To the patch team

To the mod/patch team:

You are horrible missing the point of this patch and you are not addressing the real problems.

You are continuosly not hearing the community.

With the excuse that the Brit faction is not being picked, you are overbuffing them, when the problem is not the faction itself, the problem is that Sovs and USF are waaaay more superior and fun to play.

OST is still trash (horrible teching, dont have LV, dont have 60range TD, have far inferior 4men infantry, tanks are not so good as they should for the cost, etc, etc, etc). Ost is supposed to be a late-game faction, but dont have any late game "tools"! Ost is supposed to be a defensive faction, but they are being kicked in the face by the lot of arty or explosion damage Allies have.

Incredibly OKW seems to be the only semi-balanced faction.

Please start watching replays and reading posts about the actual unbalance problems. The game have, how much, 7 years, and it is still totally unbalanced.

+1 Ostheer is trash lategame. Against its intended design. It's obvious the devs are biased. Brits get straight up buffs while Ostheer (which is in the same bad spot) gets "adjustments".

ImperialDane has 2 smurfaccounts here and writing? Kappa

With the excuse that the Brit faction is not being picked, you are overbuffing them, when the problem is not the faction itself, the problem is that Sovs and USF are waaaay more superior and fun to play.

True +1

Agreed on the Fun to play aspect for USF and SU.

It's funny you have a WC pic and talk about 7 years and complaining the game is still "totally imbalanced".

While i would love to see some other changes been applied, that remarks lacks what an imbalanced game looks like at all.

The game is playable non meta wise, because non doctrinal options had been improved. 2013 to 2017 sends their regards.

Your complains are also totally dependable on which game mode you play.
For major teamgames: it's since release till UKF was released in favour of Axis and till they patch out all the BS from UKF in favour of Allies.
For 2v2: it was back n forth with different metas.
For 1v1: back n forth with different factions been the stronger ones.


Finally: there's no such things as "early or late game factions". The extremes had been toned down, be it weakness or strengths.

Incredibly OKW seems to be the only semi-balanced faction.

You mean the faction whose crutch is getting deleted from the game?

Have fun playing it until the patch drops. You don’t wanna play it afterwards. It’s okay though, sander93 thinks it’s fine roflmao.

No reasons behind his argument just MOD TEAM NO LISTEN TO ME SO THEY DUMB

You know if he was in charge of balance the game would be 100% balanced because he is so big brain

+1 Ostheer is trash lategame. Against its intended design. It's obvious the devs are biased. Brits get straight up buffs while Ostheer (which is in the same bad spot) gets "adjustments".

Give them free hull-down, that would buff their shit.

No reasons behind his argument just MOD TEAM NO LISTEN TO ME SO THEY DUMB

You know if he was in charge of balance the game would be 100% balanced because he is so big brain

He gave a number of arguments... which you obviously try to avoid.

OST is still trash (horrible teching, dont have LV, dont have 60range TD, have far inferior 4men infantry, tanks are not so good as they should for the cost, etc, etc, etc). Ost is supposed to be a late-game faction, but dont have any late game "tools"! Ost is supposed to be a defensive faction, but they are being kicked in the face by the lot of arty or explosion damage Allies have.

but Ost has the cancer mg42

besides it still cant be as broken as brits on release

You are continuosly not hearing the community

I think that its important to note the difference between "hearing", "acknowledging" and "acting on".

You can see, near the bottom of the page, who is looking at what thread; and I've seen "Sander93", "Andy_RE", and others pop up in a lot of threads. They're clearly going through community feedback, suggestions, and other posts on a fairly regular basis.

With that said, they're not going to act on (or even acknowledge) every suggestion. A significant portion of the community suggestions are either not entirely thought-out (ex. makes sense in 4v4, bricks 1v1), impossible to implement (ex. game-mode resource scaling, SturmTiger rocket arc, etc.), or would cause further imbalances (ex. buffing already strong units).

Considering the number of these suggestions, they're not going to be able to reply to every single idea/comment/thread with a detailed response; and simply replying "no" wouldn't go over well with many forum members. As a result, staying silent is the best response in a lot of cases.

However, I think its becoming apparent that there is some degree of communication breakdown between devs, the balance team, and the community. There are several "hot button" issues within the community that have been coming up repeatedly, for months on end, that simply aren't being addressed, or even commented on.

Let's take the M36 for example; some say its drastically over-performing, some say its just a bit too good, some say its completely fine, and I've even seen some say it could use a slight buff. Regardless of opinion, its clear that a large section of the community has issues with this unit - so what is the balance teams stance on it? Even if the next patch isn't changing the unit, a statement would be nice. Something like:

We've seen that the community has been talking a lot about the state of the M36 lately. We wanted to chime in and let everyone know that while the upcoming patch doesn't have changes directly aimed at this unit, we have been discussing it internally. While we think that the USF needs a strong late-game TD to counter Axis heavies and super heavies, we've seen that the M36 is performing a bit too well against medium tanks. In a future patch, we're hoping to test a few changes to lower its performance against medium tanks, while keeping its performance against heavies.

*The above comment isn't real, and is only meant as an example of what a statement on 'hot button' issues could look like*

It would likely be beneficial to everyone if the balance team picked several of these issues, and wrote a "Q&A" type post covering their thoughts on them, even if it was only at a 'high level' like the above example (i.e. no detailed stats or promised stat changes).

Similarly, some of the more recent changes don't have an explanation, but also don't seem to be based on common community complaints; such as the On-Map artillery pop decrease, or the reason for not adjusting the Pershing's AoE along with the other Heavies (in the 1.2 patch). And, of course, a comment on (possibly) unsuccessful trial-changes (i.e. OKW's IRHT) would also be beneficial.

TL;DR - The patch team is fine, but better communication would be nice. Maybe bring on someone (or give the roll to someone already on the team) to do community FAQ/Q&A posts?

Communication from the balance team would go a long way to alleviate some of the concerns. It's utterly mindblowing Tigers and IS2 are getting nerfed but the Pershing is not getting touched.

Communication from the balance team would go a long way to alleviate some of the concerns. It's utterly mindblowing Tigers and IS2 are getting nerfed but the Pershing is not getting touched.

Nobody knows what they are doing. They have an idea how the game should look I can't confirm.

This thread is like a playground for steam-forum supernoobs

And since this applies to almost everyone in this thread: How is it possible to play hundreds if not thousands of Ostheer games and still be so damn mediocre with the faction or at the game?

"problem of UKF performance is not the faction itself"

And since this applies to almost everyone in this thread: How is it possible to play hundreds if not thousands of Ostheer games and still be so damn mediocre with the faction or at the game?

Are you referring to me? Rank 22 2v2 randumb and 0.67 win ratio is considered mediocre these days? We can't all be 3v3 heroes.

*Holds breath for Donnie Chan to swoop in with "Playercard Please"*

Are you referring to me? Rank 22 2v2 randumb and 0.67 win ratio is considered mediocre these days? We can't all be 3v3 heroes.

I wasnt calling specific names, but makes sense that you think you were one of the targets.

And funny how "the balance team is biased" is coming from a person who has 99% axis playrate and posts nothing but "waaah axis are UP, allies are OP" since ages. I dont think ranks alone decide about whether a player is good or not, Ive never used "Im rank 1 in that mode so my opinion matters more" type of arguments. Nonetheless, the type of statements a player makes can definitely make them (appear) mediocre.

When someone says that Ostheer has trash infantry and trash lategame nowadays, that just gives me the impression that this person has absolutely no understanding about his own faction and its tools. (buffed tiger, best anti blob weapons in the game, scoped elefant = bad lategame, makes sense.)

And I'm sure the people who still complain about OST infantry are players who never try to adapt and always use the exact same strat (gren spam?) since an eternity. Saying the faction has trash 4-man squads when you have access to 4-minute elite infantry that has amazing base stats, absolutely amazing veterancy and weapon upgrades against pretty much any target (schrecks vs fast vehicles and on maps with a lot shotblockers, G43 on longrange maps) makes 0 sense to me.

If your strategy barely gives you more than 60% winrate or even less, then you are the issue, not game balance. Speaking of 2v2+ ofc, but 5men grens and assault grens didnt seem weak at all in 1v1 so what are people crying about?