Profile of Nabarxos

Not sure if this is just cognitive dissonance or a blatant lie. UKF after release had winrates in 1v1 that were only surpassed by USF, team games were similar (4v4 might have been an exception, cant recall).

Also, interesting side note: up until last patch, there were 4 guys in brit 1v1 top 10 with a 90+% winrate... guess how many there were for okw or ostheer? Exactly: 0

Again: either you are trying to lie in our faces with facts clearly on our side, or you "misremember" stuff through your rose-tinted glasses somehow. UKF NEVER was last place in 1v1, that distinction belonged to Ost almost the entire time iirc.

I've played this game twice as much as you. I've played this game since release and played every playlist and faction in arranged or randoms (but mostly arranged cuz surprise surprise some people like to enjoy playing the game strategizing/cooperating with friends). Just because I've taken off from CoH2 doesn't mean shit.

Idk who gave you the permission to point out who deserves to be heard and doesn't.



It's really baffling how you're going to ignore 2v2+. You're blatantly biased, not even attempting to hide it calling team games "scrub." Lol? Do you honestly not care for CoH as a whole and a successful game?

That's some insane tunnel-vision selfish game-killing plan you got there. If you wan't the CoH 2 community to be decimated, then go ahead and say it. You gotta think from the developer/producer's perspective, not a select few "elite." It's a videogame, many people play it, not just you?

There's a ginormous community in CoH, and most of them play 2v2+. That is fact. IF balance was changed based on popular demand, 1v1 would be least looked at, I hate to break it to you. You were there on that Russian tournament yourself and saw how live a poorly marketed non-English tournament went simply because it included large team games, I don't get why this needs any further explanation.

Defensive namecalling... the last straw :-)

Also, after a look at your playercard two things become very obvious: almost exclusively allied player with PROBABLY LESS GAMES THAN DUSTY. How you come to the conclusion that you played this game "twice as much" is beyond me, but it looks like just another non-factual claim (thats fancy speak for lie ;-) ).
In case you actually, truly believed everything you said, you might want to go see a doctor as this is a serious condition.

for the first one i must tell you that Relic took those statistics and nerfed since then the British,ofc the nerf hammer was being dropped since the Alpha which i also took part in it........

second the british win streaks happend duo to the crazy centaur rush which pretty much killed any stall type of strategy into tigers also since it was soo good at clearing garrisons AND killing shreck blobs as good as the croc(but not better)this lead to those crazy win strikes,also dont forget that most british players used the Sniper as a way to keep them in the game during that time and counter the ridiculous sniper mp drain werhmacht players could do to them.

but this didnt make the faction so much viable for 1vs1s as such many people on OCF went for the usual soviets or USF as ALLIES and as AXIS went Werhmacht,also lets also not forget that the OCF champion won that strategy quite well multiple times in the Tournament(with werhmacht)

so expect heavy OKW nerfs next year,and dont bother telling people to prepare for fast luch,cause that didnt prevect relic into delaying Soviet T3 m5 rushes and t-70 rushes,dont bother telling people to wait to adapt cause that didnt happen before with the british,dont expect further UKF nerfs but minor buffs or crazy ninja buffs

Never was and neer will be. You know why ? because relic started messing with asyymetrical balance.

You cannot literaly balance 5 factions and their combinations from 1vs1 to 4vs4 when every faction have some strong phase and weak phase. And higher the mode , the sooner comes late game phase.

I have this from Relic official anoucement about factions




And i think 1vs1 and 2vs2 are most competitive game modes becuase of micro tax, amoung of strats and amound of tourneys.

And I never sayid that i like it or not , i just said it is like it is and we dont change it

this is why 1vs1 should not be considered "balanced".

the only good and balanced mode we have now is 2vs2 where we see almost all units become viable and each phase in the game has its moments

unlike 1vs1 where the one with the best early game usually wins(USF) or 4vs4 with the best late game usually wins(OKW,British)

but in 2vs2 all of them have their moments of power and weakness and they cant skip it

still the game is balanced around all 4 modes and we should never forget that and it might seem hard to balance but make no mistake its not impossible.

just to bring another example many 2vs2 and 1vs1 maps were modified and from what i seen they helped make emplacements viable in 1vs1 and some 2vs2 maps and this is huge! cause they were mostly trash units duo to how 1vs1 maps(and some 2vs2 maps) were designed

another one is how they buffed late game USF from trash to meh

another example is how they reworked OKW in order to make them better as a faction AND a viable 1vs1 faction(which they werent)

Game is meant to be balanced for 1vs1 and 2vs2. Please dont take 4vs4 win charts so serious , these game modes are for fun

game is meant to be balanced around all modes whether you like it or not

i suggest the emplacement itself doesnt die that fast and the crew should gain abit of durability.

this will be a step towards making them viable and not worthless like emplacements

Sorry, I meant 3 Infantry sections, 1 vickers, etc.

Basically I use the vickers to support 1-2 of the infantry sections in pushes, the other infantry section caps/harrasses other parts of the map since it can handle itself against practically any unit OKW has early game when they are in green cover.

The 1-2 IS and the Vickers shutdown almost all OKW pushes before ISGs come out (and ISGs are getting nerfed so its even easier in balance preview) so you will be able to hold your half of the map at the very least.

The snipers are important because they inflict bleed and are tough to counter if you micro them well. They also will shred pumas, kubels, and other lights, and once you get them to vet 1 they will engine crit any other lights hitting the field.

Brit AT gun is basically a pak with bonus accuracy.

Royal engis just plant mines, and then once you get the cromwell you go anvil, get a 2nd engineer, and upgrade both of them as heavy engineers. At this point your army is complete and you just replace losses/build more tanks/call in tanks.

when you go T2 do you go for engineers,Sniper or AT gun?

the first unit after you upgrade