[Relic Must See] Key Balance 1v1-4v4

This is not the tipical thread talking about nerfs or buffs, I just wan't to throw some ideas that will make you think... and the final purpose is to balance the game in all modes (1v1 to 4v4). These ideas could be implemented in a private beta test. And at least I need someone from Relic Staff to read it or write here [Kyle my friend, you are my namesake!]

1-Map resources limit/scaling:
It is well known that 1v1 maps usually have less resources than 4v4 maps(as well as 2 fuel and ammo points, most of the maps are limited to 10 standard points specially 1v1 maps).
10 std points (arnhem,angoville, semosky,moscow,rails and metal,etc)
11 std points (steppes)
12 std points (angermuende, ecliptic fields, hill, lanzerath,etc)
13 std points (refinery)
14 std points (General Mud)

The problem in bigger maps and team games are that the time from early to late game comes much faster than 1v1 games. Caches in 1v1-2v2's are risky, in 3v3-4v4 are safe income. It should be interesting to rework the amount of std points from bigger maps, and / or limit the amount of caches that a map can have. That will make early and mid game much longer in team games, while remaining the same in 1v1 games.

2-Handheld rocket weapons aim time (Bazooka,Panzerschreks).
I think the role of the rocket weapons was not to seek for tanks and destroy them, they were used for deffending from vehicles. Right now, either USF ,WERH and OKW (or RUS with partisan) can blob a big amount of squads and Attack move. This "strat" works great against light and medium vehicles making them useless in mid late-late game. P2 Lucht suffers from captain, medium tanks suffers from volk blobs with shreks. some AI tanks can't deal with blobs or require a high amount of micro when the blob requires no micro.
What I think it should be done is, increase the aim time of a bazooka and reduce other reload values to make the time between rockets the same as it is now. You can increase the far acuracy to compensate for that but this will make A-move blobs much easier to kite while remaining the same in case of tanks penetrating your territory. adding aim benefits when green cover or garrison could be fine as an ambush benefit.
I think light ,medium and AI tanks will benefit from this feature and will make blobing more useless requiring to combine arms (raketen, AT guns, jacksons, Jagdpanzer) will be needed to "hunt" tanks.

3-Suppresion:
There a few issues regarding this:
3.1- mines:
I think mines should have a suppresion radius for infantry as it had in coh1. This will also stop a flanking attack giving you the time to relocate your mg's , and stop the damaged squad avoiding to trigger more mines in the path with the result of a full wipe.
3.2 Mobile arty weapons should have suppression as Pwerfer does (I'm not going to talk about Pwerfer damage, just the suppresion). This will help to stop blobs, in case of OKW stuka when missing the target it'd be nice to deal some suppresion in a radius, (at least yellow suppresion) same with Kat, that will make the units more prone to retreat because right now after the first salvo, hey can move freely out of the rockets area. (UKF base arty can benefit from suppresion sice it's damage is not significant so it can be used for creating a suppresion area to stop infantry pushes)
3.3 Grenades range when in suppresion.
It is not fair to be naded when a units comes frontal to you MG , got suppressed and it nades you or throw smoke. I think that all the yellow suppressed units should have a 50% range reduction in grenade/smoke, this will avoid single units raiding an MG frontally. You can still throw smoke to help a second squad to approach but you won't be able to smoke the MG to nulify its position.

4- The design of big maps.
Most of the big maps are designed much more long than width, that makes flanking less possible and OKW faction can have an early game retreat point supported with a strong structure that can be placed behind a wall/house making the faction not getting affected by the long retreat distances. USF/UKF have retreat points but they come mid-late and with a single raid you can destroy them easy. I'm not going to talk about if the medic OKW truck shouldn't be placed outside the base sector, Designing more wider maps will nulify that big advantage. A good example could be the map steel pact from Coh1, it was a fun map with a lot of battle actions due to the short retreat paths.

Nice reading mate!

Totally agree with you KyleAkira.

4- And less important, the design of big maps.

The design of the map for any size game 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4 is of utmost importance. Its just as important, if not more important, than any system for making larger games more fun. Thats one of the biggest reasons the current patch for 1v1 and 2v2 is so good. The maps got patched and are so much better than before. One of the big, still unadressed problems is maps arent made for a SPECIFIC game mode (1v1 only, NOT 1v1/2v2) hybrid maps are a terrible idea and i know it scales to matches with more players.

If coh2 was an excellently balanced game but all the maps were terrible, the game would suck. Maps drive strategy, the game system as a whole, faction balance, etc.

Im not disagreeing with anything you said, i just dont care all that much about 3v3/4v4 (although they can be fun). But the map design in any COH2 conversation isnt less important. Its one of the most important aspects to make the game FUN.

Rant end.

...

4- And less important, the design of big maps.
Most of the big maps are designed much more long than width, that makes flanking less possible and OKW faction can have an early game retreat point supported with a strong structure that can be placed behind a wall/house making the faction not getting affected by the long retreat distances. USF/UKF have retreat points but they come mid-late and with a single raid you can destroy them easy. I'm not going to talk about if the medic OKW truck shouldn't be placed outside the base sector, Designing more wider maps will nulify that big advantage. A good example could be the map steel pact from Coh1, it was a fun map with a lot of battle actions due to the short retreat paths.

this. it should be the opposite. a good example would be Port of Hamburg (3v3), where the map splits diagonally from top-leftish to bottom rightish, creating a long wide frontline so that not all point cannot be occupied fully (in 4v4, this changes for obvious reason). A bad example would be Red Ball Express where the map splits from top to bottom, creating the shortest possible frontline length wise.

500F/120MP difference between kati and stuka. Why?

Agreed. Hybrid maps are horrible (3v3 on City 17 for example).

Very good points overall, and most of them to me seem to reward skill and promote the use of combined arms. +1 from me.

Overall I don't disagree with your points Akira. I'm not a fan of number 2 though. I think it's a huge change to game mechanics that need further testing before even thinking to implement it.

The design of the map for any size game 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4 is of utmost importance. Its just as important, if not more important, than any system for making larger games more fun. Thats one of the biggest reasons the current patch for 1v1 and 2v2 is so good. The maps got patched and are so much better than before. One of the big, still unadressed problems is maps arent made for a SPECIFIC game mode (1v1 only, NOT 1v1/2v2) hybrid maps are a terrible idea and i know it scales to matches with more players.

+1. Maps design are one of the most important things of coh2. However I gotta say I'm not that satisfied, at all, with the current maps on the list (specially in 2vs2). Still are maps that clearly favor a faction and also position in maps which are nearly gg. Coh1 had really good maps on 2vs2 and also the community has made nice ones by their own. I don't know why relic is not putting them on the list or patching better the ones we have.

Agreed. Hybrid maps are horrible (3v3 on City 17 for example).

all this kind of maps need is one base sector for one team. separate base sectors per team is a stupid idea.

Dev reduced chance to hit model with Bazooka but still happens frequently.
So I don't think that shrek blobs suddenly disappeared.

Battle group AND schwere panzer removes flank maneuver. removes light and medium vehicles usage.

So don't fool us.

I have a question to 3vs3 and 4vs4 players describe a battle OKW vs OKW.
What kind of army they would use?

Yes,more flanking possibility and more cut off points in 4vs4 would be fun.Though it will be more fun to actually soviets and oshteer have retreat points buildable for ostheer,reinforcement bunker(1 only can pe active) and somethig similar for soviets(150mp,and 60 mun)

While i'm not sure about 2 and 3.2, the rest should had been addressed quite some time ago.

The design of the map for any size game 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4 is of utmost importance. Its just as important, if not more important, than any system for making larger games more fun. Thats one of the biggest reasons the current patch for 1v1 and 2v2 is so good. The maps got patched and are so much better than before. One of the big, still unadressed problems is maps arent made for a SPECIFIC game mode (1v1 only, NOT 1v1/2v2) hybrid maps are a terrible idea and i know it scales to matches with more players.

If coh2 was an excellently balanced game but all the maps were terrible, the game would suck. Maps drive strategy, the game system as a whole, faction balance, etc.

Im not disagreeing with anything you said, i just dont care all that much about 3v3/4v4 (although they can be fun). But the map design in any COH2 conversation isnt less important. Its one of the most important aspects to make the game FUN.

Rant end.

That's true, I edited my post to remove the "less important".

I play mostly 2v2 and I don't have enough vetoes for unbalanced maps. I can't imagine a 1v1 tournament on maps like Road to Kharkov (first version)or Minsk poket.

4v4 maps are made to look cool, not to be balanced.

1v1 maps are made to be balanced

that is the key diffrence here

4v4 maps are made to look cool, not to be balanced.

1v1 maps are made to be balanced

that is the key diffrence here

I want to believe that "cool and balanced" can fit in a 4v4 map.

If that means having a pool of 4 balanced maps instead of a pool of 10 unbalanced maps, the few are welcome =).

As many other players exposed, reducing the lenght for the benefit of width with more open flanks can benefit the balance while keeping the map "cool".

I want to believe that "cool and balanced" can fit in a 4v4 map.

If that means having a pool of 4 balanced maps instead of a pool of 10 unbalanced maps, the few are welcome =).

As many other players exposed, reducing the lenght for the benefit of width with more open flanks can benefit the balance while keeping the map "cool".

I still hope for community 3vs3,4vs4 balanced map to be made into automatch by relic.I gave up on Lelic.They take so long to buff,nerf something and most of them are buffed,nerfed witout someone asking..Also i find red ball bad in 4vs4.Make me sick(as AXIS)

I want to believe that "cool and balanced" can fit in a 4v4 map.

If that means having a pool of 4 balanced maps instead of a pool of 10 unbalanced maps, the few are welcome =).

As many other players exposed, reducing the lenght for the benefit of width with more open flanks can benefit the balance while keeping the map "cool".

nope nope nope

95% of coh2 players play 4v4s vs ai or vs real people.
People who play shitfests like sittard summer, scheldt and some other crap custom maps
they wanna see cool maps, explosions and tanks and balance doesnt really bother them
they are the people who pay relic all money from dlcs and usually are those retarded wehraboo people who spam forums with retarded balance arguments, like buff KT omg because krupp steel engines boohoo

Thats some realism for you :/

nope nope nope

95% of coh2 players play 4v4s vs ai or vs real people.
People who play shitfests like sittard summer, scheldt and some other crap custom maps
they wanna see cool maps, explosions and tanks and balance doesnt really bother them
they are the people who pay relic all money from dlcs and usually are those retarded wehraboo people who spam forums with retarded balance arguments, like buff KT omg because krupp steel engines boohoo

Thats some realism for you :/

sittard summer,scheldt are camp map,unbalanced,annoying.I hate both of them.If you want to play them then go in custom game with others or AI.Those"cool" map shouldd be played only in custom games.I prefer balanced maps with more flanking routes in 4vs4

I think mines should have a suppresion radius for infantry as it had in coh1. This will also stop a flanking attack giving you the time to relocate your mg's , and stop the damaged squad avoiding to trigger more mines in the path with the result of a full wipe.

agree, cool idea.


Hybrid maps are bad... Pudding 17 is probably the best example.

Totally agree with a lot of what you've said here, and I've made similar (if not the same) suggestions before.

It's a shame that the official maps we play on don't take balance too seriously into consideration.