Can't afford to leave 3vs3/4vs4 behind

What are you guys talking about " balanced for 1vs1 2vs2 3vs3"???

If the game is balanced for 1 vs1 then its balanced for 2vs2 , 3vs 3 and 4vs4 . If a unit is op in 1vs1 it will be op in 2vs2, 3vs3 and 4vs4 . You are adding players at a 1-1 ratio not 3vs2 or 4vs1 . This increased player myth needs to be put to curb because its all nonsense.

NOT REALLY.

Some history.
-USF release completely OP and specially broken against OH, but really UP on 3v3+ with it's paper tanks (on 2v2 it was more of a, let's finish the game as fast as possible with LT into Sherman rushes).
-OKW release kinda underwhelming on 1v1 but completely OP for teamgames.
-UKF release kinda underwhelming on 1v1 but completely OP for teamgames.
-Sniper did shine/op on 1v1 but not so much on 2v2 and kinda a joke on 3v3+
-Wunderwaffe units which are hard to support on 1v1 are no brainers on 2v2+.

snip

While those are more important issues, resource inflation and specially volume of units on field per size of map and strategic points is still a problem.

1-You cap 3x/4x times faster the map which means the transition to early lights or even mediums is done faster.
2-Caches, while been a detrimental for the one building it, benefit the whole team. Been able to field 1 less unit on 1v1 can be a risk. When you have 4x the amount of units on map, that single 200mp investment isn't as risky.
3-If you have the same amount of pop as the lower modes, but equal amount of pop, then it's obvious that you are gonna end up with "spam/blob" a bottleneck of units fighting for the same points. Which makes AOE onmap/offmap shine.

Note: what i mentioned can't be changed most probably (been what you mentioned the only things which can be changed in favour of the mode).
Basically, i'm saying those are real issues, not myths, but those are part of what makes 3v3+ appealing for some people (Not having to bother with capping, huge amount of units on map).

If it was mine decision, i would had test early on, having 3v3 and 4v4 have less pop (also less mp gain) to accommodate the players/volume of units into the map.

Agreed that maps are very much a component of the problem.

One of the major reasons for this are the restrictive number of territory options that mapmakers have to work with, as well as how cutoffs cannot really be created without putting more resources on the map. There could be so many more functional designs if there weren't just the selection of territory points available to mapmakers without modding.

However, there is another component to the issue: CP income. It is possible to be able to fully tech as Ostheer before acquiring the CPs to call in a Command P4 (or even a StuG E now.) Doctrinal abilities are all over the place in 4v4 as a result. I think this contributes to an illusion of inflated resource income.

yep. there is not that much to fix to be honest. but how do you fix super heavies for 3v3+ when they are already balanced for 1v1? same with rocket arties, FRP.

Make 4v4 maps larger and less clusterfucky

yep. there is not that much to fix to be honest. but how do you fix super heavies for 3v3+ when they are already balanced for 1v1? same with rocket arties, FRP.

Super heavies TD: they have been niche and i don't mind them been SUPER niche on 1v1 but not stupid units on 2v2+.

CalliOP: it was nerf in the wrong way. They just removed the 3rd barrage instead of nerfing and spreading the damage of the first and 2nd barrage.

FRP: make it have a cooldown.
Ex. Upon activation, for the next X seconds, all units who retreat will do so to the FRP. After that there's a 2X seconds of cooldown til the ability can be used again.

yep. there is not that much to fix to be honest. but how do you fix super heavies for 3v3+ when they are already balanced for 1v1? same with rocket arties, FRP.

Which super heavy are you referring to?

There's no way we are going to balance Elefant/JT around 1v1. That would be like trying to balance light vehicles around 4v4. That's beyond silly.

Calliope/King Tiger/Sturmtiger/AVRE are OP even by 1v1/2v2 standards (just overshadowed by teching/more OP stuff). Thus, they will be getting the nerfhammer sooner rather than later.

Finally, just popcap/repair changes alone will make no-brainer fielding of heavy tanks actually punishing if you don't use them properly.

I hope someone will give this small suggestions to relic. The game would be fun, if a game is not fun no one wants to play

NOT REALLY.

Some history.
-USF release completely OP and specially broken against OH, but really UP on 3v3+ with it's paper tanks (on 2v2 it was more of a, let's finish the game as fast as possible with LT into Sherman rushes).
-OKW release kinda underwhelming on 1v1 but completely OP for teamgames.
-UKF release kinda underwhelming on 1v1 but completely OP for teamgames.
-Sniper did shine/op on 1v1 but not so much on 2v2 and kinda a joke on 3v3+
-Wunderwaffe units which are hard to support on 1v1 are no brainers on 2v2+.


While those are more important issues, resource inflation and specially volume of units on field per size of map and strategic points is still a problem.

1-You cap 3x/4x times faster the map which means the transition to early lights or even mediums is done faster.
2-Caches, while been a detrimental for the one building it, benefit the whole team. Been able to field 1 less unit on 1v1 can be a risk. When you have 4x the amount of units on map, that single 200mp investment isn't as risky.
3-If you have the same amount of pop as the lower modes, but equal amount of pop, then it's obvious that you are gonna end up with "spam/blob" a bottleneck of units fighting for the same points. Which makes AOE onmap/offmap shine.

Note: what i mentioned can't be changed most probably (been what you mentioned the only things which can be changed in favour of the mode).
Basically, i'm saying those are real issues, not myths, but those are part of what makes 3v3+ appealing for some people (Not having to bother with capping, huge amount of units on map).

If it was mine decision, i would had test early on, having 3v3 and 4v4 have less pop (also less mp gain) to accommodate the players/volume of units into the map.

Maybe instead of less pop on 3's and 4's, just revise the map pool to eliminate long narrow maps (Red Ball) and more short wide (shaped like Steppes or General Mud). The long narrow maps put Soviets at a significant disadvantage.

Putting a cooldown on FRP would help, but it should apply to all FRP's including Major.

One improvement to caches could be to divide the normal resource gain by the number of players (1/2 for a 2v2, etc) and then let other players improve it, 200mp at a time, until it reaches full value. Having it benefit only one player would likely result in people teamkilling caches instead of playing the game (at least in randoms).

Maybe instead of less pop on 3's and 4's, just revise the map pool to eliminate long narrow maps (Red Ball) and more short wide (shaped like Steppes or General Mud). The long narrow maps put Soviets at a significant disadvantage.

Putting a cooldown on FRP would help, but it should apply to all FRP's including Major.

One improvement to caches could be to divide the normal resource gain by the number of players (1/2 for a 2v2, etc) and then let other players improve it, 200mp at a time, until it reaches full value. Having it benefit only one player would likely result in people teamkilling caches instead of playing the game (at least in randoms).

Those are great ideas, especially the one about supply caches !!!! Simple and brilliant !!!

Super heavies TD: they have been niche and i don't mind them been SUPER niche on 1v1 but not stupid units on 2v2+.

Would anybody feel that Elefant/JT are getting butchered with the following changes?
- Damage reduced from 320 to 280-300
- Accuracy reduced (by a lot) to SU-85 levels

The idea here is that JT/Elefant will remain marvelous at countering TD-walls (keeping them in the repair pad). They would also punish Comet/T34/85 spam/etc. They would also be amazing at dealing with allied heavy tanks. However, they wouldn't assassinate veteran medium tanks like it was nobody's business.

(This assumes that Firefly's accuracy/moving accuracy also gets nerfed to SU-85 levels, to keep it even. Tulips should give the new blind TWP critical from Puma, rather than deny movement. Jackson is OK since it's brittle and will still go down to 2 shots)

JT has a lot on its plate too, compared to the elefant:
- Nerf mobility stats so that engine-upgraded JT performance will equal live-version unupgraded performance
- Barrage no longer requires veterancy. Costs 30 munitions and projectiles follow an arc so as not to collide with ground all the time
- Range decrease from both attacks to 80 (because increasing 17pounder range would be a terrible idea
- Piercing rounds requires Vet5 (Vet5 currently does nothing since stun-removal ninja-buff)

Elefant:
- Can no longer upgrade to spotting scopes (so that we don't have to nerf scopes)

Then, I would trace Elefant/JT popcap as follows:
- Elefant: around 25-26
- JT around 28-29 (since it's a generalist with the barrage)

CalliOP: it was nerf in the wrong way. They just removed the 3rd barrage instead of nerfing and spreading the damage of the first and 2nd barrage.

CalliOP definitely merits a durability nerf first of all. It could go around Priest level.

Then, range should either be reduced a lot (but kept lethal). In that way, you have to be careful not to have your CalliOP murdered, and that would differentiate it from the long-range priest.

Otherwise, change the barrage pattern from 10-8 to 6-6-6.

FRP: make it have a cooldown.
Ex. Upon activation, for the next X seconds, all units who retreat will do so to the FRP. After that there's a 2X seconds of cooldown til the ability can be used again.

That could be an interesting idea. I think that could work.

By the way, thank you to have a look at the team formats. It's giving me hope and make me want to play again !

Also, all the comments ive seen so far in this thread breath maturity and intellectual integrity. Thank you. It's so refreshing.

May Relic see the light.

Which super heavy are you referring to?

There's no way we are going to balance Elefant/JT around 1v1. That would be like trying to balance light vehicles around 4v4. That's beyond silly.

Calliope/King Tiger/Sturmtiger/AVRE are OP even by 1v1/2v2 standards (just overshadowed by teching/more OP stuff). Thus, they will be getting the nerfhammer sooner rather than later.

Finally, just popcap/repair changes alone will make no-brainer fielding of heavy tanks actually punishing if you don't use them properly.

i think Ele and JT should be viable in 1v1 however rarely viable they might be.

more and more i think about it, with exception of FRPs, and caches everything really depends on maps.

You cant simply have same number of points as 1v1. The reason why super heavies can dominate and achieve critical mass with only a bit of support is because there is just so little room to fight for. Ele, KT, JT, IS2, whatever heavies become problem because they can simply sit on one of two places where the team has to defend. ONE of TWO places. maybe that is ok for 2 players total but that cant really fly 6 players+ or even 4 players. Walking stuka becomes steadily more of a problem as the gamemode gets bigger because there is simply not much room for the opponent compared to 1v1. Same with all other arties.

solution?bigger size and the whole attitude and template for making 2v2+ maps has to change. for example, in 4v4, no longer maps designed to have two separate 2v2s on separated fuel points. We just simply need bigger maps with more resource points but with each of them with lesser income - again, we need to separate gamemodes to do this.

i'd say the size has to be at least as big as general mud or montargis region but with eyeball design of Hill400 and Hamlet to make distance from frontline to base not too far.

p.s. just remove FRP, make OKW base have 4x higher health so it becomes good soft retreat base. L2SoftRetreat FFS.

Would anybody feel that Elefant/JT are getting butchered with the following changes?
- Damage reduced from 320 to 280-300
- Accuracy reduced (by a lot) to SU-85 levels

And a price decrease?

i think Ele and JT should be viable in 1v1 however rarely viable they might be.

I think that Ele/JT should be nerfed to the point that they remain good units in 4v4, but not completely dominate those modes (when allied cheese gets toned down as well, ofc). If we nerf those units in a clever way, we could, at least, make them non-meta troll units for 1v1.

The best way to achieve this is turn them less of anti-armour only super-specialists to something more generalist-like.

For instance if JT had access to a stug-e kind of barrage every now and then, then, eh, it could also act as a semi-mobile howitzer.

more and more i think about it, with exception of FRPs, and caches everything really depends on maps.

You cant simply have same number of points as 1v1. The reason why super heavies can dominate and achieve critical mass with only a bit of support is because there is just so little room to fight for. Ele, KT, JT, IS2, whatever heavies become problem because they can simply sit on one of two places where the team has to defend. ONE of TWO places. maybe that is ok for 2 players total but that cant really fly 6 players+ or even 4 players. Walking stuka becomes steadily more of a problem as the gamemode gets bigger because there is simply not much room for the opponent compared to 1v1. Same with all other arties.

solution?bigger size and the whole attitude and template for making 2v2+ maps has to change. for example, in 4v4, no longer maps designed to have two separate 2v2s on separated fuel points. We just simply need bigger maps with more resource points but with each of them with lesser income - again, we need to separate gamemodes to do this.

i'd say the size has to be at least as big as general mud or montargis region but with eyeball design of Hill400 and Hamlet to make distance from frontline to base not too far.

p.s. just remove FRP, make OKW base have 4x higher health so it becomes good soft retreat base. L2SoftRetreat FFS.

That's all nice and dandy. However, that still leaves us with only 1 viable 4v4 map (new Hill400 without watchtowers is amazing). I think it's more realistic to alter how certain mechanics work, rather than recreate a mode's map-pool from scratch.

e.g., walking stuka barrages could become inaccurate when firing into the fog-of-war. That would already make adding trois-points kind-of straight passages in a map kind of viable without completely shooting yourself in the foot.

And a price decrease?

Maybe. I don't know how much price I would attach to them without seeing them in action.

Only for fuel though, not manpower.

FRP why not 100/200 or X meters maximum from the HQ?

That's all nice and dandy. However, that still leaves us with only 1 viable 4v4 map (new Hill400 without watchtowers is amazing). I think it's more realistic to alter how certain mechanics work, rather than recreate a mode's map-pool from scratch.

Considering that the maps themselves have a large part to play in the problem here, maybe I can be of some assistance.

Weirdly, the main reason why I've created so few 4vs4 maps is because they are some of the least popular. 1vs1 and 2vs2 get picked up by Relic and competitions, but 3vs3 and 4vs4 get left in the dust.

HelpingHans seems to be quite enamoured with my 4vs4 version of Elst (which was actually the original version of the map) for its wide play style. Since PC Gamer Weekender, we've tried to get it in the cycle, but there's not much room for 4vs4 maps! Either way, if you know which strings to pull, please do!

...

if relic is willing to at least incorporate a handful of new competitive maps and remove some of the worst offenders, i would be happy to work overtime.

But this would help so much already. Fix the things you said and some op bs like Ostheer Stuka Dive Bomb and UKF Artillery Cover and we are in a very good spot already.

What I want to say: It is possible to balance all game modes in one go (at least for the most akward things), you just have to think about different approaches to balancing.

+1

You dont need 5 t-34s to kill a panther, ever heard of an su-85 tank destroyer?

A player who does nothing but caches has no army, that means you should be able to push through him and effectively destroy his caches that he wasted Manpower on..

As for USF they are absolute trash for 4v4 make no mistake, unless you purely cheese your opponent with calliopes or something...

+10000
I too am calling L2P here OP.

But this would help so much already. Fix the things you said and some op bs like Ostheer Stuka Dive Bomb and UKF Artillery Cover and we are in a very good spot already.

What I want to say: It is possible to balance all game modes in one go (at least for the most akward things), you just have to think about different approaches to balancing.

+1

You dont need 5 t-34s to kill a panther, ever heard of an su-85 tank destroyer?

A player who does nothing but caches has no army, that means you should be able to push through him and effectively destroy his caches that he wasted Manpower on..

As for USF they are absolute trash for 4v4 make no mistake, unless you purely cheese your opponent with calliopes or something...

+10000
I too am calling L2P here OP.

Would anybody feel that Elefant/JT are getting butchered with the following changes?
- Damage reduced from 320 to 280-300
- Accuracy reduced (by a lot) to SU-85 levels

The idea here is that JT/Elefant will remain marvelous at countering TD-walls (keeping them in the repair pad). They would also punish Comet/T34/85 spam/etc. They would also be amazing at dealing with allied heavy tanks. However, they wouldn't assassinate veteran medium tanks like it was nobody's business.

(This assumes that Firefly's accuracy/moving accuracy also gets nerfed to SU-85 levels, to keep it even. Tulips should give the new blind TWP critical from Puma, rather than deny movement. Jackson is OK since it's brittle and will still go down to 2 shots)

JT has a lot on its plate too, compared to the elefant:
- Nerf mobility stats so that engine-upgraded JT performance will equal live-version unupgraded performance
- Barrage no longer requires veterancy. Costs 30 munitions and projectiles follow an arc so as not to collide with ground all the time
- Range decrease from both attacks to 80 (because increasing 17pounder range would be a terrible idea
- Piercing rounds requires Vet5 (Vet5 currently does nothing since stun-removal ninja-buff)

Elefant:
- Can no longer upgrade to spotting scopes (so that we don't have to nerf scopes)

Then, I would trace Elefant/JT popcap as follows:
- Elefant: around 25-26
- JT around 28-29 (since it's a generalist with the barrage)



CalliOP definitely merits a durability nerf first of all. It could go around Priest level.

Then, range should either be reduced a lot (but kept lethal). In that way, you have to be careful not to have your CalliOP murdered, and that would differentiate it from the long-range priest.

Otherwise, change the barrage pattern from 10-8 to 6-6-6.



That could be an interesting idea. I think that could work.

The nerfs on the JT and Ele would probably work. Would be better to try this as a first step rather than nerfing it into the ground. The ISU was overnerfed and has rarely been built since.

Changing the barrage pattern of the Calliope to 6-6-6 might work. I don't think reducing it's range would make things better. It's already at its best when fired from near minimum range. It almost guarantees wipes of full health squads when used like a shotgun. The only rocket arty that is comparable is the Walking Stuka, which is better at wiping squads and support weapons when it hits, but is a little more hit-or-miss due to the tight cluster. Please don't do anything to the Walking Stuka without nerfing sim city, and please don't do anything to the Calliope without nerfing the super TD's.