You click on the bug then click on the vote button
it won't let me. I do not see a vote button |
I believe it's a mistake to assume that 3 vs. 3 and 4 vs. 4 players are 'casual'. I've been playing COH since 2006, on average several matches per week, and I've never really been interested in 1 vs. 1, and only rarely have I played 2 vs. 2. Am I a 'casual' player? Why don't I play 1 vs. 1 or 2 vs. 2? Because for me, the game stops being a 'game' when there are enough random elements introduced to eliminate the predictable, causality of a small match: in short, it's more like real war, rather than chess, which I find infinitely more stimulating. It's boring to me to realize only 5 minutes into a match that, because you didn't take the 'farm house', you've lost, and it's GG. Utter stupidity as far as I'm concerned. In a 4 vs. 4, if you are having trouble taking the 'farm house', you can ask an ally to provide reinforcements, while still leaving 2 other teammates to continue with other objectives, and possibly reverse a potentially serious setback without simply having to 'GG' and start again. Or you could find that enemy has allocated 3 players worth of troops to take an objective rather than only one player's worth of troops -- the random element is much greater with more players. In a 1 vs. 1, you know EXACTLY how much force your opponent can possibly have, and the only variable will be where they are. Boring IMHO. Kind of like being able to count cards. I crave the sheer unpredictability of war. It's like playing chess, but your opponent might have 3 bishops instead of 2, or 2 queens and no knights, etc.
In addition, as I mentioned in an earlier reply, I find the chatter of comrades over the headset adds a level of verisimilitude that's missing if you're by yourself, or only communicating with one other ally. The chaos of trying to get your colleagues' attention during a crucial battle event is something that's utterly missing in a 1 vs. 1. I'm sure I'm not the only player who craves that kind of auditory battle-atmosphere. In fact, I think a future version of COH should require players to connect their headsets into the game engine itself, so that if/when one of the 'radio intercept' abilities is activated, you can actually listen in to the chatter of opposing team for a few seconds without them knowing. Yeah, I know there are potential issues with this (people refusing to patch in, and using skpye instead, players not speaking the same language, etc.) You could require the players to patch in to the game with headsets before the match starts, and use voice-pattern recognition to force them to really do it or the game will not start/or it will stop in mid-match, but I digress.
+1 I totally agree. Really captured the reasons why people play teamgames. It is silly to generalize all teamgame players as "casual". |
how to vote? I am sure relic won't give a fuck |
The problem with 3v3s and 4v4s is that no faction is really designed to cope with any amount of 2v1 action.
You can double and triple team players in these game modes, and all you really sacrifice is one or two territory points amounting to a measly few points of fuel or munition for a given period of time.
How do you balance that?
Map design for games greater than 2v2 is a challenge because it either becomes a series of concurrent 1v1s, or a situation where an otherwise competent player gets facerolled by a second player's entire army and loses 1000ish manpower in one maneuver.
That's a challenge to recover from, and it's not really something that's easily preventable or countered. This game just isn't designed to have players facing superior numbers. The main/only counter to that is to have your own team simultaneously double team the opponents.
But ultimately, the whole strategy behind virtually every metagame decision is just reaching the critical mass of firepower, and no one player alone can field units faster than multiple opponents. The fact that maps overlap for 3v3s and 4v4s doesn't help, because it more or less leaves it to be a diceroll to how well balanced the front lines are every game.
Good post and I very much agree. The way 4v4 maps are set up, the focus is generally on two points. Vp's are conveniently located next to another important resource such as fuel or ammo. THis devolves the game into 2 2v2s or 1 3v3, etc. The lack of other meaningful objectives turns the game into a meatgrinder. This de-incentivizes flanking and strategic play. |
just lost 3 in a row with sovs.. lmg gren spam, obersoldaten spam, fallschirmjaeger spam, pak spam you name it. Axis just need to know how to exploit the game, and there it is - EZ mode just as some of you want think late game sov is ...
|
Well I think I said it before earlier in this thread, but even if you have enough tanks, you are still at a disadvantage due to better Axis AT.......an AI |
It sure is no final solution, but at least will makes things a little better.
I knew you were a Nazi
On topic though, I think this would kill Soviets because they have no decent armor in their nondoctrinal roster. Having to wait longer for the ISU or IS2 would really hurt. Ostheer and OKW would crush the Soviets (more than they already do now ) Ostheer can just bring out a Panther that will pwn T34/76 and SU85. OKW would probably run amok due to schreck spam defeating all nondocttinal vehicles |
Axis against ISU = L2P |
*Jagdtiger arrives*
"No Problem! I will just flank it because it is slow and immobile!!"
"OOORAHHHH"
*Paks and Schreck Volks are waiting*
"We're burning!"
"Armor breached!"
"Noooooooo"
"Ahhhhhhh"
|
First they looked at my player card, and they told me I only played one faction, so my opinion didn't matter
Then I played all factions, but they told me I only played team games and the balance is around 1v1, so my opinion didn't matter
Then I played 1v1, but they told me I wasn't good enough because the game is balanced around top players so my opinion didn't matter
Then they looked at the top 200 players across all factions and all games modes, and they said this wasn't accurate because it doesn't reflect the game as a whole
But it didn't matter because I'd long since stopped listening to these idiots who will always find a reason to reject things they dislike
holy shit. epic post |