Interesting Results from 4v4AT Round 1

Allies won every game by a large margin.

I think we need to revisit balance - axis op anymore certainly doesn't seem true.

Thoughts?

Hello.

Probably, 4v4 is a game by itself.
How many games where played? is there a replay pack aviable?

Kozo.

Its probably about adapting/ planning. I think if you have an Axis team with 3 Ostheer 1 OKW (OKW gets JT or Commandpanther) 3 Ostheer players with solid builds (all double sniper? ) I just think you need A LOT more teamwork/ planning with Axis to succeed.

I watched the games casted by A_E and I was surpriced of the Wehrmacht build order for both teams in the beginning of the games, because it looked to be much like the build order in 1vs1. Usually the grenadiers get wiped out quite easily in the 4v4 and the allies has the advantage on the light vehicles (AEC and T-70), so therefore the game could be little different if the build order would have been different. Maybe more MG-42 in the buildings instead of so many grenadiers, and more panzergrenadiers with schrecks to counter the early vehicles.

Of course the Americans have the Calliope and the Brits have the "Press the Button"-artillery that is quite good now.

It's funny. How it works ->

Play with randoms: Axis OP, allies shit.
Play with coordinated team: Allies OP, axis shit.

cant fix it im afraid.

People still take random 4v4 games as an accurate depiction of balance problems?

If allies go heavy light vehicles and Axis try to go for heavy tanks of course they're going to lose. Not a single puma made. The snowball effect of allies are strong in 4vs4 if every axis player sticks to a single lane. Have to treat 4s as you do 1s/2s, get a part of the map and slowly move out.

Though allies might be stronger, but imo not by a huge margin.

Interestingly enough all the factions appear to be pretty balanced this week. in 4vs4 http://coh2chart.com/ Probably speaks more to the power of AT where I think many people think that Allies benefit more from coordination.

We're also talking about a pretty small sample size of what... 4-8 games?

I honestly think 4v4 just boils down to teamwork and coordination and it seemed to me everyone playing as Axis just didn't know how to play as Axis. USF All Stars for example had no idea how to play Axis and we just got steamrolled.

It would be nice if coh2chart.com incorporated arranged team stats. I bet they are very balanced.

Or some allied fanboi teams cant play ez mode axis (which, surprise-surprise, turned not to be so ez mode) for sheit.

Like seriously, you gotta abuse hard (coz allies do). 5-6 volks shreck uberblob spam into 2-3 stukas into jt. isg spam with flare spam into luchs and situational puma/jp4 into cp or kt. Hard mhts, stug spam and hard pwerfer spam. paks 43 n other good stuff like command p4 and cp aura stacking, overall coordination.

Most axis teams just play like "well i gotta use self-sufficient regular crap which smashes randoms" getting caught out of position, punished by mines and demos, than totally destroyed by well-used shock units which they don't prepare for like op usf 3cp quad and its gg.

Btw, 128 streak which started in glorious days of old ober terminators, kubel ace and jt which could shot trough shot blockers by default. Compared to balance back than current allies is walk in a park, nerf plz.

Allies won every game by a large margin.

I think we need to revisit balance - axis op anymore certainly doesn't seem true.

Thoughts?

can't be made different or precious balance of 1v1 pro mode is in danger MVGame

Allies is really strong with their Infantry. USF alone , Guards, Shocks, Commandoes, and then in a fight between vickers and mg42 the vickers wins it unless mg42 has rate of fire bulletins

so you have to hold against it and then get your first tank out as axis , and boom, calliope, katyusha for the inf and it goes downhill. and then to counter their tanks you have a tank, while allies infantry is still going after you, if done with teamwork and denying axis to have fuel you pretty much win it.

As another point i think that there are more viable soviet commanders than wehrmacht commanders, and commanders of USF just push you to another level.

Last but not least, Grenadiers just die like Flies to every indirect fire. Infantry Sections are only 4 men, but don't die to random mortar shots.

For Tank battles axis have to rely on panther or the heavy call ins, while soviets have then mark target (if not then wtf why you dont want to help your team) and brits artillery cover, while IS-2 and KT is mostly a fair fight and JT can be punished so easily by just getting snared, same goes for elefant. Pretty much another reason, because the only real good things axis have is JU-87, which gets just ripped down by centaur.

In general you could just make a list like this :

stuart can bang puma easily, while luchs can't bang a stuart (unless poorly microed) = more punishment

Vickers > MG42 in a house to house fight (unless rate of fire bulletins)

Grenadiers just have a real hard time with just 4 men that also get wiped really easy.

Allies Mines > Wehrmacht mines , OKW is pretty much a fair deal. But you have to decide between s mines or teller as wehrmacht.

Pack howi > Leig gun

If you don't get the better position, you will lose. And in that regard allies have the clearly advantage.. As Axis you have to coordinate way better, way more aggresive support weapon play and you can be punished much easier.

If you succeed, you might win, if you lose it, shit's coming down at you soon


So in general : Axis mistakes in early and mid get punished way harder than allied mistakes

Allies do have plenty of Commander abilities that synergies incredibly well if used within a combo. It does require heavy team-play and communication to get it perfectly timed though.

E.g. Brit TankStunArty + Mark Target + P47 + 2xJacksons = Dead 3-4 Panthers

By allies you mean british, soviets are not a party ...

Hello.

Probably, 4v4 is a game by itself.
How many games where played? is there a replay pack aviable?

Kozo.

Not aviable no. There is a pack available though.

Allies won every game by a large margin.

I think we need to revisit balance - axis op anymore certainly doesn't seem true.

Thoughts?

Frankly, I am not surprised!
Due to the early game advantage of allies, it is realy, it seems not possible to win as axis. e.g. both games won by allies when a qualified team plays them.

Anyway, the community seems to see this differently.

Watched 3 games from 4, I was disappointed with axis play, very disappointed, mostly with build orders. Like Jadame said - allies were trying to use anything that gave them advantage and abuse it, and axis played like in regular mediocre game.

can't be made different or precious balance of 1v1 pro mode is in danger MVGame

Allies is really strong with their Infantry. USF alone , Guards, Shocks, Commandoes, and then in a fight between vickers and mg42 the vickers wins it unless mg42 has rate of fire bulletins

so you have to hold against it and then get your first tank out as axis , and boom, calliope, katyusha for the inf and it goes downhill. and then to counter their tanks you have a tank, while allies infantry is still going after you, if done with teamwork and denying axis to have fuel you pretty much win it.

As another point i think that there are more viable soviet commanders than wehrmacht commanders, and commanders of USF just push you to another level.

Last but not least, Grenadiers just die like Flies to every indirect fire. Infantry Sections are only 4 men, but don't die to random mortar shots.

For Tank battles axis have to rely on panther or the heavy call ins, while soviets have then mark target (if not then wtf why you dont want to help your team) and brits artillery cover, while IS-2 and KT is mostly a fair fight and JT can be punished so easily by just getting snared, same goes for elefant. Pretty much another reason, because the only real good things axis have is JU-87, which gets just ripped down by centaur.

In general you could just make a list like this :

stuart can bang puma easily, while luchs can't bang a stuart (unless poorly microed) = more punishment

Vickers > MG42 in a house to house fight (unless rate of fire bulletins)

Grenadiers just have a real hard time with just 4 men that also get wiped really easy.

Allies Mines > Wehrmacht mines , OKW is pretty much a fair deal. But you have to decide between s mines or teller as wehrmacht.

Pack howi > Leig gun

If you don't get the better position, you will lose. And in that regard allies have the clearly advantage.. As Axis you have to coordinate way better, way more aggresive support weapon play and you can be punished much easier.

If you succeed, you might win, if you lose it, shit's coming down at you soon


So in general : Axis mistakes in early and mid get punished way harder than allied mistakes

WOW. just wow... i haven't see a strong axis fanboi in the post until this came along and compelled me to reply. KT and IS2 on equal footing? nooo, i don't think so. anyone else on this forum agree?
Mark target means you don't get a heavy... Axis has one on the command panther too!

Pack howi > leig gun? oh please... vet and range is way better. I'd trade you for an leig...
Both 4 men IS and gren squads get wiped easily... except one costs more and the cheaper one gets a snare as well

Vickers is better at killing things. mg42 is better at suppressing things. Please give me a suppression platform... i need it to control blobs. also mg42 is cheaper.

this guy/girl complains about katyusha... the most balanced rocket artillery in the game and then onto the calliope without mentioning the panzerwerfer.

If you deny fuel for either side, that's pretty much a huge advantage on either Axis or Allies side... what a poor argument

How are Allied mines better? You cannot pick and choose your enemy. teller mines will only target vehicles if that's what you want. and s-mines will deny an area or kill enemies on retreat if you place them well....

Why don't you go into 230 fuel croc versus a 230 fuel tiger... I want a tiger. 230 fuel is2 or 230 fuel tiger... i'd still probably go with tiger. 230 fuel pershing or 230 fuel tiger... debatable and situational but tiger has the HP advantage and blitz

you complain about allies infantry but not shrek blob in team games?... phail

please present an unbiased view please.

WOW. just wow... i haven't see a strong axis fanboi in the post until this came along and compelled me to reply. KT and IS2 on equal footing? nooo, i don't think so. anyone else on this forum agree?
Mark target means you don't get a heavy... Axis has one on the command panther too!

Pack howi > leig gun? oh please... vet and range is way better. I'd trade you for an leig...
Both 4 men IS and gren squads get wiped easily... except one costs more and the cheaper one gets a snare as well

Vickers is better at killing things. mg42 is better at suppressing things. Please give me a suppression platform... i need it to control blobs. also mg42 is cheaper.

this guy/girl complains about katyusha... the most balanced rocket artillery in the game and then onto the calliope without mentioning the panzerwerfer.

If you deny fuel for either side, that's pretty much a huge advantage on either Axis or Allies side... what a poor argument

How are Allied mines better? You cannot pick and choose your enemy. teller mines will only target vehicles if that's what you want. and s-mines will deny an area or kill enemies on retreat if you place them well....

Why don't you go into 230 fuel croc versus a 230 fuel tiger... I want a tiger. 230 fuel is2 or 230 fuel tiger... i'd still probably go with tiger. 230 fuel pershing or 230 fuel tiger... debatable and situational but tiger has the HP advantage and blitz

you complain about allies infantry but not shrek blob in team games?... phail

please present an unbiased view please.

thread was not about shreckblobs, just for your info :> i don't complain, i just state it how it is. It was about ALLIES being strong.


Also, playcard mr scrub. IS-2 losing to a tiger, in what universe you live?

and before more shit comes out of your mouth, playercard.

Edit: saw you put your playercard in after i read your post, Mr 4v4 Random hero. Like 4v4 randoms and AT is the same bro

Allies won every game by a large margin.

I think we need to revisit balance - axis op anymore certainly doesn't seem true.

Thoughts?

no man, it's only because Axis teams DID NOT play good and allies teams played better,

mainly because most of those teams are allies teams (better with allies) (in team games), not to mention some of them are not familiar/experienced with 4v4 game/meta so u can't judge it according to that

if you disagree, name me one team that played good axis!(at least those that I've seen so far) they all played bad because most of them don't know how to play axis (in bigger team games like this), or they are not experienced in 4v4

IS-2 losing to a tiger, in what universe you live?

An universe where tanks are on the move and take advantage of their maximum range.