Factinal showdown makes for an interesting show, but I don't think it's an interesting show, but I don't think it is representative enough for the state of balance:
- Too few matches
- Only on map used(?)
- This was an knock-out tournament, where best players' preferences skew results
- 4 out of 5 matches each show are played by the same (winning guy) skewing the results
- Most of the time, the two people that play will not alternate factions
It might not representative enough of the state of balance but it very strong indication that Soviet are OP even without their meta commander.
Even with its limitation certainly demonstrate that your claim "Soviets received nerfs to their only strat that is currently viable (Penals, DSHK, Lend-lease Shermans)."
Does not hold too much water.
...
You always rebalance what's most important first. Picking an arbitrary element of the game and narrowing the scope to only touch that element will only create more misery than before:
- Either the balancing team is forced to make all infantry copy-paste of each other
- Or you create eye-glaringly obvious imbalances that persist in the game until Relic allows us to narrow down our focus on another aspect of the game
...
And mainline infantry balance IS the most important thing because this units are meant to be used thought the game and should be the core of an army. And because the are some of the first units to arrive having a major impact on how the game unfold.
1) No one does not have to copy paste unit one has to balance them keeping mind the "weapon profiles", relative "positioning in mind" faction design in mind.
2) Or one get the number about right for each one and wait for the turn of the next one.
OR even better one balances all of them at same time one vs other as it was original done.
Again I feel the need to clarify something, Relic is the only one responsible for the patches they implement. So there no real need to assign blame.
I am not attacking you or anyone involved in these patches, I actually respect all people involved and congratulate them for their hard work. What I am saying is the most of the patches do not reduce the number of issues, if the solve one issue they create at least one more.
Nevertheless, GCS was a good patch, in that it allowed the game to do progress. However, it did severely upset teamgame lategame balance, in ways that we've already predicted and protested from the very beginning of GCS patch design.
GCS was a rather good patch (would even go as far as to call it great) but that does not change the fact that 27 April Patch messed up so many things that next patches where simply trying to fix some of the problems it created.
My point remains. The early stage of the game remains problematic and mainline infantry remain problematic.
Imo there is little point in opening new wound as FBP does before closing the old wounds.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
