Ahh...so I use all all games then people complain Allies players are simply noobs and don't know how to play and if I choose Top 200 the sample size is too small.
I guess that proves the game is totally balanced then. How could I ever doubt the balance team?
I dont think any sane person thinks that Allies have an advantage in 3vs3/4vs4. But whats the solution? Sander already said that faction reworks (like stock calliope) are out of the window. And most of allied stock units are decently balanced. Commanders get adjusted in the upcoming patch and (hopefully) bring down axis down to a reasonable lvl.
So what realistic thing is there to do on top of that? |
|
Soon tm.
I heard the PowerPoint developers from Microsoft helped to optimize FPS. Its going to be great! |
Do note the patch note changes which are available for reading, they are less potent early on in exchange for a stronger LMG and that LMG arriving earlier. Prior to those changes, Osttruppen traded/won at mid and long-ranges against even Rifles and Tommies when in cover wars early game despite being cheaper and costing much less to reinforce than these units.
But whats the point of buffing their dps? This change makes them pretty similar to Grens. Decent squad with snare and good long range lategame performance. The only difference is the model count. So if both units are stock, there would be no reason to go Grens. I still dont know why Osttruppen - the cheap, poor equipped and barely trained squad (ingame and historical) - gets a lmg. Or am i wrong here?
Is there no solid idea around giving them more utility instead of this? |
|
They cant compete vs Obers and Rifleman, so they are clearly underpeforming. So the balance team tried to buff their dps, but it was not enough. Thats why i think Osttruppen should get one lmg34 on top of their lmg42. Maybe increase their squad size to seven just to be save.
2 Shrecks sound good, but Teller and an at nade like Conscripts RPG-43 are mandatory. |
For the stats page I selected top 200 and for 3v3 and 4v4 found a big difference of 80 matches from 5th position Heavr Armor to 3rd position armor and that is from a total of 276 games I guess. But before going into stats I would geniunely like to ask you, if you play USF automatch and find anyone of Aerafield, Sturmpanther, Helping Hans against you on your lane would you really go for Heavy Cavalry? I would like to see you try atleast so maybe if I am doing something wrong, it would help me.
Heavy tanks arent particularly good in 3vs3/4vs4. Tiger, Kingtiger, IS2, Pershing, Churchill. Doesnt matter which heavy tank you build, most of the time it will be subpar to other options you have (unless the Heavy is completely broken ofc). Thats why most Ostheer player choose Elefant, most OKW players choose Jagdtiger and Usf player favor either Calliope or Priest. Thats just how it is. Even if you make the Pershing like the Tiger stats wise it wont change much. Rocket arty is still way better than an expensive, slow range 45 Heavy. |
Thanks for the tips. Youre right regarding okw having to deal with the same shit but at least they can get a light tank relatively early and also have the stuka. Brits have nothing
You have the single best counter to sniper: Another Sniper. I would love to delete Snipers from the entire game if i could, but it is what it is. So either you have to lern how to countersniper or rely on your mate forever. |
I mean, Commanders are a fairly major factor in factional balance. Changes to commanders' abilities and units are just as important in making factions usable/balanced as changes to their core rosters.
Sure if your faction has no major flaws in their stock line up like Sovs or Ost. But no commander, unless its omega broken, can make a weak faction like Brits viable.
About Ostheer: Are you guys sure about Lightning War Doctrine in 1vs1/2vs2 and Fortified Armor Doctrine in 3vs3/4vs4?
Both of these seem way too powerful now. Lightning War is solid now but it gets 3 straight buffs while it has heavy tank call-in, sprinting g43 Grens/Pgrens, powerful call-in arty and fast reinforcement. I can already see the abuse with forward reinforcement and Relief Infantry. |
They are tho according to this:
https://coh2stats.com/stats/month/1617235200/1v1/wermacht?statsSource=top200
They go, in fact, all the way from pretty much perfectly balanced in 1v1 to batshit insanely OP in 4v4.
The 1vs1 stats support my argument tbh. Ost and Sov best, Usf is good, Okw mediocre and Brits are just bad.
The 4vs4 stats are easy to explain.
1. Axis tank roster is way easier to use than that of the Allies. Using Elefant or Jagdtiger requires way less micro and team coordination. On the other side Allies have to play as a team to counter these units. Similar to the old ISU in 2vs2 where you had to play our of your mind to beat this shit unit. Most of the maps favor range compared to speed too.
2. USF and Brits lack some tools like stock Rocket Arty. Thats why in my opinion both factions should have Calliope and Land Mattress as stock units. |
So.... OKW is balanced then.
50% win rate is literally an indicator of perfect balance.
Against a faction that has almost zero chances to win vs Ost (while Sov are 50/50 vs Ost). WOW. Just cause Okw can compete with the british faction, who has major problems too, doesnt mean that they are competitive vs the top dogs. |
you're right that things like a techless heavy or cmnd panther skewed the tech choice heavily in favor of mechanized. though even when these were already a thing of the past going mechanized still remained viable.
the analogy to usf prior to their revamp feels certainly true as well; if you want light vehicle dominance (i.e. both luchs and puma), you have to skip readily available healing, indirect fire and an early t3 - and vice versa. i'd say this isn't necessarily a bad thing and with now cheaper back tech to medics in the late game also a lot less punishing than it used to be.
270 (370 full) manpower is quite high for just getting healing (leig and flak ht dont offer much later in the game). That could be a mg, a raketen or most of an obers squad. So i dont think the fuel is the problem. Going all 3 tech structures is very manpower draining though.
And that for a faction who has mediocre mainline (Cons get 6,26 HP per manpower at vet3, Volks get 4,1 HP per manpower at vet 5; from that point Cons are 50% more efficient than Volks), expensive elite (cost compared to timing window),and just a few mediocre ways to deal with infantry later on. Imo the faction has major manpower problems later on in the game (atleast compared to SOV/Ost; Usf bleed the same but atleast their inf isnt shit) |
Relic Entertainment
