Profile of Protos Angelus

Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 09:35 AMGeblobt

USF has the best scaling mainlane infantry in the whole game. 2 upgraded vet 3 Rifleman outperform 1 vet 5 Volks+1 vet5 Ober slighty. The infantry matchup isnt the problem. The Calliope nerf is justified and reasonable. Scott and Pack Howie are still decent, but require more micro in a micro heavy faction.

But i agree that stock rocket arty should be available for every faction. Its just too important. Dealing with anti tank gun/mg walls without arty is really annoying and way too punishing. Tbh if you nerf Calliope a little bit more you could just swap it with scott. Stock Calliope would make USF way better in teamgames and way less dependent on 1 or 2 commanders. UKF (and OKW with BGHQ, but atleast there you can backtech) lack rocket arty too and thats why they struggle in teamgames.

Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 07:55 AMSander93

I'm glad to finally have some statistics to work with. Even if they should be taken with a grain of salt (as indicated by the website itself).


I do find it odd that people don't veto the laney maps more that clearly favour the HMG 42 and heavy TDs. Playing less games on Red and White Ball or Hamburg (maps where there is 0 room to flank HMGs or TDs) would probably significantly decrease the disparity in win ratios.

Does this website have any way to filter the win ratio per map? Or does anyone know if there any plans for that? Does anyone know who the author of this website is?



Also Jaeger Armor does seem to still be super meta. I think it was already planned to remove Spotting Scope from the Elefant itself, but it probably needs more. In hindsight the AT strafe has been stronger than anticipated.

Jump back to quoted post6 Apr 2021, 21:33 PMApplejack

Some interesting conclusions you're drawing here but I think your reasoning is not sound.

At the end of the day, the unfortunate reality is the balance team balances for 1v1s and not 4v4s. Its very clear that Axis are struggling in 1v1s but are dominant in 4v4s. Its not hard to see why though. In team games there are less points to capture, the fronts are smaller so MGs are much more potent. Things like Soviet squad advantage with conscripts don't really matter as much in 4v4's but in 1v1s it puts them in a very dominant position when they can out-capture and out-trade their opponent.

This is why I advocate for a different balance patches for team games in my CoH3/DoW4 wish list here: https://www.coh2.org/topic/107980/my-coh3-dow4-wishlist/page/1#post_id857982

Plug aside though. The balance team does consider 4v4s when it comes to balance seeing as the last patch nerfed some very powerful 4v4 strategies such as the pack howie nerf you mentioned, ISU-152 commander nerf and some other commander changes.

Its very difficult to balance for both 1v1 and 4v4s. I do hope that the balance team notice that their changes is skewing the 4v4 win rate heavily in Axis favour while doing not much to improve their 1v1 win rates. We can help them balance by bringing up unfavourable match ups in a reasonable manner with evidence supporting the claim so it can be discussed, debated and eventually considered for change in an measured and paced way. This game will probably never be fully balanced but an evolving meta keeps the game fresh and I enjoy that.

Also as a side note: I do think Sturmpanther and other balance team members playing a single faction needs to start playing other factions or be removed from the balance team. Someone who is only focused on one faction does not belong on the balance team. A voice in the community is okay but not a voice on the balance team. They are not demonstrating that they are an unbiased person on the balance team and therefore does not belong on it. Sturmpanther occassionally has (toxic) troll bait forum posts which I do not think is acceptable for a balance team member.