Login

russian armor

4v4 win rates disparity

PAGES (7)down
7 Apr 2021, 12:59 PM
#61
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 734

About why axis have higher win rate in 4vs4! :
1.in random vs random axis are most of the time better. But in premade vs premade allies are stronger. Allies random don't know how to counter a mg or killing a tank.

This is Top200 games. People in Top200 random games don't know how to kill a MG? I'm not Top200, I only was close to beeing Top200, but I know how to do it.

2. Matchmaking is fail atm. When you search axis you get top 100 mates but only facing 1k to 6k allies. So ofc axis wins. Just look last streams from duffman. Shows the same. And when duffman played random allies, he got friendly snipes.
So yes atm something is wrong in 4vs4. But imo its not the unit balance self. Something in the matchmaker is not working. It wasn't so worse in past. Ofc there were days where you faced as top 100 1k-6k but it happend on axis and allies sind. Now its only on allies side.
So ofc axis has higher winrate.
As said look duffmann stream, or rosebone thread, or ask aerafield. He tried in the last week to play random allies and no chance at all from matchmaking.

We are an arranged team and our 3vs3/4vs4 allied winrates dwindled from 50% to 60% to below 50% over the course of the last year while 2v2 stayed pretty much the same above 50%. I don't think matchmaking got so much worse suddenly. At the same time we are doing good with Axis with way less experience.

3. As allies random: Ban redball, port of hamburg. Snow maps are not that bad. Lower your settings or get better pc if you have still problems.

I don't have a bad PC, ressource inflation exists on all maps independently of snow.

fftopic you guys saw the wins from allies in 1vs1? 3 time 52 % allies faction. poor wehrmacht 44 % lol.
Brits with the highest. But on the other side you don't see brits in 1vs1 Cups, because people know how to counter it.

If you look at my post #45, you'll see I said this already. Allied early should get nerfed slightly too.

7 Apr 2021, 13:04 PM
#62
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 915



last 40+ games axis?`How can you see that? only the last 10-15 games in history are acutall. the other 10-15 are from 2-3 years ago btw...
--> again lie

Last game I can see is: Wehr 2v2, VonAsten and you vs SpongeCoh and TM Q, length 29 minutes, KD ratio 1.21. Exactly 38th game if I didn't count it wrong
EDIT: counted wrong, exactly 40th


Yeah you maybe remeber the time where allies in 4vs4 were broken as shit? 1919 spam and brits etc. There i agree we played more axis as i explained you already.
I remember, and those were necessary nerfs. Nothing wrong with nerfing borken shit


Now mainly axis? I stopped playing coh2 since 2 months because of RL and Job. Just for few days ago i played 3-4 games with old friends.
--> again lie
Can't see the date of the games. Never said that you played them yesterday. Only said last 40 games or so. Last 40 games in past 10 years or 40 games in past 10 days, don't care. I play a game a week so I understand and I apologize if I gave a notion about you playing constantly

About data, thats why i explained you in the 3 points, which are not shown in the stats.
Also its about week to weeks. When i play active again with my friends, probably allies will be higher winrate then again^^.

I just can agree that random allies are most of the worser than axis randoms and that atm something is wrong in matchmaking! And that is what the stats from his side shows.
7 Apr 2021, 13:11 PM
#63
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 915


Complete lie. You can clearly see him playing as Allies regularly. Your "mostly Axis" claim is just made up.



You regularly post you opinion about balancing ideas. How is that not being interested in balance?


I seldom post balancing ideas. Posted one on AEF forum yesterday (??). I shit on the balancing ideas being proposed by some people mostly. Like disguising nerfs as buffs or using "cookie-cutting, in line with" BS. I like the game, don't like majority of people involved in balancing the game. I'm light years away from being good at balancing COH2. I don't play it regularly, nor do I play OST/brits/soviets. I play with soviets and brits VS OST but I don't play as them.

Ok, counted it all out using CTRL-F in Mozilla and it highlights in the scroll all occurances : http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198046481660/history
Last 40 games:
Soviet: 9
AEF: 1
Brits: 5
Axis: 25 (WGerman 4)

Sturm can balance Germans as much as he wants, but I don't expect him to say anything about USF or Brit balancing
7 Apr 2021, 13:12 PM
#64
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 11802 | Subs: 1

I am not sure why some people waste so much time an effort to "demonstrate" that some else one is biased. (and usally people who themselves play a certain faction or show bias themselves)

Even so one in MOD team is biased that does not make any buff to one's faction or nerf to other factions "wrong".

It much more constructive to focus on the changes and not the people.
7 Apr 2021, 13:14 PM
#65
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 734


(not to mention they are German so it naturally comes to play with Germans, nothing wrong with that).


I'm german too and play about 80% allied side. In the end I just want to have a balanced and fun game. 1vs1 and 2vs2 seems to be close to be balanced if you ask me. 3v3 and 4vs4 are far of because of ressource inflation and too small maps for the unit count.

If that can't be changed you have to change units. You could use doctrinal units like E8, Pershing, IS-2, KW-1 and so on to achieve that without changing balance in the smaller gamemodes.
7 Apr 2021, 13:14 PM
#66
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 915

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 13:12 PMVipper
I am not sure why some people waste so much time an effort to "demonstrate" that some else one is biased. (and usally people who themselves play a certain faction or show bias themselves)

Even so one in MOD team is biased that does not make any buff to one's faction or nerf to other factions "wrong".

It much more constructive to focus on the changes and not the people.


I wholeheartedly agree. But those people are in "charge" and 90% of good suggestions will go sidelined because they do not agree with the changes. I mean look at the arguments "Ban Redball if you play allies". People like that should not balance a game.



I'm german too and play about 80% allied side. In the end I just want to have a balanced and fun game. 1vs1 and 2vs2 seems to be close to be balanced if you ask me. 3v3 and 4vs4 are far of because of ressource inflation and too small maps for the unit count.

If that can't be changed you have to change units. You could use doctrinal units like E8, Pershing, IS-2, KW-1 and so on to achieve that without changing balance in the smaller gamemodes.


TBH, if there was NDH or Yugoslavia or Croatia in any way shape or form in any game, I'd avoid it like it was the devil. Hate my country. On another note, I do love Germany. Beautiful country ran by a chemist. Also the best tourists, who, unlike the brits, don't litter, curse and yell all the time.
7 Apr 2021, 13:19 PM
#67
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17410 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 13:12 PMVipper
I am not sure why some people waste so much time an effort to "demonstrate" that some else one is biased.

Really? I thought of all people on .org, you'd understood that better then anyone else.

It much more constructive to focus on the changes and not the people.

Is this why you personally attack every single person who disagrees with you and do everything in your power to discredit them?

Rules for thee but not for me?


Every single man is biased, the extend to which he is is the only difference.
To claim self as unbiased is arrogant and ignorant.
This is why not a single person is responsible for balance changes, but a whole team that discusses best solutions from all sides pov.
7 Apr 2021, 13:22 PM
#68
avatar of Kisiel
Benefactor 115

Posts: 90

Ignore everything people in this thread said about what the issues are.
Suggest that top 200 players can't counter mg or kill a tank.
Blame it on matchmaker and red ball express and finish off with "but 1v1 though".

Amazing.
7 Apr 2021, 13:23 PM
#69
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 221

About why axis have higher win rate in 4vs4! :
1.in random vs random axis are most of the time better. But in premade vs premade allies are stronger. Allies random don't know how to counter a mg or killing a tank.

2. Matchmaking is fail atm. When you search axis you get top 100 mates but only facing 1k to 6k allies. So ofc axis wins. Just look last streams from duffman. Shows the same. And when duffman played random allies, he got friendly snipes.
So yes atm something is wrong in 4vs4. But imo its not the unit balance self. Something in the matchmaker is not working. It wasn't so worse in past. Ofc there were days where you faced as top 100 1k-6k but it happend on axis and allies sind. Now its only on allies side.
So ofc axis has higher winrate.
As said look duffmann stream, or rosebone thread, or ask aerafield. He tried in the last week to play random allies and no chance at all from matchmaking.

3. As allies random: Ban redball, port of hamburg. Snow maps are not that bad. Lower your settings or get better pc if you have still problems.

Offtopic you guys saw the wins from allies in 1vs1? 3 time 52 % allies faction. poor wehrmacht 44 % lol.
Brits with the highest. But on the other side you don't see brits in 1vs1 Cups, because people know how to counter it.



It's really good to learn why Allies are losing in team battle from the BT.

Thank you, I'll make sure to learn how to destory mg & tanks.

BTW, have you seen my other reply that shows 41.9% win rate of UKF in 1vs1?

Can UKF also gets poor british... from you?
7 Apr 2021, 13:26 PM
#70
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 11802 | Subs: 1


Really? I thought of all people on .org, you'd understood that better then anyone else.

Maybe easy for you understand because you usually have zero argument (that make sense that is), so you choose to go for the person not the point.


Is this why you personally attack every single person who disagrees with you and do everything in your power to discredit them?

That is what you do, not what I do, you seem confused for some strange reason.

I suggest you try to read you 17k post. In the majority of them you are calling other, 4 digit noobs, whareboos, or some other diminutive personal comment that in non constructive and has nothing to the with point of the debate.


Rules for thee but not for me?

Another example of your mentality not mine, (you even use first person).

For instance you are probably unranked in most mod yet you insist to call other "4 digit noobs".


Every single man is biased, the extend to which he is is the only difference.
To claim self as unbiased is arrogant and ignorant.
This is why not a single person is responsible for balance changes, but a whole team that discusses best solutions from all sides pov.

Then you should stop trying to prove that other are biased, accept the fact that you yourself is biased (and even the self proclaim allied fanboy number one) and focus on point and not people.

Now can stop this personal BS pls? (10 time)

(edited to add examples.)
7 Apr 2021, 13:26 PM
#71
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5319 | Subs: 28



I seldom post balancing ideas. Posted one on AEF forum yesterday (??). I shit on the balancing ideas being proposed by some people mostly. Like disguising nerfs as buffs or using "cookie-cutting, in line with" BS. I like the game, don't like majority of people involved in balancing the game. I'm light years away from being good at balancing COH2. I don't play it regularly, nor do I play OST/brits/soviets. I play with soviets and brits VS OST but I don't play as them.

Ok, counted it all out using CTRL-F in Mozilla and it highlights in the scroll all occurances : http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198046481660/history
Last 40 games:
Soviet: 9
AEF: 1
Brits: 5
Axis: 25 (WGerman 4)

Sturm can balance Germans as much as he wants, but I don't expect him to say anything about USF or Brit balancing


Great so the random saved 15 games in past from years ago were sadly axis or even wehrmacht. RIP me, you got me indeed...
You know that i have many teams with different people and there i can play okw or soviet or usa or brit too? But yes i look what my mates play and then i fill. Thats why most of the time I end with soviet and wehr, to fill the team with balance.




I wholeheartedly agree. But those people are in "charge" and 90% of good suggestions will go sidelined because they do not agree with the changes. I mean look at the arguments "Ban Redball if you play allies". People like that should not balance a game.


Makes no sense again, since
- i play all 5 faction in 1vs4 to 4vs4. tho in special number question in 1vs1 i hear more of the others.
- even IF i would be biased it makes still no sense, because we are a team and everyone has the same power of his vote. So its not that i say no nerf to axis and then all the votes from the others are nothing LUL.

And yes there is a difference between unit balancing and map balancing. Some maps are axis favorited, some allies. And then even special for brits or usa depends if its CC or longrange map.
So we can't balance the games based in units for all maps.
Its the same for brits on port of hamburg, brits lack in indirecte fire in early game. So a map, which is mainly only camp and arty is bad. So ban it.
And about this map thing, that is not only my opionion from the BT btw :) So we all should not balance the game then i guess...

And again about the 90% of good changes get ignored. Come on pls, i think in the 3-4 patches the BT looked often to the people and how they feel. And good changes went in. I think the last unit patch was big success. Never had soo less mimimi and crying after the patch came out.

The only one where i agree is, in 1vs1 i do more the job as observer, since 1vs1 is not my main modus. I am tho around 60-100 when i play active 1vs1...
And then you don't need to play 1vs1 self active from micro skill to understand the game. For example AE has good knowledge about what is op and what is up in 1vs1. Just from casting and using his brain.

It is your right, that you don't like me or think i make mistakes, but keep that for yourself and not bring this into a discussion. And esp. don't spread any lies!

Look how this forum thread changed his topic already...
That is another reason why i most of the time try to avoid to reply on coh2.org forum threads. But i still see them.
7 Apr 2021, 13:29 PM
#72
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 191

Offtopic you guys saw the wins from allies in 1vs1? 3 time 52 % allies faction. poor wehrmacht 44 % lol.
Brits with the highest. But on the other side you don't see brits in 1vs1 Cups, because people know how to counter it.

It's OKW with that horrendous winrate, not OST. OST is 53%, 51.8%, 49.7%, 50.7%.
The Brits in 2v2 took a dive tho. Actually just started to worry why my UKF rank dived this patch, lol. Could be totally my mad bad shape tho.

With all being said, the stat is inconclusive, because it does not show performance per ladder placement.
7 Apr 2021, 13:31 PM
#73
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 734

TBH, if there was NDH or Yugoslavia or Croatia in any way shape or form in any game, I'd avoid it like it was the devil. Hate my country. On another note, I do love Germany. Beautiful country ran by a chemist. Also the best tourists, who, unlike the brits, don't litter, curse and yell all the time.


Since most germans have a complicated approch to that part of history it isn't that natural to play germans in a WW2 computer game, but yeah in the end I'm pretty lucky to get born here. Btw its ran by a physican ;-)
But thanks for your positive perception.

7 Apr 2021, 13:36 PM
#74
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5319 | Subs: 28

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 13:22 PMKisiel
Ignore everything people in this thread said about what the issues are.
Suggest that top 200 players can't counter mg or kill a tank.
Blame it on matchmaker and red ball express and finish off with "but 1v1 though".

Amazing.




It's really good to learn why Allies are losing in team battle from the BT.

Thank you, I'll make sure to learn how to destory mg & tanks.

BTW, have you seen my other reply that shows 41.9% win rate of UKF in 1vs1?

Can UKF also gets poor british... from you?


I just showed the other side of the medal. I never said that the stats are full wrong or your opinion.
Since your opinion were already shown here, i showed the counterpart. Nothing more or less.
No i did not looked at your single thread. I just told the fact, that in ML almost nobody plays brit 1vs1. And if you ask the topplayers they said brit is not playable in 1vs1^^.

IF you ask for MY OPIONION:
I think brit can be strong in 1vs1. But if you make 1 mistakes you have a problem. Also you are kind of onesided from gameplay in 1vs1. So your enemy knows exact what will come and can try to counter it.
Also it depends on which map and which side you play brit.
Also it depends if you play vs wehrmacht or okw.
In automatch everything is random so it's fine.
In cups there is nothing from that.

Also from what i heard is that alot of people prefer usa+ soviet then using a brit player. Yes in some cases brits are very powerful, don't get me wrong.

But again this here is offtopic.

Oh and about all this but i am top 200 random 4vs4 guy:

1. I don't say that you self are one of this person, but there are many top 200 players, who just have this rank because they spam games, nothing more.

2. Ok ask yourself, how often do you use smoke?
7 Apr 2021, 13:50 PM
#75
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 915



Great so the random saved 15 games in past from years ago were sadly axis or even wehrmacht. RIP me, you got me indeed...
You know that i have many teams with different people and there i can play okw or soviet or usa or brit too? But yes i look what my mates play and then i fill. Thats why most of the time I end with soviet and wehr, to fill the team with balance.




Makes no sense again, since
- i play all 5 faction in 1vs4 to 4vs4. tho in special number question in 1vs1 i hear more of the others.
- even IF i would be biased it makes still no sense, because we are a team and everyone has the same power of his vote. So its not that i say no nerf to axis and then all the votes from the others are nothing LUL.

And yes there is a difference between unit balancing and map balancing. Some maps are axis favorited, some allies. And then even special for brits or usa depends if its CC or longrange map.
So we can't balance the games based in units for all maps.
Its the same for brits on port of hamburg, brits lack in indirecte fire in early game. So a map, which is mainly only camp and arty is bad. So ban it.
And about this map thing, that is not only my opionion from the BT btw :) So we all should not balance the game then i guess...

And again about the 90% of good changes get ignored. Come on pls, i think in the 3-4 patches the BT looked often to the people and how they feel. And good changes went in. I think the last unit patch was big success. Never had soo less mimimi and crying after the patch came out.

The only one where i agree is, in 1vs1 i do more the job as observer, since 1vs1 is not my main modus. I am tho around 60-100 when i play active 1vs1...
And then you don't need to play 1vs1 self active from micro skill to understand the game. For example AE has good knowledge about what is op and what is up in 1vs1. Just from casting and using his brain.

It is your right, that you don't like me or think i make mistakes, but keep that for yourself and not bring this into a discussion. And esp. don't spread any lies!

Look how this forum thread changed his topic already...
That is another reason why i most of the time try to avoid to reply on coh2.org forum threads. But i still see them.


I never said I got you or I exposed you or whatnot. I only meant Sturmpanther should focus on balancing axis factions and people that play allies should focus on balancing ally factions and then you don't democracy it but do an intersection of best ideas. F*** democracy in games.
I don't care what or how you play. Nor do I care if you play well or not. I do not care about any of that. I also understand why you balance around 1v1.
I also do not have anything against you as a person. I do have against the arguments Sturmpanther laid out. Especially the "ban redball if allies" and "get a better computer".
I also agree that the last patch was good, especially in the QoL. Only bad changes IMHO were:
AssGrens sprint nerf, pak howi AOE nerf instead of autofire accuracy, Puma nerf, Ostruppen nerf, and Scott rework.

This thread is about 4v4 disparity. So I ask you a question:

Has the balance team ever thought about how the changes affect other game modes? (eg. current partisan rework might make them OP).

I also agree: "You don't have to actively play to understand". That goes without saying. What doesn't go is the bias. That's what I have a beef with, whether the fact that allies are generally stronger in 1v1s propagates a notion of allies needing hard nerfs without giving anything in return. By allies I mostly mean USF. I'm biased towards USF so I'll only give my input on that faction.

It's no secret that rifles have a field day with volks on maps where volks can't take advantage of their superior long range accuracy, or that spios are needed for OKW in those early stages to turn the tide, or that grens suck a big wet fart close range and cannot be used in later stages the same way rifles or conscripts can. So no wonder that 1v1 is quite well balanced, where the early stages favor allies a bit and later stages favor axis but neither team can have more than 100 population on a 300x300 map so it all works out.
7 Apr 2021, 13:50 PM
#76
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2203 | Subs: 2


I seldom post balancing ideas. Posted one on AEF forum yesterday (??). I shit on the balancing ideas being proposed by some people mostly. Like disguising nerfs as buffs or using "cookie-cutting, in line with" BS. I like the game, don't like majority of people involved in balancing the game. I'm light years away from being good at balancing COH2. I don't play it regularly, nor do I play OST/brits/soviets. I play with soviets and brits VS OST but I don't play as them.

Doesn't matter if you suggest yourself or comment on other people's ideas. You have an opinion about balance and you voice it regularly. I just casually scrolled through your 20 most recent posts and you commented on Falls, Volks and USF units.


Ok, counted it all out using CTRL-F in Mozilla and it highlights in the scroll all occurances : http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198046481660/history
Last 40 games:
Soviet: 9
AEF: 1
Brits: 5
Axis: 25 (WGerman 4)

One wehrmacht comes from "most played faction". Soviets comes up 11 times for me. The WGerman seems to be bugged out to 4 but is 3. He apparently played 45% as Allies. How is that "WGerman and Wermacht mostly"? Especially if you consider his overall profile, so stop misleading. He plays apparently more Ostheer and less OKW than if it were completely random, also more Soviets and less USF. The rest is COMPLETELY in line.

Sturm can balance Germans as much as he wants, but I don't expect him to say anything about USF or Brit balancing

Wtf does it have to do with Germans? He even has more games as Brits than as OKW despite there being 3 Allied factions.
Nevertheless, if you want to stay consistent with your own logic you should not comment on anything outside of team game USF then, yet you do.


You don't like the balancing people/Sturmpanther and what they do for whatever reason while simultaneously claiming you did not care about balance. I don't mind, I don't like every balance suggestion that has been done either. But at this point you are just projecting some Axis fanboyism into someone where even your own quoted data contradicts what you say. If you don't like the changes despite not caring about balance, then phrase it accordingly. But stop lying about false linkages.
7 Apr 2021, 13:52 PM
#77
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 221


I just told the fact, that in ML almost nobody plays brit 1vs1. And if you ask the topplayers they said brit is not playable in 1vs1^^.

IF you ask for MY OPIONION:
I think brit can be strong in 1vs1. But if you make 1 mistakes you have a problem. Also you are kind of onesided from gameplay in 1vs1. So your enemy knows exact what will come and can try to counter it.
Also it depends on which map and which side you play brit.
Also it depends if you play vs wehrmacht or okw.
In automatch everything is random so it's fine.
In cups there is nothing from that.


I see nothing but an execuse.
You already said yourself top players said brit is not playable in 1vs1. AND their WR in 2vs2 ~ 4vs4 is the lowest. Not to mention lowest pick rate from 1vs1 ~ 4vs4.

But still here you are saying they are strong at SOME part depending on thingy.
And it's all fine because in automatch everything is random. Nice.



2. Ok ask yourself, how often do you use smoke?


You do realize that UKF don't have access to smoke unless building "mortar pit" in prior-to tank right?
And you DO know that emplacements are VERY VERY bad idea especially if you are at high-tier right?


Or should I use AEC to go front-line and fart some smokes?

Oh, wait.. there was a mortar drop... NVM. Gonna be removed in next patch for some reason.
Wait again, mortar cover from the Commando..? NVM CP8 required.
7 Apr 2021, 13:54 PM
#78
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 361

The most solid data that I can see from this is the commanders pick rate (or load out rate).

I think that's a good place to look at first before anything else.
7 Apr 2021, 14:00 PM
#79
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 915


Doesn't matter if you suggest yourself or comment on other people's ideas. You have an opinion about balance and you voice it regularly. I just casually scrolled through your 20 most recent posts and you commented on Falls, Volks and USF units.


One wehrmacht comes from "most played faction". Soviets comes up 11 times for me. The WGerman seems to be bugged out to 4 but is 3. He apparently played 45% as Allies. How is that "WGerman and Wermacht mostly"? Especially if you consider his overall profile, so stop misleading. He plays apparently more Ostheer and less OKW than if it were completely random, also more slightly Soviets and less USF. The rest is COMPLETELY in line.

Wtf does it have to do with Germans? He even has more games as Brits than as OKW despite there being 3 Allied factions.
Nevertheless, if you want to stay consistent with your own logic you should not comment on anything outside of team game USF then, yet you do.


You don't like the balancing people/Sturmpanther and what they do for whatever reason while simultaneously claiming you did not care about balance. I don't mind, I don't like every balance suggestion that has been done either. But at this point you are just projecting some Axis fanboyism into someone where even your own quoted data contradicts what you say. If you don't like the changes despite not caring about balance, then phrase it accordingly. But stop lying about false linkages.


I see my mistake. I apologize. I did go a tad much (a lot more) overboard because of all the hard nerfs my fav faction is getting (the unjustified ones, shit like calliope need nerfs) in the indirect department. Especially in a faction where indirects are seldom
7 Apr 2021, 14:02 PM
#80
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5319 | Subs: 28

The most solid data that I can see from this is the commanders pick rate (or load out rate).

I think that's a good place to look at first before anything else.


+1 Yeah this shows which 3 commanders are most loved and used!



You do realize that UKF don't have access to smoke unless building "mortar pit" in prior-to tank right?

Or should I use AEC to go front-line and fart some smokes?

Oh, wait.. there was a mortar drop... NVM. Gonna be removed in next patch for some reason.
Wait again, mortar cover from the Commando..? NVM CP8 required.


Its offtopic, but there you go:

Use the smoke from your IS? Yes brit IS can smoke if you don't go for the medic upgrade, which is not needed for all IS.(I know many people don't know it or don't use it... but as top player you should know that :) )
And yes sometimes i use the smoke from the aec that is correct.
Also the normal commander doc is meta and very usefull. You can make good pushes with this smoke.
Also yes the mortar smoke range is great.

PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Patch is out! If you find bugs...
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Soviets flag Lyco
  • Soviets flag Tomakaze
  • Ostheer flag Ikarus ★
  • Oberkommando West flag Rutra
uploaded by Tomakaze

Board Info

234 users are online: 6 members and 228 guests
Avnas, Kurobane, Zapartos, Smaug, Crecer13, Lady Xenarra
89 posts in the last 24h
668 posts in the last week
2499 posts in the last month
Registered members: 38677
Welcome our newest member, Caffentzifgd10
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM