Login

russian armor

Buff Wehrmacht

PAGES (7)down
30 Jun 2016, 22:27 PM
#101
avatar of JohnnyShaun

Posts: 144

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jun 2016, 22:25 PMpigsoup


i was just being nice :). it was just an overview of the forum in general in its lifetime. it is fascinating to see how quickly and drastically OKW UP changed to OST UP though.


No more easy win for axis, deal with it.

edit : it's also fascinating how OKW was OP when has 66% income and UP when they got 100% income and still has vet 5.
1 Jul 2016, 00:39 AM
#102
avatar of stonebone000

Posts: 109



No more easy win for axis, deal with it.

edit : it's also fascinating how OKW was OP when has 66% income and UP when they got 100% income and still has vet 5.


lol "easy wins" wtf try playing the game hahahahahahahahahaha
1 Jul 2016, 00:41 AM
#103
avatar of Mistah_S

Posts: 851 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jun 2016, 20:15 PMTobis

What did Cookiez just tell you? :facepalm:


Lul
1 Jul 2016, 00:43 AM
#104
avatar of stonebone000

Posts: 109



Lul


come on mate quit derailing my thread!! :]
1 Jul 2016, 02:05 AM
#105
avatar of OuTLaWSTaR
Donator 11

Posts: 453

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jun 2016, 11:34 AMAradan
Yours wishes dont reflex reality.
http://coh2chart.com/

Game never been well ballanced as it now.
It is a pleasure to play for each side, and have the same chances of winning.


Franz L can't even do basic math. That statistics website is a joke.
1 Jul 2016, 02:19 AM
#106
avatar of OuTLaWSTaR
Donator 11

Posts: 453

Let me re-iterate, before someone jumps in and starts talking numbers. Fundamentally, the results are skewed. To really delve into statistics you have to have a set experiment, meaning each side has to have evenly played games.

Basing data off of random X games played and plugging into a formula doesn't prove anything because the basic numbers are flawed. The only thing his numbers actually prove is how many games each faction got played.

I laugh when he starts using averages, and in turn people start basing statements off it. Lol
1 Jul 2016, 04:50 AM
#107
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

Let me re-iterate, before someone jumps in and starts talking numbers. Fundamentally, the results are skewed. To really delve into statistics you have to have a set experiment, meaning each side has to have evenly played games.

Basing data off of random X games played and plugging into a formula doesn't prove anything because the basic numbers are flawed. The only thing his numbers actually prove is how many games each faction got played.

I laugh when he starts using averages, and in turn people start basing statements off it. Lol


this statistics prove more than 99% posts made this week.
1 Jul 2016, 06:54 AM
#108
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Franz L can't even do basic math. That statistics website is a joke.

That statistic website is a direct feed from relic.
You're the joke for being ignorant.
1 Jul 2016, 07:45 AM
#109
avatar of OuTLaWSTaR
Donator 11

Posts: 453

You guys are missing my point...
1 Jul 2016, 07:47 AM
#110
avatar of OuTLaWSTaR
Donator 11

Posts: 453

Just because it's a direct feed from Relic doesn't prove anything besides what i originally stated.
You cannot base an arguement of win/loss averages because the matches aren't relative.
1 Jul 2016, 08:08 AM
#111
avatar of OuTLaWSTaR
Donator 11

Posts: 453

Look, lemme try to explain statistics on a more basic format.

In order to give unbiased statistical data you have to take into account more factors other than x games played divide by x factions. Yes that is how you obtain a basic average, we all know this.

Basic statistics states that data cannot be represented in a skewed manner, meaning the matches played between each faction are completely uneven and not necessarily representing a good experiment.

For example, let's create a hypothetical experiment to put this into perspective. I'm a scientist, and i'm doing research on 3 regions to see which regions have the best long distance runners. Rather than lumping all runners into each region into a category, to remain unbiased I'd choose 10 runners from each region with olympic medals out of the 100 runners (age20-30) randomly, opposed to just picking all runners in each region and basing my study off raw data. This way the data is unbiased, otherwise you would run into the fact that there's an uneven playing field (i.e old runners, younger runners, non olypmic, olympic, in good health, not in good health)...

My basic point being the average (http://coh2chart.com/) is based off raw data... Which doesn't really represent which factions are better than the other.
1 Jul 2016, 08:39 AM
#112
avatar of stonebone000

Posts: 109

Look, lemme try to explain statistics on a more basic format.

In order to give unbiased statistical data you have to take into account more factors other than x games played divide by x factions. Yes that is how you obtain a basic average, we all know this.

Basic statistics states that data cannot be represented in a skewed manner, meaning the matches played between each faction are completely uneven and not necessarily representing a good experiment.

For example, let's create a hypothetical experiment to put this into perspective. I'm a scientist, and i'm doing research on 3 regions to see which regions have the best long distance runners. Rather than lumping all runners into each region into a category, to remain unbiased I'd choose 10 runners from each region with olympic medals out of the 100 runners (age20-30) randomly, opposed to just picking all runners in each region and basing my study off raw data. This way the data is unbiased, otherwise you would run into the fact that there's an uneven playing field (i.e old runners, younger runners, non olypmic, olympic, in good health, not in good health)...

My basic point being the average (http://coh2chart.com/) is based off raw data... Which doesn't really represent which factions are better than the other.


This guy knows his stuff.
1 Jul 2016, 09:21 AM
#113
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

Look, lemme try to explain statistics on a more basic format.

*STUFF*

My basic point being the average (http://coh2chart.com/) is based off raw data... Which doesn't really represent which factions are better than the other.


Do you refer to whole data (all pages) or to "General" page in particular?
2 Jul 2016, 01:24 AM
#114
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Ostheer is in a fine place. Ostheer rewards you for good micro with vet and combined arms tactics. True Grens aren't elite anti Inf but they are not meant for that, they fulfill a support role. Ost can feel very fragile if used incorrectly ie to aggressively or spread-out. Play defensively with them and they can be the most rewarding faction to play as. All this goes without saying that they just got a cost reduction to tier3 and 4 which they needed.


Lies. Ostheer is obviously NOT fine. This outdated faction is getting barely anything new to compensate for all the buffs allies are getting (esp USF). All of the allied players have been bitching about OKW for years. So Relic decided to buff allies. Then nerf OKW. Less complained about OH cuz OH is a poor man's OKW. So OH just got even more underpowered after all the allied buffs. That's why the most complaints now are about how pathetic of a condition some OH units are.

Ostheer doesn't reward you for good micro in the early-midgame. It merely allows you to stay in the game so you can bring your late game stuff, which has been nerfed to oblivion. And Relic thinks that lowering the tech costs for t3 and t4 solves the problem which again, is the wrong way to do it. 1v1 OH players won't go for t4 if the units (esp panther) is still the same trash as before the patch. Ost players will gladly pay the original fuel tech costs if the Panther was fixed and made at least a relevant unit.
2 Jul 2016, 01:28 AM
#115
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned


Let's play a game: Find the allied fanboy thread:


This means that the Allies are OP right now, because if they weren't you'd find some allied fanboys posting their rants. Right now most allied fanboys are saying that Ostheer is fine. Translation: Ostheer is underpowered and a free win for us so keep it that way. I'm sure when OKW was OP the forums were full of allied crybabies. It's human nature.
2 Jul 2016, 01:30 AM
#116
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jun 2016, 15:47 PMbicho1




no no no USF need a buff we are weak early and late game

we need this bug to rifelman cos they get rekt bars need an upgrade cos its got shit preformnce

shermans are shit vs aixe powers \armor!!!




Is this a troll post? USF just got all the buffs it needed and then some.
2 Jul 2016, 01:46 AM
#117
avatar of Justin xv

Posts: 255

Give Grens an option to tech to 5 man squad and give Ostheer a Hotchkiss in T2... Something comparable to the USF/Soviet lights.
2 Jul 2016, 01:48 AM
#118
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jun 2016, 07:57 AMSvanh

I agree with most of this. :)

Switching the Sniper and the Pak40 might be nasty for Ostheer against USF/UKF but those match-ups are the ones that seem to cause the most posts and could do with a look anyway.

"A 280MP squad...really good at long range combat" describes Infantry Sections. This is probably partially why there are complaints about Grens; using them as mainline combat infantry against UKF isn't a great idea.

Panzergrenadiers are actually already quite powerful (better DPS than upgraded Grens out to range 25/30). The only real change they need is better vet distribution. Moving half of their vet 2 received accuracy bonus to vet 1 and/or giving them a better vet ability is enough.

The Panzer IV will win any straight fight with the Cromwell and, barring crushing, seems to have better AI (it definitely has better MGs). The reason that the Cromwell is so powerful is because the Tank Commander upgrade allows the Cromwell to get the first shot off and its maneuverability allows it to flank the Panzer IV fairly easily. The Tank Commander needs a cost increase but the Cromwell is reasonably balanced otherwise (might require a small cost increase).

+1

Every Brit players knows to get up close and personal with the cromwell and flank. THe cromwell can circle a p4 faster than the p4 turret rotation. Hence the Cromwell should get a fuel increase to 120.


2 Jul 2016, 02:12 AM
#119
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

give Ostheer a Hotchkiss in T2... Something comparable to the USF/Soviet lights.

2 Jul 2016, 02:19 AM
#120
avatar of Justin xv

Posts: 255

THATS WHAT I SAID! #TeamHotchkiss
PAGES (7)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

Offline

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

863 users are online: 863 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49138
Welcome our newest member, trevinehickman
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM