Login

russian armor

Ultimate Balance - Allow Mirror Matchup

2 Feb 2016, 15:33 PM
#41
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15

USF VS SOVIET COLD WAR YES BRING IT
2 Feb 2016, 16:07 PM
#42
avatar of Skabinsk

Posts: 238

lol Starcraft
2 Feb 2016, 16:56 PM
#43
avatar of Ful4n0

Posts: 345

Who ever is suggesting mirror matches you fail to understand what the factions were designed around.

Let me give you a small example. Wth is the point of smoke if you're versing another USF?



pretty sure you would love to pop some smoke from your badly damaged sherman if a jackson or an ez8 is chasing it...


has no usf .50 cal??? can´t smoke from rifles be usefull to shut down a .50 cal????




I get it that mirror machtes are not good but come on, and I´m with the most of you in this, but..... let´s give to the OP goood reasons to not do it...
2 Feb 2016, 17:23 PM
#44
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

Who ever is suggesting mirror matches you fail to understand what the factions were designed around.

Let me give you a small example. Wth is the point of smoke if you're versing another USF?


Not a good point. Smoke would still be good in USF vs SOV or SUF vs UKF so an ability that is good in 4 out of 5 matchups aint bad. Which bring me to another reason why your point is bad: there are plenty of abilities/units/commanders in this game which only work in a select set of matchups.

Having said that, I would absolutely hate mirror matches. I already dislike it enough that Soviets can team up with western allied forces. Mirror matches would break immersion even more.
2 Feb 2016, 17:29 PM
#45
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Mirror matches are fine in fantasy games but in games about history? I don't think so.
2 Feb 2016, 17:45 PM
#46
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

asymmetrical balance = no mirror matches


There is no asymmetrical balance.


Here is pseudo asymmetrical balance.
2 Feb 2016, 17:51 PM
#47
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

OKW vs OKW


So fun!



Shreck blob (+1 invisivble rak) vs P2? AA Haftrack? Flame hetzer? Panther?



One side Win Other side lose lose lose lose





+ One side of the map blocked by Shwerer

So much in design.


So fun!
2 Feb 2016, 17:53 PM
#48
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

The most interesting match between Ost vs OSt

2 Feb 2016, 17:56 PM
#49
avatar of niutudis

Posts: 276

No.
2 Feb 2016, 18:44 PM
#50
avatar of keithsboredom

Posts: 117

they already can't balance the game, this wouldn't help
2 Feb 2016, 18:48 PM
#51
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Mirror matches would be amazing and inject a lot of new strategy in the game. Instead of having to know 3 strategies per army as Axis or 2 as Allied, you would have to play completely differently depending on who you are playing.

Imagine USF vs USF... the game could truly go any way depending on player skill.

My only worry with this would be big team games tbh
2 Feb 2016, 20:02 PM
#52
avatar of NorthWeapon
Donator 11

Posts: 615



Exactly the same thing when you are against an okw / ostheer ? block line of sight


jump backJump back to quoted post2 Feb 2016, 16:56 PMFul4n0



pretty sure you would love to pop some smoke from your badly damaged sherman if a jackson or an ez8 is chasing it...


has no usf .50 cal??? can´t smoke from rifles be usefull to shut down a .50 cal????




I get it that mirror machtes are not good but come on, and I´m with the most of you in this, but..... let´s give to the OP goood reasons to not do it...




Not a good point. Smoke would still be good in USF vs SOV or SUF vs UKF so an ability that is good in 4 out of 5 matchups aint bad. Which bring me to another reason why your point is bad: there are plenty of abilities/units/commanders in this game which only work in a select set of matchups.

Having said that, I would absolutely hate mirror matches. I already dislike it enough that Soviets can team up with western allied forces. Mirror matches would break immersion even more.


That's not my point. Smoke grenades were given to Riflemen because Riflemen are supposed to smoke & flank and are supposed to be mobile at all times. This only works properly versus defensive factions. A .50 cal can't be smoked, that is one of the most mobile MGs in the game with a really good setup/pickup time designed around attack moving.

Smokes would be good versus bunkers, MG42s/34s, Shwerer HQs, static tanks such as Panthers or JP4s instead of highly mobile units such as M10s, .50 cals, M20s, M15AA, Shermans, etc. USF doesn't even have defensive emplacements besides the Fighting Pit which can die to small arms fire.

As I said in my original post, I was talking about design. Each faction was designed to counter the opposing team, that's how the game was designed, assymetrical balance. If you make it symmetrical all of a sudden you get huge design issues.

For ex. Bazookas can be overpowered versus Allied tanks because Allied tanks have less HP and less armor, so each Bazooka round would penetrate. In terms of DPS the Bazooka is better than the Panzershrek if all rounds penetrate, when you have two on Riflesquad with AT grenades you get terrible balance issues vs. Shermasn, T34/76s, etc. The only reason why its weaker versus Axis is because they tend to have more armor.

More examples: Did you know the Panzer IV has more armor but less penetration than the Sherman? It doesn't seem that way because a Sherman vs. P4 is usually in favor of the P4 (especially P4-J) because of its higher armor value. A Sherman needs more penetration or else its useless because Axis mediums and heavies all have really high armor. Now what happens when a P4 versus an Axis tank opposed to the usual Allied paper armor? It's rendered useless with a penetration value smaller than a Sherman's. It wouldn't stand a chance versus JP4s, Panthers, Tigers because it wouldn't even penetrate. It's not a mobile tank either so how do you flank an Axis tank with a P4? Hmm.

It's elementary guys, it's not hard to figure out why assymetrically balanced/designed factions would suck if changed to symetrical.
2 Feb 2016, 20:05 PM
#53
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515


It's elementary guys.

2 Feb 2016, 20:06 PM
#54
avatar of NorthWeapon
Donator 11

Posts: 615

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Feb 2016, 20:05 PMNosliw



lmao. I've been reading to much Sherlock Holmes
2 Feb 2016, 20:13 PM
#55
avatar of some one

Posts: 935



Each faction was designed to counter the opposing team, that's how the game was designed



One question What was Shreck blob design for?

assymetrical balance.



There is no such thing in the game.
2 Feb 2016, 20:46 PM
#56
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702







That's not my point. Smoke grenades were given to Riflemen because Riflemen are supposed to smoke & flank and are supposed to be mobile at all times. This only works properly versus defensive factions. A .50 cal can't be smoked, that is one of the most mobile MGs in the game with a really good setup/pickup time designed around attack moving.

Smokes would be good versus bunkers, MG42s/34s, Shwerer HQs, static tanks such as Panthers or JP4s instead of highly mobile units such as M10s, .50 cals, M20s, M15AA, Shermans, etc. USF doesn't even have defensive emplacements besides the Fighting Pit which can die to small arms fire.

As I said in my original post, I was talking about design. Each faction was designed to counter the opposing team, that's how the game was designed, assymetrical balance. If you make it symmetrical all of a sudden you get huge design issues.

For ex. Bazookas can be overpowered versus Allied tanks because Allied tanks have less HP and less armor, so each Bazooka round would penetrate. In terms of DPS the Bazooka is better than the Panzershrek if all rounds penetrate, when you have two on Riflesquad with AT grenades you get terrible balance issues vs. Shermasn, T34/76s, etc. The only reason why its weaker versus Axis is because they tend to have more armor.

More examples: Did you know the Panzer IV has more armor but less penetration than the Sherman? It doesn't seem that way because a Sherman vs. P4 is usually in favor of the P4 (especially P4-J) because of its higher armor value. A Sherman needs more penetration or else its useless because Axis mediums and heavies all have really high armor. Now what happens when a P4 versus an Axis tank opposed to the usual Allied paper armor? It's rendered useless with a penetration value smaller than a Sherman's. It wouldn't stand a chance versus JP4s, Panthers, Tigers because it wouldn't even penetrate. It's not a mobile tank either so how do you flank an Axis tank with a P4? Hmm.

It's elementary guys, it's not hard to figure out why assymetrically balanced/designed factions would suck if changed to symetrical.



Post doesnt make much sense. Bazookas actually being good in usf mirror matches might actually be very interesting since it would actually counter light vehicle rushes and make for a diverse meta. Againts sov they wouldntnbe good except fending off t70 or quad.

Really dont know what you mean from allied paper armor since aside from usf allies have many heavyish tanks. Only paper tank really is sov t34 76 which nobody uses. Shermans would still lose to m10 and would be countered by zooks. Thinking about it USF mirror match would be alot of fun since it would be a very rifle and support heavy meta. Light vehicles would have a counter with zooks . Fair and skill based armor battles. Infantry with zooks continue to play a big role againts armor. Demos 0 50 cals and pak howis to counter blobbing. It would also come down to positioning rather than meta abuse like axis vs allied.
Thinking about it i think usf mirror would be awesome. Of course in automatch mirror shouldnt happen because game is about ww2. But tournaments ? Why not
2 Feb 2016, 20:47 PM
#57
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Not everything has to be equally effective against all factions. We only compare factions assynetrically because that's the only way they can be played. If SC2 was Protoss and Terran vs Zerg, the only purpose of Mutas would be harass and not countering other Mutas. Similarly in a USF vs USF the AA track wouldn't be a 222/infantry spam/bunker buster, it would be an anti everything unit that's countered by smoke zooks mines and AT guns.

More examples of why mirror match ups (allies vs allies and axis vs axis) would be good below:

OKW meta vs every faction is to rush Luchs, but against Ost they would need to contend with sniper, mg42 and Grens early game. Against okw BHQ 1st would be more relevant and light vehicle play/infantry micro would have greater impact on who wins.

USF HMC that's called up would suddenly become a good unit against the allies because allied AT isn't insane

Fast T70 wouldn't be "the strat" because Stuart and AEC

UKF on UKF would be pure skill, who has better strat and positioning, just like Ost on Ost

Sov and Sov would probably have a defensive meta because Soviets attacking Soviets in the early game would be costly for attacker because of mines maxims and 2 man snipers, t70 on t70 battles would be great

2 Feb 2016, 21:08 PM
#58
avatar of some one

Posts: 935



OKW meta vs every faction is to rush Luchs, but against Ost they would need to contend with sniper, mg42 and Grens early game. Against okw BHQ 1st would be more relevant and light vehicle play/infantry micro would have greater impact on who wins.




U so wrong.

Shreck blob gonna win vs everything OKW has.

If other side gonna use light or medium vehical.

Pop out Falls snare and kill it.

If other side gonna use more than 1 Leig

Pop out Jaigers or Falls and kill them.

If other side put Swhere somewhere too far. Sacrifice a squad at one side and remove the swherer with shreckblob

Only Stuka would have some impact even Sturmtiger will suck coz OKW has so many units with extened vision range.


This mirror match up will show how broken OKW design is.
2 Feb 2016, 21:28 PM
#59
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Not really, people would just plant Shu mines at every doorway and beat Volks blobs with Fusillers/Jaegers

3 Feb 2016, 04:54 AM
#60
avatar of LafoMamone

Posts: 16

I guess this issue is like religion to most of you guys.
Yes it would be historicly inaccurate and wrong in many ways, and most of us wouldnt play it that way.
Still i can see none giving a good reason why it should not be possible to click: "include mirror matchups".
Option to play it doesnt break the game. And rankings are based on faction you play. None expects Axis vs Axis to be balanced, its just for fun of it and for those that are not affraid of playing someone with same tools.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

670 users are online: 670 guests
0 post in the last 24h
2 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49389
Welcome our newest member, Haruta446
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM