So, your feed back on the Jan 14th Patch.

I assume your kidding about not knowing what the aec is, but unless you actually think the aec is OP, you should probably be voting what you really believe in. Just like Politics.

I believe in what I said! Look at my Playercard.
I am a true warrior of the interwebz

It is like politics. Most people vote without knowledge

In that case, I'm going to vote no. Oregon and Washington both have lots of ballot measures that are started by "concerned citizens", and most of those ballot measures are contradictory, nonsensical, or just plain pudding.

ps - Hi Edible - it would've been nice if overall Brits had been buffed a little and the AEC not quite as much, but it is certainly much better for Brits than it was. I'd rather Relic make small changes, then wait to see effect, rather than huge changes that sometimes badly miss the mark.

In that case, I'm going to vote no. Oregon and Washington both have lots of ballot measures that are started by "concerned citizens", and most of those ballot measures are contradictory, nonsensical, or just plain pudding.

ps - Hi Edible - it would've been nice if overall Brits had been buffed a little and the AEC not quite as much, but it is certainly much better for Brits than it was. I'd rather Relic make small changes, then wait to see effect, rather than huge changes that sometimes badly miss the mark.

I can definitely agree that the Brits in general should've been buffed, contrary to just the aec. I would be content if Relic could really just make changes that wouldn't break balance, or result in mass contention. I believe gathering more information and testing further would really help, and even possibly having some top players act as quality control, would really be nice for everybody.

Sooooooo this is supposed to be satire?

caaalliifornia, prop 63...

I can definitely agree that the Brits in general should've been buffed, contrary to just the aec. I would be content if Relic could really just make changes that wouldn't break balance, or result in mass contention. I believe gathering more information and testing further would really help, and even possibly having some top players act as quality control, would really be nice for everybody.

I'd be fine with Relic and the top players doing all the testing as long don't go too far down the rabbit hole. They've bordered on that with USF, making a army that can be OP if micro'd really well but is a bunch of fragile units if not. Then the elite players complain about it because USF wins most of their matchups while the general player base complains about it being UP because they can't micro like Jove. Also, factions built like that don't scale well into team games because micro loses much of its advantage late game in a 4v4.

Timing is too early for such a shock unit, then the brits can snowball into late-game arty cover with an AEC train.

Like everything Relic does, they released a patch without any playtesting at all and instead of creating fun interactive gameplay such as making the AEC weaker against vehicles while buffing anti-infrantry or making it less splash while upping damage against infrantry, they make it an insta-wipe machine of death.

The AEC is literally the same vehicle as the T17 when Tales of Valor was released. An overpowered infrantry-squad wiper that made the game unplayable for months.

Relic idea of balance is to create less interactive mechanics and have more RNG to hide how awful they are at their job.

I guess it's fine vs OKW's early schrecks, but Ostheer has a lot of trouble in their early game against USF and the brits. Mainly because of countering early light armor. Seems like Relic has forgotten the ostheer and soviets exist and only buff/nerf things like the only factions were OKW and USF.

I can definitely agree that the Brits in general should've been buffed, contrary to just the aec. I would be content if Relic could really just make changes that wouldn't break balance, or result in mass contention. I believe gathering more information and testing further would really help, and even possibly having some top players act as quality control, would really be nice for everybody.

I'd be fine with Relic and the top players doing all the testing as long don't go too far down the rabbit hole. They've bordered on that with USF, making a army that can be OP if micro'd really well but is just a bunch of fragile units if not. Then the elite players complain about it because USF wins most of their matchups while the general player base complains about it being UP because they can't micro like Jove (or pick name of any elite player). Also, units that are good only if micro'd well in 1v1 or 2v2 usually don't scale well in a 4v4.

I'd be fine with Relic and the top players doing all the testing as long don't go too far down the rabbit hole. They've bordered on that with USF, making a army that can be OP if micro'd really well but is just a bunch of fragile units if not. Then the elite players complain about it because USF wins most of their matchups while the general player base complains about it being UP because they can't micro like Jove (or pick name of any elite player). Also, units that are good only if micro'd well in 1v1 or 2v2 usually don't scale well in a 4v4.

TBH, the top players in this game really don't have great control compared to the top players in other games. The engine is too unstable; and movement/pathfinding is too unpredictable.

As for factions being balanced only if you have good micro: what's wrong with that? If lower players can't compete just have somewhat competitive commanders that are less punishing for player with low APM. Bad players in a game like Starcraft can't micro like the pros but you can still reach the top of the ladders by learning basic timings and builds alone. RTS have a lot of dimensions.

And having high-micro units that don't scale into 2v2 and beyond seems like a good thing for relic. It will make it easier to balance the format most players engage in (team multiplayer) versus the competitive format fewer players engage in (1v1 laddering).



***************

Biggest fault of the patch is of course the bullpudding AEC car being so OP. It's always been a problem with British design. They are too campy by nature which makes them hard to balance because if there are mobile units are too strong, then their emplacements push them over the top. AEC spam into camping on the opponent's side of the base is basically auto-win for british right now.

Fundamentally they need to change british from being so campy and more versatile like the other factions where there are commanders that are more mobile and offensive. The camp design should've been discarded after OF anyways. It's not fun at all to play against or watch in 1v1 and creates static, boring games. Just leave that aspect to big team games where balance doesn't matter as much anyways.

British are hardly locked into a "campy" playstyle.