yet ost sniper is more powerful vs infantry and other snipers, legit asymmetrical balance there.
only that it isn't. both ost and brit sniper get oneshot by each other. even if it was legit asymmetrical balance, you are still cherrypicking here, because, like i mentioned above, there are multiple other instances where allied units are quite clearly and obviously stronger despite exact same role and similar costs. again, you only use the argument when it fits your narrative and not in general.
No it doesn't serve its purpose, which is countering light vehicles and reliably fighting mediums. Also, if you change obers price to 600 MP, will they still serve their purpose? Yes. WIll they be a balanced unit? No.
It does serve its purpose, because it IS countering light vehicles, it just cannot take on medium tanks on its own (and again, if it could, it would be OP, even by your definition). it very well can take on medium tanks if you have two or three of them, negating the argument that the unlock costs can be added to the price. |
after old CAS commander, i think this is the most imba thing that i am sure about in terms of 3v3+. and yea, i know in normal circumstances, i should give more times but that is not a choice now. we need a patch before christmas because i cannot fathom waiting four months with the game at this state.
you classify me with the lowest class of beings in this forum, fanboys, and assume i am getting angry because you think only thing i want is easy wins as allies. its at least passive aggressive.
you mean, you can't endure the same thing axis players had to endure at least since brit release? that does seem fanboyish...
and yes, i would also like a balanced game sooner rather than later... but "taking free wins" for months and then ranting like crazy after a few days... c'mon man, if you don't like it, step away from the game for a week or so until the dust starts settling. OKW WILL get nerfed, if only because the backlash is the enormous . until then, either join the winning team and live with 30 minute queue times, are just keep playing allies and accept the fact that now you will lose games you didn't deserve to lose, just like you won games you didn't deserve to win earlier. |
Those snipers actually have different roles, so this comparison is false if puma and AEC is supposed to fill the same role.
I don't play brits so I'm not trying to voice any opinion about the state of the AEC, only that your comparison with the snipers are incorrect.
i could have picked ANY unit combination and made the same point... but if the brit sniper is actually supposed to counter vehicles, then what DOESN'T he counter? or whats supposed to counter him?
but, alright, for the sake of the argument, let's take tommies vs. grens: comparable costs (tommies higher purchase cost, but lower reinforcement cost), yet tommies have way better vet, can get self healing upgrade (self healing for free after initial investment), can get nades, arty nades, have access to weapon racks (so different weapon combinations possible, as well as multiple upgrades), can get a 5 man upgrade, get boosted stats in cover... while having the same general role. but this, of course, is asymmetrical balance, because it fits the narrative, while the AEC is just underperforming. no hypocrisy here. amirite? |
1. read my original post again. i talk about okw the most not "only".
2. you really think one of us will get convinced here? especially since half of your statement is about the past and another half is very general and you didnt even put an effort in to back your very general argument.
3. i said several times in this forum pre-december patch about how allies are OP in 3v3+. and numerous times in game. as allies 2v2, i beat momo&ciez and momo&luvnest and in one game i explicitly mentioned in all-chat how allies are OP. i know i shouldve lost those games and not proud of them at all.
so there goes the straw that is apparently your main argument. your problem dealing with me is how you try to group me in as a fanboy and you are trying very hard with weak shit.
i was talking in general terms because i haven't played this patch enough to form an opinion based on facts. but i guess everybody else was able to after just a few games, right? and my point still stands: you might have mentioned it in game (btw, i apologised for playing allies pretty much every game i played since brit release, just because i knew that i probably didn't deserve half of the wins i got), but i never saw you being vocal on here when allies were OP for MONTHS. yet 3-4 days of percieved axis (or, more correctly OKW) OPness is enough to bring out a rant? also, please read all your posts again and tell me how I am the one being aggressive and unreasonable in here. |
All of your examples illustrate different units with different roles, having different strengths. That's called "asymmetrical balance". The puma and the AEC have the exact same roles, and their performance to cost ratios are radically different. That's not asymmetrical balance, that's an underperforming unit.
it works both ways. ost sniper is same price as brit sniper, yet brit sniper can counter vehicles. thats not asymmetrical balance, that's an underperforming (or overperforming?) unit. MVGame.
...and again, because i haven't said it often enough: the AEC serves it's purpose, it doesn't need a buff. i even doubt very much it needs a cost reduction, for the points mentioned above. |
for the first one i must tell you that Relic took those statistics and nerfed since then the British,ofc the nerf hammer was being dropped since the Alpha which i also took part in it........
second the british win streaks happend duo to the crazy centaur rush which pretty much killed any stall type of strategy into tigers also since it was soo good at clearing garrisons AND killing shreck blobs as good as the croc(but not better)this lead to those crazy win strikes,also dont forget that most british players used the Sniper as a way to keep them in the game during that time and counter the ridiculous sniper mp drain werhmacht players could do to them.
but this didnt make the faction so much viable for 1vs1s as such many people on OCF went for the usual soviets or USF as ALLIES and as AXIS went Werhmacht,also lets also not forget that the OCF champion won that strategy quite well multiple times in the Tournament(with werhmacht)
so expect heavy OKW nerfs next year,and dont bother telling people to prepare for fast luch,cause that didnt prevect relic into delaying Soviet T3 m5 rushes and t-70 rushes,dont bother telling people to wait to adapt cause that didnt happen before with the british,dont expect further UKF nerfs but minor buffs or crazy ninja buffs
brits were nerfed several times... and after every patch their winrate was still higher than most (apart from USF). centaur was one part of why brits were so OP (and pls, go back and look at all the threads back then that demanded a nerf to the centaur, you will see quite a few familiar faces defending the centaur back then and now demanding buffs to brits and nerfs to axis), there were quite a few others as well.
brits adapted fairly quickly to ost snipers btw... if you spam 5 IS and neglect teching up or getting a countersniper or a bren, then the MP bleed is not the result of ost sniper being OP, but you failing to adapt. ost sniper wasnt nerfed, only change was to IS reinforce cost, and even before that patch went live almost nobody was complaining about MP bleed anymore.
also, pls go back and watch OCF again... especially aimstrongs games. lots of brits, lots of bofors, lots of centaur. also, go back a few posts and read my post about UKF winrates in 1v1... 4 out of the top 10 players in UKF 1v1 had 90+% winrates, as opposed to 0 for either OKW or Ostheer.
i do expect OKW nerfs, but buffing allies because OKW might be too strong (and ofc nerfs to OKW as well) is incredibly fanboyish. |
1. i have problem with all FRPs if you read at all.
2. each to their own.
3. how can i take you seriously when you dont even have playercard visible?
almost exclusively? i still play axis 2v2 even when they were UP for fun and just to keep in touch. is it my fault if i like usf the best? nice hyperbole dude.
if i was a cry baby, i wouldve ranted in '13 when i realised how shamefully ppl treat 3v3+ players then, which was worse than now surprisingly.
we'll wait and see about okw but i doubt anything will change. if okw is really op as these "fanboys" are saying, would you say they figured it out early using logic and common sense or rather argue that their fanboism lines up with real balance issues by chance?
1. so you have a problem with "all" FRP, but you only mention OKW?
2. point ignored, okay.
3. i could link you my playercard (which isn't hard to find btw), but since i'm not the one making claims, i doubt that it is relevant (i openly admit that ostheer is my most played faction, never played a single OKW game)
also, thanks for ignoring the other point about only complaining when your favorite faction is at a disadvantage, because that's EXACTLY what you're doing right now. literally months of USF (and general allied) dominance over pretty much all game modes (save for maybe 4v4) and not a single word. not even 4 days of a new patch where USF doesn't have highest winrate anymore? HOTFIX PLS.
also: i can guarantee that if you argue for a balance game instead of buffs for your favorite faction, people will be way more susceptible to your reasoning than now. |
I didn't name-call at all??? I was talking about his argument of ignoring 2v2+ and looking at 1v1 exclusively.
Bro my most played playlist and faction is Ostheer 4v4 it says it RIGHT on the playercard??? I have more Ostheer 1v1s as well. True, I have my preference over the USF faction as of recent, but who doesn't have a preference?
I've reached top 200 for all factions in at least one playlist. I have an entire YouTube channel dedicated to it: https://www.youtube.com/user/blasdlagwatasdsa. It's not like I'm hiding anything.
My point was I've played all playlists, all factions, both in randoms and arranged. I have almost 2,500 hours in this game and DUSTY has around half of that (check Steam profiles I have 2,400 something and he has 1,400 something). That's where I got my "played twice as much as you".
And COH2.ORG playercards don't take in every arranged team you played with unfortunately, it has a max. I said I played mostly arranged, most of my games goes to arranged not random so they aren't even recorded in my playercard.
hours played on steam says how much again? :-) i've got 270h on steam, finished campaign and pretty much all ToWs... still i am also around 200 (or better) in almost all modes i play... does that make my opinion more or less relevant? does it make dustys opinion more relevant that he is ranked 3 in UKF 1v1?
thanks for linking that youtube channel btw, browsing through it real quick i found 1 (!) axis game from 1.5 years ago, way to prove a point :-)
also: you still lied about ukf 1v1. thanks for completely ignoring that. |
There is two reasons for this so called RANT. First, I am sick of getting ignored by Relic (justified or not due to lack of manpower resources)and this COH2.ORG community as whole.
There are glaring problems in 3v3+ that are like the old Opel Blitz. Remember that? an inevitably fixed glaring balance issue that affected only non 1v1. That took more than half a year to fix. But instead now, the new glaring problems are taking more than a year to be fixed or not even going to be fixed in the future.
The second reason for this rant is that the community as whole, especially those so called elite 1v1 players who has the most say think this is just fine. Just par for the course. Not 1v1, not interested. Team games are for fun and go fuck off if you don't got the balls to play the real mode. It not my mode, who the fuck cares about it.
Haven't even played a real 3v3+ match where you throw a grenade and slide over 500m to reverse order the jacksons you ordered to move up just a second ago while keeping your ears open for katty/stuka/werfer while remembering where numerous mines your teammate has discovered but could not sweep. The game where you had to coordinate 4 armies to kill hordes of churchill, jacksons or JT, KT etc etc. Nope, I played 1v1 and fuck it if I care, 3v3+ scrubs, I am coming, jump into the fuckin icy river and kill yourself in shame because you don't play 1v1.
----------------------------------
1. first glaring issue, forward retreat base. I don't want to be partisan here but OKW Forward Retreat Point is especially cancerous. it is hilarious that they can get it up so early into the game and maybe in 1v1 it might shave 20 seconds off retreat most of the time, in 3v3+, shaving of more than a minute of retreat time is fuckin given. To take it down early, allies invest into weak light arty early game, which means less mainline and if that serious commitment to take down the FRP does not work, you know because he is back on the field in 30 seconds while for you it takes 2 minutes? flak is already up.
not to say other FRP are good. but they come later and seriously, if you can not counter allies FRP with "wipe machines" so called walking stuka or panzerwerfer, you are a fuckin idiot.
FRPs promote blobbing and mass retreat, and removes one of the tactical essence of coh2: TIME. when Yoink said it in SNF4, he was absolutely right. Time is a fuckin resource and if you made your opponent retreat, you earned it. Now, you get a fuckin slap in the face for reward because the same blob returns 20 seconds later.
2. Whoever has late game wins usually. Well, now OPKW has early-mid-AND late game but... For eternity, Axis been wiping the fuckin floor in 3v3+ and since TBF release and last patch cycle, suddenly with rifle/con buff plus brit turned the table upside fuckin down? I wonder why.
others, I will not mention because they seems more personal or not particularly 3v3 exclusive as in OPkw in general, current popcap "bug", etc etc.
You do realise that only ost and soviets have no forward retreat points?
Its true that whoever is stronger late usually wins the game... but on UKF release brits had early, mid and late. They've been nerfed every patch since but i'd contend they still have the edge in late game, especially in team games.
Also, how serious can i take someone who almost exclusively plays allies and wants a hotfix for okw, but was completely fine with stuff like bofors and centaur? Because thats exactly the kind of people raging and ranting in the forums now, after months of allies having superior winrates. Patch comes that semkingly makes one axis faction too strong, within 24 hhours this forum was filled with demands for nerfs for axis, buffs for allies and all of that as hotfix. If you want a balanced game, then dont just cry when your favorite factio doesnt have 70+% winrate anymore, also complain when it DOES. |
T2 is tech cost. AEC tech + unit cost is unit cost.
"light tank hunter" implies that the AEC is light, not the tanks it hunts. Should have worded it better, yeah.
Exactly, that's what a puma does except the "BUT mediums tanks" part.
Still no reasons for buffs. All i hear is "but puma is better, i want puma!". And i want rifle vet for grens... and 5 man squad upgrades, bars instead of lmg42s, a sniper that can counter light vehicles, emplacements that have a "can't kill me" button, forward retreat points with weapon racks and reinforcing, having to spend only 30 muni once to be able to heal all my squads all the time, cloakable infantry that is deployable everywhere on the map with insane dps, tanks that can survive roundabout 20 pak shots and throw grenades, indestructable artillery pieces in my base and so on and so forth.
Also: your tech cost thingie makes no sense. |
Germany
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
