|
yeah this was about balance overall, but i made a cmment about 4v4 so i guess that's what we are tlaking about now |
People here are saying AT balance is not the way forward.
So games where people are proficient at making use of each factions pros and cons in a team oriented manner, as opposed to the clusterfuck of 4 random dudes who may nor not be cooperating, is somehow not a good reflection of balance.
Just take a look at that for a second. You literally want to balance around people that are not playing the factions to their proper extent, and ignore those that do.
i wouldn't say top 200 players have no idea what they are doing (especially 4v4 allied players). If the top 200 players winrates are so skewed, i think it is fair indicator to say there is some major issues at hand. It could ve maps, units, factions, etc. |
Changing it so randoms do not match with AT is completely conceivable.
New maps would be beneficial too. The original maps in COH1 were horrid. Hochwald Gap, Achelous, Scheldt (yes, it was automatch once)... just horrid.
it would be difficult to implement that feature, as good as it sounds. Although 4v4 is most played game mode, the overall playerbase is still fairly small. It already takes a long time to queue as Axis, now imagine screening out all ATs for a pure random-only match. That would take a very long time.
Just a few words to say:
Future COH2 esports tournaments will be 100% balanced for the following reason:
- Both teams will be able to play both Axis & Allies
- Both teams will play on the same maps
- Both teams will have access to the same commanders & factions
and if you wanna go further
- Both teams will have the same bulletins
Problem solved. Think CS:GO. Terrorists & Counter-Terrorists asymmetrically balanced but because you get to play both of them, it's balanced at the end.
This makes sense in 1v1 and 2v2, where the modes seem balanced. However, i don't think this would help that much in 3v3+ where the W/L ratios are very lopsided. I think there are structural issues at play such as faction imbalance, and maps.
|
You can't balance for the fact AT's will always beat randoms in 3v3 and 4v4. There will also be issues so long as the 3v3 and 4v4 maps are utter unrelenting shit because they allow players to win by dog piling 2 VP's.
You can handwring about Axis being OP in 3's and 4's because of this unit and that, but the culprit 99% of the time is the fact Ostheer has excellent defensive tools and when the game is "who can dog pile and entrench the VP fast enough" the faction with the best defensive tools will do the best.
ATs will have an advantage over randoms, especially if the AT has voice chat. But i hope Relic can even out the playing field.
and the points you are bringing up is part of the reason why Axis are so much stronger in these modes. It is difficult to dislodge Elefants, King TIgers, and Jagdtigers, especially on cramped maps like Lanzerath |
Way to miss the point.
The problem isn't in AT games. It is in 4v4 randoms and ESPECIALLY in 4v4 AT vs. random.
Since most of the new players are going to be in random, and since the vast majority of play hours are in 3v3 and 4v4s, then it is entirely likely (I don't have the #s but Relic must) that 4v4 Random is the format most newbies play. If they don't like the experience they will leave. No argument about AT or L2P or other balance aspects will change that.
You can balance all you want for top players in 1v1 top-tier. But if you don't get more players playing then your community atrophies. Many have left COH1 for the simple reason that so many others had left COH1. it is still a great game and better than almost all others out there. These are basic is a network effects and esports won't change it.
exactly
4v4 is the most played game mode. it edges out 2v2 by a little bit. |
They sure are 
This notion needs to stop. Not only is it untrue, but its giving fodder to newer players to cry balance rather than attempt to do a self evaluation. The perception of balance and actual balance are completely out of whack, IMO. Are there balance issues? Yes. Will there always be balance issues? Yes. Am I losing because of balance? NOOOOOOO.
Balance is not affecting 99% of the 4v4AT games being played. People just want to assume they are losing because of balance; its an easier pill to swallow than looking at ones own faults.
This brings me back to my original point. So when one loses, they say I lost because of balance and therefore what I did during the game was the correct approach and its the game that needs to change and not me. This stifles creativity and learning. This has been one of the most prevelant contributing factors to the toxicity of this community, and the worst part is - its an unwarranted self manifestation.
the winrates have been lopsided for a long time. there are statistics to back it up. everyone is talking about 4v4 randoms not AT. Some issues can be avoided with ATs but it is important to balance the game for people who solo queue or with or two friends.
you are acknowledge that balance issues do exist, so why not advocate a more balanced game? If balance issues exist, why do you tell people to just suck it up? This makes no sense. I
|
Because this game is not built for competitive gaming but casual.
Everyone plays 4v4 or compstomp.
and yet the game is balanced for 2v2 and under. |
As a COH1 player who has played a little COH2, watched a hellaton more of it, and kept up with the various forum posts on balance, patches, etc. (I am waiting for COH2 to be in a state where I would like to play it.) here is some feedback which is worth what you paid for it:
COH2 is all of those great things with one problem, the 3v3 and 4v4 ranked match situation. The problem is twofold, the balance (as seen in the huge imbalance between Axis and Allied wins), and that AT teams are allowed to compete with randoms at all.
That an arranged 3v3 or 4v4 team is allowed to go up against unskilled randoms almost guarantees a bad experience for new players. Why would you want to do that?! Why must they find 3 friends, learn the game, and then learn to play as a team before they can start to enjoy a win? Someone needs to play weeks or months before they can enjoy a win? Or switch to playing Axis so they can join the multitudes learning to spam and stomp noobs?
While a "true" balance in 4v4 needn't be achieved, a lot of the design of the current COH2 is to blame. That the VP counter moves at essentially the same pace as in COH1 (3 points, 500 VPs to win, etc.) but the early, mid and late games all come faster, and with a decided imbalance in late game strengths, means team games are bound to be imbalanced. Without changing the balance of the teams you could slow down the progression. That would also possibly solve the call-in meta.
That 1v1 balance is a priority doesn't mean that you should ignore the 4v4. It just means that you work harder on 4v4 balance while watching the 1v1 and 2v2 closely. A more balanced 4v4 is achievable. COH1 was certainly more balanced in 3v3 and 4v4 than COH2 while probably also being more balanced in 1v1.
4v4 balance will retain more players. That is a decided "good" for the franchise. It should not be ignored. ATs should not play randoms. Probably ever. Good game experience > fast bad game experiences. And if there are more good game experiences you get more gamers... and so less wait.
nice analysis and i agree with what you said.
however, i want to point out that the latest patch did remedy some of the call-in problems with the limiting of one heavy tank. However, the winrates are still extremely lopsided in 4v4 |
|
show it after the match please |
|
no because some people here are elitist enough |
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
