Login

russian armor

4vs4 has become a repetitive verdun and bataille de la Somme

18 Nov 2015, 11:57 AM
#1
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

Brit hype seems to be gone, Searching a match in 4vs4 random is now again 70% Axis 30% Allied since a couple of weeks everytime I connect (European time at different hours of the day).

Analyzing my own feeling about it (I like to play 4vs4 for fun), the fun factor is also gone with the coming new meta mortar/ISG dominance in this mod (and in some extend 3vs3 as well).
I don't want to say "spam", since having a couple of them per player isn't really a spam (but 8 of them on the field is something), but their over-impact in any game on this format is evident and spending the 15 first minutes being wipe out by indirect fire protected by early MGs, bunker or 5-6minutes Flacktruks and having to do the same with your pak howi in order to maintain the hope until late game isn't attractive. At all in my case, I really don't like spaming mortar.

I guess my feeling is shared by quite a lot of players looking at how the search rate is low for Allied in 4vs4. But don't be fool thinking it is different in team game. I have play more than enough team game 4vs4, and it is probably even worst since it works so well.

My opinion is that in term of gameplay this is a disaster, its not fun at all to play with and vs. I really look forward for the next patch if any is planned by Relic, but till then, the 4vs4 Allied search rate has lost another regular player.

18 Nov 2015, 12:07 PM
#2
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 830

As you said, you play 4v4 for fun, so don't play it anymore if it isn't fun.

Nothing will change any time soon
18 Nov 2015, 12:23 PM
#3
avatar of mycalliope

Posts: 721

..??? mate i think you haven't seen the new winrates of 4v4 i.e it has gone to allied side lets just say and mortar and isg were nerfed and there are plenty of counters to them and u should no difficulty getting them..lets just say rocket arty
18 Nov 2015, 12:28 PM
#4
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

As you said, you play 4v4 for fun, so don't play it anymore if it isn't fun.

Nothing will change any time soon


My biggest fear. I like it enough to start a 4vs4 game thinking "yeah it is just for fun" and asking myself later "why did I went in that, just want to leave the game now..."

@ Calliope, refering to that? But it doesn't change anything, I had more fun before the brit when Allied weren't in favor as well but the game wasn't ISG/Mortar meta.
18 Nov 2015, 13:41 PM
#5
avatar of ATCF
Donator 33

Posts: 587

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2015, 12:28 PMEsxile


My biggest fear. I like it enough to start a 4vs4 game thinking "yeah it is just for fun" and asking myself later "why did I went in that, just want to leave the game now..."

@ Calliope, refering to that? But it doesn't change anything, I had more fun before the brit when Allied weren't in favor as well but the game wasn't ISG/Mortar meta.



Dont give up!, Fight fire with fire, bring out your own USF Pack Howitzer or punish them with the M8A1 Howitzer and give them a taste of their own medicine
18 Nov 2015, 13:50 PM
#6
avatar of AvNY

Posts: 862

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2015, 12:28 PMEsxile


My biggest fear. I like it enough to start a 4vs4 game thinking "yeah it is just for fun" and asking myself later "why did I went in that, just want to leave the game now..."

@ Calliope, refering to that? But it doesn't change anything, I had more fun before the brit when Allied weren't in favor as well but the game wasn't ISG/Mortar meta.



I recently tried coming over to COH2 from COH1 and I got that same feeling. Less so mortars but every game felt like it there were friggin' ISGs everywhere, like there was no other option than to flood a portion of the map with ISGs on top of med trucks covered by flak trucks. One specific low apm strat that you have to execute your counters against.

It's like the COH2 version of Scheldt except it is unavoidably in automatch because of meta. (All COH1 players know the cancer that is Scheldt.)
18 Nov 2015, 14:02 PM
#7
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17892 | Subs: 8

..??? mate i think you haven't seen the new winrates of 4v4 i.e it has gone to allied side lets just say and mortar and isg were nerfed and there are plenty of counters to them and u should no difficulty getting them..lets just say rocket arty

I usually avoid all 4v4 threads, but you've asked for it with this post so:


Allies factions=OKW and ostheer.



Took the screen literally minute ago.

Try to cry less in the future, too much salty tears have negative effects on sight.
18 Nov 2015, 14:11 PM
#8
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

4vs4 winrates were never depending on balance but only on the playerbase. The playerbase with most players has more wins because the teams have a better elo. While the team with the smaller playerbase has a more diverse (worse) elo.

When brits came out, everybody played brits, since allie winrates were much higher. Now more people play axis in 4vs4 and we have again a higher axis winrate.

Thats random 4vs4. 4vs4 AT has probably a 90 - 100 % winrate no matter what
18 Nov 2015, 14:11 PM
#9
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2015, 11:57 AMEsxile

Analyzing my own feeling about it (I like to play 4vs4 for fun), the fun factor is also gone with the coming new meta mortar/ISG dominance in this mod (and in some extend 3vs3 as well).
I don't want to say "spam", since having a couple of them per player isn't really a spam (but 8 of them on the field is something), but their over-impact in any game on this format is evident and spending the 15 first minutes being wipe out by indirect fire protected by early MGs, bunker or 5-6minutes Flacktruks and having to do the same with your pak howi in order to maintain the hope until late game isn't attractive. At all in my case, I really don't like spaming mortar.

I guess my feeling is shared by quite a lot of players looking at how the search rate is low for Allied in 4vs4. But don't be fool thinking it is different in team game. I have play more than enough team game 4vs4, and it is probably even worst since it works so well.

I agree and I feel your pain.

Except mortars IMO are fine (can't comment on mortar pit though).

Search rates vaires in my timezone from 30-70 to 60-40 so nothing to complain about here.
18 Nov 2015, 14:26 PM
#10
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

4vs4 winrates were never depending on balance but only on the playerbase. The playerbase with most players has more wins because the teams have a better elo. While the team with the smaller playerbase has a more diverse (worse) elo.

When brits came out, everybody played brits, since allie winrates were much higher. Now more people play axis in 4vs4 and we have again a higher axis winrate.

Thats random 4vs4. 4vs4 AT has probably a 90 - 100 % winrate no matter what


Player base willing to search in one side also depend on balance. Someone, probably a team found that building an army around early 2x ISG/Mortar (I agree mortar are fine) is more efficient than anything else and then everyone started to do that as Axis.
From there, 3 options:
1- Do the same as allied: failed, pak how are ususally too late and force you to play capt tier, Brit's mortar pit are not efficient at all vs ISG and Sov is the only faction having early mew mortar + Cp2 heavy ones. Honestly, and I'm perfectly fine with the fact Allied can't match them: but since its too good and drive the game in a Verdun style gameplay, I simply don't like it.
2- Switch Axis for the patch time being until better a better meta raise
3- Stop playing 4vs4 until next patch and a better meta

2 of the 3 options impact 100% the player base search rate.
18 Nov 2015, 14:33 PM
#11
avatar of Just easy

Posts: 110

I haven't been annoyed much by isgs so far this patch, they are still strong though and a little too accurate. They rarely dominate the 4v4s I play now like they used to.
18 Nov 2015, 14:39 PM
#12
avatar of mycalliope

Posts: 721

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2015, 14:02 PMKatitof

I usually avoid all 4v4 threads, but you've asked for it with this post so:


Allies factions=OKW and ostheer.



Took the screen literally minute ago.

Try to cry less in the future, too much salty tears have negative effects on sight.


...??? katiof gonna katiof :D
i never said that allies have higher winrate i just said winrate has gone up for allies because axis use to have higher winrates in 3v3 and 4v4..now they are 50-50.
Taking and manipulating my comment like that shows ur mindset catty...meow :lol:

Edit: also the data is from random :bananadance:
18 Nov 2015, 14:41 PM
#13
avatar of Gdot

Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1

Allies > Axis in 4v4AT, no questions asked imo.

Kaitof is referencing data for 4v4 random which is useless on many levels.
18 Nov 2015, 14:47 PM
#14
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

I dont know man, 4 v 4 feels more balanced to me now. Yea you will have your regular spam fest, but that is what 4 v 4 is all about since day 1.
18 Nov 2015, 14:58 PM
#15
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

4vs4 winrates were never depending on balance but only on the playerbase

What a nonsense.
18 Nov 2015, 15:01 PM
#16
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276

Axis has better unit synergy in 4v4's between OKW and Wher than allies do. Recently when I've been playing I'm running into AT's that spam the hell out of indirect fire early game and almost entirely push allies off the map as they don't share the same amount of indirect firepower. the indirect fire coupled with the Med truck allowing for VERY forward position makes team games a mess, balance is all over the place early and mid game.


Due to the state of 4v4's its rly hard to compare balance as you either go up against an Arranged team or randoms meaning you hardly ever get to see the true state of them.

18 Nov 2015, 15:09 PM
#17
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3


What a nonsense.


Guess you never used Celo. If 4 top 100 players go against 3 top 1000 and one 1 top 100 player, balance absolutely doesn't matter. And most 3vs3+ games are like this. You can nearly always determine the winning and the losing team before the game starts by watching at Celo.
18 Nov 2015, 15:24 PM
#20
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871


What a nonsense.


The majority of games are decided by MM. Pre Brits as Axis you were pretty often on the stronger team just based off ladder rank because there was a much bigger selection of players, though imo Axis generally had an advantage in randoms due to both factions having late game units. When Brits arrived, the player base shifted massively in favour of Allies, giving them the advantage as well as finally having a decent lategame.

Since the player base has shifted back towards Axis favour slightly, once again they have the advantage due to MM, but I feel balance is pretty good right now in 4's unless you are too soviet heavy / have no Brits.

Does eventually turn into an arty fest if there is no clear winner, which ends up being pretty boring.
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
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

269 users are online: 1 member and 268 guests
aerafield
2 posts in the last 24h
28 posts in the last week
143 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45160
Welcome our newest member, amartotosultan
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM