You can tout how many people play 3v3 and 4v4 all you want. If you still think that somehow means 4v4 balancing should be a priority, and that balance somehow trickles down, all it proves is a complete lack of understanding of game mechanics, full stop.
Notice how I never said that 1v1s are the most popular game mode. My post implies/claims that 1v1 tournaments receive more viewership because they are, in fact, more competitive than 3v3 and 4v4.
Again, your fundamental understanding of the game is flawed. The nature of variables and the amount matchups to balance, that other users have pointed out in this thread, mean that 4v4 is exponentially harder to balance and technically impossible. Throw map balance in to that, something that is refined in 1v1 and 2v2 for the most part, and it becomes even harder.
If you ever played CoH
, I was in the top of the 4v4 ladders for a very long time. I've played my time in 4v4s. Individual skill is hardly the factor that it is in 1v1s and 2v2s. "Top" 4v4 teams get away with literally a-moving blobs, because there are little opportunities to flank. The "Go hard like" team showed this many times on one of their POV streams during League of Heroes, where one of the players on north Lienne had 4 squads of Pgrens a-moving around for half of the game. I fail to see the "skill" involved in that.
Yes, because most of the best 4v4 teams (with notable exceptions like the TATUS guys that have proven themselves to be extremely competent 1v1 and 2v2 players) get away with poor micro on the basis of map knowledge. Knowing where to optimally place bunkers, schwerer HQs, and which buildings to garrison at the start of the match are not indicators of skill, they are indicators of cookie-cutter pre-planning. The nature of 4v4 allows these plans to be executed with minimal micro because, again, the lack of flanking opportunities and human wave tactics that only 4v4 lets players set up a machine gun and not have to worry about it for 5 minutes. 1v1 and 2v2 have minimal pre-planning at best, and no MG will stay static for 5 minutes. All players must adapt on the fly to cutoff maneuvers and well-microed light vehicle play. A 4v4 team could theoretically place a machine gun on their cutoff for the entire game and it would hardly constitute a few percent of that teams effective fighting strength. If anything, League of Heroes proved that these types of players were abysmal at micro and on the fly planning, as these teams lost the majority of their 1s and 2s games, and only stayed in the tournament because of the extreme point weighing on the 3s and 4s games.
I look at each player individually. When the players arguing with me play 90% of one faction, have mediocre ranks, and only play 3v3 and 4v4, it is EXTREMELY safe to say that they have a limited understanding of game mechanics/timing/resourcing. I don't even have a perfect understanding of all the numbers in this game, yet I'm not going to run head first into an MG42 over and over again, I'm not going to lose two squads to a sturmpio, I'm not going to chase a low health tank without stopping to shoot, I'm not going to fight on the move and in open cover, I'm not going to have my pants down for a light vehicle rush,and I'm not going to leave roads unmined for Panthers and complain about losing my katyusha on the forums.
I've never said they aren't the most popular, I have always said that is a dumb metric to use when prioritizing balance in an RTS game. This isn't a MOBA, go play DOTA or Total War Arena if thats what you're looking for. The game is, never has been, and never will be designed to be anywhere close to perfect in 3v3 and 4v4.
My judgements are superior to the average 4v4 player, because again (and this is getting very old to repeart), the average 4v4 player sticks to one faction or side, has mediocre micro, and has mediocre game mechanic understanding. This really isn't hard to understand.
This thread really has proven to me that the "unskilled idiotic casual" moniker becomes more true each day. Notice how I've never even said in this thread that OKW isn't OP, but everyone is pretending like I'm saying there isn't a problem. The hyperbole in this thread that I've been calling out is about "LEL 90% winrates" 3 days after a patch that had a MAJOR faction redesign, most importantly the potency of EARLY light armour play in the Luchs that Allied factions have NEVER had to prepare for (unlike the m20, t70 rush of early 2014, m5 rush in the summer) and the fact that people are up in arms about this without even learning how to counter it is ridiculous. Even better is the people that make these arguments have no right to make them, they have hidden ranks with OKW, or a majority of games played as allies. I don't really care how batshit OP something is, but no one is allowed to make a balance argument without playing a SINGLE match as what they claim to be oh-so-OP. Sure, 11 minute KTs are retarded (and surprise, only exist in 3v3 and 4v4, remember what I said about lack of flanking, micro, and retarded tunnel vision static play? No wonder, people can just build caches and never get cut off in 4v4) and that is going to be changed.
1v1, and 2v2. And yes, that literally is a good justification. 1v1 and 2v2 primary players have a better understanding of game mechanics, because if they don't, they lose. Tell me how many of your 4v4 friends can say the same about their matches, considering you don't need to know much at all to be a competent 4v4 player. Bonus points when these players complain about patch notes and specific numerical changes. I loved reading the posts when the flame changes happened, and people knee-jerked harder than I've ever seen, repeating the same incorrect bullshit that only someone with a lack of understanding of mechanics would be able to fathom. Oh, lets not forget the crit shot change too, apparently EVERYONE claimed to play the balance mod, and apparently none of them did because they all though there was no more snare.
Are we really going to base UKF being bad on the 25% 4v4 statistics that do not take into account matchups with what is a fairly broken OKW due to pop cap?
UKF performs completely fine against Ostheer, and would perform fine against a fixed OKW. This is the truth for all game modes. UKFs win rates can easily be explained by the lopsided OKW search rates, and the fact that their brokenness disproportionately affects UKF more, on top of UKFs current population cap bug.
The hyperbole in this thread about UKF being "on life support" comes from the exact same clowns that think the sniper was fine, the churchill was fine, the crocodile was fine, and free heavy engineers were fine. These are those oh so high caliber 4v4 players that required these crutches to make up for their poor play. After all, a cheap 1400HP well armoured tank requires minimal micro, ditto for one with a stupid long range, DOT dealing, AT gun wiping 1400HP well armoured tank with a flamer, perfect for 4v4 players.
2
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
