Login

russian armor

Winrates indicate horrible balance

PAGES (8)down
13 Jun 2021, 21:02 PM
#41
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13161 | Subs: 1


....
UKF is not doing well, but that's why they are getting a boat load of buffs to their doctrinal arsenal in the upcoming patch. Along with a heavy nerf to Jaeger Armor.
...

That is simply a very bad solution.

The commander patch should focus on solving commander diversity issues and not faction balance issues.
13 Jun 2021, 21:07 PM
#42
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1741 | Subs: 2

I would also like to add the fact that Relics server is totally fucked.

I think I had like 6 wins out of 50 games as soviets. That may skew the allies a touch.
13 Jun 2021, 21:13 PM
#43
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 21:02 PMVipper

That is simply a very bad solution.

The commander patch should focus on solving commander diversity issues and not faction balance issues.

It does.
That's why a lot of UKF commanders got buffs, while other factions meta commanders got nerfs.
Both actions increase commander diversity while addressing weakest faction indirectly too.

Its only logical and natural thing to do, given we must treat every patch as last one nowadays.
13 Jun 2021, 21:17 PM
#44
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1741 | Subs: 2



USF at start: Rifles only.
No Mg
Smoke is behind tech
Granades are behind tech
No snares for early kubel spams which can put a lot of bleed in teamgames and displace rifles from cover easily.
Good enough?

You can tech nades quickly. OKW has no NON DOC nades worth a shit.
You get smoke from mortar. OKW need a truck teched and parked.
Snares at VET 1 correct? OKW is locked behind a truck because they get a rak instead??? Which makes no sense at all. Should switch the rak for an ISG and return fausts. But what do I know.
13 Jun 2021, 21:32 PM
#45
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 21:17 PMRosbone

You can tech nades quickly. OKW has no NON DOC nades worth a shit.

I donno about that, lava nades cover/garrison denial is pretty worth it, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be spammed all the time by top players.

You get smoke from mortar. OKW need a truck teched and parked.

It was made very cheap and affordable to allow specifically for smoke and medics easily. Its no longer an excuse. It arrives later, sure, but its not prohibiting anymore.

Snares at VET 1 correct? OKW is locked behind a truck because they get a rak instead??? Which makes no sense at all.

Incorrect.
USF snares are tech locked now.
13 Jun 2021, 21:36 PM
#46
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3467 | Subs: 1



I'd suspect that all the lane maps (White Ball, Red Ball, Hamburg and to some extend Arnhem) being the most popular maps have quite a significant impact on the Allies/Axis global win ratio because those maps are relatively easier for the Axis with their HMG 42s and especially superheavy TDs, and because most casuals have a hard time dealing with them. Sadly top 200 3v3 and 4v4 data is such a small sample size that it's unreliable, but at least in 2v2 with a bit bigger sample size it shows that within the top 200 the Axis/Allies WR is mostly fine at 52/53 vs 49 (with the exception of UKF, but again that could be skewed due to low sample size). I'd consider anything between 47-53 to be good enough.

Also the Allied factions seem to rely more heavily on light vehicle play, as indicated by high WRs in 1v1 for USF and SOV (but not UKF who lack an AI LV), which makes them very good at 1v1, but less so at teamgames where LV play is weaker.

UKF is not doing well, but that's why they are getting a boat load of buffs to their doctrinal arsenal in the upcoming patch. Along with a heavy nerf to Jaeger Armor.

I wish we could add the Land Mattress and the Calliope to the stock rosters of UKF and USF, as I reckon that would improve their performance (mostly on the lane maps) dramatically, but sadly that's not going to happen.


Error margin is can be an argument if it doesn't shows always the same factions on top and always the same faction on the bottom, if we were seeing Allied bottom one month and then Allied top the next month you're analysis would be correct but we're far from it. When there is always the same factions on top and the same on the bottom that's not anymore error margin, that's inbalance.

Then you're just explain us that water's wet and you can't do anything about it.

Finally you're telling us oh sadly Calliope can't be stock this didn't stop you to decided to nerf to the ground Scott and Pakhowi which were the lower version equivalent of Calliope for USF. Oh and after those nerf USF players are picking even more Calliope so now its time to nerf it too, too bad.
13 Jun 2021, 21:46 PM
#47
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13161 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 21:13 PMKatitof

It does.
That's why a lot of UKF commanders got buffs, while other factions meta commanders got nerfs.
Both actions increase commander diversity while addressing weakest faction indirectly too.

Its only logical and natural thing to do, given we must treat every patch as last one nowadays.

That is quite irrelevant to what I have posted and also inaccurate.

Meta commander from all faction got buffs including the number one meta UKF commander Mobile assault regiment.

Trying to solve faction balance issues with commander is simply a bad approach that should be avoided.
13 Jun 2021, 22:01 PM
#48
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1741 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 21:32 PMKatitof

I donno about that, lava nades cover/garrison denial is pretty worth it, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be spammed all the time by top players.

I have throne nades on squads that never moved and lived. Does not sound like its denying anything.

But you have to agree OKW is the worst no matter what your counter argument is.
13 Jun 2021, 22:02 PM
#49
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 22:01 PMRosbone

I have throne nades on squads that never moved and lived. Does not sound like its denying anything.

But you have to agree OKW is the worst no matter what your counter argument is.

You're playing some weird mods, because it will kill anything standing on it, just as any other thrown flame nade.
13 Jun 2021, 22:24 PM
#50
avatar of Clarity

Posts: 478

Meanwhile Ostruppen are being buffed for some reason.
13 Jun 2021, 22:34 PM
#51
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1741 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 22:02 PMKatitof

You're playing some weird mods, because it will kill anything standing on it, just as any other thrown flame nade.

Yes the mod is called Coh2. And it is complete trash.
13 Jun 2021, 23:54 PM
#52
avatar of Lewka

Posts: 306



Top200 for 3v3 and 4v4 is useless cause it just shows how not even 1% of the games are balanced match making wise.

All stats for 3v3/4v4 works in the context that it's the only useful sample we have. And the counterargument they gave you of "noob" allies doesn't work because there are both noobs on Allies and Axis and in the past we already have stats that made Allies have better WR.


Yes, I mean I feel like I'm in no place to say, but I'm glad someone else did it
14 Jun 2021, 01:09 AM
#53
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4119 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 22:24 PMClarity
Meanwhile Ostruppen are being buffed for some reason.


I had the same reaction when I first saw the pfusi buff. Thankfully we came to our senses.
14 Jun 2021, 02:18 AM
#54
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 967 | Subs: 1

Imo there is a bit of hysteria present.

While 4v4 is objectively dominated by Axis, other gamemodes have around ~5% difference regadless of faction, the only exeption are UKF (but because less ppl play them mostly).

And again judging from stats 5% is around 1000-2000 games, which is in a global picture, it not such a scary number considering that 20k games are played mountly.

Not to mention that you should also consider that 200+ ranks are not ending up with 1000, they go below. And its a wildwest there.

So think about this. We are having 2000 games difference between factions in all gamemodes, aside 4v4, and this uncludes game with ppl playing 1000+ ranks.

And you can say that the player is at least somewhat mediocre if he has like rank 400-500, but its still not garanteed. Sensible players can be found around rank 300-500, past that it digrading rapidly.

Its really not a bad result. Thouse 2000 games also include drops, ragequits and really lowranked games.

And again, imo, when it comes to lowranked games Axis have an upperhand, since allies are not that strate forward as axis. We all know the stories how 1 MG bunker have stoped the whole flank.
14 Jun 2021, 05:36 AM
#55
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 471

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 22:01 PMRosbone

I have throne nades on squads that never moved and lived. Does not sound like its denying anything.

But you have to agree OKW is the worst no matter what your counter argument is.


Are we talking about OKW in 1v1 or 3v3/4v4?

Because when I last checked, OKW had huge margin advantage in WR on 3v3/4v4.
14 Jun 2021, 06:30 AM
#56
avatar of Lewka

Posts: 306



I had the same reaction when I first saw the pfusi buff. Thankfully we came to our senses.


He's been worried about Osttruppen for a while. Currently the changes are they are built from the Infantarie Kompanie and are no longer a T1 skip and their panzer faust range is reduced
__
In beta they get acces to lmg42 at BP2 instead of BP3 as well as improved accuracy of the lmg42
__
I think the change in beta is to compensate for the fact they are no longer a T1 skip and have shorter faust range in order to keep them as a viable mainline choice. However from my observation the playstyle has changed a bit as they seem to synergize with Grenadier more. As opposed to before where Grens are generally completely replaced by Osttruppen and supplanted by Panzer Gren
14 Jun 2021, 07:54 AM
#57
avatar of redfox

Posts: 92

Is it set in stone that balance is not simultaniously possible in medium ranks / top 200 and or 1v1 / team games?

I too think that one big balance problem for 3v3 and 4v4 is the nature of the maps (lane-like) and the quick access to MGs for axis. You can simply spam MGs and sit on the fuel for the beginning phase of the game, force the opponent into mortars (until then they can only wait and do nothing, flanking sometimes is virtually impossible, for example on Over the Rhine). Then run them over with a 222.

An easy fix for this would be to limit MGs (for everyone obviously) on 1 per player, at least on 4v4. Then observe how it works on iterate forwards from that. I do think we have an idea what the problems are, so why not tackle them explicitly?

Balancing only for top200 is a dangerous thing. If you make half the playerbase tilt out because of imbalance, axis players wont find matches anymore, the playerbase will decrease quickly and nobody will watch casts or tournaments from the top200. I am sure you can still find some axis players jerking to their Endsieg then, but overall it would be a very sad downfall.

It HAS to be tried over and over again to balance the game for the broad mass!
14 Jun 2021, 08:00 AM
#58
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jun 2021, 07:54 AMredfox
Is it set in stone that balance is not simultaniously possible in medium ranks / top 200 and or 1v1 / team games?

Yes.
Map dynamics/map control change completely mode to mode, influencing timings massively.
In 1s and 2s you have map constantly changing hands, making tech and units arrive later, in 3s and 4s its pretty static once you claim it and cache spam doesn't help either.

And units are balanced with assumption that player can use them to their full extend, that clearly doesn't help players who can't even spell units name properly.
14 Jun 2021, 08:02 AM
#59
avatar of PatFenis

Posts: 133

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jun 2021, 07:54 AMredfox


An easy fix for this would be to limit MGs (for everyone obviously) on 1 per player, at least on 4v4.


I dont get why people keep bringing this up, you cant balance this game sepereatly. You would need to redo the entire game.

Additionally balance would be alot different if we had a big mapping-community which relic would give a shit about.

But sadly lelic can't even be bothered to implement a map rotation, or even be convinced to change maps more than once a year.
14 Jun 2021, 08:07 AM
#60
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13161 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jun 2021, 08:00 AMKatitof

Yes.
Map dynamics/map control change completely mode to mode, influencing timings massively.
In 1s and 2s you have map constantly changing hands, making tech and units arrive later, in 3s and 4s its pretty static once you claim it and cache spam doesn't help either.

And units are balanced with assumption that player can use them to their full extend, that clearly doesn't help players who can't even spell units name properly.

The theory that there is a "massive" difference in fuel between 1vs1 and 4vs4 is simply not supported by numbers.
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

71 users are online: 71 guests
40 posts in the last 24h
264 posts in the last week
727 posts in the last month
Registered members: 34986
Welcome our newest member, muchab97
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM