Login

russian armor

"balancing" discussions are ALL pointless

PAGES (7)down
1 Oct 2018, 15:21 PM
#41
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Ah, I knew you'd come knocking Jae. Your stormtrooper idea was BEYOND BAD. I HAD to call u out on it...

I would suggest that we separate balance issues from personal issues, a suggestion should be judged only on the basis of weather it improves the game or it makes it worse. The identity of the person proposing it should be irrelevant, else you end up with flame wars and you lose focus.
1 Oct 2018, 15:29 PM
#42
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned

You beat me handily because I was trying out a stupid strategy for fun. If I recall correctly you also lost 2 p4s to an at gun that game. If you want, we could rematch and I’ll acrually try. That or stop referencing that meme of a match. Again, I’d be totally down for a rematch. Also, if you’d go read the thread you keep referencing, I agreed that Thompson paras are powerful and have their niche. Maybe that’s why I tried a meme build so I could make two of them. If you seriously think I was actually trying with a build that started with a rifle and an additional rear echelon I don’t know what to tell you mate. Stating you actually provide facts is a bit far fetched too.

For the third time, I’d be very happy to have a rematch with you this next weekend in a real game.


Yeah except that even when brits did get picked they lost an overwhelming majority of their games.


More excuses. Your memory is wrong. I lost ONE p4 to TWO at guns. You killed the second p4 with a Sherman. I still have the replay to prove it. How does getting an additional RE = trying out a stupid strategy for fun? I could have used your build to defeat an Ost opponent quite easily on Lost Glider. You know its very common for people to say they weren't trying. I could say that I wasn't trying because I was using Ostruppen which is a meme build. I'd be down for a rematch.

1 Oct 2018, 15:52 PM
#43
avatar of Kirrik

Posts: 573

Pick a doctrine with ambush camouflage and roleplay your Panzergrens as Stormtroopers. Problem solved
1 Oct 2018, 15:54 PM
#44
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post1 Oct 2018, 15:52 PMKirrik
Pick a doctrine with ambush camouflage and roleplay your Panzergrens as Stormtroopers. Problem solved


Not a bad idea, except u only get the accuracy bonus from ambush cover but tactical advance can be used anytime. And ambush camo pgrens are a bit less reliable with the ambush bonus.
1 Oct 2018, 15:56 PM
#45
avatar of LeOverlord

Posts: 310

Yeah, asking the pros. The hypocrisy at its finest. I will say it plain straight, i don't give a damn about pros, and a game is balanced so that EVERYBODY can play it. Want to balance it around pros? Ok then, all the players will leave. Have fun pros playing with each other 10 consecutive matches. I still remember how Imperial Dane got mad when he lost a 2v2 game and when i told him that it's funny that he complains when he loses 1 match out of 100, but when he wins 99 matches out of 100, he says nothing. I got a nice block from his stream that day. If this is an objective reasoning, then fine, whatever you say...
1 Oct 2018, 15:59 PM
#46
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Yeah, asking the pros. The hypocrisy at its finest. I will say it plain straight, i don't give a damn about pros, and a game is balanced so that EVERYBODY can play it. Want to balance it around pros? Ok then, all the players will leave. Have fun pros playing with each other 10 consecutive matches. I still remember how Imperial Dane got mad when he lost a 2v2 game and when i told him that it's funny that he complains when he loses 1 match out of 100, but when he wins 99 matches out of 100, he says nothing. I got a nice block from his stream that day. If this is an objective reasoning, then fine, whatever you say...


I game TWO options. We don't need to balance around pros. But if we're going to balance around the average Joe, we shouldn't care about the winrates of a tournament of the top 20 players in the world.

I will agree with u on Imperial Dane though. He is still my favorite caster. What he says about Ost being underpowered is almost completely correct. However, he does rage far too often when he's losing and blaming Relic on balance when sometimes he is partly to blame.
1 Oct 2018, 16:02 PM
#47
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Jesus, the whole point of the thread is that USF and UKF are NOT as weak of a faction in lower level play and so if we keep on buffing these 2 factions they will become over buffed. USF in 1v1 is easy mode. I was rank 250 USF in 100 games of experience with them. UKF on the other hand is bad in 1v1 and still great in team games. Changes need to be made but I fear that UKF is getting overbuffed. FOr example Section AT mines? Really? U can't wait 4 min for sappers with snares and piats?
1 Oct 2018, 16:03 PM
#48
avatar of NorthFireZ

Posts: 211

Wasn't Incendiary Rounds banned for excessive flaming?

This just seems like a baiting post to flame either the community balance team or the opinions of the common player. AKA not worth anyone's time.

Please, people from all over the world, it is not worth replying to this threat. Move on with your life and keep discussing balance changes :)
1 Oct 2018, 16:07 PM
#49
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
*
1 Oct 2018, 17:17 PM
#50
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

Yeah, asking the pros. The hypocrisy at its finest. I will say it plain straight, i don't give a damn about pros, and a game is balanced so that EVERYBODY can play it. Want to balance it around pros? Ok then, all the players will leave. Have fun pros playing with each other 10 consecutive matches. I still remember how Imperial Dane got mad when he lost a 2v2 game and when i told him that it's funny that he complains when he loses 1 match out of 100, but when he wins 99 matches out of 100, he says nothing. I got a nice block from his stream that day. If this is an objective reasoning, then fine, whatever you say...


This is not hypocrisy. This is the knowledge about how the game works. Players outside of the top are not affected by inter-faction ballance at all thanks to matchmaker. Even if one faction was clearly better than the other, the matchmaker would still find you such matches, that your chance to win would be close to 50/50. And even if the number of players is small, you still get half of matches for you to lose, no matter what are the factions involved.

This is the reason why ballance opinions are so varied and usually players who play one faction seem to say it is the weakest. They get close to perfect ballance from matchmaker, but they justify their loses with "OP" and "UP". In effect, it is easy to find a match where both sides believe the grass is greener on the other side and that their side is UP.

Let's sum up then. We have a crowd of people who believe that some faction is underpowered or overpowered even though you can mathematically prove that they play in ballanced conditions. And these people can't agree on anything. Do you really think they are the right source of information to chose future direction of changes within the game?
1 Oct 2018, 17:43 PM
#51
avatar of LeOverlord

Posts: 310



This is not hypocrisy. This is the knowledge about how the game works. Players outside of the top are not affected by inter-faction ballance at all thanks to matchmaker. Even if one faction was clearly better than the other, the matchmaker would still find you such matches, that your chance to win would be close to 50/50. And even if the number of players is small, you still get half of matches for you to lose, no matter what are the factions involved.

This is the reason why ballance opinions are so varied and usually players who play one faction seem to say it is the weakest. They get close to perfect ballance from matchmaker, but they justify their loses with "OP" and "UP". In effect, it is easy to find a match where both sides believe the grass is greener on the other side and that their side is UP.

Let's sum up then. We have a crowd of people who believe that some faction is underpowered or overpowered even though you can mathematically prove that they play in ballanced conditions. And these people can't agree on anything. Do you really think they are the right source of information to chose future direction of changes within the game?


If you really ignore those people complaining about that stuff and ask for nerfs and buffs which are also insane (as i have mentioned in another post, nobody -sane though- asked for AR-15s to Riflemen and AK-47s on Conscripts, or G36C and G3A3 on Volks and Grenadiers). Every faction has some pros and cons, and if i want to write them down, i will need to create a new post for that. Ignore people saying stuff about nerfs and buffs, stop spamming to people "l2p" all the time, and start giving advice. What i hate in this community is that everybody is toxic as hell. Give advice, be friendly, stop asking for someone's rank (nobody spends the same time as someone else in the game, so there's OBVIOUSLY a skill gap) and try to talk about balance in a logical manner. No, giving the Jackson or the AEC the armor of a M1A1 Abrams, the speed of a Ferrari F1, the damage of a nuclear missile and the cost of a piece of paper, IS NOT A LOGICAL THING!
1 Oct 2018, 17:49 PM
#52
avatar of LeOverlord

Posts: 310



I game TWO options. We don't need to balance around pros. But if we're going to balance around the average Joe, we shouldn't care about the winrates of a tournament of the top 20 players in the world.

I will agree with u on Imperial Dane though. He is still my favorite caster. What he says about Ost being underpowered is almost completely correct. However, he does rage far too often when he's losing and blaming Relic on balance when sometimes he is partly to blame.


If we are going to ingore the tournaments, then we can do the following things :
-Ignore people giving stupid ideas
-Discuss possible changes and WHY we believe they are good
-Use actual argument on why you thing a certain thing will/won't work if implemented
-Stop being toxic and start giving advice
-Make the game easier to play for everyone without constantly trying to balance it

On Imperial Dane now, i won't disagree that he's a great player, but his attitude is what pisses me off. I hate that kind of behavior. Wins and losses are in the game, you should be able to accept both. Nobody ever wins everywhere, and nobody ever loses everywhere. Simple as that.
1 Oct 2018, 17:49 PM
#53
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



If you really ignore those people complaining about that stuff and ask for nerfs and buffs which are also insane (as i have mentioned in another post, nobody -sane though- asked for AR-15s to Riflemen and AK-47s on Conscripts, or G36C and G3A3 on Volks and Grenadiers). Every faction has some pros and cons, and if i want to write them down, i will need to create a new post for that. Ignore people saying stuff about nerfs and buffs, stop spamming to people "l2p" all the time, and start giving advice. What i hate in this community is that everybody is toxic as hell. Give advice, be friendly, stop asking for someone's rank (nobody spends the same time as someone else in the game, so there's OBVIOUSLY a skill gap) and try to talk about balance in a logical manner. No, giving the Jackson or the AEC the armor of a M1A1 Abrams, the speed of a Ferrari F1, the damage of a nuclear missile and the cost of a piece of paper, IS NOT A LOGICAL THING!


Can't agree with you more here. I always try to give as much as I can and as my limited knowledge allows me to. Hence over 2000 posts under my belt. Even in ballance forums, the first person to reply often directs the OP that they should direct their problems to replay review or strategy forum, not ballance one. They get some tips as well. But such kind and helpful behaviour is often seen as calling "l2p" as well. Which is pretty sad. And actually, when somebody really makes a thread in one of these sections, he doesn't really wait long for good advice. Sadly, some players think they are perfect and always blame ballance. Such players not only won't ever ask for advice, but they also get offended when you give them tips...

So really, nobody wants to ignore those people. But there are better places on this forum for comps stompers and weaker players than ballance forum. This is the last place they should look into.
1 Oct 2018, 19:26 PM
#54
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053



More excuses. Your memory is wrong. I lost ONE p4 to TWO at guns. You killed the second p4 with a Sherman. I still have the replay to prove it. How does getting an additional RE = trying out a stupid strategy for fun? I could have used your build to defeat an Ost opponent quite easily on Lost Glider. You know its very common for people to say they weren't trying. I could say that I wasn't trying because I was using Ostruppen which is a meme build. I'd be down for a rematch.


Ok it’s settled. I have other obligations during the week, but this weekend for sure. And yes, you’re right. The second p4 died to a belated sherman dive. How you don’t understand how self-damaging building only one rifleman and one rear echelon in the early game is beyond me but whatever. I’ll use a real strategy next time and you’ll see the difference I’m sure.

Also, why you are so mad that stormtroopers now have objectively better veterancy, are better at a specific role, and have the best camo in the game only shared with one other infantry squad (discounting snipers) is beyond me. They don’t even need to spend muni on getting their mp40s, unlike the 100 muni panzergrenadier clone upgrade they used to have.
1 Oct 2018, 19:56 PM
#55
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Wasn't Incendiary Rounds banned for excessive flaming?

This just seems like a baiting post to flame either the community balance team or the opinions of the common player. AKA not worth anyone's time.

Please, people from all over the world, it is not worth replying to this threat. Move on with your life and keep discussing balance changes :)


Hush, let him do his work, he is perma banned on official and steam forums, his ultimate goal is to get banned on all coh2 forums, now its .org turn, then he'll go for now obscure gamereplays.

You know you deal with horribly bad player, when he advocates to ignore pros opinions.
1 Oct 2018, 20:13 PM
#56
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

Yeah, asking the pros. The hypocrisy at its finest. I will say it plain straight, i don't give a damn about pros, and a game is balanced so that EVERYBODY can play it. Want to balance it around pros? Ok then, all the players will leave. Have fun pros playing with each other 10 consecutive matches. I still remember how Imperial Dane got mad when he lost a 2v2 game and when i told him that it's funny that he complains when he loses 1 match out of 100, but when he wins 99 matches out of 100, he says nothing. I got a nice block from his stream that day. If this is an objective reasoning, then fine, whatever you say...


I said something similar and got perma banned
1 Oct 2018, 21:13 PM
#57
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned


Hush, let him do his work, he is perma banned on official and steam forums, his ultimate goal is to get banned on all coh2 forums, now its .org turn, then he'll go for now obscure gamereplays.

You know you deal with horribly bad player, when he advocates to ignore pros opinions.


That's rich coming from u. Don't know who u paid off to let u back on this forum. You were permabanned here
1 Oct 2018, 21:21 PM
#58
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned

Ok it’s settled. I have other obligations during the week, but this weekend for sure. And yes, you’re right. The second p4 died to a belated sherman dive. How you don’t understand how self-damaging building only one rifleman and one rear echelon in the early game is beyond me but whatever. I’ll use a real strategy next time and you’ll see the difference I’m sure.

Also, why you are so mad that stormtroopers now have objectively better veterancy, are better at a specific role, and have the best camo in the game only shared with one other infantry squad (discounting snipers) is beyond me. They don’t even need to spend muni on getting their mp40s, unlike the 100 muni panzergrenadier clone upgrade they used to have.


Not sure I can do it on the weekend. And the way you talk, it's obvious u haven't tried using them in the patch, that's why u don't understand why most people want to keep the stgs. And you don't need to care about them since the only factions you're ranked in are 1v1 USF and UKF.
1 Oct 2018, 21:25 PM
#59
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 879

The game is so substantially different across all modes and for different skill levels that it's never going to be balanced enough for everyone.

Brits are borderline OP in 2v2, but in 1v1 they suck. Why? Not because of the units, but because of how the resource income ends up working out for a faction that only does well in cover or hiding in garrisons. Players facing defensive Brits in 1v1 can just go cap the map somewhere else until they can dislodge them. That's not the case in 2v2 or larger game modes. Hell, 3v3 and 4v4 could even be balanced if the maps were twice as big with far lower resource income per point, but the game engine would no doubt have to be completely redone to allow that.

As it is right now I notice from my own horrible Axis ranks, and those of other players in top 200 2v2, that it seems to be a LOT easier to win as Allies. That's because at intermediate-upper intermediate skill levels, Allies are just easier to play, with fewer wipes and micro that doesn't require as much skill as Axis. I can't get MG or raketen micro right, and that's what causes me to lose a lot of games. I see plenty of other people with the same problems and who I would otherwise say are competent players and that's a different form of imbalance. The old 4-man vs 5 or 6 man squad problem is also still an issue in game modes where there is a ton of indirect fire, ie., Axis squads just end up losing health faster or getting RNG wipes, and you have to retreat a lot faster and be smarter about picking your battles when playing as Axis.

But for the top 25, I suppose it's balanced? I don't know, I tend to think top 2v2 teams would still rather play Allies than Axis if they want a sure victory, primarily because of how much less dependent Allies are on infantry preservation late game.
1 Oct 2018, 21:37 PM
#60
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



That's rich coming from u. Don't know who u paid off to let u back on this forum. You were permabanned here

Contrary to you, I was actually missed.
PAGES (7)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

694 users are online: 1 member and 693 guests
dola789ski
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49857
Welcome our newest member, dola789ski
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM