Thread: Balance14 Apr 2021, 15:07 PM
Serious question: has anybody checked winrates allies-axis?
I counted up recent buffs-nerfs to allies. It was 8-2. I counted up axis changes. 6-4.
Mass rifles firing lmg on the move + officer bonus unit. 5-man Tommies with on-field healing.
It feels like it's gone from hard but decent balance to extremely hard. Is there nobody else feeling this?
All allied fast lights superior to kubel. Why do Brits get Bren and Sovs get flame truck, both hugely influential units? No idea.
Volks are pathetic now. There is not a single mainline unit they beat. Cons come much faster t9o, so they always outnumber.
Am I just in need of L2P? Or will someone give me a good answer showing stats where axis early units are better than allied.
Fck... Is everybody on the balance team from a country hurt by Germany and they just can't take the idea of them having better mainline in, early vehicles and rocket arty?
1v1 or team games? Cause if youre talking about team games, I got some bad news for you soldier. |
quite simply using the data from "https://coh2stats.com/stats/month/1614556800/1v1/soviet"; each commander get a score according to how often it appears on the load out in each mode.
Since there 9 USF commander in 1vs1 Airborne company would have a score of 9 while armor company a score 1.
Now one can add the score from each mode and then divide by 4 and see how popular a commander is across all modes.
Or, here me out here, we DONT use whatever convoluted measurement system you just set up to cherry pick stats and we just use the actual numbers from the website itself. We can select by all game modes across different timelines. We dont need the Vipper Model to tell us which commanders are popular. |
Clearly good choice would be to make lmg non doc so we could free up ability slot for 2 commanders and make stock usf more intresting.
+1111111111111111111 |
Yeah, someone can actually think a certain upgrade is bad, but take the current implantation for granted because it's obvious it's not going to change, and instead advocate that at least it shouldn't be made more available. Is that really so hard to understand?
Again, you've spent more time defending Vipper's comments in this thread, that are clearly and demonstrably about removing the LMG upgrade because "they shouldnt have something that allows them to trade at optimal range just like axis shouldnt have an upgrade that wins at mid range" instead of responding to all the people here(not even talking about myself) that have put a lot of time into feedback for your team to use. |
Because of relative positioning, mainlines of each faction are designed to trade optimal in certain range.
For the same reason axis mainline infatry should not have an upgrade that allowed them to beat double bar riflemen at mid range.
No it was this one actually. His response to "why shouldnt USF have LMGs?"
|
His follow up makes it very clear he wants LMGs gone from USF.
Thank you. |
I did not suggest that M1919 should be removed from the commander they already exist in.
What I have said is that imo M1919 should not be added to more USF commanders.
I also suggested that USF could get an upgrade(or ability) that allowed them to use rifles with better far DPS.
No what you said was "No more LMG on USF troops pls." and then when i asked why rifles shouldnt have them you said because its like axis that shouldnt have mid range upgrades?? |
Because of relative positioning, mainlines of each faction are designed to trade optimal in certain range.
For the same reason axis mainline infatry should not have an upgrade that allowed them to beat double bar riflemen at mid range.
That makes no sense. The upgrades allow for diverse build orders and different playstyles. If there are no m1919, USF will have no way to trade infantry in long range battles. and thats on top of a commander pick. In fact, all m1919 upgrades are doctrinal. You're just suggesting to remove basic functionality from commanders on the basis of the balance you made up in your head. Why shouldnt axis mainline infantry have an upgrade that allows them to trade and win at mid range? |
with the removal/heavy nerf of faction gimmicks (USF/OKW/Brits) I agree with you there isn't too much of a reason to have half factions exist anymore. Ideally, commanders should now "add onto" armies rather then fill holes. Ostheer feels really good to play because their commanders add spice to their main composition.
In OKW's case, they had a lot of tools because of their original "gimped" faction design.
+1. OKW has had a ton of work on it which has really helped its ability to be flexible and not crutch on cheese. Its still not all the way there but man, theyre completely different than at launch. USF has had some big changes with its teching but really havent had the actual issue of missing units in the roster fixed. I'm not sure why no one wants to do that, but its clear thats the issue. Build orders are stale and easy to counter and doctrinal choices for these factions don't add to power spikes, they just plug holes like a finger in a dike. |
Ignore everything people in this thread said about what the issues are.
Suggest that top 200 players can't counter mg or kill a tank.
Blame it on matchmaker and red ball express and finish off with "but 1v1 though".
Amazing.
Like clockwork. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
