What faction and modus get played most / less!

Let's take a simple example to show to you that you really don't know what you are asking:
Lets assume grens and cons are perfectly balanced in 1v1. What change do they need to make to balance them in 2v2? My point is if the factions are perfectly balanced in 1v1 why they need to be balanced in 2v2? How are they umbalanced?

Many reason like:
Different economy of fuel and CP across modes
Different design and synergy. For instance IS and Penal are very powerful but if one built them cap slower. In 2vs2 the other player can produce more unit to cap fast and let his teammate do the heavy fighting or support him team weapons in fortified positions.

My point is if the factions are perfectly balanced in 1v1 why they need to be balanced in 2v2? How are they umbalanced?

...also you'd need to consider the whole asymmetrical balance thing. Certain faction might have to make choices in their tech which would can give them an advantage in one aspect while leaving them vulnerable in another aspect. In team games, the teammate potentially can cover these disadvantages (or in fact any disadvantages, the teching was just an example).

Or another example: I guess you would agree that certain commanders are more useful in team games than in 1v1 and vice versa. This shouldn't be the case when 1v1 balance would perfectly carry over to team games, right?

It is strange that there are least discussions about OST even though it is the most played faction.

I don't think it's that strange - when playing Ost, you have a MG that works like a MG should, an AT gun that works like an AT gun should, etc. In short, everything is what you expect it to be when playing it. Teching that is linear and relatively straightforward but still gives you options. It doesn't feel like there are any units to complain about.

Had no idea WM is so popular and brit so unplayed. USF too, i mean OKW and USF come in the same time and USF is OP, why people play OKW ?lol

I, like many of my friends, find the UKF to be boring to play with.

it's just holding out for Churchills while hoping the enemy doesn't overhelm you with indirect fire and rocket arty.

Reminder that balance will never fix matchmaking.

Also that Wehrmacht and okw is always mosted pick. In the middle is soviet; and brit and USA is less.

They are most picked, because there are only 2 axis factions and 3 allied. Imagine there would be only 1 axis faction, the "Wehrmacht", and 3 allied opponents. Stats after 1000 games would be something like "Wehrmacht played 1000 times, brits 300, usf 300 and soviets 400"

Let's take a simple example to show to you that you really don't know what you are asking:
Lets assume grens and cons are perfectly balanced in 1v1. What change do they need to make to balance them in 2v2? My point is if the factions are perfectly balanced in 1v1 why they need to be balanced in 2v2? How are they umbalanced?

Gameplay shifts quite a lot. 4v4 is way more crowded than 1v1, since front line and map size do not quadruple. In team games it's less likely to be cut off, so resource income is WAY more stable, caches become more relevant, so gameplay shifts away from LV to late game vehicles. Artillery is more potent since it has more targets, loiters can be more devastating, but most of the time they are just shot down. And also a player can be taken out more easily if two or three players focus one down in one specific attack before the team mates can react properly, which can't be the case in 1v1 (obviously), where it is also much easier to predict the enemy, since you can keep track of the units and you only play against a single faction.

Balance in small modes is easier to achieve since there are less synergies (only units of the same faction can synergize) and there is no coordination with other players involved. In team games you can compensate mediocre micro by good teamplay, this is a level of complexity that 1v1s cannot have.

In short: Team games are mostly about teamplay and team synergy on a densely populated map with few gaps, while 1v1 is more about unit micro and exploiting unavoidable gaps in the enemy's front line.

Speaking about the topic, I prefer the Soviets for several reasons:
- I like them
- I'm tired of constantly copying a fraction: 4 Germans, 2 USA, 2 Britain in two parts of the game. That’s why I don’t really like playing for the Axis - 4 German factions. If СoH2 had Italy or Japan as a third fraction, I would spend significantly more time on the Axis.
And If the Third Part will really be Italy / Africa - new Italy alone will not motivate the purchase of the Third Part.

One has to factor in also how many people actually own each faction if one want to draw any conclusions.

So UKF getting new doctrines soon to fix them?

So UKF getting new doctrines soon to fix them?

no commander at all for any factions

We've known that for ages based on how easy it is to get higher ranks for these factions.

Uh, the faction with the most players (Ostheer) means that it is the HARDEST to get higher ranks. I've seen UKF sim city scrubs get rank 200 in 1v1 while 200 is a very decent rank for Ost.

Since often people ask about what modus is played most atm and which faction.
I will list it here now. This list counts only active player in the ladderboard. 05.09.2019

What you can see is:
Most played random modus is 4vs4 > 3vs3> 2vs2 > 1vs1

Also that Wehrmacht and okw is always mosted pick. In the middle is soviet; and brit and USA is less.

Why for Premade AT does not count this numbers?!
1. Reason is, that many teamgame players are playing often in new combinations. But they need to play 10 games with the same 4 players, to get shown up here. Thats why the AT 4vs4 numbers are so low.

2. Many 2vs2 AT premade are seachring 3vs3, 4vs4 too.

Remember: That are only the people, who have an acutal rank. If you did not played for 1 month, you disappear here.

Also alot of 2vs2 AT search 3vs3, 4vs4.
Also there are plenty of 4vs4 teams, with few games, but not 10 placements games. Thats why the number is so small.