Im gonna hit you guys with an opinion

This is just me venting frustration late at night but in my honest opinion you shouldn't post about anything to do with unit balancing or balancing the game in general if none of the following points match you

-You are one of the few pro players of the game
-Ranked at least top 10
-have extensive knowledge on the inner workings of the game
-Be fully unbiased for all factions (the amount of weird faction fanboyism is so dumb to me please stop)


i could probably come up with more criteria but im tired.

I want to see what people think about this to me the most important criteria is to be HIGH ranked since 99% of threads on balance can be summed up with L2P issue...

All players should be looking to understand why they think something is op or broken instead of declaring it so immediately. Playtest and counter playtesting is required. Even low ranked players can do this to a degree for lower tier skill levels in the game.

Low ranked players often simply lack the knowledge of both why something is strong, and how to go about beating it. So without complete information it can be easy to say that's unstoppable because to them it is.

The real problem is when you have your dummies who stick to their guns after they've been told how to defeat what's causing them problems and cherry pick stats and information that applies only to their made up scenarios.

All players should be looking to understand why they think something is op or broken instead of declaring it so immediately. Playtest and counter playtesting is required. Even low ranked players can do this to a degree for lower tier skill levels in the game.

Low ranked players often simply lack the knowledge of both why something is strong, and how to go about beating it. So without complete information it can be easy to say that's unstoppable because to them it is.

The real problem is when you have your dummies who stick to their guns after they've been told how to defeat what's causing them problems and cherry pick stats and information that applies only to their made up scenarios.

This ^ +1

Furthermore although the question pertains to CoH2 balance, I don't think it belongs in the balance section.

/Moved to lobby

Balancing is something that we can't do both pros and normal player because it requires totally objective opinions. I mean, if a unit needs to be adjusted, it will have to have an X strength and a Y weakness. This is what we can't fully understand. We all want to create the absolute unit or the next Universal soldier/Captain America. That's not how it works.

As an example i will point what G2.Fabian (professional player playing Rainbow Six Siege) said about an operator called Lion. He said that he is op and he has to be nerfed. He even signed a petition along with some players. The result? The specific operator has been banned and cannot be used in Pro League just because this guy is a whinnie and can't improvise when playing against this specific operator. Of course i'm comparing 2 different games in which balance is also different.

In CoH2 some units might be broken, but we need to sit down and see how they are broken or how they are underperforming in order to "balance" them. We can't simply give a unit the cost of a loaf of bread, the strength of a fortress, the firepower of an aircraft carrier, the armor of a modern tank, the speed of an F1 racer and the range of an ICBM.

I'd say that COH2 will never be balanced, not because it's a bad game, no. Just because it's never meant to be that way. It has too many RNG elements to be fair.
As i know balancing in games takes entire dev teams and days of testing, calculations and modeling. I appreciate what guys are trying to do here, but that's not nearly enough.
In my opinion balance is much more complicated thing than "X is stronger than Y, so nerf X". It requires objectiveness, and developer-level understanding of game mechanics.

So, i think COH2 will always be unbalanced, but that's nobody's fault, it's just the way this game was designed

Yes and no.

Although I completely agree that the amount of Fanboyism is too much and it is a general issue, not exclusive to this game (Other games, football, etc.) there is something you should keep in mind.

Skill and knowledge are 2 different things. I completely agree that if a player starts a balance thread, they should have the tactical and strategic knowledge of the game and unit(s)/Situations that they are talking about, BUT they might not be skilled enough to perform it.

Let me ask you a question, do you think that every engineer and designer working at a company like BMW or Porsche are skilled competitive drivers? Of course not! But they have the knowledge to make good cars. Same goes here, a person might not have the skill or reaction time to perform a tactic in game, but they might have the knowledge.

About being the top 10/50 or whatever, from a balance perspective this is kind of a dilemma for the developers. Do you balance the game for the small percentage of "pro" players or do you balance it for your main audience (The vast number of people who pay for the game)? This affects a lot of things. This difference became very apparent after the transition from Table Top games to Computer Games (You guys remember those days? ). Back in those days, there was no such thing as "Player Reaction Time" but in computer games, there is. So yea, it's a fine line to walk on, and you can never keep everyone happy. But whom do you focus on?


Although, as you said in the beginning, you're venting a bit and I have to be honest, I understand. People have the right to express their opinions, and I agree that many of these issues are L2P matters. It is up to Pro players to ask for a replay and guide them, and up to us as community members to not engage in pointless discussions.

A fanboy has the tendency to turn into a troll at an instance, and a fundamental rule of internet is : Do Not Feed the Troll.

P.S As others pointed out, we have the element of RNG in these kind of games (Dice Gods in Table Top) so balance becomes subjective to some extent, and this is what makes these games unique otherwise we should all go and play chess. Although in computer games, we have meta data, win ratio, unit performance etc. which can be measured and despite their flaws, can give the Devs, and us an insight.

Bad idea. The game does not only consist of top players but >99% of "average" gamers that also have a very different point of view on the game.

Sure, if we talk about things like "Does the Jackson need 300 Penetration, wouldn't it be better with 280?", this is a topic for the pros as average players won't notice any difference.

BUT

There are also strategies, which are laughable for Pros, but tend to suck all the fun out of the game for a larger player base. A good example is the former British Sim City. It is a huge pain in the ass for average players to cope with this strategy while the pros just played around the emplacements. Sure, "noobs" could also do this, but you still have to keep your retreat paths in mind to prevent your retreating troops running through the Bofors and getting wiped.

Not a big deal for a pro, but still amazingly annoying for average players. Pros would now suggest that everything is fine, while the average noob struggles and quits the game.

I have a friend who always watch his defeat's replays, If I've heard him bitching live cuz defeat isn't always easy to swallow I've never heard him about how unfair or unbalance stuff are without a serious argumentation about it.

I have a way to overcome "unfair balance" when i start to lose continiously to OST for example and have thoughts like "oh gosh they're so OP" i start playing OST. If it's OP so i'll be winning and get my rank up easily, right? When some faction gets OP just play it and climb to top ranks, right?!

But that doesn'w work in fact. When i think OST is OP and i start playing them that's never a winning spree)))

About auto-sport comparison. I think pro drivers are good at testing, and telling how well they feel the car is performing, but that's the engineers who make changes they decide if something needs to be adjusted or not.

This is just me venting frustration late at night but in my honest opinion you shouldn't post about anything to do with unit balancing or balancing the game in general if none of the following points match you

-You are one of the few pro players of the game
-Ranked at least top 10
-have extensive knowledge on the inner workings of the game
-Be fully unbiased for all factions (the amount of weird faction fanboyism is so dumb to me please stop)


i could probably come up with more criteria but im tired.

I want to see what people think about this to me the most important criteria is to be HIGH ranked since 99% of threads on balance can be summed up with L2P issue...

Well, you missed me big time
Visit a shooting range and try again

Perfect chess balanced will never be achieved nor it is the goal. What you want out of a game, is for it to be feel FAIR.

Yes and no.

Although I completely agree that the amount of Fanboyism is too much and it is a general issue, not exclusive to this game (Other games, football, etc.) there is something you should keep in mind.

Skill and knowledge are 2 different things. I completely agree that if a player starts a balance thread, they should have the tactical and strategic knowledge of the game and unit(s)/Situations that they are talking about, BUT they might not be skilled enough to perform it.

100%. The problem is that the main issue is the bolded part. 90% of the threads in balance deserved to be posted on stage office and the OP needs to ask for help first instead of coming here to rant about what strat he just lost to.
How many threads have you seen where the OP knows what he is talking about? Replays? Stating which mode? Accurate game stats?

There are also strategies, which are laughable for Pros, but tend to suck all the fun out of the game for a larger player base. A good example is the former British Sim City.

Everyone agreed that it was annoying and "cancer". Even when you knew how to deal with it, it just dragged the game for a long time.

100%. The problem is that the main issue is the bolded part. 90% of the threads in balance deserved to be posted on stage office and the OP needs to ask for help first instead of coming here to rant about what strat he just lost to.

How hard do you think that would be to make a forum rule?

Combined with the 'no balance talk in the State Office' that could go a long way to cleaning up around here.

Bad idea. The game does not only consist of top players but >99% of "average" gamers that also have a very different point of view on the game.

Sure, if we talk about things like "Does the Jackson need 300 Penetration, wouldn't it be better with 280?", this is a topic for the pros as average players won't notice any difference.

BUT

There are also strategies, which are laughable for Pros, but tend to suck all the fun out of the game for a larger player base. A good example is the former British Sim City. It is a huge pain in the ass for average players to cope with this strategy while the pros just played around the emplacements. Sure, "noobs" could also do this, but you still have to keep your retreat paths in mind to prevent your retreating troops running through the Bofors and getting wiped.

Not a big deal for a pro, but still amazingly annoying for average players. Pros would now suggest that everything is fine, while the average noob struggles and quits the game.

Why do i always see people talking about British Sim City? Where is the Wehrmacht MG/Bunker spam? Do you know how annoying is this?

Top player dosnt mean that he know the game, he just are fast in hands and in mind, you can born with it. I know that some top players play on instinct and speed only. So its cannot be argument in all balance discussion, coz president dont know how all work and what to do.
Ask top players about this (have extensive knowledge on the inner workings of the game ) and you will see that thay dont know it. But some mediocre players know it. You get my logic.
To see how top players are wrong, check old balance thread and when CAS doc arrive and how many players play with it. And only when thay see how need to play with doc, thay undestand. So theory level of game show thay are not better then all anothers.
Here in coh2 never will be balance, coz some players have different opinion about some units. What is better give panther armor and less HP or more HP and less armor? All sides can be right and wrong.
More problem coming that peoples write some things from emotes and are biased, coz thay cannot lose (if thay was less lucky or just bad), but its a balance problem. I remember old Luvnest storys on old Kharkov, where all north lose was coz side of map, but when he win in south it was not side win, it was skill win OpieOP.
And what we must to do, when one top player think that brumbar are fine and another think that nope? Who have better rank or win more tourney or make bo7?
Also in all game modes and levels are sometimes different problems for players.
If somebody ask me what opinion abut balance and game i can hear more i say its will be Elchino or Mr. Smith (with all mistakes that thay can do, coz its okey), but not HelpigHans or DevM.
Main problem beetwin top players and regular is that, first think that balance mistake can be fixed from there skill, if i can counter it, its okey (somthing like that). Second think, if thay cannot counter somthing, its OP.

How hard do you think that would be to make a forum rule?

Combined with the 'no balance talk in the State Office' that could go a long way to cleaning up around here.

It's up to the community to push this forward.

This forum is affectionately referred to also as "The Latrine."

Go to war with other forums users (and the devs) about how you feel COH2 should be balanced!

If the community is trash, the forums are trash. If the community wants this to improve, the forums can improve.

As an example i will point what G2.Fabian (professional player playing Rainbow Six Siege) said about an operator called Lion. He said that he is op and he has to be nerfed. He even signed a petition along with some players. The result? The specific operator has been banned and cannot be used in Pro League just because this guy is a whinnie and can't improvise when playing against this specific operator. Of course i'm comparing 2 different games in which balance is also different.

Except that Lion is widely considered broken overpowered by the community, and him being banned is not at all because Fabian signed a petition to ban him. Its not that Fabian cant improvise, its that no one can improvise. Im pretty sure that anyone who so much as reads how his equipment works could tell that hes broken at this point. Furthermore, even if he wasnt globally banned every game in pro league, he would still be banned by the players through the in game pick and ban system every game anyway. Honestly, this passage is so thoroughly off base and out of touch in every way.

I'm only going to raise issue with the top 10 nonsense. A ton of people play this game and are in the middle area (ranks 50-300) and their opinions matter because they make up the bulk of the playerbase. Active people who spend half a dozen hours a week, but don't live CoH2 for hours every day. I spend about 2 hours a day playing CoH2, I love it, but I'm never going to be great because I can't afford to spend the time necessary for practicing every faction. Furthermore, I don't want to be a great player, I want to have _Fun_ and has El Chino points out, it's not about perfect balance but about fairness.

You think if every non 1v1 pro disappeared, any of the tournaments or level of support for this game would be possible? You think Sega would ahve dumped 20,000 dollars on a game with a total of 100 people playing online? No. I don't play 1v1 at a competitive level, but I do watch and support the tourneys and events, and if people like me have their opinions disregarded then we'll eventually stop playing and the playerbase, AKA the lifeblood of this game, will shrink even more than it has.

You can weigh a person's opinion with their biases and their experience, that's fine, but to say that a 4v4 player has no right to talk about game balance is absolute nonsense -- especially when the majority of the complaints line up with the 1v1 "pros".

As an example i will point what G2.Fabian (professional player playing Rainbow Six Siege) said about an operator called Lion. He said that he is op and he has to be nerfed. He even signed a petition along with some players. The result? The specific operator has been banned and cannot be used in Pro League just because this guy is a whinnie and can't improvise when playing against this specific operator. Of course i'm comparing 2 different games in which balance is also different.

As j4j said Lion in r6 is a game changing operator and gives the attacking team a major advantage over the defending team. This is also after several very hard nerfs to the character who was even more broken at launch. Conceptually the character is immensely broken at a design standpoint.

There is no counter to this operator, zero outplay potential and likely should have never been introduced in the first place considering how impactful hes been since his debut. He also had a 100% pick/ban in pro league which showed how strong he was.

Ubisoft are considering a complete rework for Lion, thats how ridiculously broken he is.

the basic, memorize the cruzz google doc (or at least save it) and pass first math grade, that's it i u have those u can post

It's up to the community to push this forward.



If the community is trash, the forums are trash. If the community wants this to improve, the forums can improve.

Well, I mean it is possible and I personally would welcome that. People should be encouraged to first upload a replay and ask for help and then make a balance thread. But how would that be implemented? Can't just use something automatic for that (Player card, number of posts etc.). I don't know, maybe a notification before creating a balance thread? I think we should start a foundation now and improve the community for CoH 3

Show Spoiler

True. Lion is trash, the new 44mag is gonna be trash, most new operators are trash, Ubisoft is trash.