I messaged the creator of the COH2Stats site and got a clarification. My numbers should've been:
Week Start 15-Jun 22-Jun 29-Jun 6-Jul 13-Jul
Games Played 134 111 99 70 69
Axis Win 75 64 65 46 45
Axis Win % 56.0% 57.7% 65.7% 65.7% 65.2%
OST Player % 43.7% 40.0% 41.2% 44.6% 39.5%
OKW Player % 56.3% 60.0% 58.8% 55.4% 60.5%
Axis Win % STDEV 0.048146573
There are 483 games since the patch with all players in the top 200. The win rate is pretty stable around 65% Axis. The standard deviation of win rate is 0.048 so the average is a little over 3 sigma above 50%. That means there is about a 0.3% chance that this game mode is balanced and these are just abnormal results.
I'd need to be a lot better at multivariate analysis to say if the Ost versus OKW percentage actually has an effect on the outcome or is simply a measure of popularity.
(edit - here are the 2v2 numbers, which are also relatively stabile)
Week Start 15-Jun 22-Jun 29-Jun 6-Jul 13-Jul Stdev
Games Played 619 498 407 363 325
Axis Win 300 228 196 165 153
Axis Win % 48.5% 45.8% 48.2% 45.5% 47.1% 0.013565168
These numbers say the opposite, not quite to the same degree, but in this case enough to say it's a little unbalanced towards Allies. I do think that it has a lot to do with how the units and maps interact. The 4v4 maps aren't nearly wide enough, so most engagements are going straight out from your base with little room for flanking or strategic positioning. Units are a lot more clumped together so a unit like a walking stuka, that isn't good in a small game mode, becomes great in a 4v4. There's nothing worse than having a random teammate get beat in their lane in a 4v4 and have them decide to stack their units on top of mine.
I don't think it's very surprising that smaller games tilt towards axis. A lot of times it feels like I get pushed around by Penal blobs until I get the Sturmtiger out.
|
Offtopic question, but can you explain why lend lease is popular?
The other two don't surprise me, haven't given lend lease a try in a while
Lend Lease - The M4C gets radio net and is relatively efficient in terms of pop cap. It has a lot better chance to damage something like a Panther than a T34/76. Level 3 radio net with 3-4 M4C's is a lot to deal with.
The guards can be upgraded with either Thompsons or bazooka's. They are "bazooka experts" so their bazooka's have some bite to them, as opposed to regular bazookas which are mostly good for the cool sound they make when bouncing off a Panther.
I don't agree with the sentiment that the T34/76 is trash. Fuel-wise, you can get around 3 of them for the price of two M4C's. The advantage of the M4C is just better penetration and If you treat them like throw-aways then they are, but if you vet them up then they're incredibly cost efficient. A vet 3 T34 can circle strafe a vet 0 Panther, which is oddly hilarious when somebody rushes their Panther out to the edge of a map thinking that they will easily wipe the T34.
|
Every time I think to myself: well, I need an MG, how bad can the Maxim be. And it turns out that this MG can be really really fucking bad. Basically every time I build that pos, it turns out to be a grave mistake. Even floating MP would help you more than this crap. It just shows that the balance team has no idea what they are doing, taking away every bit of uniqueness (Maxim with fast setup times but small arc) and making these units just unbearably worse (or buffing other units to levels previously unknown to mankind...)
The maxim doesn't do any better in 3v3's. I started getting a lot better results by doing either 4 con starts or 3cons and second engie. The setup time was nerfed to match the MG42. The arc is about 90 versus 120? for either of the Axis MG's. It might not sound like a huge difference, but it often takes 2 maxims to cover what 1 MG42 covers. A MG42 will suppress more or less instantly but the maxim can have units walk through the arc and often not suppress.
Overall, the balance doesn't seem that bad unless you're playing in the Sturmtiger league (4v4), just don't get maxims and outblob with Cons or Penals. |
if you factor in any 160 damage from any source, indeed it does not make any difference to 640 hp unit. Although it is fairly realistic situation when su-76 is the only source of damage to a specific unit.
Imo, if anything the unit need more penetration to be relevant after arrival of p4, at least make it so 'suchka' pens pre vet2 PIV consistently like it used to couple years ago.
IIRC, the balance team nerfed the penetration so it wouldn't be effective against heavies. I'd be surprised if they undid that. Part of the problem was massed SU76 plus Mark Target was good against heavies |
Yeah but they've nerfed its penetration since then. And the barrage was nerfed a tiny bit too I think
That said I think free barrage would be mistake. The cost isn't that much and Soviets don't have heavy muni drain to begin with
I don't want free barrage because I don't want to play against it. Buffing the damage to 160 would help it against mediums but wouldn't affect heavies that much. I think the penetration nerf was done specifically to detune it against heavies and it would still be an effective nerf even if the damage was buffed to 160.
A small cost decrease to the barrage would be helpful. I play a lot of Soviet and think it has a heavy muni drain. |
Maybe make barrage free again? I forget why they added cost but i dont ppl spam the su76 anymore ever since some of the other nerfs When the barrage was free, some people would get 3-5 of them and would make it hard to use cover or mg's against them. |
120*1.167=140
640/120=5.3≈6 penetrating shots to kill.
640/140=4.5≈5 penetrating shots to kill
If the game was played on a spreadsheet, that would matter. Single AT sources rarely kill anything. The SU76 often ends up paired with a ZIS or a SU85. They usually hit and pen P4's. The alpha damage is 280 or 300, but it will take 3 more penetrating hits to kill a medium in either case. |
In the AT department I agree. The bonus only works if you use SU76 in tandems. But Vipper was talking about the vet bonus also applying to the barrage.
No, he wasn't. I made a specific comment about the increased AT not providing any significant benefit. He said I was simply incorrect.
I know what the argument was about. Your comment feels like more gaslighting, just coming from a senior moderator.
...Due to the way that most tanks have some multiple of 160, the 16.7% improvement doesn't really provide a benefit. .....
That is simply incorrect.
....
|
Looking in the fog of war is a regular for me, I look for trees being knocked over and other items of the terrain etc, indicating armour moving through the area. I'd suggest many players do exactly the same thing, so a player looking into the fog of war is not a great sign of MH.
Better to look for other signs, like tech choices, avoiding mines and launching attacks in the weakest points of your army with no scouting.
It's subjective and depends on the amount and the timing. The last time I reported someone, they started the game watching the outside of my base on Steppes. There definitely wasn't tanks or crushed trees at less than a minute.
Most people look into the FOW at times, especially if there is a Sturmtiger around as you can get an approximate location by the sound of the engine when it is moving. |
That is simply incorrect.
Apart from doing more damage in AT the bonus applies to barrage also increasing the kill radius.
This is simply a personal attack that is being used in an attempt to derail the thread.
When most tanks have 640 health, there isn't a significant difference between 120 and 140 damage. When the SU76 is paired with another AT (either a ZIS or SU85), it will take 3 volleys to kill a tank whether the damage is 120 or 140. Unless there is a special Vipper version of COH where you win the game based on the number of times you almost kill a tank, there is no significant advantage to 140 over 120. |