If you're also going to segment arranged and non-arranged teams, then pretty much nobody will be getting games with the small number of people searching at any given time. This problem will be amplified with larger team sizes. The current situation is not ideal, but splitting is definitely not the solution. Poor matches are (marginally) better than no matches - see CoH1 automatch for AT.
No they are not. There is no point in playing a game where you already know at the loading screen that you will never win. It's a waste of time for all sides involved, but especially for the losing one. And yes, I very much look to the coh1 automatch as proof that the playerbase is no issue with it. Hell you can just implement a freaking checkbox that says "Also match to premade teams" when you are searching as randoms. Not that a single random player is likely to keep it checked.
Food for thought - if there are so few allies, then they should be getting matched with an equivalent axis of close skill level. Since there's so many Germans across all skill ranges, an allied team had the benefit of choosing the closest one. Unless, that is, players who have searched over 5 minutes get priority in the queue over equal skill opponents (who are searching less than 5 mins). Then in that case this prioritization is causing the gross mismatch between games.
No, because of how flawed the system is. It's not even about prioritization of long searching teams, it's simply that the system is looking for an elo match, people searching for a long time count as any elo value, and so you get instantly matched to them because it's the easiest matching for the system. |
@ OP
Noun's ELO explanation
Which really has nothing to do with what the OP is talking about.
Based on a year of experience with random teamgame matching, the expanded search is purely onesided, ie. if an axis team has been waiting for a long time and has thus expanded their search to a humongous range, if any two players join the allies queue, they can get instantly matched to the axis players no matter how large the ELO differences are. So with the current generally 100% axis searching pattern, you get absolutely horrible matchmaking as allies which leads to even less players wanting to play allies.
There's also the issue of the system not differentiating between randoms and arranged teams, leading to even poorer matches. But this applies to both factions. |
|
It's a ridiculous unit that desperately needs a fuel cost, but there are SO many other things more wrong with the balance that who can honestly be bothered to complain about TA specifically? |
|
#Kubelmaster...oh wait, nevermind, just amove to opponent base.
|
ISUs vs Jagds, Snipers vs Everything
I'll agree on the sniper part, especially with allied machineguns in a worse state than ever right now, soviet snipers are really the one thing holding the allied early game together. Every remotely competitive 2vs2 game you see is going to involve snipers from the soviets by the looks of it right now.
I tend to feel that while Jagd is the easy, no thought required counter to ISU, axis are in no way forced to go for it to counter the ISU, while allies pretty much are forced to go for ISU as it is the only vehicle they get that will regularly oneshot wipe axis lolsoldaten in the lategame. As soon as your tigers or panthers have blitz, there is little allies can do to stop them from hunting down the ISUs now that Button only tickles, and mines tend to get wiped away as collateral damage from the constant stuka and mortar barrages from the superior axis artillery options.
Though the sheer OPness of the P47 does potentially open some doors for medium usage, I very much doubt that is going to last as the ability is clearly a total outlier in potential munition efficiency. |
|
(Based on beta, which I doubt differs much from the release version of emperor's edition):
It's definitely better. But it's still the same fundamentally very flawed campaign play with some of the rougher edges smoothed out.
AIs can kinda do a siege battle now, but are still so inept that 3 or 4 elite infantry will easily defeat two full stacks from them.
Politics matters more, but largely just boils down to luck as you have no way of knowing what outcome decisions will get, and gaining support for your faction is largely a function of actually getting general recruits from your faction, if you don't, you can't do much short of immediately stopping all wars.
AIs are very passive again, you never have to worry about getting into a war you didn't start after first 15 turns.
Beelining to higher tech units is still the #1 strat, AI simply can't handle them. Largely doesn't matter what you build in provinces now with the relaxed squalor and negative food, economy bonuses still too small to matter, so it's safest bet just to spam buildings that give happiness so you can permanently run higher taxes.
Actually winning a campaign is still a huge grind because even after you've become a huge empire with more provinces than the next 5 largest combined, you're still only halfway through the victory goals and have to grind through armies of levy spearmen for several hours if you want to "win".
If you thought Rome 2 was ok but really buggy at release, this version is probably just what you wanted. If you thought Rome 2 had fundamentally issues with its systems and that those needed to be completely rewritten for it to work as well as say Shogun 2 did, this release does not do much to fix that. |
|
I'd love to see caches removed from allied factions, it would improve the quality of random games immensively.
I have a decent number of OKW games and a decent rank with them and agree fully with what Brachiaraidos just said. With the super cheap tech, if anything you end up having MORE fuel available in the first 15 minutes of the game than an ostheer player would. But even more importantly you've got so much manpower to spam your overpowered infantry... |
USF Riflemen Garand long range DPS is 1.46
USF Riflemen BAR long range DPS is 4.11
THAT'S A 282% THE DMG!!!!!!
I should point out your spreadsheet has several wrong values:
aim time multiplier med 1, should be 1.25
aim time multiplier far 1.25, should be 1.5
burst duration multiplier far 1.5, should be 1
Actual BAR dps is currently ~2.95 at far.
|
JLI:
-Cost a bit more per entity
.
Both Pathfinders and Jaegers cost the exact same 38mp per man to reinforce
Jaegers have 0.8 received accuracy straight off when spawning
Jaegers have higher vet bonuses (like 1.4 accuracy compared to 1.2 on pathfinders etc)
But Pathfinders do only require half as much exp for levels. Even with how little damage they tend to do they vet pretty quickly, which is nice. |
Doesnt the maxim use the bike turning plan? 
Yes and no, they're in different files but the maxim one is just straight copy and paste from the motorcycle turning plan. |
Finland
cruzz
momo4sho
momo4sho
cruzz
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
