The decemberpatch 2017 was focused on 4vs4.
But yes most changes are for 1vs1, tho are good in 2vs2-4vs4 too.
Jackson buff, ele and JT nerf in past
now brumbär and flamerhft and t70 nerf.
so this is for 4vs4 as well
Undeniably true. However, it is only in the early stage of the battle. In the late stage of the game when the battle is very chaos, those changes are hardly noticeable. |
How many players play in 4v4 and 1v1? Keepo
Coh2 is not game for elite meta mastrubate callin warriors, its for all players, who will be buy next coh if Relic care about mediocre players in 4v4? PauLa, Prodi, Price?
If its not competitive game mode or if relic care about it, why thay dont write official? No balls? Scary about money?
Its realy very stupid and sound like rasist when players who have wooden PC and play 1v1, blame players who have good PC and play 4v4, like fun game mode. Ye, its look like, 4v4 have more ways to make combinations with units, docs. But ye, we are elite coh 1v1 and 2v2 players that care about 4v4 plebs, nice one guys.
I am not sure about the number of the player base of each mode, personally. However, to give u a rough look. It only took me a 20 games winning strick to reach top ten as USF. |
To be honest, I was not expecting this post could be this popular. I will be updating the description for this post later today to further explain the problem. |
It has been 4 years since I started to play this game. And every time they just patch so a little in terms of balancing the 4v4 game mode. 4v4 need some love. Are they going to make the 4v4 balance or not? I am really sick of the 25-min marker.
To be honest, I was not expecting this post could be this popular.....
If you guys have any questions about the post, please go to page two and read comments #33, 34, 35, and 37.
And I do personally appreciate everyone who posts a comment here. At least it makes me know that there are people out there who cares about 4v4. |
Great, there is no way to purchase Ardennes Assault independently. Anyone facing the same issue? |
While I don't agree with the exact points OP gave, I do agree that soviets seem to be over performing a bit, especially in larger team games.
Particularly, the self-spotting mortars thanks to flairs and penals seem to be the main issues I can think of. The former seems out of place, since indirect fire shouldn't be able to self spot, and the later seems to be entirely due to the early scaling of penals.
Once a soviet player gets two Vet 1 mortars, they are basically impossible to counter, since they can constantly self spot - it also makes getting your own mortars incredibly challenging, which means ost has basically no structure clearing abilities, save for the weaker flamer-pios.
As for penals, the main problem is that their vet 0/1 performance is far too high, meaning late-game losses aren't too much of a problem. I think their Vet 2/3 performance should stay about the same, as well as cost, but their current performance vs. vet 3 grens at medium range is just far too high at vet 0/1, trivializing late game engagements. An alternative to a direct debuff to this unit would be increasing its pop-cap, meaning that supporting 4+ squads as well as other units would become much harder.
An argument could also be made the the PTRS upgrade doesn't seem like a 'trade' in terms of AT vs. AI, but just an overall upgrade. IMO it should work more like the shrek upgrade for PGrens, where AI power is dramatically reduced for AT power.
Excuse me, sir!!! But, I have no, even a single idea of what you are talking about!!! I don't even know that there is anyone on earth will even consider that any allies faction is more overperforming than the German faction in team game in general.
As a player who used to be ranked top ten in 4v4(allies mainly, axis top 50(during the allies op patch period just a few months ago), I refuse to keep playing axis because it is too boring.). Let me introduce you how ridiculous this game mode is.
1st. I have never played any game(regardless TBS, RTS, or FPS) that has any faction that will guarantee to win if the game past 25 or 30 mins. In this game, I achieve the dream. The only strategy I have and the only one I need to have to play axis is to hold my line for 25 mins. After that period, regardless of how good my opponents performed, my team will always turn the game around and win the game.
2nd. The ridiculous resources flow of axis factions compares to allies. If you have ever watched any replay, you will just realize how much more resources the axis have compared to the allies after the army is completely built up. I am talking about 500 more MP, 200 more Ammo, and 100 more Fuel.
3rd. The stupid strategy of completely lock down a part of the territory. Try this, one JT or elephant, plus 3 bunkers. Blame yourself if your opponents actually break through your line.
If you ever consider any allies support weapons or infantries squad are better than the Germans' in the first period of a game, especially 5~20 mins, please do me a favor and understand it. It is the only period that allies could win a game. Besides that period, there is hardly any chance for them to win a game.
|
hi,
If you are still looking for a mate to play with, please feel free to contact me.
I also play allies mostly, and I have the same reasons as yours that I chose to start with the allies instead of the axis. I used to be ranked top ten for SOV and USF and top hundred for UKF and OST in 4v4. However, it dropped a bit after I got into college.
I have a friend who mostly plays in low rank as well, so I always act very easily to the new players and don't mind to lose the game.
The only issue is that I live in the PTS time zone area which may not fit your schedule.
Please leave me a message under this site, and we can discuss further.
|
I know it has been a long time since the last time I played this game, but people just seems to pay no worry to the axis bunker spam in the team games!!! The building itself is not op at all but spamming it without any pop-cap or resources income deduction penalty is too cheesy to counter. Especially in a situation of a linear map when elephants or JT, and Panzerwerfer are guarding them. There was one game I played( which I know is kind of extreme) that each of the victory points was having five bunkers guarding them. After the game, I went through the replay of the match and realized that those Axis players literally built 32 bunkers on the map, and even themselves were having some traffic problem.
Here is my solution:
OST and OKW MG bunker needs to have pop cap count: 3 or 4 will be the best.
US MG bunker also needs to have pop cap count: 2 or 3 will be good considering that they are not immune to small arms fire.
Just in case some of you guys need me to show my player card, here you go:
Personal Best rank(not current rank since I have thrown all of my time into college work and have no time to play this game for more than 2 months):
SOV(4v4) top 10
USF(4v4) top 10
UKF(4v4) 100ish
OST(4v4) 100ish |
Here are the ideas I have been thinking about for a long time:
If COH is planning on staying with the WWII topic, the game should include experimental weapons and tanks, and even, some countries that may not even exist during that period. Purely building another historical WWII base game won't attract customers anymore since this topic has been over-used in these two years. I love both the COH game and the WWII topic so much, but I worry if Relic keeps on making another pure historical base WWII COH. The new game will be as bad as DOWIII
So, here below are my ideas of how the game should be like:
Original game: France and Germany.
There is no need to talk for the German faction since they have tones of small arms and tanks already.
France may need a little bit of creativity and imagination. 47 mm APX anti-tank gun is very light but could penetrate up to 100mm in very long range with special ammo historically which could make it perform similarity as the Rak 43 88mm rocket gun in COH2. The G series tanks did not get produced in history but could be built into the game to run a role similar as the other MBTs like the Shermans, PZ 4, and the T-34. Things like ARL44, Ribeyrolles1918, and even FCM F1 can also to add into the game base on needs.
DLC1: CommonWealth and Italy.
I don't think these two nations need to be mentioned a lot. The reason that I say CommonWealth instead of the UK is because countries like Australia and Canada also had excellent weaponry during the war which should be introduced in the game probably in the forms of unique commanders. Italy should more be like a defensive faction. It did not have any great tanks historically or on paper. But it did have some of the best arties during the war.
DLC2: Soviet and Austria-Hungary ( If this country's name has aggressive meanings to some people especially those who live in that region, please tell me, and I will delete this idea immediately.)
No need for extra talk for the Soviets. However, I do want to add T-44 and SU-100Y to give this faction some extra fun. The reason that I think Austria-Hungary will be a good faction is that countries like Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and some other pre-AH nations had some really interesting tanks and small arms but just too few to build as a single nation. Combining them together could make into a good faction.
DLC3: USA and Japan.
Both of these two nations have some excellent stuff that could be built into the game. Check ideas on Wikipedia.
DLC4(Very Hard to build): Poland and Sweden.
As the topic, both of these two did have some good weapons during the war but just too few to be created as an independent faction. But still worth to give them a try. |
Thread: SU-7612 Jul 2018, 04:09 AM
gbem, really excellent job to try to convince these guys to know that SU-76 is currently under power. I think your first idea sounds good to me. Here is why:
Since most of these people here agree that SU-76 is an AT Platform but not an AI vehicle, I did a test. From my pre-patch successful experience, if you want to make SU-76 lethal enough you have to build at least 4 of them. So the total resources cost is 1120 MP and 300 fuel, which is more than the cost of a JT or a elephant. The test is simple, try to compare the kill time that four su76s use to destroy two panthers, and one elephant plus one pak40( total of 1040 MP and 265 fuel) time to kill two t34/85s and one t34/76. The result was quite shocking even to myself since I have given up using Su76 after the recent patch. Su76s use the exact same time to kill two Panthers with tones of non-pen and misses, which when elephant and pak are killing t34s like chewing jelly. Please keep in mind, even after building the elephants and a pak, the total price is still lower than the total cost of 4 SUs; 2 Panthers have a total HP of 1920, and 2 t34/85 plus t34/76 have HP of 2320. Please point me out if there is anything wrong with the HP value and the cost. |