Do you understand any team of players with 1,000 hours or more and or top 200 skill could probably go 20-0 in team games with allies or axis simply because you will almost always play vs randoms that cant tell their shoe from their dick and not the other top AT's? When did i call anyone a noob? Can you read?
???????
Like when i asked for the calliope to be nerfed like a week ago? Like when i said "give ostheer panzer 3 to counter allied vehicles" about 3 times this past week. dafuq?
when I said "axis was ezmode" i was clearly referring to pre brit release in 4v4s.......which only a donkey would disagree with that.
again, can you read? Are you stupid?
0/10 shitposts m8.
first of all, you seriously need to calm down, "m8".
regarding "just" going 20-0, you can ofc get lucky and only get randoms that lack the coordination that an AT has. getting rank 1 on top of that you pretty much have to beat top teams to get there with this little amount of games.
i didn't read any of those posts, must have been in topics i didn't read. not going to sift through all of your posts, but i know for certain that you were still saying that axis are too strong (or something along the lines of that) way after brit release, and no, not after OKW rework. at a time when winrates were clearly showing that they weren't.
even if i repeat myself here... just go out and play some games as axis, and you'd start to feel the pain. just like i would like to play some allies again, but currently (at least in 1v1) it's almost impossible to get a game as allies because of 90+% allies searching... and i'm pretty tired of getting smashed into the ground repeatedly by players that i feel are worse than me.
Im neutral on your discussion just want to ask because im not sure how mechanics works.
Dont you need to Win versus (for example) top 5 teams to gain #1? Or can you just "grind" your way up without ever playing versus decent enemies?
the basic mechanics are fairly easy. i'll start explaining from a 1v1 perspective first:
you start with a fixed "rating" number. when searching for a game, the engine tries to match you with a player with roughly the same rating as you. depending on the rating difference and outcome of the game, you either gain or lose points. the bigger the difference in rating, the more points you get for beating your opponent (if his rating was higher) or the more points you lose (if his rating was lower).
in team games, the mechanic is similar, but since relic never told us how exactly they match people, everything from here on out is mostly conjecture and educated guess based on experience.
most likely, ATs get a "bonus" to their rating, so they either get matched with "better" random players, or with other ATs that have a similar rating. since the game somehow has to get multiple players in a team that at least roughly match the rating value of the AT when mixing teams, you can have weird stuff like say 2 top 50 players playing with a 2000+ player vs. a rank ~250 AT team. whether this is unfair, and if so for which side, i leave up to you, but i guess everyone agrees that it's not exactly the optimal scenario.
the basic underlying mechanics are still the same though: your opponent is way worse? you get less points. so getting to rank 1 becomes a grind (playing against loads and loads of "bad" players to just get a few points) if you don't get matched with good teams.
also noteworthy: pretty sure it also is in coh2 (definitely was in coh, and i think it was in coh2 also, at least around release), if you keep searching for a game for a long time, the engine "widens" the rating window in which it tries to match players with you. ergo: the longer you are searching, the more likely you get matched with either a dud or a stud. so if you want to make sure that you only get "interesting" games, restart your queue every minute or so.