Strictly meta:
I dislike how every OH player just gets at least 4 gren squads.
More of a balance/game design issue:
The answer to this is often snipers, which have no real counter, especially on more 'closed' maps like semois. 2v2s involving one player going maxims and the other going sniper/guard/M3 are also pretty OP.
What is your opinion on the current meta?
9 Jun 2014, 18:26 PM
#21
Posts: 393
sig by tricky 
9 Jun 2014, 18:30 PM
#22
Posts: 412
On June 24th, I suspect allot of the stuff I dislike will be fixed/adjusted.
Still not mad about some aspects of the overall game design, like the resources and territory modal, but i'm afraid that ain't up for changing
Still not mad about some aspects of the overall game design, like the resources and territory modal, but i'm afraid that ain't up for changing
9 Jun 2014, 18:34 PM
#23
15 
Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2
I also agree that this is a bad poll because the metagame is developed by the players, how varied it can become depends on the map pool and the tools available at the players disposal.
With the amount of viable strats the soviets have at their disposal I think some of the accusations of boring meta are down to players not experimenting enough.
With the amount of viable strats the soviets have at their disposal I think some of the accusations of boring meta are down to players not experimenting enough.
9 Jun 2014, 18:36 PM
#24
Posts: 2053
I also agree that this is a bad poll because the metagame is developed by the players, how varied it can become depends on the map pool and the tools available at the players disposal.
With the amount of viable strats the soviets have at their disposal I think some of the accusations of boring meta are down to players not experimenting enough.
People could, but theyd lose. And no one wants to lose, so meta isnt made voluntarily. People are limited to their tools and how their tools are balanced. Balance dictates people to win with what little they have, so meta is dictated by the variety in the game. Meta is stale atm for most people.
9 Jun 2014, 18:44 PM
#25
Posts: 4928
People could, but theyd lose. And no one wants to lose, so meta isnt made voluntarily. People are limited to their tools and how their tools are balanced. Balance dictates people to win with what little they have, so meta is dictated by the variety in the game. Meta is stale atm for most people.
Yeah, while it's true the metagame is developed by the players, but the players adapt to how units perform. If your MG 42's are always getting killed by Snipers and M3's, then you're going to stop building MG 42's when you see the enemy go T1. That's why the current meta is stale, the options for OH T1 vs SU T1 are largely limited to Grenadiers who are more mobile and can somewhat threaten M3's or Snipers, for example.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
9 Jun 2014, 19:00 PM
#26
Posts: 1705
Meta is awful, Soviet T1 counters German T1 pretty effectively. Soviet Meta is M3 / Sniper / Maxim spam into T-34/85's. German Meta is Grenadier Spam into T2 Scout Car and then to Tiger or StuGs.
Potential causes:
German T1:
SU T1 counters most of OH T1 effectively. MG's, Mortars, and Snipers are obvious targets for M3's and SU Snipers, which leaves just Grenadiers, leading to Grenadier spam. Against SU T2 it's more viable, but OH MG's are still extremely immobile yet are expected to constantly reposition and reface themselves. Sniper has very low health and is threatened by everything under the sun.
German T2:
Panzergrenadiers don't perform in any defined role, not as Attackers (low durability) or Flankers (low speed). PG's high cost are also off-putting with a 40MP reinforce cost, the highest in the game. Flame Half-Track upgrade comes too late and is too big an investment when Tanks are entering the field.
German T3:
Panzer IV's accuracy is too low, making it awful against Infantry and even miss vs Tanks. Ostwind is okay I guess, still no T-70/Quad/KV-8. Often skipped in favour of Tiger Tanks due to T3's high cost, and the high durability and power of a single Tiger being worth more than 2 Panzer IV's while also being much cheaper.
German T4:
Panther is seldom used now due to it's high cost, when a Tiger and a StuG can do the same job and more for much much cheaper. Panzerwerfer is in an odd spot, don't like 'em being useless, but didn't like the days when the guy with the most panzerwerfers / katyushas won the game.
Soviet T1:
M3 Scout Cars are spammable, durable (against OH T1 units), and often carry Flamer Engineers for easy repairs. The only counter is the Panzerfaust, which has limited range, only does half health damage, and does not slow them very much, and drains munitions. SU Snipers in pairs can force-retreat any OH unit except Osttruppen, and effectively nullify any support unit due to that.
Soviet T2:
Maxim Guns are highly mobile with a very short setup time and a large crew. Like many 'spammable' SU units, alone they are vulnerable, but in groups they are extremely difficult to deal with. Crew is cheap and replaceable, and a vigilant player can reface the gun in 2 seconds to cover it's own flank. No other problems.
Soviet T3:
T-70 has a limited window of effectiveness before StuG's or Panzer IV's hit the field, otherwise is a great unit. No other issue.
Soviet T4:
SU-85's mobility penalty for 'zoom' is no longer necessary imo. SU-76 is seldom used due to it's low health and armour, although it is not a bad unit, but requires lots of support or babysitting. Katyusha suffers the same problems as the Panzerwerfer.
Overall:
Call-in tanks are more accessible than T3/T4 for both factions, although this seems to be a much bigger deal on the Germans. Soviets can beat a Tiger with T2/T3 combo or T4, but dual T-34/85's is very difficult to fight with OH T3 and T4 is seldom used due to pricing.
Oh dear I've written a small essay.
Well sir that was brilliant.
9 Jun 2014, 19:03 PM
#27
Posts: 1705
I also agree that this is a bad poll because the metagame is developed by the players, how varied it can become depends on the map pool and the tools available at the players disposal.
With the amount of viable strats the soviets have at their disposal I think some of the accusations of boring meta are down to players not experimenting enough.
There is no option but grenspam due to it being the only thing with any hope vs scout cars,soviet snipers.....and also because it has lategame scaling due to lmg and lack of options due to pzgrens being costly MP bleed sinks.
Tiger and grens are really the only 2 german units that are able to force a contest.Paks are good as support.Grenspam will continue until car and pzgren are fixed.
10 Jun 2014, 00:38 AM
#28
9 
Posts: 2072 | Subs: 1
With the amount of viable strats the soviets have at their disposal I think some of the accusations of boring meta are down to players not experimenting enough.
This. I have to strongly disagree with people who claim that the boring meta is due to balance.
I haven't seen anyone in many months try to go for multiple MGs as Germans for example. I do it a lot and it works very well, but you have to change your habits a little to make it work, play the map differently.
It's been only a month or so since the patch came out, so I don't think we've figured everything out.
10 Jun 2014, 02:28 AM
#29
Posts: 611
Meta is awful, Soviet T1 counters German T1 pretty effectively. Soviet Meta is M3 / Sniper / Maxim spam into T-34/85's. German Meta is Grenadier Spam into T2 Scout Car and then to Tiger or StuGs.
Potential causes:
German T1:
SU T1 counters most of OH T1 effectively. MG's, Mortars, and Snipers are obvious targets for M3's and SU Snipers, which leaves just Grenadiers, leading to Grenadier spam. Against SU T2 it's more viable, but OH MG's are still extremely immobile yet are expected to constantly reposition and reface themselves. Sniper has very low health and is threatened by everything under the sun.
German T2:
Panzergrenadiers don't perform in any defined role, not as Attackers (low durability) or Flankers (low speed). PG's high cost are also off-putting with a 40MP reinforce cost, the highest in the game. Flame Half-Track upgrade comes too late and is too big an investment when Tanks are entering the field.
German T3:
Panzer IV's accuracy is too low, making it awful against Infantry and even miss vs Tanks. Ostwind is okay I guess, still no T-70/Quad/KV-8. Often skipped in favour of Tiger Tanks due to T3's high cost, and the high durability and power of a single Tiger being worth more than 2 Panzer IV's while also being much cheaper.
German T4:
Panther is seldom used now due to it's high cost, when a Tiger and a StuG can do the same job and more for much much cheaper. Panzerwerfer is in an odd spot, don't like 'em being useless, but didn't like the days when the guy with the most panzerwerfers / katyushas won the game.
Soviet T1:
M3 Scout Cars are spammable, durable (against OH T1 units), and often carry Flamer Engineers for easy repairs. The only counter is the Panzerfaust, which has limited range, only does half health damage, and does not slow them very much, and drains munitions. SU Snipers in pairs can force-retreat any OH unit except Osttruppen, and effectively nullify any support unit due to that.
Soviet T2:
Maxim Guns are highly mobile with a very short setup time and a large crew. Like many 'spammable' SU units, alone they are vulnerable, but in groups they are extremely difficult to deal with. Crew is cheap and replaceable, and a vigilant player can reface the gun in 2 seconds to cover it's own flank. No other problems.
Soviet T3:
T-70 has a limited window of effectiveness before StuG's or Panzer IV's hit the field, otherwise is a great unit. No other issue.
Soviet T4:
SU-85's mobility penalty for 'zoom' is no longer necessary imo. SU-76 is seldom used due to it's low health and armour, although it is not a bad unit, but requires lots of support or babysitting. Katyusha suffers the same problems as the Panzerwerfer.
Overall:
Call-in tanks are more accessible than T3/T4 for both factions, although this seems to be a much bigger deal on the Germans. Soviets can beat a Tiger with T2/T3 combo or T4, but dual T-34/85's is very difficult to fight with OH T3 and T4 is seldom used due to pricing.
Oh dear I've written a small essay.
Couldn,t agree more...
I stopped playing sov because every game i faced grenspam.
I have now stopped playing ost because of m3 spam, sov weapon team spam and t85 spam / ISU. I occasionally get an opponent who does not play latest op strats and those games are both satisfying and enjoyable.
Soviets when played at their cheesiest are a broken frustrating faction that does not reward ost for being better opponent. The best outcome would be to reintroduce popcap based on sectors held thus forcing players to make real decisions about unit compositions and not just pushing out more units as soon as manpower available. The fact that some sov players are allowed to build defensive walls and wait for callins is just ridiculous.
As it stands sov builds basically define how ost plays. Fix this so ost have other viable builds and you will see more evolution to metagame.
10 Jun 2014, 04:02 AM
#30
Posts: 4928
I haven't seen anyone in many months try to go for multiple MGs as Germans for example. I do it a lot and it works very well, but you have to change your habits a little to make it work, play the map differently.
Personally I don't because if the Soviet player goes T1, it's probably GG for me. Those MG's won't be able to fight Snipers or M3's and Penals are something you only see once 222's arrive and Sniper / M3 are no longer dominating the map largely unchallenged.
The best outcome would be to reintroduce popcap based on sectors held thus forcing players to make real decisions about unit compositions and not just pushing out more units as soon as manpower available. The fact that some sov players are allowed to build defensive walls and wait for callins is just ridiculous.
I do disagree with this though. All that does is make a losing game nigh impossible to recover from. It's already bad enough when one side has most of the map, but then you'd have them with most of the map and way more units. They'll be able to guard each point with the number of men you have total, which does not sound fun and just encourages quitting early. Plus it encourages suiciding units to get better units which is also obviously a bad thing.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
10 Jun 2014, 04:50 AM
#31
Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21
Couldn,t agree more...
I stopped playing sov because every game i faced grenspam.
I have now stopped playing ost because of m3 spam, sov weapon team spam and t85 spam / ISU. I occasionally get an opponent who does not play latest op strats and those games are both satisfying and enjoyable.
Soviets when played at their cheesiest are a broken frustrating faction that does not reward ost for being better opponent. The best outcome would be to reintroduce popcap based on sectors held thus forcing players to make real decisions about unit compositions and not just pushing out more units as soon as manpower available. The fact that some sov players are allowed to build defensive walls and wait for callins is just ridiculous.
As it stands sov builds basically define how ost plays. Fix this so ost have other viable builds and you will see more evolution to metagame.
Summed it up nicely.
10 Jun 2014, 08:08 AM
#32
Posts: 1
"metagame" does not equal "balance." I don't understand who you think should "tweak" the metagame... Relic? Relic tweaks balance. Players develop the metagame.
Thats partly right.
Players (most time the best and most experienced players) develop the metagame, correct. While doing so they tend to find the most efficient and easy way to beat there opponents because they want to win. So they check out the amount of options the game offers and lean into the options which support this objective at best.
And thats the problem. CoH lack´s options. Talking about 1 vs 1 there is some sort of balance but there are also just about 2 strategies and a lot of useless units. Relic has to tweak the balance but Relic also hast to tweak the game design itself. This will give players the opportunity to develop a more extensive metagame. And i am talking about options & strategies for the mainstream player, not just the top players as the always got more options (Twister talked about MGs for example) because of there better understanding of the game.
To sum it up, the metagame is made by the players as a result of options the game offers based on the game design and the current balance of the game.
10 Jun 2014, 08:46 AM
#33
Posts: 680
I love the new meta in 2v2 as there is a BIG window for my T3 until the opponents call-in comes. So I surely hope people will stick to there call-ins so I can roam the fields with my T3.
10 Jun 2014, 09:11 AM
#34
Posts: 2819
I also agree that this is a bad poll because the metagame is developed by the players, how varied it can become depends on the map pool and the tools available at the players disposal.
With the amount of viable strats the soviets have at their disposal I think some of the accusations of boring meta are down to players not experimenting enough.
I disagree.
You cast games yourself and you see how much the 2v2 ele-isu fight is fought.
Ofcours all players could abandon the ISU and ele and play other more fun games, but players rather just win than experiment.
'Players should experiment', agree.
But that's not the case and won't be the case.
Players (most time the best and most experienced players) develop the metagame, correct. While doing so they tend to find the most efficient and easy way to beat there opponents because they want to win. So they check out the amount of options the game offers and lean into the options which support this objective at best.
This.
Players make the meta - Yes, but they make it with the tools available.
The OP unit will always be used.
All posts made are about situations in 2v2's. Not a 1v1 player.
10 Jun 2014, 18:17 PM
#35
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
As people has mentioned it before, balance wise is in general fine but the meta is getting "boring", specially on 2v2.
2v2: ISU152 vs Elephant, specially when you have maps such as Minsk Pocket, Rails n Metal, Rzhev Winter, Crossing in the woods.
What i would like to see:
2v2: ISU152 vs Elephant, specially when you have maps such as Minsk Pocket, Rails n Metal, Rzhev Winter, Crossing in the woods.
What i would like to see:
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
10 Jun 2014, 18:31 PM
#36
Posts: 1705
Really love this game,but stopped playing till WFA precisely for same reason.Becoming too boring and repetative.Same gren-maxim-carspam followed by tiger-isu-t-34/85.If i wanted spam game better to play command and conquer.
10 Jun 2014, 19:03 PM
#37
Posts: 1637
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
10 Jun 2014, 20:47 PM
#38
Posts: 89
3v3+
german armor is stronger and that wins games
early and midgame: hold ground, preserve units
endgame: wait for critical tank mass = unstoppable
best soviet AT is the mine
first 10 minutes are most fun with infantry battles, setting up flanks etc
german armor is stronger and that wins games
early and midgame: hold ground, preserve units
endgame: wait for critical tank mass = unstoppable
best soviet AT is the mine
first 10 minutes are most fun with infantry battles, setting up flanks etc
10 Jun 2014, 21:44 PM
#39
Posts: 254
Meta is awful, Soviet T1 counters German T1 pretty effectively. Soviet Meta is M3 / Sniper / Maxim spam into T-34/85's. German Meta is Grenadier Spam into T2 Scout Car and then to Tiger or StuGs.
Potential causes:
German T1:
SU T1 counters most of OH T1 effectively. MG's, Mortars, and Snipers are obvious targets for M3's and SU Snipers, which leaves just Grenadiers, leading to Grenadier spam. Against SU T2 it's more viable, but OH MG's are still extremely immobile yet are expected to constantly reposition and reface themselves. Sniper has very low health and is threatened by everything under the sun.
German T2:
Panzergrenadiers don't perform in any defined role, not as Attackers (low durability) or Flankers (low speed). PG's high cost are also off-putting with a 40MP reinforce cost, the highest in the game. Flame Half-Track upgrade comes too late and is too big an investment when Tanks are entering the field.
German T3:
Panzer IV's accuracy is too low, making it awful against Infantry and even miss vs Tanks. Ostwind is okay I guess, still no T-70/Quad/KV-8. Often skipped in favour of Tiger Tanks due to T3's high cost, and the high durability and power of a single Tiger being worth more than 2 Panzer IV's while also being much cheaper.
German T4:
Panther is seldom used now due to it's high cost, when a Tiger and a StuG can do the same job and more for much much cheaper. Panzerwerfer is in an odd spot, don't like 'em being useless, but didn't like the days when the guy with the most panzerwerfers / katyushas won the game.
Soviet T1:
M3 Scout Cars are spammable, durable (against OH T1 units), and often carry Flamer Engineers for easy repairs. The only counter is the Panzerfaust, which has limited range, only does half health damage, and does not slow them very much, and drains munitions. SU Snipers in pairs can force-retreat any OH unit except Osttruppen, and effectively nullify any support unit due to that.
Soviet T2:
Maxim Guns are highly mobile with a very short setup time and a large crew. Like many 'spammable' SU units, alone they are vulnerable, but in groups they are extremely difficult to deal with. Crew is cheap and replaceable, and a vigilant player can reface the gun in 2 seconds to cover it's own flank. No other problems.
Soviet T3:
T-70 has a limited window of effectiveness before StuG's or Panzer IV's hit the field, otherwise is a great unit. No other issue.
Soviet T4:
SU-85's mobility penalty for 'zoom' is no longer necessary imo. SU-76 is seldom used due to it's low health and armour, although it is not a bad unit, but requires lots of support or babysitting. Katyusha suffers the same problems as the Panzerwerfer.
Overall:
Call-in tanks are more accessible than T3/T4 for both factions, although this seems to be a much bigger deal on the Germans. Soviets can beat a Tiger with T2/T3 combo or T4, but dual T-34/85's is very difficult to fight with OH T3 and T4 is seldom used due to pricing.
Oh dear I've written a small essay.
I agree with you!
10 Jun 2014, 21:45 PM
#40
Posts: 254
Thats partly right.
Players (most time the best and most experienced players) develop the metagame, correct. While doing so they tend to find the most efficient and easy way to beat there opponents because they want to win. So they check out the amount of options the game offers and lean into the options which support this objective at best.
And thats the problem. CoH lack´s options. Talking about 1 vs 1 there is some sort of balance but there are also just about 2 strategies and a lot of useless units. Relic has to tweak the balance but Relic also hast to tweak the game design itself. This will give players the opportunity to develop a more extensive metagame. And i am talking about options & strategies for the mainstream player, not just the top players as the always got more options (Twister talked about MGs for example) because of there better understanding of the game.
To sum it up, the metagame is made by the players as a result of options the game offers based on the game design and the current balance of the game.
+1
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
116 | ||
 |
|
|
51 | ||
 |
|
|
9 | ||
|
|
|
|
29 | ||
 |
|
|
13 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.29446.865-1
- 4.276110.715+14
- 5.259143.644+3
- 6.250150.625+11
- 7.22491.711+11
- 8.250135.649+1
- 9.19265.747+5
- 10.6111.847+8
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
753
Board Info
516 users are online:
516 guests
9 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
151 posts in the last month
39 posts in the last week
151 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45061
Welcome our newest member, karsovan85
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, karsovan85
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM