Profile of Hannibal

• More people are running CELO and seeing poorly matched the games are and ALT-F4 during load.
  

Out of those 4 options 2 can easily be fixed by Relic with minimal effort. Will they?

Can Relic though?
In October, 4v4 made up about a third of the playerbase, judging by the amount of games on PageP's site when weighting for the player count.
CoH2 also has a peak of about 7,5-8k players during the week and ~10k on weekends. Let's assume about 9k players on average (which is already high), giving us 3k players for 4v4.
Average play time per map is ~25 minutes. With an assumed 5 min search time about a sixth of all players (600) are available for the server for balancing games, spread across Axis and Allies of about 300 each.

The ladders in 4v4 randoms span about 10k ranks, which gives us an average distance of 33 ranks per player. Best case scenario: Players are at least 133 ranks apart within their own side.

Now, factor in we've only compared peak players. Play 2 hours too early or late and you're already down 1k players.
We've assumed all players are in multiplayer and do nothing else than going from game to game. No comp stomps, no custom games, no breaks with the game running in the background, no single player, no arranged teams that might require special conditions.
Every player should find a game within a reasonable time. It makes sense for the algorithm to widen the search range the longer it searches, leading to suboptimal match ups.
And obviously normal fluctuations. What if your bracket is underpopulated, if the players near your elo are by pure chance not searching, players not evenly spaced etc.

I don't want to defend those "top 50 gets matches with rank >5000" or something. The algorithm is has a lot of shitty sides and needs optimization. But even under optimal conditions, I'd assume that a rank difference of at least 400-500 within your own team is to be expected, plus whatever is available for the opposite team. If you play at a slightly suboptimal time, I don't think there is much you can do against rank differences of 1000-ish.

ok i get it but what is your solution? lets say we will nerf its armour to make it paper thin like su85. Its performance vs TD's wont change as they have high pen anyway, it will still be OP with KT's/tigers and makes an underused unit even less desirable but at least it will be more venerable to med tanks.

From my experience, the problem does not stem from the unit itself but when its used in combination with other tanks. jp4 + KT or su85 with ISU152's both are almost impossible to overcome.

1 solution could be armour and VET nerf (give accuracy or more damage in VET instead or nothing at all) as well as a price decrease which could make it more appealing to go for (maybe have it med truck like before), but im curious about what you think should be done.

My initial thought would be to delete that +160 HP veterancy and reduce the ROF a bit, in exchange for a small price buff and making the stealth a bit more appealing (I personally don't like it although I recognize that it can be strong in some situations). I'd also move some of the reload veterancy to penetration. +10-20% (or split across two vet levels) probably would make it a bit more reliable while still not being OP vs heavies).
I think this could position the JP4 as a cheaper and less durable alternative to the Panther. Unfortunately this makes it also more of a SU85 copy.

Technically, it could also get the Jackson treatment and have thinner front armor so that mediums have better chances assaulting it.

Not sure if that is too much or maybe even not enough, but it would take away the indestructability.

i agree with your assessment. So whats wrong? should JP4 be losing to allied TD's? isn't jp4 beating and to effectively fighting back and counter allied TD's exactly what this unit should be capable of? correct me if wrong, jp4 exists to counter medium armoured tanks and below, hence why it does not have the pen of other 60 range TD's but does have better armour and health which allows it to counter them better. Allied TD's already effectively counter every single axis non doc vehicle expect for the jp4. as far as i can see, this unit is performing as intended.

As I wrote in my opening post, I am kind of divided if I personally consider the JP4 already OP or "just" very good. That's why I wanted to start this discussion.
From how I read your post, you're arguing that Allied TDs are already good against everything except for the JP4. If they performed well against the JP4, they'd lack a real weakness, which would be bad for the game.
I fully agree.

And that's exactly the issue that I have with the JP4. It counters all Allied non-doc vehicles with the exception of the Comet and maybe, maybe the Churchill (against which it still does "okay"). Including - if not to say, especially - all Allied TDs. One single unit in one single faction is all that the JP4 is bad against. USF and Soviets are kind of out of options. Also, the JP4 does not win against TDs because of its armor (it has <4,5% frontal bounce chance), but because of its ROF and at vet2 also health.

While Allied TDs are at least rather fragile (SU85 and Jackson) or clunky and slow firing (Firefly), giving even mediums the chance to just bum rush a damaged TD and win. That's not the case with the JP4. If you don't find the rear armor, good luck with ~55% pen chance with your medium tank all while having lower ROF than the JP4. If you're Axis and dive an Allied TD, getting to the rear is beneficial, but you can still manage if not. As Allies against the JP4, it is actually required, because otherwise you cannot win.

In my eyes, the only things holding the JP4 back are slight mobility issues until it vets up and most of all its timing. In the current meta and with OKW often losing the infantry advantage around the 15 min mark, your first vehicle should be a medium, not a TD. For some reasons (I assume reliability and less micro but not sure) people often get the Panther afterwards.

As Sanders said, builds with heavies are hard to beat. I personally play them with grand offensive. Pfusies keep you safe from flanking mediums, and you have the option for the Tiger. I found it sometimes difficult to make it to the Tiger because of some holes in the AI line up that are caused by the JP4, but they can be manageable and once you got the Tiger, you're usually good to go for the end game.

A lot of comments here saying jp4 shuts down allied TD's, that's just simply not true, they are both in range and can fight each other, yes in a vaccum jp4 may have the advantage but this is not 1 unit vs 1 unit and even it was, Firefily can have tupils to wreck the jp4, jackson can outflank it easily and su85 can spot it first. AN elephant or jagdtiger shuts down Allied TD's.

Ppl as usual over exaggerating unit performance

The SU85 will usually still lose even despite having the first shot (which is by far also not a guarantee).
Firefly can fight back with Tulips, those are very hard to aim at 50-60 range and apart from Tulips it will heavily lose.
Jackson? Not too much. It can just avoid the JP4. Best it could do is to spot an angle, take a pot shot and back off before the JP4 has rotated, but that is unreliable at best and takes a huge micro effort. Real flanking is not a realistic option. The main Jackson's main strength is its 60 range, you're not diving this vehicle. If you want to flank and dive, a Sherman is the better option.

In most scenarios, Allied TDs will trade way worse than the JP4, especially of both of them gather veterancy over time.

You're not supposed to dive the HQ sector. There are free defenses there for a reason. Nvm the potential for running into a brand new Panther with its sights trained on you.

The defenses are there to prevent super early infantry rushes into the base, which would effectively mean that you "cap" the enemies base, denying him to retreat his squads outside as well as building new ones (since those will be outgunned heavily).

But I think OP is overexaggerating, especially with damage against heavies.. Even Against a T34s rear armor, the Flak emplacement does about ~5 DPS. There is some damage, but not an awful lot, especially since some shots will be front armor and the Emplacement quickly deleted. Still, they are the best of all emplacements in case an LV wants to enter your base for the last shot.