[Feedback requested] - balancing issues in large team games

Axis so easy in 4's

i completed a business call while playing back in the day

Axis so easy in 4's

i completed a business call while playing back in the day

If we are talking AT's both Axis and Allies are piss easy in team games, the issue is randoms.

The Problem are not the factions it's the matchmaking, Axis have larger playerbase -> better match ups among team mates, while facing lower ranked allies.

If you play AT there's really no difference in winning.

Resource caches remain a problem in large team game. The cost doesn't change but the return on investment triples or quadruples depending on the number of players on the field. In a 1v1, for example, a fuel cache provides 5 fuel per minute. In a 4v4 that fuel cache provides the same 5 fuel per minute but to all 4 player for a total of 20 fuel per minute. This makes caches hyper efficient investments in team games and results in these caches being built on every single capture point. Combine this with the fact that larger game modes have more capture points in general and resource income quickly gets out of control. As a result the window for light vehicle play is nearly non-existent and even medium tanks quickly find themselves outclassed. Resource cache income needs to be divided by the number of players in a match (then rounded up) to remain balanced in larger game modes.

Another issue is forward retreat points. Forward reinforcement and healing is fine as all factions have the ability to do it but forward retreat points give a huge advantage to the OKW and US on large maps since it can easily cut retreat times in half and makes it extremely difficult for the opposition to take ground near such a point. A hard retreat should result in a long walk back to the front regardless of faction.

I have to agree with IpKai, my biggest issue with these game modes is the disparity of maps. Some are far too large and almost divided into sections, so you end up with several 2v2s or 1v1s until you get to tanks like on city 17.

Distributing resources into more, but lesser points would put more emphasis on supply lines and spread some into less desirable or defensible positions putting a larger percentage of the total resources into contention than what we have now. These large team games are too easy to get a snowball rolling and deny your opponent vital territory after a single error or forced retreat.

Forward HQ and retreat points give serious advantages and can keep one army in the field while the enemy spends close to 5 mins retreating, reinforcing then returning to the lines.

My other gripe is the poor decision to amalgamate 3v3 and 4v4 maps. While similar in scope, I feel these game modes are too different for one-size-fits-all. Steppes, city 17, general mud, hill 331(though I love this map), lanzerath and the like are just far too large for 3 players, especially when it is arbitrarily decided that one player per team will be on the other side of the map by themselves.

Either remove these from the 3v3 rotation or make smaller versions similar to La Gleize

two things:

maps and caches.

either make caches only benefittable to the owner or just remove them. maps, well, fix them and many needs more than just a small "fix" that moscow outskirt or minsk pocket got.

This is more about the balance itself than the large team games, but here's an idea that seems to me - would do much for the balance equilibrium of coh2.

Tbh I was very surprised when I realized that they made the KT non doctrinal unit. I actually like it, since it gives the feeling of complete and well rounded faction to OKW, with which you do not necessary have to choose the spec. doc. to build your early to late (game)play.

and personally I never understood why they didn't build all the other factions that way ?

Give 'main heavy tank' to all factions, and you proly solved the vast majority of balancing problems for the large team games.

So every faction gets to build their non doc. Heavy tank from their HQ, after they do all the teching. just as OKW.

So obviously soviets get IS2, Ostheer gets Tiger I, and USF get Pershing - finally !?

The main problem would be, the redesign of those 'few' Soviet and OstHeer doctrines that are carried by the Tiger and IS2, but it shouldn't be impossible to implement/patch !? Just add another cool ability, or specialized unit in their old spot and we're set.

That would actually deal with many undesirable effects of the gameplay that we're seeing now. every faction would have it's heavy late game contender, and I bet that we would be seeing quite a boom with all those forgotten doctrines, that are seldom used, since majority of players follow the so called meta, of the Call in Tigers and IS2's. Doctrines are supposed to complement play styles with cool abilities, some battle group's (T34/85, PZIV's) and Highly Specialised Vehicles (Elephant, JT, ISU152, Command Tanks etc.) Heavy tank should be an option for every faction, every player, every game.

I am sure that with such mechanic, factions would be far more balanced throughout the game, early to late, and there would be less irrational moves as the latest KT nerf, in the silly attempt to tone down the faction itself.

Main issues with large team games (priority in order)

1) resource distribution and sharing is the biggest issue. This is primarily a axis problem due
to only one soviet commander with fuel call in (and free AA with OKW). I know people are tired of nerf axis threads but it is truely unfair for players to synergise up and modify each others incomes and the allies cannot. None of the air drops should be able to be picked up by other players. The reason is that these effects are not linear, they are compounding like medicine side effects (1+1=3). You pass off fuel to the intentionally designed fuel starved faction and they bypass intended draw backs. this is one example but in general passing fuel or munitions to other players to fast lane them into army compositions is simply unfair if the other side cannot replicate.

2) Resources are too high in 4v4 maps. Ipkai shares my exact thoughts.

3) Maps. The problem with large team games is that they do not have the maps to support good play. These spam fests quickly turn into grind lanes where players throw their blobs into fire trying to dislodge their opponents. This could be fixed if 4v4 maps were scaled to the size of a 1v1 on Angoville. Plenty of space for maneuvers, both ranges are supported (It is actually great for more of the important stuff to be in the short ranged side because it is easier to compensate for those disadvantages then it is for say a conscript to make up for its disadvantage against a max range lmg gren)

Beyond that, 1v1 balance will sort of trickle down to large player games, but there is not a whole lot they can do to balance besides stopping single player intended abilities from affecting team mates in an unfair manner.

To elaborate on the problem of the maps, there was a huge flexibility to scale the size of maps without impacting resources too badly in CoH1 thanks to different sized resource sectors and "empty" strat points that provided no income. Now you have a choice of having a small number of absolutely enormous sectors, or inflating the income potential of both teams with a lot of strat points, all of which give income and can be cached. It's problematic, imo, for the ability of the game to scale up and down in map sizes.

I proposed in another thread that caches should be altered - they should give full resources to you, and half resources to your teammates. At least then, when the map is spammed with caches the resource income won't be quite as ludicrous.

Good feedback thus far. This won't be a simple solution. What would happen to the game if there was no caches? Slow it down?

What if the cache income would increase with the tech level (tiers 1 to 4) or if it would increase with the command level (command points) ?

Your toughts ?

It would encourage teching, wouldn't it? It would have to be tied to the player least teched up though.

To be honest, a lot would already be fixed if population cap was linked to territory. Its plain bullshit you have 100 popcap at the start of the game.

Too much infantry spam => No tanks or not much tanks.

I don't think that would make come backs at all possible though. Out numbered and out gunned, etc.

Good feedback thus far. This won't be a simple solution. What would happen to the game if there was no caches? Slow it down?

When I think about it, it'd probably not help the whole call-in thing.

Right now, people do it because you only got so much fuel, so you save fuel by forgoing teching (and them tending to be superior vehicles doesn't help...).

Without caches, you'll definitely have even less fuel so you'll really want to forgo teching then.

I don't think that would make come backs at all possible though. Out numbered and out gunned, etc.

And dealing with reinforcing your units when a sneaky bastard slipped into your lines and neutralized a cutoff was hell. The game's got missteps, but I'm perfectly happy with the popcap one.

Troll post invised

Back to topic