure I am missing more. I also cannot help but notice some serious attention to balance issues that afflict anything but 3v3+.
With ESL 1v1 tourney bestowed upon us, my question is this:
When can 3v3+ players expect some love? no map fixes, which is unbelievably easy to implement is nowhere to be seen and obviously other glaring issues.
When should I start to expect something from you Relic in regards to 3v3+?
Solutions:
Obviously, balance in 1v1 has become very good and we don't want to disturb it, so how can we tweak the balance in 3s/4s without disrupting 1v1/2v2? Scaling Income Nerfs.
Whether we incorporate 2v2 in this is another discussion but the general plan would be to have scaled income nerf for larger game sizes. Example for 3v3, OKW could receive a 10% income nerf, for 4v4 OKW could receive a 15%. These numbers are examples and testing would clearly have to be done.
MAPS: Maps that work for 4s typically don't work for 3s and vice versa. RBE is a 3v3 map - when played as 4s it becomes too crowded. City 17 works fine for 4s but when playing 3s it becomes awkward and unrewarding - it also creates unfair matchups due to random position starting positions (2v1 or 1v2 per side). Solution would be to create maps designed for 6 players, not 6-8.
28 Dec 2015, 19:33 PM
#3
Posts: 2070
I am curious to know as well. I hope Relic goes back and look at the 4v4/3v3 maps. Some of them are imbalanced, and some of them can be improved. For example, Rostov was taken out of the rotation many months ago. It would be nice if it could be improved and inserted back into the rotation.
Axis doesn't have the best AT options in the game
28 Dec 2015, 19:48 PM
#4
1 Posts: 1276
Would be great if we got different balance modes for 3v3+
28 Dec 2015, 21:54 PM
#5
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
28 Dec 2015, 22:04 PM
#6
Posts: 1122
how can we tweak the balance in 3s/4s without disrupting 1v1/2v2?
By buffing British, which is up in 1v1 as well back and nerfing stupidly op rocket arty, which destroys infantry play.
Scaling income is just BS.
28 Dec 2015, 22:09 PM
#7
Posts: 752
"You are competitive if play to win and make efforts to improve." -Basilone
28 Dec 2015, 22:20 PM
#8
1 
Posts: 640
yeah they should promote larger teamgames a bit more...
4v4 and 3v3 randoms is nonsense...
but
4v4 and 3v3 AT have a lot of potential. You cant just win doing your own thing... the whole team needs to synergize well to achieve a victory. Coordination and communication is very important...
The sad thing is there arent that much good active teams playing and the matchmaking is really bad. 90% the time you will stomp enemies which are 5000 ranks below you but when you finally face a good team (there are some around) it will be a feast of teamwork - which can be very entertaining.
The problem is coh2 is supporting blobs... so blobbing is probably the most seen thing in 4v4s due to lack of coordination - "because its easier".
I would really like to see Relic putting some love in larger teamgames.
Especially 3v3s maps are the worst (some 4v4s maps could also use some love)... more cut-offs, more flanks,...
4v4 and 3v3 randoms is nonsense...
but
4v4 and 3v3 AT have a lot of potential. You cant just win doing your own thing... the whole team needs to synergize well to achieve a victory. Coordination and communication is very important...
The sad thing is there arent that much good active teams playing and the matchmaking is really bad. 90% the time you will stomp enemies which are 5000 ranks below you but when you finally face a good team (there are some around) it will be a feast of teamwork - which can be very entertaining.
The problem is coh2 is supporting blobs... so blobbing is probably the most seen thing in 4v4s due to lack of coordination - "because its easier".
I would really like to see Relic putting some love in larger teamgames.
Especially 3v3s maps are the worst (some 4v4s maps could also use some love)... more cut-offs, more flanks,...
| Playercard of SwonVIP | |||||||||||||||
|
28 Dec 2015, 22:48 PM
#9
Posts: 1124
3v3 map pool is the worst. City 17 for example. Or la glaize where a 2v1 will occur a lot
28 Dec 2015, 22:59 PM
#10
15 
Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2
The first thing that needs to be done in the team games is take a look at the maps.
Currently each point gives the same amount of resources as 1v1 and the amount of points to cap for a team game map is the same.
With more players the map can be capped a lot faster, leading to higher income in the early game in team games than in 1v1s.
What would help if the resources gained from each point was lowered in team games but also increase the amount of capture zones.
Then they could look at map flow, i.e. how easy is it to execute flanks, too many choke points, vehicle pathing etc.
Currently each point gives the same amount of resources as 1v1 and the amount of points to cap for a team game map is the same.
With more players the map can be capped a lot faster, leading to higher income in the early game in team games than in 1v1s.
What would help if the resources gained from each point was lowered in team games but also increase the amount of capture zones.
Then they could look at map flow, i.e. how easy is it to execute flanks, too many choke points, vehicle pathing etc.
28 Dec 2015, 23:05 PM
#11
Posts: 2561
Caches. Main problem of all teamgames.
Maps, scaling, and all that other bullshit every other poster is talking about is miniscule when you consider the effects of caches.
Teamgames will never be balanced as long as players are receiving constant resource increases from a single players small investment.
Maps, scaling, and all that other bullshit every other poster is talking about is miniscule when you consider the effects of caches.
Teamgames will never be balanced as long as players are receiving constant resource increases from a single players small investment.
28 Dec 2015, 23:27 PM
#12
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
Caches. Main problem of all teamgames.
Maps, scaling, and all that other bullshit every other poster is talking about is miniscule when you consider the effects of caches.
Teamgames will never be balanced as long as players are receiving constant resource increases from a single players small investment.
How does increased resource income for both sides cause the "Main problem of all teamgames". What problem exactly are you refering to?
| Playercard of RedT3rror | |||||||||||||||
|
28 Dec 2015, 23:53 PM
#13
1 Posts: 640
How does increased resource income for both sides cause the "Main problem of all teamgames". What problem exactly are you refering to?
I think he is referring to the axis tank advantage caused by fuel caches.
| Playercard of SwonVIP | |||||||||||||||
|
29 Dec 2015, 00:03 AM
#14
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
I think he is referring to the axis tank advantage caused by fuel caches.
The axis tank advantage has it's roots in the lack of flanking abilites and many players being jammed together/fighting over a few points. It favors frontal engagements which the axis are best in, thanks to superior long range units, MG42 and high frontal armor.
| Playercard of RedT3rror | |||||||||||||||
|
29 Dec 2015, 00:49 AM
#15
Posts: 161
The axis tank advantage has it's roots in the lack of flanking abilites and many players being jammed together/fighting over a few points. It favors frontal engagements which the axis are best in, thanks to superior long range units, MG42 and high frontal armor.
hush dont let them touch my skillwerfer as-well
29 Dec 2015, 01:19 AM
#16
Posts: 102
One thing they could change which wouldnt effect 1v1 balance is not allow OKW to benefit from caches that a OST team mate has put down. In 1v1 OKW cant get caches so this change would basically help mirror OKW income from 1v1 in to team games.
29 Dec 2015, 01:21 AM
#17
4 Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
i think caches in 3v3+ is crap idea in general and the fact that it is only 200mp is a joke.
| Playercard of Bo-Bobby Lion | |||||||||||||||
|
29 Dec 2015, 01:22 AM
#18
Posts: 879
Arguably the 4v4 maps are too small and the number of resource points are too few.
That's why it's referred to as casual mode. Lots of fighting very quickly over very few precious resource points, which usually results in a victory for the faction with the strongest late game (hi OKW!)
I would love to see serious 4v4 with much larger maps where serious team coordination and thinking ahead about territory control is necessary. Where team macro would really shine and micro would be the icing on the cake. The problem there is that then if maps were larger, flanks would be overrewarded. Once half a team got pushed off you would have major problems with VPs ticking down before a comeback could be achieved. Still, all factions have forward reinforce abilities - it might not be THAT bad. 1000 VPs would have to be the norm, games would be much, much longer...Probably an hour to achieve a decisive victory at a minimum.
That's why it's referred to as casual mode. Lots of fighting very quickly over very few precious resource points, which usually results in a victory for the faction with the strongest late game (hi OKW!)
I would love to see serious 4v4 with much larger maps where serious team coordination and thinking ahead about territory control is necessary. Where team macro would really shine and micro would be the icing on the cake. The problem there is that then if maps were larger, flanks would be overrewarded. Once half a team got pushed off you would have major problems with VPs ticking down before a comeback could be achieved. Still, all factions have forward reinforce abilities - it might not be THAT bad. 1000 VPs would have to be the norm, games would be much, much longer...Probably an hour to achieve a decisive victory at a minimum.
29 Dec 2015, 02:02 AM
#19
Posts: 1122
I think he is referring to the axis tank advantage caused by fuel caches.
Topic about abundant resources arises each time 3v3/4v4 discussed, and each time people rising it fatally wrong.
Fuel caches benefit allies more than axis for simple reason if allies manage to pressure and bleed their enemy caches is overall best thing to invest their mp lead into. And if caches will be nerfed, or income nerfed, it would cause exactly opposite effect those people expect it should do.
I think everybody knows that axis, notably OKW can use mp much more efficiently than any other faction, and whole "reduce income" proposal is basically "increase mp income in exchange for delaying tanks". So they want to give axis more mp, and at the same time delay allied tanks which can bleed/push axis from the map, on top of that believing those changes would somehow help allies.
Only resource income which could be reduced in 3v3/4v4 is mp income, but then it very tricky thing to do without hurting USF/UKF progression too much.
29 Dec 2015, 03:40 AM
#20
Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2
Caches aren't the only thing that needs to be looked at.
- Map design, must move away from narrow channels
- Volks with Shreks
- Superior Axis armor*
- Halo bonus units
(Wasn't this way until the 2nd round of British nerfs)
- Map design, must move away from narrow channels
- Volks with Shreks
- Superior Axis armor*
- Halo bonus units
(Wasn't this way until the 2nd round of British nerfs)
The views and opinions expressed in my posts and topics are solely those of the Napalm. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Relic, the developers, The Angry Bears and/or any/all contributors to this site.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
27 | ||
|
|
|
|
12 | ||
 |
|
|
73 | ||
|
|
|
|
21 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.271108.715+22
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1232
Board Info
836 users are online:
836 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM