Check coh2chart again in 2 weeks, so that the winning rate stabilise again.
Players need time to adapt and discover the next-best cheese to abuse.
The factions that were buffed always experience a surge in win-rates for the first few weeks. Then, the matching algorithm will adapt, and people will be matched evenly again. Then, winrates will probably look the same like before.
coh2chart is an OK representation of balance. However, it's the best representation of how fast ELO ranks adjust after a patch.
It seem to affect all modes of play,random and arranged. Hoping the curves stabilize quickly.
When there is smoke, we "could" have a fire, so let's be cautious.
Thx for all your efforts by the way.
P.s: May the meta be fair for us all ! |
Coh2chart.com new data tell us alot....
Coh2chart.com
What are your conclusions?
Lets discuss them intelligently.
Thanks. |
|
By the way, thank you to have a look at the team formats. It's giving me hope and make me want to play again !
Also, all the comments ive seen so far in this thread breath maturity and intellectual integrity. Thank you. It's so refreshing.
May Relic see the light. |
Maybe instead of less pop on 3's and 4's, just revise the map pool to eliminate long narrow maps (Red Ball) and more short wide (shaped like Steppes or General Mud). The long narrow maps put Soviets at a significant disadvantage.
Putting a cooldown on FRP would help, but it should apply to all FRP's including Major.
One improvement to caches could be to divide the normal resource gain by the number of players (1/2 for a 2v2, etc) and then let other players improve it, 200mp at a time, until it reaches full value. Having it benefit only one player would likely result in people teamkilling caches instead of playing the game (at least in randoms).
Those are great ideas, especially the one about supply caches !!!! Simple and brilliant !!! |
as long as relic refuse to separate 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3+ for balancing - which will be a harder work, you'll just have to deal with it. aand with so many people just jumping on a bandwagon yelling "let team modes die, but not 2v2 because i play 2v2 occasionally... but let 3v3+ die..." BS, i doubt we will see an improvement in coh2 or even in future relic titles.
if the community balance teams get more power to do things, we might still have glimmer of "hope", but i mean, the game is already 3+ years old.
and you cant micro balance teammodes like 1v1. a lot more variables and 6-8 players mean you have to rely way more on player's ability to #adapt. so only fix big shits like stupid super heavies, rocket arties, FRP. and maps if you have time.
But We all already know what are the few problems for the large team format, let'just work to fix it.
Example : We know that supplies cache's impact grow with the number of player.
You divide the bonus given too all by the number of players of that side round up. That would greatly help already...
Make attack ground do less damage, so Hmg like .50 can survive long enough to suppress the bazooka/shreck bloob shooting it. It's a plague now.
And so on...
The key here is balanced enough to be fun and fair for all.
|
I disagree with many of your points but the most important one you made I have quoted.
This game never was and never will be balanced for more than 2v2 at best. Probably need to just learn to accept that and you might start having fun again.
The game could be balanced without breaking 1vs1 for sure. Plz stop saying it'cant. |
|
The worst case scenario is when Allies faced in 4vs4 an Axis team composed of 1-2 OSTs and 2-3 OKWs, they covered all theirs weakness. It's where the 3 problematic factors (see above) matter the most.
Things I've spotted when playing 4vs4 random automatch:
If i go alone (in 4vs4), the matchmaking seem better, as teams seem to be composed of mostly single player. Rather even.
But, If i go as a team of 2-3 (in 4vs4), we mostly face whole teams of 4 all the time, so it's very hard to win.
P.S. Plz don't tell me to play 1vs1, i hate it. I'm a team/coop player type. |
The game was never balanced for a team arena and never will be. It's always been heavily swung in one way or another. I don't know if you saw when the Brits were first released but they were stupid overpowered and playing large team games as Axis was just an exercise in futility; the game is just all over the place.
It is largely going to depend on the map though.
You speak the truth, but for now the exercise in futility is on the Allies side... |
|
I'won't try to convince you, but as far i'm concerned, the team formats are not balanced enough anymore to be fun.
Hoping for a miracle, I'still want to play this game. |
I know people don't play this game to be competitive and i know that people like to play it in with their friends in set teams playing the same factions and armies and that is just how you want to do it. That's fine, you paid for the game and you can play it any way you choose.
But for the love of god just play 20 axis games just to see what it's like facing Calliopes, Kattys, landmatresses, Mortar pits, 120mm mortars, Pak howies, auto repairing emplacements, Bofors with barrage, USF retreat points that can move, Brit ones that can equip units with LMG's and Soviet t-34'76 spam.
It's the starting phase that matter, the first 10-12 minutes. The loses there are critical because of the snowballing effect it's cause.
All of you mentioned come later in the game.
I did watch so many games in so many formats...and played so many games...
Use your own in-game experience, when you analyse the problematic factors.
Those are the majors offender when playing team formats.
Thanks for your comments.
|
Canada
![VoltarDark [QC] flag](/images/replay/ostheer_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
