Profile of AchtAchter

Scavenger arty does not reliably destroy the ml 20, it's a heavy rng fest that might not even destroy it.

How do I deal as OKW with ML 20?

STATISTIC LEL

And you play the game sometimes ? It will be a good start.

I definitely play it after 22:00.

average/low players are going.

Now you can argue that team vs team, it is balanced, yes but still it requires teamplay for a side while the other no.

Yes it's easier to micro a HMG42, likewise it's easier to micro 2 960 hp units instead of 3 640hp units.
Likewise it's harder to overwatch 4 men squads with less hp that encounter more RNG wipes during the whole game. So it's harder to micro USF, but not soviets, soviets don't have micro taxes like USF do. Their units are as durable as the Axis ones. Only maxims are harder to micro on OPEN maps, that's the only thing that comes in mind when I think about hard soviet micro.

But this all doesn't matter when you are top 200 because at this level microing factions properly is not the problem, it's more of a nuisance but nothing that stops you from winning.
It doesn't matter if you are Axis or Allies, if you have no teamplay in 3vs3+ At you gonna lose. AT is balanced. With proper matchmaking random would be also balanced.
Therefore, brits increase the allied playerbase and we actually will have balanced match ups. I would play far more often allies in 3vs3+ if it wouldn't be so frustrating that your mates are ALWAYS, always noobs who don't know how to use their units.

Says the guy who's player card indicates his greatest success are as axis random in large games....


Popcap is absolutely a disadvantage for USF particularly at low-mid level skill. Late game is dominated by vehicles and a small number of robust vehicles are easier to micro and keep alive than a large number of paper vehicles. And "late game" comes quite quickly in large game formats.

As to squad wiping... It takes a real moron to loose vet5 squads. Not that it doesn't happen, and more so now with the vet5 nerf, but they are still super robust. And the MG buffs in large games will shut low skilled allies down hard. To set it up so that someone needs 2 months to L2P and has to find mates to do it is a FLAWED game design unless the intent is a small but more elite player base. I don't think it is.

Random 3vs3+ games have only ONE balance problem, HORRIBLE matchmaking.
When you play axis, you always get good team mates in your rank rage, due the fact that there is a bigger player base. As allies, even if you are high ranked, you get just shit mates.
Most match ups look like this in 3vs3 for me as OKW

3 12 118 vs 311 9102 24758 - I WONDER WHO'S GONNA WIN.
Matchmaking decides games in 3vs3+ random games, not balance. I use CELO since it came out, that's the only reason for those absurd winning rates for axis in 3vs3+.
I really hope the Brits will significantly increase the allied playerbase, otherwise it will be still frustrating to go on 3vs3+ as allies.

If you are so keen on my playercard you'd might notice that I'm also successful playing allies in a 3vs3 team, that means with equally skilled players ( that carry me ).

You lose all the time squads in late game due Artillery, rng one shots or lag nades, you don't have to be a moron for that.

Also always easy referring to playercards while not showing the own.

Randoms should NOT be matched up with AT. Not ever and player waits be damned. To allow it sacrifices the long-term goals (more new players) with short-term gratification (players shouldn't have to wait so long).

I agree, it's frustrating for both sides and I already asked relic in the past about this. Answer: they want to avoid long waiting times