I recently came back after a long hiatus from the game, and while I am admittedly quite bad right now, I have been finding it difficult to withstand OKW Volks blobs and have been generally just getting beaten with USF - which is fine. I'm not even here to talk about what I can do to get better or have someone tell me "l2p".
My question is: When I check the win percentages of 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 and 4 vs 4; it appears Axis forces are winning quite handedly in every game mode. Specifically in 2 vs 2's it says Axis wins 0.76 while Allies are at 0.57 - is that a large discrepancy?
Basically, long story short, is the game currently balanced? Am I at a disadvantage playing as USF in team games?
It isn't currently well balanced. The "community balance" team decided they didn't need feedback on their last patch and created a balance patch that was as bad as their first, with the bias that some of us think they have.
That said, USF isn't that bad in team games. My random 4v4 rank as USF is mid-400's and I'll normally be the top 1 or 2 in damage and kills. The biggest problem that they have is when opposing players use Sturmpios aggressively, as those chew through anything. Before this patch, RE's in a building could hold out against Sturmpios, now they can't.
I don't know how the servers match people in 4v4's, but even by my ranking there is such a huge variation in skill level that win or lose is going to be random based on the skill level of the players. If you enjoy USF, then play it. If you're not having success, maybe watch one of your own replays plus some from better players. |
|
As a player whose preferred faction is USF, I liked the old Calliope because it could delete squads like Obers that regular USF infantry couldn't beat. I understand why the balance patch team nerfed it, but they took it from a unit that deleted squads to one that is intended as an area-denial unit, but doesn't do that either.
It could have worked as an area-denial unit if they did something like force infantry units to retreat if hit (like propaganda arty), but even then it would need a little cooldown reduction and a fuel cost reduction. |
|
For Ost, it would be nice if Relic changed one of the commanders so that it could call in or build a JP4 (borrowed from Okw but with just 3 levels of vet). Going Elefant commander on maps like Steppes or Red Ball every time is getting really stale. |
|
UKF would be helped a lot if the Boys AT infantry was just a 3rd upgrade option for infantry sections. It would also make more sense, instead of the outright nerfs that the last patch had. The AT sections in special weapons could be replace by command vehicle or something similar, maybe even a Valentine if they made the Valentine not suck. |
The data shows that even if there is statistical clustering, which there isnt, the data is very solid. I work in aerospace engineering and if I saw statistical data like this and I was looking for a signal outside of the noise none of this would qualify. In other words its consistent and SiphonX is correct that there is no signal suggesting that maps are preferred in any way.
Which makes perfect sense, there is no reason to be selecting any map more than another, except when people veto a map more, which means statistically its played less.
Given that reality this kind of data should be used to remove maps as players vote with their vetos. It could also be used other ways, but first it should be used to remove maps from ladder to make room for newcomers that could improve the pool.
This...all day long.
Vielsam is a really weird map that is 2 separate 2v2's, and not that enjoyable. Mud is too big, and gives to much advantage to teams with FRP's. Most people veto those. On the different 4v4 teams that I play with, one of the middle group of maps gets the other veto, depending on who speaks up the loudest. The top group rarely gets vetoes.
It is good to have a mix of maps. If you could veto down to one type of map, the game would get stale fast.
As far as the claims about clusters, I think that teams can get into a rhythm where the server gives them the same map several times in a row because the server is pseudo-random and they just ended up that way in the rotation. Also, if you flip a coin 100 times, chances are that you'll have at least one streak of 8 heads or tails in those tosses. Granted, there are more than two maps, but most people have also played a lot more than 100 games. |
As small of a sample size it would give, I think doing separate stats for the semi (or maybe quarter) finals and up would tell a lot more. Well, youd essentially have to throw out all of devm's games since hes basically boosting factions, but I think taking from games where the players are more closely matched in skill and taking play rates from the top players is just more meaningful.
Since you like talking statistics, answer a few simple questions for us newbies.
What type of data is wins and losses?
How do you determine if the sample size is large enough to make a conclusion? |
I wasn't aware the balance "rework" in regards to this commander was to make it even more useless than it already was. Why was withdraw and refit removed? Right now you purchase a WC51 that can't even cap like a kubel or even shoot things (yes apparently it's not allowed a weapon unless you spend 60muni...) then after 3-4 mins it obviously dies from a brisk wind or god forbid a 222. Yes that's right, the 222 terminator wagon has the same manpower cost as your toy jeep with no gun.
the half tracks are just a waste of commander slots with no refit, they expend their use pretty fast as lategame ends near and the sherman feels a little overpriced compared to an easy 8.
Well apparently the WC51 can call in artillery if you tech to T4, but who has one alive by then really? I would much rather have the old arty call in or even a generic time on target arty than having to micro a paper car around.
I've tried the WC51 in the present patch. It has too short of a range to be of any use. You only keep it alive by keeping it well back of everything and diving in when there is nothing likely to shoot at it.
The dozer upgrade isn't that useful, especially given that your paper-armored Sherman has only a few more hitpoints and is now even slower. Lastly, paying 135 fuel for a 640 HP up-gunned Sherman isn't that great either. |
|
It's better than it was, for the reasons that Ethereal mentioned. It's still pretty situational - it does well on open maps and not so well when firing indirect. |
Pak Howi and Leig are fine. But whenever I get mortars since SBP they struggle to get any kills. Even with vet they end up getting 5-10 kills in 35mins+ games. And I only get mortars vs enenmies that have support weapons.
Mortar HTs arent doing much better either.
Just bad luck or are mortars UP across all factions now?
Your luck is the same as everyone else's luck when they buy a USF mortar. The USF one is working as intended, which is a really inefficient way to move MG's out of garrisons.
The OST is maybe a little better than intended, and so is the Soviet one. The patch seems to have made them more similar in performance. If anything, I'd like to seem them both nerfed a little more. Anything above a 2v2 turns into an arty shitshow. |
I dunno, why does OKW get a non-doc King Tiger?
Or better yet, why doesn't USF get a non-doc Pershing? |
Relic Entertainment
