UKF feels entirely uphill, the entire game

I hate playing USF against OKW as you cannot counter 2 LeIGs parked beneath a Schwerer Panzer HQ.

Have you tried smoking it, and then walking up to kill the leigs?

Or use callope or priest?

Or usf pak howitzer?

Or a tank?

Have you tried smoking it, and then walking up to kill the leigs?

Or use callope or priest?

Or usf pak howitzer?

Or a tank?

NO but I came onto the forum and posted about it on a thread about a different factions problems. Why hasn't relic fixed it yet?

Huh, why didn't we see this balance disaster coming?

Where's your balance champion Mr. Smith now, guys? Axis easier to beat now? Ya'll having fun yet?

Isn't it so ironic that the majority of the balance forum posters wanted so badly for these "balance patches" to go live so that they could play Allies in team games again, and yet here we are with 2 out of the 3 Allied factions basically being instalose in every game mode. Great job fellas.

Huh, why didn't we see this balance disaster coming?

Where's your balance champion Mr. Smith now, guys? Axis easier to beat now? Ya'll having fun yet?

Isn't it so ironic that the majority of the balance forum posters wanted so badly for these "balance patches" to go live so that they could play Allies in team games again, and yet here we are with 2 out of the 3 Allied factions basically being instalose in every game mode. Great job fellas.

I've said many times that bringing up the Eastern Front Armies instead of nerfing the Western Front ones is the way to go.

And also, symmetry.

What proves my point? The changes made to USF and OKW when it was obvious that they were extremely lacking, specifically the addition of the MG34 and Panzer IVs to the OKW and Mortar to the USF.

What exactly would the problem be if you gave the Ostheer a repair bunker upgrade, a forward retreat point and perhaps an upgrade to 5 man squads to boost their LATE GAME survivability?

What would be the problem with giving the same options to the Soviets? Altho I would argue that the Soviets are one of the better if not the best designed faction, they got 3 doctrinal ways to repair their vehicles in most of their commanders, a semi-durable Halftrack that can be used to reinforce and both infantry as well as provide AA cover when upgraded, they have elite infantry in most commanders again and a fair amount of commanders with better than their standard tanks, really the only thing they lack is healing in the field and that's about it.

"Ohhh, but then they'll be too similar!"

I call bullshit, given the amount of differences between the same roled units, RNG and commander choices alongside other Army specific designs this would never be the case. Armies will NEVER be similar to each other, even if they have all of the basic tools to work with.

If people want the game to be balanced, as well as fun because ultimately that's why we're here, symmetry will need to be implemented, with the said most of that has already been done with the OKW and USF as I already said, now the UKF need it as well and again, I would argue the Ost and SOV as well so everybody would be on an equal playing field as far as basic tools goes.

Apart from that as already said about Mr. Smith there is no point in further arguing about it, he did what he could and I do not believe his intentions were bad, and now he is gone. We all have to live with our choices but life still goes on.

Have you tried smoking it, and then walking up to kill the leigs?

Or use callope or priest?

Or usf pak howitzer?

Or a tank?

NO but I came onto the forum and posted about it on a thread about a different factions problems. Why hasn't relic fixed it yet?

Naa I just wrote USF but meant UKF. My bad.

Maybe exaggerate even more? I don't see how IS is supposed to be worse in late game than Grens or Volks f.e. And even tho the Vickers might be worse than other MGs when it comes to supression (at least thats what I hear all the time, is it really the worst one? Can someone please show the datas on this?) it still kills faster than other ones (at least from my experience). Also their tanks loosing in every single 1 vs 1 isn't only not true but, at least when it comes to cheaper tanks, completly justified, or do you want a 110 fuel tank to win against a Panther ?



PIAT is a thing you know ?

Yes the data is out there, no I will not find it for you.

I believe it is listed in a Brit guide on this website. Vickers has much worse suppression, better damage. But that isn't why you build MG's, especially as a faction that desires to have emplacements. As it stands you can take the extra precaution of putting an MG down to guard a mortar (already excessive) and the Axis blob still has enough time to huck grenades into your mortar pit before getting pinned. This is a huge problem.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, regarding tanks. You can't say "it's not true" and then go "but if it were, it would be justified!" do you understand how completely disingenuous that sounds? The truth is, Brits have absolutely no early tank presence and therefore have to rely on their AT guns, which were nerfed, but due to their inferior infantry and MG that has trash suppression their ATs are now completely undefended against the Axis blobs! Also PIATs are trash against just about everything above armored car.

Now here's an idea, how about you get a mortar emplacement to handle the infantry? Brilliant idea, except for the fact that it gets solo'd by any competent player's own single mortar (which costs less mind you). Even if you waste an engi squad to sit and repair it all day you wont out-repair the enemy mortar dps. The only solution is to send, what, a UC to try and hit their mortar? Good luck with that, it has the HP of a CoH1 jeep!

Great well just send in your infantry to kill the enemy mortar! Well that'd be dandy, if the superior LMG42 Gren squads don't wipe them, the 40 manpower cheaper MG42 that they undoubtedly have guarding their mortars surely will suppress them INSTANTLY. But at least they didn't lose a unit in their squad like the dps superior Vickers might have done to Jerry, right? No, its much better, rather than losing one member and throwing a grenade to disable the MG, 2 squads were instead pinned forcing a retreat (strategically wiping the squad for the time being).

Should I go on?

Yes the data is out there, no I will not find it for you.

You said that Vickers has worst supression of all MGs. It is your job to prove it.

I believe it is listed in a Brit guide on this website. Vickers has much worse suppression, better damage. But that isn't why you build MG's, especially as a faction that desires to have emplacements. As it stands you can take the extra precaution of putting an MG down to guard a mortar (already excessive) and the Axis blob still has enough time to huck grenades into your mortar pit before getting pinned. This is a huge problem.

So you complain about blobs not getting nailed by a single MG?
Well gues what? This isn't only a problem with Vickers.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, regarding tanks. You can't say "it's not true" and then go "but if it were, it would be justified!" do you understand how completely disingenuous that sounds?

Well ... it doesn't sound more disingenuous than You when you take only parts from my argument and even represent them wrong by changing them.
I said that it is not true that every single 1 vs 1 between UKF tanks and Axis tanks is a loss for UKF AND that a loss for UKF is justified in some cases since you can not expect a cheaper tank to win against a more exspensive one(even tho this somtimes happens)

The truth is, Brits have absolutely no early tank presence

The truth is that you do not know what an AEC is

Now here's an idea, how about you get a mortar emplacement to handle the infantry? Brilliant idea, except for the fact that it gets solo'd by any competent player's own single mortar (which costs less mind you). Even if you waste an engi squad to sit and repair it all day you wont out-repair the enemy mortar dps.

Tell me more about your mortar pit getting destroyed by a single mortar while it gets repaired.

the 40 manpower cheaper MG42 that they undoubtedly have guarding their mortars surely will suppress them INSTANTLY. But at least they didn't lose a unit in their squad like the dps superior Vickers might have done to Jerry, right? No, its much better, rather than losing one member and throwing a grenade to disable the MG, 2 squads were instead pinned forcing a retreat (strategically wiping the squad for the time being).

So you are complaining about that 2 squads couldn't take out a MG 42 frontally while probably being in negative cover?

Apart from that as already said about Mr. Smith there is no point in further arguing about it, he did what he could and I do not believe his intentions were bad, and now he is gone. We all have to live with our choices but life still goes on.

He was incredibly unhealthy for the community, he presented all of his opinions as fact, backed it with bogus data and flamed anyone who disagreed with him. It wouldn't have been so bad if he didn't have the entire moderation team of CoH2.org propping him up on the forums, but it basically came down to discussions being heavily moderated to fit Mr. Smiths balance agenda, giving him and Relic this false sense of justification for all the changes made to the game within the past year or so that he was involved in the balance team. Fast forward to now and here we have arguably more broken factions (and not in a good way, but rather in a painfully obvious underwhelming kind of way). Axis now actually overperforms! (lol, something that the vocal minority has always cried about and is now actually true)

So no, I'm sorry. You can let bygones be bygones but if you actually want a balanced and enjoyable CoH2 in the future I think he is the last person to help deliver that - and I think it's important the community remembers that going forward before you bring about Mr. Smith #2.

That said, I agree with everything else you brought up to an extent. Balance should have always been about bringing the EFA more in line with the WFA using moderate unit tweaks and buffs, and not putting out these sweeping nerfs and radical redesigns. Brits had always been a problem since they released and the changes they received, while welcome, didn't come with compensation and now they severely underperform in some of the most critical areas of the game. I think an early reliable suppression tool, a non-doc snare that isn't tied to a sniper and inconsistent as hell as well as a TD (whatever you want to call the Firefly) that doesn't move and turn its turret at the speed of runny shit would help UKF a lot.

There is alot of people blaming Mr Smith for the balance which i dont think is completely fair. I mean the guy took time out his own life to try and make the game better for everyone.

Have you not seen the state of these balance forums, how the hell is someone suppose to know whats going on with all the biased BS that is posted on here. Dont get me wrong these forum have done a huge amount for COH2 but the balance forums are a mess. They are completely toxic and massively dictated by the axis only army of half a dozen people. Even the main number cruncher will only post stuff that is a arguement for axis, if its a allies unit underperforming they magically vanish and you dont hear from them. There is a very very small handful of people that speak truthfully but they just get shot down by the same biased people over and over again. I certainly wouldnt want to be the one to try and balance the game and keep everyone happy. Most balance problems are the bit between the keyboard and the chair but now the game is a joke.

Simple rules like player cards required to post on the balance forum would make a huge difference to the discussions here as you would know who to listen to and who to ignore. It would kind of like be your COH2 CV. Fact is alot of things that were changed was what people asked for, but the problem is its littered with extremely biased people.

Sorry to post this on here but the thread is going of topic so i just wanted to say how i see it.

UKF in the current 1v1 meta is 5 man inf spam into t3 rush. You either blob and get free mgs or lose after being forced to play more defensively allowing your opponent to outcap and outflank you. They are the worst faction to play at the moment as stated by Cruzz the Wise Wizard of CoH2. Only HelpingHans and Kimbo know how to play brits competitively.

Should call this the Mr. Smith bash thread. On that topic though, anytime I’ve criticized the balance team or changes i’d say my beef with it and whoever I was talking too would just blame someone else. There’s honestly very little if any responsibiilty coming from the balance team or those with power. I’ve talked to Siddolio and it gets pointed to Mr. Smith, I’ve opened threads addressing my concerns towards issues and smith throws it at relic or scope.

It’s ok to do those things if you’re telling the truth, but no one really knows anyone 100% here and you don’t know who tells the truth because relic is virtually silent and communicates through either sturmpanther or Mr. Smith. As long as people are kept in the dark you can point fingers all you want but no one is stepping up and saying “MY BAD”.

We all make mistakes, it's only human and even if so I still blame Relic.

........

But perhaps that would show them how they were wrong in not giving full creative freedom to the community.

Making a mistake once is human, but repeating it.......

The balance team showed their bias in their first patch. Relic seemed to learn from it and the second patch was much better. Unfortunately, they let them "balance" the game again with even less oversight than the first, so they managed to kill two allied factions instead of one.

Giving them full creative freedom would probably allow them to make all three allied factions non-competitive.

I'd be fine if they balanced primarily for elite 1v1 players. I'm not one of those but I'd find a way to adapt. However, even the elite players think the last balance patch is terrible. Relic does own this, because they own the game and let the balance team "balance" by themselves.

PS - blaming scope is a joke when the basic infantry is so unbalanced.

So you are complaining about that 2 squads couldn't take out a MG 42 frontally while probably being in negative cover?

AEC against anything but a Stug is a death sentence. Additionally its too bad that every single Axis foot soldier has a panzerfaust in their back pocket which can immediately shut it down. Lastly it does absolutely nothing to infantry.

The issue is, 2 squads approach a single MG from opposite sides of its cone. From max range, tripod already deployed, an MG42 (with a single click micro), can suppress both squads before ever being in grenade range and eventually pin them. A Vickers cannot do this. This is a problem. This is why you have MGs. Not to deal damage.

I think an early reliable suppression tool, a non-doc snare that isn't tied to a sniper and inconsistent as hell as well as a TD (whatever you want to call the Firefly) that doesn't move and turn its turret at the speed of runny shit would help UKF a lot.

Wow hit the nail right on the head there.

Making a mistake once is human, but repeating it.......

The balance team showed their bias in their first patch. Relic seemed to learn from it and the second patch was much better. Unfortunately, they let them "balance" the game again with even less oversight than the first, so they managed to kill two allied factions instead of one.

Giving them full creative freedom would probably allow them to make all three allied factions non-competitive.

I'd be fine if they balanced primarily for elite 1v1 players. I'm not one of those but I'd find a way to adapt. However, even the elite players think the last balance patch is terrible. Relic does own this, because they own the game and let the balance team "balance" by themselves.

PS - blaming scope is a joke when the basic infantry is so unbalanced.

Right, so who gets to call the shots on the balance then?

Relic severely limits the team on what they can do, but you say that the team is biased, but then again Relic decided to trust them to "fix" their game.

So how do we solve this? They won't fix it themselves so they need unbiased modders, but such people are hard to come by and I would volunteer but I will sure as hell not accept bullshit scopes and rushing of development be put on me and I think that many other modders will agree, feedback and suggestions yes, some compromises maybe, but flat out me putting my ass to hang for some ungrateful person, no way, I've done it enough to know that it's generally not worth it.

Apart from that they'll probably never accept me in a balance team but just putting it out there, I'm willing to fix the game for the sake of the loyal fanbase, but not under bullshit circumstances.

Right, so who gets to call the shots on the balance then?

Relic severely limits the team on what they can do, but you say that the team is biased, but then again Relic decided to trust them to "fix" their game.

So how do we solve this? They won't fix it themselves so they need unbiased modders, but such people are hard to come by and I would volunteer but I will sure as hell not accept bullshit scopes and rushing of development be put on me and I think that many other modders will agree, feedback and suggestions yes, some compromises maybe, but flat out me putting my ass to hang for some ungrateful person, no way, I've done it enough to know that it's generally not worth it.

Apart from that they'll probably never accept me in a balance team but just putting it out there, I'm willing to fix the game for the sake of the loyal fanbase, but not under bullshit circumstances.

Well look man I am by no means part of your guys community, even though I have been playing CoH since the THQ shutdown. I frequent these boards and usually post once I feel something is fishy in the game. Things are fishy. We have a community mod team responsible for game balance, we can unfish these things.

My first point being, I for one was completely unaware that the .org was (loosely) responsible for balance these days. That honestly is a lot more comforting than Relic being in charge. Hopefully they can find a solution to the problem we have been having recently. I will try to be more constructive with the information I bring to help balance the game now that I know people actually are listening.

My first point being, I for one was completely unaware that the .org was (loosely) responsible for balance these days. That honestly is a lot more comforting than Relic being in charge.

Oh you sweet, sweet summer child. You just haven't read enough suggestions on the "balance" forum yet. That sentiment will change real quick if you dive a little deeper.

Right, so who gets to call the shots on the balance then?

Relic severely limits the team on what they can do, but you say that the team is biased, but then again Relic decided to trust them to "fix" their game.

So how do we solve this? They won't fix it themselves so they need unbiased modders, but such people are hard to come by and I would volunteer but I will sure as hell not accept bullshit scopes and rushing of development be put on me and I think that many other modders will agree, feedback and suggestions yes, some compromises maybe, but flat out me putting my ass to hang for some ungrateful person, no way, I've done it enough to know that it's generally not worth it.

Apart from that they'll probably never accept me in a balance team but just putting it out there, I'm willing to fix the game for the sake of the loyal fanbase, but not under bullshit circumstances.

As far as I know, this was the same group of modders as the last patch, which was one of the best ever. The difference was that this patch didn't seem to have any of the feedback that the last one did.

I don't think that anyone is doubting the modders skill, but do think that they have preferred factions. If you doubt this, just go back and read their notes from the WPB:

https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/243341/winter-balance-preview-changelog#latest

According to them, nearly every useful allied unit was overperforming and every axis unit was underperforming. They didn't go quite that far this time, but almost.

There were a few good things done on this patch. They did a good job of making the super-units like JT's & Ele's counterable without overbuffing the counters.

However, this is ultimately on Relic as it is their game and they decided to implement this patch.

Right, so who gets to call the shots on the balance then?

Relic severely limits the team on what they can do, but you say that the team is biased, but then again Relic decided to trust them to "fix" their game.

So how do we solve this? They won't fix it themselves so they need unbiased modders, but such people are hard to come by and I would volunteer but I will sure as hell not accept bullshit scopes and rushing of development be put on me and I think that many other modders will agree, feedback and suggestions yes, some compromises maybe, but flat out me putting my ass to hang for some ungrateful person, no way, I've done it enough to know that it's generally not worth it.

Apart from that they'll probably never accept me in a balance team but just putting it out there, I'm willing to fix the game for the sake of the loyal fanbase, but not under bullshit circumstances.

From QA point of view, Relic does the right thing.
When you are modifying a value on the software, you have to evaluate what could be affected anywhere else in the software by that change. Limiting values that can be changed at the same time (aka same patch) limit the risk to see many collateral issues in various areas of the software.

From a player perspective it can be frustrating but I see the "scope" as a solution to avoid bad patchs as we had before.


Now I don't want to blame Mr.Smith and I backed him time to time in the past even when I wasn't agreeing with his position, but not for this last patch because he simply went rogue of the forum, he provided us with an Alpha.patch and zero explaination, zero comment and zero reason to trust him.
I didn't comment much on it, just a saracasm about 222 being twice cheaper than the M20 but my understanding of the situation is that Mr.Smith and his team is responsable for the Alpha version and Relic mitigated the changes, I think we can thanks Relic for having mitigated the disaster that would have bring the Alpha version of the patch.

I also heard rumors about the balance team being Axis bias which could also be a reason why we are in such situation. But this could come from the fact last patch had direct and indirect huge nerf for the USF and UKF, I mean I'm not surprised with the state of the balance today, this was clear from the moment they push the patch live.

As far as I know, this was the same group of modders as the last patch, which was one of the best ever. The difference was that this patch didn't seem to have any of the feedback that the last one did.

I don't think that anyone is doubting the modders skill, but do think that they have preferred factions. If you doubt this, just go back and read their notes from the WPB:

https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/243341/winter-balance-preview-changelog#latest

According to them, nearly every useful allied unit was overperforming and every axis unit was underperforming. They didn't go quite that far this time, but almost.

There were a few good things done on this patch. They did a good job of making the super-units like JT's & Ele's counterable without overbuffing the counters.

However, this is ultimately on Relic as it is their game and they decided to implement this patch.

It's my own opinion that because of all of the crying about the Western Front Armies being OP and the EFA being left in the mud they just nerfed them down to EFA level to satisfy the few... I will refrain from calling them names but it's what the deserve honestly and it's why you don't see them with that stupid shit anymore here.

But yes I do agree with you that there was little to no feedback taken from the community last patch, as well as now with the new commanders and revamps.

It's like Coh2.org's got talent with us trying to persuade the jury that our ideas are not stupid af.

And lastly I'm not saying that the guys in charge of balance got hit with a dose of elitism but it's probably possible that the successful patch you mentioned went to their heads a little too much so they thought that the community's feedback was no longer neccessary and that they already know what to do perfectly well.

At the end of the day we should all remember that as humans we are susceptible to the corruption of power, fame and glory, money, sex and so forth.