Profile of TheSleep3r

with b), but dont you think you can't balance everything at once? it was different when it was only two factions but now there is five. the only way to properly balance is to, imo, smaller scale with smaller scope for each individual patches with higher frequencies (per month maybe?) I think the way the "scope" is thought of is completely out of touch with how it should be thought of imo. Instead of factions and units being in the "scope", it should be concepts like "call-ins", "inf-balance" etc etc.

So in my opinion, we would start with "call ins", then next month, "FRPs", then "late game team-game balances" etc etc. you cant have everything meddled at once so every results get muddled together so you can't see which meddling caused which results, which is my main criticism of big scope big patches.

with a), it is just Relic not having infinite resources no? i mean i am sure they are still mostly focused on DoW3.

But the my main problem with your comment is that CoH2 is not a failure nor it is doomed. Its got good enough player base. It has not reached its potential in the same sense as all the americans who has not and will not become the president... in that sense, you can say CoH2 is a failure cause it had potential but to be honest what doesn't?

Of course you can't. Smith and miragefla were smart to break the mod into smaller pieces, which were then cut into the Fall Balance mod. Everything would be heading in the right direction, except the amount of changes that slipped in the Fall Balance is unjustifiably small. The scope doesn't include pieces of balance that do not interfere with each other; why is the scope 'teamgames' and not 'teamgames and conscripts for example which are in dire need of help and would arguably help balance the teamgames even more which are the damn scope by the way', I don't know. There are a lot more things that could be packed into the patch and not doing harm, but: the scope.

Unavailability of resources is not an excuse for scrapping a lot of good (not all of them of course) changes made by the community team, which made a complete package ready to be delivered (let's skip the validity of changes for dopehaircut's sake).

Note that I did not claim CoH2 is a failure; the patch and scope system is a failure because of execution. The game has potential which could be greatly utilized if the interval between patches decreases. CoH2 is also not doomed; see that what I wrote is doomed to be spoiled. And when it spoils, will the population drop? Not likely as the game is unique at this moment. And while it's good it can be made better so

kyle pls come on don't do this to me let them add more thx

Please, teach us. Grace us with your knowledge.

Your idea of periodic small patches taking care of predefined, singular problems (A.K.A. the scope) has failed miserably. You may maintain the view that it is to prevent huge imbalances that would be difficult to predict and fix, but in the end it blocks very meaningful changes; I remember huge patches years ago, not talking about redesigns, but the patches before Western Front Armies. The patchnotes pages long and of quality, not quantity. Where is your ability to balance so many things at once now, where did it go? I am very glad you saw my harsh comment, so you can consider what I wrote now.

Also adding conscripts to the scope would be sweet.

Question: is there any chance that a Commissar​ unit would be designed to give conscripts support and added to the Soviet faction, then added to commanders like NKVD, cons support and terror? I find lack of zampolits in a faction with stock penal battalions unbelievable. Relic would have to agree of course, but it would be entirely community effort as the model and voiceover are already in-game.

Update 1.5.5
Recent Matches list now has Victories and Defeats shown
Fixed typos

I believe increasing call-ins costs without tiers built is a serious mistake. There are more reasonable yet interesting alternatives to fixing the problem. Treating all the call-ins the same way is madness.

First of all, call-ins should be divided to two categories:

• emergency/utility call-ins, such as halftracks, mechanised grenadier teams, pumas, and ultimately the M10 tank destroyer (the Armor doctrine was designed in such way).
  
• powerful units, comparable or plain more capable than stock ones. T-34/85s, Easy 8's, IS-2's, Tigers, M4C's, Pershings, Calliopes, Elefants, etc.
  

This is why there has to be a middle ground. If I was in charge, I would implement the following changes:

• all call-ins from the first category would stay as they are. No additional costs, as the units can't completely change the tide of a game.
  
• all call-ins from the second category should be tied to tech exactly like 85's and Easy 8's in current implementation. Additional flavor based on faction could be interesting, like Wehrmacht having only to tech to Battle Phase 3 and not to build Tier 4 (as the ingame text states).
  

I urge the balance team to look at any concept that is not flawed and that doesn't interfere with classic coh gameplay.