Login

russian armor

When will the beloved Brits enter the balance scope?

18 Jun 2017, 08:00 AM
#21
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1



Hmm, you've been doing this for the last couple of topics now, what is your motivation exactly? Do you have a fetish for me because I proved you wrong or just like stalking me from your mom's basement or something?

Let's settle this like men, or whatever you identify as.

Maybe you should Start play the game.dont be a katitof.

There is nothing more cringey than Balance Posters who dont play the game
18 Jun 2017, 10:49 AM
#22
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1


It sure costs less, but the pit gets countered by double indirect fire and the game is also over if you lose all of a simcity. At least as okw you can get a command panther if you pick that commander (which I usually do for flares if I'm using double isg). Medhq and flakhq are also part of teching, so you would have to include platoon cp and bofors sidetech. Still, emplacements are lulzy and awful, but I guess they're cheaper as you say..


Well, it is not really hard to destroy the Flak HQ, while it takes a large effort to just destroy one Bofors. And if you lose your Bofors, it is not a big deal (if you don't lose it outright ofc), but if the Flak HQ is down, you can basically surrender or have to rely on the single Command Panther call-in. THat's why you have to place the Flak HQ so extremely defensively, because it is pretty fragile.

Now, if you have double OKW in team games and they both go LeIG spam, then you get into problems, because 120mms get countered as well as At guns attacking the Flak HQ. But I guess if you have 2 Brits going mortar pit, it can also be cancerous.

However, since the Cromwell/Comet have been nerfed, the cheese has become less for Brits, one thing that could use some attention are the racist trenches though, which allow to cap a point in extreme safety and if destroyed you won't lose the squad, which means no real risk.
18 Jun 2017, 11:54 AM
#23
avatar of SturmTigerVorgo

Posts: 307

This game will never be balanced, COH1 was not balanced COH2 is not balanced COH3 will not be balanced. Just try to accept it and deal with it if you can. This is a small game by a mediocre studio who are still making money from the success of COH1. It's funny that free to play games are more balanced than COH lol.
18 Jun 2017, 12:48 PM
#24
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2


Maybe you should Start play the game.dont be a katitof.

There is nothing more cringey than Balance Posters who dont play the game


Hmmm, and where have I exactly bitched or moaned about the balance, and wanted straight buffs or nerfs to a unit ir Army, and when have I ever been biased?

You can't prove anything you say except for the fact that I am currently not playing the game because my computer is out of order.

But still, I have experience with the game and that's why I keep posting, plus I'm a modder, I can backup my claims unlike many other people who don't even know or care how the game works.
18 Jun 2017, 13:18 PM
#25
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

It´s weird because British emplacements should have been the first thing they change and not EFA.

British emplacements kill this game. I don´t care if they are OP or not. They are just totally killing any fun you might have. Yes you can kill a mortar/bofor combination but is it fun? Does it promote a skillful playstyle? I swear everytime I have to play against Brits I just pray they don´t go full cancer. COH2 is not supposed to be about building some insane emplacement combinations and watching your mortars autofire on everything that is in range or your bofors shred any approaching infantry light vehicles and even medium tanks. It´s just plain garbage. In my opinion it would be best for COH2 to just totally delete this shit from the game.
18 Jun 2017, 13:21 PM
#26
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

This game will never be balanced, COH1 was not balanced COH2 is not balanced COH3 will not be balanced. Just try to accept it and deal with it if you can. This is a small game by a mediocre studio who are still making money from the success of COH1. It's funny that free to play games are more balanced than COH lol.


Question is not if the game is ballanced or why is it not perfectly ballanced. Question is still why non-tournament players care about something that doesn't make any difference. I would understand if somebody cared about the amount of viable strategies or the depth of factions - so that the game is interesting to play. But ballance between factions? Really? We all know it makes no difference whatsoever as the matchmaker either accounts for it (with lots of players in queue) or just gives you a random person that is so far from you on the ladder that ballance is of last importance in the matchup.

Also - with all factions being used in current tournament in a effective way I would say that ballance between factions is pretty damn good.
18 Jun 2017, 13:23 PM
#27
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1



Question is not if the game is ballanced or why is it not perfectly ballanced. Question is still why non-tournament players care about something that doesn't make any difference. I would understand if somebody cared about the amount of viable strategies or the depth of factions - so that the game is interesting to play. But ballance between factions? Really? We all know it makes no difference whatsoever as the matchmaker either accounts for it (with lots of players in queue) or just gives you a random person that is so far from you on the ladder that ballance is of last importance in the matchup.


Because people don´t want to lose because of bad balance but because they got outplayed.

Plus playing against Brit cancer kills any fun. It makes you literally want to deinstall the game.
18 Jun 2017, 13:26 PM
#28
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



Because people don´t want to lose because of bad balance but because they got outplayed.

Plus playing against Brit cancer kills any fun. It makes you literally want to deinstall the game.


Think again. Yes - if some build is not fun to play against it is a problem. But it is not a ballance problem. And yes if you lose then you got outplayed - becouse either opponent was much better and ballance didn't matter at all or he was on your level with ballance taken into consideration and played better.
18 Jun 2017, 13:29 PM
#29
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1



But it is not a ballance problem. And yes if you lose then you got outplayed - becouse either opponent was much better and ballance didn't matter at all or he was on your level with ballance taken into consideration and played better.


So if two players play at the same level but one loses because of balance it is somehow still not a balance problem?
18 Jun 2017, 13:36 PM
#30
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



So if two players play at the same level but one loses because of balance it is somehow still not a balance problem?


It is not only not a ballance problem. It is not a problem at all.

That is becouse if you want to define the same level (or ballanced matchup) you would say that if the players play a lot of matches - say 100, in the same matchup (same patch, factions) then if both win roughly about half of them they are on the same level.

There are two important facts about this definition:
  • there is no other way to define players of same level becouse they may have different skill and predispositions to different factions
  • this definition already accounts for ballance - so if the ballance changes then different matchups are going to be ballanced, even, whatever you call it. But you still can and will play in ballanced matchups.
18 Jun 2017, 14:23 PM
#31
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 640 | Subs: 1

Whether people win or lose depends on how well they perform that particular match, which can vary. I've won against rank 50 and lost to rank 400 in a single day.

However I see there are people in this very thread who don't think proper balancing can exist as a concept. But obviously there is a sense of fairness that should be upheld for the game, otherwise we could have Obers in Med truck for 100 manpower and T70 as starting unit for Soviets, I suppose these people would still go "yeah but balance is so subjective man, maybe you should just adapt".
19 Jun 2017, 06:19 AM
#32
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243


The cancer on brits is:

they can lock a area for the next 20min easily---and this lock doesnt prevent them to get out early tanks...thanks to non/cheap cost for their emplacment.

30fuel for bofors? really? for it performanche it should cost around 70-100fuel.
400mp for the motoremplacment? really?? it cost less than two ost mortar...but is much more potent and neraly unkillable if well supportet.
19 Jun 2017, 16:46 PM
#33
avatar of Rocket

Posts: 728

I would be more than happy for them to get rid of emplacements and brit sim city when they give okw reg base buildings and take away there sim city.

The cancer on okw sim city is : early fwd retreat thats unkillable in early to mid game that stops you from being able to push okw. Flak hq that stops you from being able to push okw. Double lieges protected by flak hq. Free anti-air from flak hq. No cost for flak cannon on hq, Flak hq does not cost pop like brit bofors. Super repair speed on sturms that can repair badly dmged okw buildings back to full hp in 30 seconds.
19 Jun 2017, 18:11 PM
#34
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1

Since OKW managed to sneakily enter the scope and get punished by unwarranted nerfs and changes, how about we give the Brits the same treatment? Especially because people complain more about UKF and they are the most abusive faction at the moment?

These are the core problems: Broken Offmaps, ridiculous nades, silly suvivability valuse and bonuses, double LMGs, double piats, ultra fast teching, powerful-multirole-non doctrinal vehicles, and, you guessed it, emplacements.


*Looks at last Patch Notes*

OKW

Panzerfausts

Cost increased from 25MU to 30MU
Requires a truck to be be set-up (as opposed to be called-in) to be available

Command Panther

Nerf to Mark Target and Slight AI Nerf + Command Point Delay

UKF Nerfs

Tank Commander
Emergency War Speed
Cromwell
- Crush
-Cost
- 25% Moving Accuracy Nerf
- Scatter
Comet
- Range
- Popcap
-Crush
-Moving Accuracy 25%
-Rear Armor
-Scatter
-White Phos.

Land Mattress

Arty Party Cover

Emplacement Placement

Damn, when will Brits get nerfed the way OKW did last patch?!


19 Jun 2017, 23:35 PM
#35
avatar of Mistah_S

Posts: 851 | Subs: 1


There is no scope. Mr. Smith and miragefla are making a personal mod. They're getting a whole lot of attention since they made the balance patches, but this is just a mod of their own making, independent of anything Relic will do.

That's what it's sounding like at this point.


/snip

Can we please not make this into a dick swinging contest pls?
Soldier is primarily Axis player and so am I.


Wait double piats and british grenades are op?

Yes they are. Ever since they made piat a heat seeking missile.


Well to be fair, some of Brit off maps like Bombing Run(90% health trucks in one go), Typhoon Loiter(targets inf and tanks with ridiculous damage)

+1
Re: nades, only gammon is OP as fuck.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jun 2017, 01:53 AMNano

But what I will say is that Double ISG protected by Med HQ and Flak HQ costs 1260MP/165 Fuel and requires T4, if you lose all of it you essentially lose the game.
Remind my how much a mortar pit and bofors combo costs, then remind me what happens when you lose them?

If 1v1 then yes its GG, if 4v4 then mortar bofors are cancer
20 Jun 2017, 06:03 AM
#36
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053


Yes they are. Ever since they made piat a heat seeking missile.


+1
Re: nades, only gammon is OP as fuck.


If 1v1 then yes its GG, if 4v4 then mortar bofors are cancer

Why is the piat OP for being heat seeking? The bazooka and schreck both do it too. Realistic? No. OP? Not really. They also basically changed the piats stats to the bazooka and increased the cost to 50. It's basically a bazooka with a different skin.

Yeah if you're talking about commando (light) gammon bombs those things are OP basically because they're on commandos (who have camo). I don't get why they have a slightly shorter fuse than bundled nades either (something like ~.25 seconds IIRC). Worth noting that stormtroopers also get a nuke grenade that can be used from camo, but with a slightly longer fuse and more restrictive camo.

I find that pits are easier to deal with in larger game modes because counter-artyspam is a lot more feasible and usually pits get hit with more concentrated fire by a team that has any brains at all (ctrl+a and everyone rapes the pit with isgs, GrWs and stukas, most of the time). You can just knock them out one by one. They also cover less of the map. If it's a problem in any one mode, it's probably 2v2.
20 Jun 2017, 06:22 AM
#37
avatar of Nano

Posts: 212


Why is the piat OP for being heat seeking? The bazooka and schreck both do it too. Realistic? No. OP? Not really. They also basically changed the piats stats to the bazooka and increased the cost to 50. It's basically a bazooka with a different skin.


He's obviously exaggerating. Sturm Pio with Shrek have gawd awful accuracy and a slow arse fire rate with out vet, but it doesn't feel that way with Piat Engies who seem to never miss.

One has to be super careful with light/med vehicles as Germans these days because of sticky nuclear tipped satchel and laser guided Piats.
20 Jun 2017, 07:15 AM
#38
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jun 2017, 06:22 AMNano


He's obviously exaggerating. Sturm Pio with Shrek have gawd awful accuracy and a slow arse fire rate with out vet, but it doesn't feel that way with Piat Engies who seem to never miss.

One has to be super careful with light/med vehicles as Germans these days because of sticky nuclear tipped satchel and laser guided Piats.

Oh please. Satchels are easy to dodge with anything faster than a kt and piats are just regular old at weapons, nothing more or less than zooks. Schrecks are slow but in exchange you get to penetrate almost everything almost all the time. Not so with piats or zooks.
20 Jun 2017, 07:21 AM
#39
avatar of Nano

Posts: 212


Oh please. Satchels are easy to dodge with anything faster than a kt and piats are just regular old at weapons, nothing more or less than zooks. Schrecks are slow but in exchange you get to penetrate almost everything almost all the time. Not so with piats or zooks.


Yes you are right about Shreks, but the only OKW unit with access to them has terrible accuracy with out hard to get vet. It is not a Shrek problem but a unit problem. Ost has double shrek with what feels like better accuracy, but double the weapon means double the chance to hit anyway.

I don't feel Zooks are as effective as Piats, but this might be down to the unit using them too.

Satchells are not hard to dodge yes, but one tiny micro mistake and good bye light or medium vehicle. No other team has a snare that does crippling damage as well (that I can think of).
20 Jun 2017, 07:25 AM
#40
avatar of JaminROCK

Posts: 84

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jun 2017, 07:21 AMNano


Yes you are right about Shreks, but the only OKW unit with access to them has terrible accuracy with out hard to get vet. It is not a Shrek problem but a unit problem. Ost has double shrek with what feels like better accuracy, but double the weapon means double the chance to hit anyway.


What other unit do you think should get shreks? Remember when volks could get shreks? Idk if I'd want taht shit back in this game.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 5
United States 159
New Zealand 9
unknown 5

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

839 users are online: 839 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49127
Welcome our newest member, Constant
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM