We can do a lot of speculations for all modes, however we also don't have many hints that they are true or how exactly they should favor one side more than the other.
In the end we also have a lot of gameplay reasons that could explain the differences without needing to speculate as much. But this would lead too far from this topic about Scotts, so I'd rather leave it at that.
Main point here is that USF seem to have low win rate only in 4vs4 ( OKW/Wer seem only to have high win rate in the same mode) and still higher than the other allied factions.
USF have the one of highest allied win rate in 3vs3.
In sort stat do not seem to support that USF is "trash" claim.
|
It is probably less reliable, but the question is by how much.
Games that last less than 5 minutes goes up from 4,5% to 9,5%. Games shorter than 10 minutes go from 12,6 to 16,4.
The point to prove would be though that it happens to one side more often than the other one, which I don't really see why it should be the case, unless players from far away regions with smaller player count have heavy bias towards one faction. But then again the player count is low, and so will be the influence.
Anyway, we can only hypothesize. There seems to be a trend though that Axis become stronger the larger the mode is, even despite the higher drop rates in 4v4 the data might be credible (with a grain of salt)
One thing that seems strange is the difference between 3vs3 games and 4vs4 in win rates. The modes are not that different nor the map pool.
It is possible that also that users county of origin, their connection and hardware might be different from 3vs3 to 4vs4 and that might somehow effect win rates. |
The game overall is decently balanced considering you have to have a "one fits all" solution across all modes.
....
I am under impression that 4vs4 stat might not be very reliable since the number of dropped players before minute 5 is probably very high. |
"but people should really stop pretending like USF is the worst faction on life support"
followed by
"one particullar cheese strategy is the only thing making them playble"
So they are on life support? On life support, only one thing is making you alive, that's the life support machine. USF only has paths/scott combo making them playable. I'd say that's as closest to "life support" as you can get.
Having said that, I seldom play paths/scott as it's unwise in 3v3s. You have no mines and you'll get swarmed by panthers sooner or later. And I don't play 1v1s but I do know that axis are not hard nor harder to play than allies. I consider soviets and OST to be the "easiest" factions to play in 1v1, but USF/UKF/OKW are not harder, just different, in a sense that they lack something either early, or later on.
I don't even consider the scott/paths to be that strong, in any game mode. People just don't want to get out of the usual build orders and playstyle to counter it.
Lets put the "USF have no mines" myth to rest.
USF have access to:
Stock
RE M7 light tank mine
M20 M6 Anti-Tank Mine
Dotrincal
Field defenses 3 commanders
Assault engineer 1 commander
Support Paras 1 commanders
And airborne comes with loiter that would make diving vs Scots with panthers a bad idea.
|
Thread: AFK31 Jan 2022, 18:01 PM
He even acknowledged that by saying that an afk kick feature and dropping yourself will yield the same result.
His original post made the point that leaving yourself is already a solution to the problem. His post wouldn't make any sense otherwise. Why should you drop the game if the player would get replaced by AI anyway?
It's a bad solution for sure, but for what we have everyone can fix the problem himself by simply leaving the game. There is no need to stick to the game apart from a small amount of lost rewards. I think your suggestion would fit better to CoH3 since CoH2 will likely not see an update anymore, I hope though that they implement it along with a lot of other QoL features for multiplayer.
1) If one drop out of multiplayer game the game does not end but continues even if no active players playing, it there any reason why play should be forced to continue playing a game vs no human opponent?
2) When one drop out of game one received a penalty that make gives him lower score in disputed games, why should one be penalized for having an afk teammate especially since the afk player receives no penalties at all?
3) Is there anyone that thinks that the current system is better and that there should not be a mechanism that disregards AFK in surrenders vots?
4) Why is this thread reached 16 post already when none so far has disagreed with OP? |
The COH2 match making seems to be tailor made to be as awful as possible because it matches people of similar ladder rank per team before finding opponent teams.
This is essentially a way to guarantee Elo hell for some players.
I have a main account and a smurf account for testing this. I had a good run on the smurf account for first 10 matches, my ladder rank was top 300 in one faction after 150 matches in 4v4. On my main account my ladder rank is over 2500 in the same faction.
Fixing this is simple, you match similar ladder rank per opponent, not per teammate.
For the first 10 games you do not have a rank. That means you can fight vs anyone from rang 10.000 to rank 1. Elo is established after you first 10 games... |
Thread: AFK31 Jan 2022, 16:36 PM
I saw it. He suggested that you can drop yourself to find a new game sooner since CoH2 does not support afk recognition.
Katukov's opinion has nothing to do with Esxile's response, you're jumping to conclusions here.
This is what I posted
In you next game stay afk and see if you will drop or not.
Now pls stop disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing.
to which he quoted and responded
But you can drop the game if your partner is afk.
The response start with "but" which an indication of disagreement not agreement and the is no relevance between being able to drop and the existence of a afk kick mechanism. In sort there is no reason to quote the specific response.
Do we all agree that there is no afk kick mechanism? If yes we can move on. |
Thread: AFK31 Jan 2022, 16:28 PM
You're the one disagreeing with Esxile for whatever reason. He just made the point that you can drop yourself if your Ally is afk, nothing else.
Nope.
See post #6 he quote my response to katokuv which said that there is not auto AFK kick mechanism to say something completely different. |
Thread: AFK31 Jan 2022, 16:13 PM
[post="883219"]
Is there any relevance between what you have posted and what I have replied to?
(Which is
)
Yes, if your partner is afk then just leave the game, the result will be the same. If you can process this info can't do more for you.
Do you agree that contrary to what Katukov claimed there is no afk kick mechanism or do you agree with him that there is? If it the if first I suggest you stop quoting and responding to irrelevant if it is the later I suggest you provide proof.
Now if you want to claim that there is no need for a surrender mechanism because people can quit feel free to explain why in your opinion there should not be one.
Now pls stop disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing. |
Thread: AFK31 Jan 2022, 14:53 PM
But you can drop the game if your partner is afk.
Is there any relevance between what you have posted and what I have replied to?
(Which is
they usually drop after a while, either in 30 seconds or 3 minutes
if they are afk for over half a minute then just drop the game
)
There is no kick mechanism for afk players |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
