Blitzkrieg has it's place on PIV's and Panthers to give them scaling against the heavier armour, except even then it still shouldn't be able to move on reverse move. But I really don't see how removing Blitzkrieg on Tigers/King Tiger would cause any balance problems other than allowing SU-85's and Jacksons to perform as intended as well being caught of position and being outplayed to actually be punishing instead of just popping the get out jail Blitzkrieg free escape button. The King Tiger especially, is not not already strong enough without the ability to out ran any Sov/USF armour?
When Blitzkrieg was only acceleration I don't remember it causing any balance problems.
Blitzkrieg causes so many problems in everything from 1v1 to 4v4. Soviets have no infantry based AT, and Bazookas don't work against anything bigger than a Panther. AT guns don't penetrate enough and the only non doctrinal AT there is for Allies is SU-85 and Jacksons. SU-85 is incredibly flimsy due to it's lack of rotatable turret, weak armour and lack of anti infantry. The Jackson on the other hand is quite fast and mobile, but is very weak and also has no Anti infantry.
The only thing Allied tanks have over Germans is their speed and range, except this balance is completely thrown out the window when they pop Blitzkreig, then all of a sudden the super strong Tigers are literally able to out speed Jacksons and SU-85's and close in for the kill effortlessly. For both regular Wehrmacht Tigers and the King Tiger, it makes absolutely no sense at all to give these tanks Blitzkrieg, a means of absolutely and effortlessly countering everything that either Soviets or Americans can field. Tigers, and especially King Tigers have lots of health, lots of armour, a rotable turret, strong anti infantry and strong anti tank. Their only weakness is their lack of speed, so why give them an ability that not only negates it, but also makes them faster and able to chase down Jacksons/SU-85's. It's breaking the late game balance so hard.
A possible solution would be to remove the Top MG Gunner as a munitions upgrade, but instead put it on for free upon reaching Vet1. In fact, that's probably a good idea for the IS-2 as well, capture point is deadful and not needed but losing the abiltiy to build the MG gunner would be a small nerf to it.
This is a bit of a non specific rant, but it's very important none the less.
The huge balance problem we have in team games is the maps. Conceptually, Axis are two very defensive factions where as Allies are very mobile and very aggressive. In 1v1's or on some 2v2 maps such as Moscow Outskirts Allies are able to make use of their aggressive and mobile units. However due to all of the chokepoint, cluttered and blobby maps that occupy 3v3, 4v4 and the majority of 2v2 maps, it means that flanking and outmanoeuvring your opponent is impossible so it's all about blobs vs blobs, support weapons verse support weapons, tanks vs tanks over the exact same points.
Axis by design have better defensive infantry (LMG Grens, Obers) better blob control with MG teams, better mortars and artillery, better AT guns and stronger tanks. The strengths of Soviets and Americans can be used in a 1v1 to flank, outmanoeuvre and outplay your opponent, but in the awful blob/camp/chokepoint maps of team games there just simply isn't any potential or possibility for that to happen. There isn't enough skill differentiators in team games, and especially just the unit design is so much easier and forgiving for axis especially in the late game.
For example looking in a non doctrinal call in sense, you've got the SU-85's which are super finesse because of their lack of rotatable turret and with no infantry damage. Jacksons are incredibly fragile and die very easily and also with no infantry damage. One small minor mis-plays and you can lose these dedicated tank destroyers incredibly easily. Especially when you factor in Panzerfausts/AT Grenades penetrate SU-85's and Jacksons essentially 100% of the time, compared to AT Grenades penetrating P4's and Panthers basically 50% of the time.
Axis tanks however you've got Panzer IV's, Panthers. Both are very mobile, very strong, very powerful, have great infantry damage and have Blitzkrieg to keep them alive. Where as what do Jacksons and SU-85's have going for them? Range. That's it, range. Except Blitzkrieg negates the range and speed entirely because then Blitzkrieg allows the stronger Axis tanks to out speed and chase down the weak squishy SU-85's and Jacksons.
Regardless of Blitzkreig, it's very hard to make use of the range against tanks supported by Shreks or Paks. And because it's team games with so many more people there's always going to be blobs of Shreks or Paks supporting tanks.
It's also impossible for Soviets to support their tanks with AT infantry because it just doesn't exist, and Americans have bazookas which work okay against medium tanks, but as soon as any heavy tanks come in such as a Tiger/Elefant Bazookas are pretty worthless. Not only do they have less damage/penetration than Shreks, but also Axis armour have so much more health and armour. Then there's the AT guns which fire slower than Paks and Raketenwerfers, but also the armour on Axis tanks means Allied AT guns don't penetrate as often where as Axis AT guns will essentially always penetrate against anything other than IS-2 or ISU.
To allow Allies to be more aggressive and outplay the maps need to be more open, bigger and wider. Maps can't too big though, otherwise retreat timers are too punishing. Maps for team games should be rectangular with bases spawning on the long edges so distance to and from bases isn't that high, but the map is wide enough so there's lots of room to prevent choke point and clutter. The example to look at is Moscow Outskirts and Vaux Farmlands, they're great 2v2 map.
TL;DR Allies are balanced in 1v1 because of the map design allows for outplays and use of aggressive play style. Due to the choke points, clutter and so many more units in team games, the awful map design of the majority of team game maps needs to be fixed and opened up to stop rewarding camping and blobbing so much, which conceptually favours axis play style compared to Allies. Some of the current maps really need reworks to open them up and declutter them, allowing my room for flanks and aggressive plays.
The only reason why Allies are currently able to win team games without relying on the Axis making mistakes is because of how ludicrously overpowered the ISU-152 is.
I think the real problem is the maps. Conceptually, Axis are two very defensive factions where as Allies are very mobile and very aggressive. In 1v1's or on some 2v2 maps such as Moscow Outskirts Allies are able to make use of their aggressive and mobile units. However due to all of the chokepoint, cluttered and blobby maps that occupy 3v3, 4v4 and the majority of 2v2 maps, it means that flanking and outmanoeuvring your opponent is impossible so it's all about blobs vs blobs, support weapons verse support weapons, tanks vs tanks over the exact same points.
Axis by design have better defensive infantry (LMG Grens, Obers) better blob control with MG teams, better mortars and artillery, better AT guns and stronger tanks. The strengths of Soviets and Americans can be used in a 1v1 to flank, outmanoeuvre and outplay your opponent, but in the awful blob/camp/chokepoint maps of team games there just simply isn't any potential or possibility for that to happen. There isn't enough skill differentiates in team games, and especially just the unit design is so much easier and forgiving for axis especially in the late game.
For example looking in a non doctrinal call in sense, you've got the SU-85's which are super finesse because of their lack of rotatable turret and with no infantry damage. Jacksons are incredibly fragile and die very easily and also with no infantry damage. One small minor mis-plays and you can lose these dedicated tank destroyers incredibly easily. Especially when you factor is Panzerfausts/AT Grenades penetrate SU-85's and Jacksons essentially 100% of the time, compared to AT Grenades penetrating P4's and Panthers basically 50% of the time.
Axis tanks however you've got Panzer IV's, Panthers. Both are very mobile, very strong, very powerful, have great infantry damage and have Blitzkrieg to keep them alive. Where as what do Jacksons and SU-85's have going for them? Range. That's it, range. There's also speed, except for when the big medium/heavy tanks pop Blitzkrieg and are faster than the allied tanks.
But it's very hard to make use of the range against tanks supported by Shreks or Paks. And because it's team games with so many more people there's always going to be blobs of Shreks or Paks supporting tanks.
It's also impossible for Soviets to support their tanks with AT infantry because it just doesn't exist, and Americans have bazookas which work okay against medium tanks, but as soon as any heavy tanks come in such as a Tiger/Elefant Bazookas are pretty worthless. Not only do they have less damage/penetration than Shreks, but also Axis armour have so much more health and armour.
To allow Allies to be more aggressive and outplay the maps need to be more open, bigger and wider. Maps can't too big though, otherwise retreat timers are too punishing. Maps for team games should be rectangular with bases spawning on the long edges so distance to and from bases isn't that high, but the map is wide enough so there's lots of room to prevent choke point and clutter. The example to look at is Moscow Outskirts, it's a great 2v2 map.
There's so many other little design features that make Allies really hard to play and axis really forgiving. For example the fact that Soviets can not build Howitzer due to the abundance of one click artillery call ins that instantly destroy 600 manpower worth of Howitzers for a small munitions cost, whilst Soviets just have no equivalent.
TL;DR Allies are balanced in 1v1 because of the map design allows for outplays and use of aggressive play style. Due to the choke points, clutter and so many more units in team games, the awful map design of the majority of team game maps needs to be fixed and opened up to stop rewarding camping and blobbing so much, which conceptually favours axis play style compared to Allies.
The only reason why Allies are currently able to win team games is because of how ludicrously overpowered the ISU-152 is.
Looking great! Thanks for all your work. We cast a lot of Company of Heroes 2 but we're looking to cast some more Company of Heroes 1. I'd rather shoutcast Elite mod so if anyone has some good games get them to send me their replays so we can make a shoutcast to YouTube.
The reason why Cheesey play styles is such a problem for Soviets is because all of their core standard units such as Conscripts, Penals, Combat Engineers and Shocks are not only really crappy, but also don't scale well at all into the late game otherwise you wouldn't always see Soviets depend on Maxim/Sniper/Guard/M3 play.
Even Penals are okay but really cheesey with the flamer, but the rifle damage is just atrocious. It should be evened out.
But I agree, it's also the same for Wehrmacht. Wehrmacht is just spam LMG Grens all day, but everything else is rather underwhelming. The problem is though the nature of WFA armies and their high DPS means balancing the factions around them compared to the core factions is going to cause a lot of problems.
Today we have an excellent Company of Heroes 2 match between two of the very best players! Jesulin as the OberKommando West versus BartonPL as the Soviets.
0
TheMachine
jove
Siberian
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
