Profile of ThoseDeafMutes

Alpha alpha alpha, NDA NDA.

And also nanomachines.

God I hope we hear something by E3.

It's just that I can't accept a loss in CoH2 as easy as in other games because the balance is simply poor. In LoL or CS I know the enemy beat me with his skill because those games are pretty well balanced.

I don't think it's to do with the state of the balance; I know several other people who also feel that when they lose it's due to shit balance and/or factors out of their control, so it feels like they didn't "earn" the loss. Even when they're playing factions that are basically OP (e.g. the infamous march deployment when we still got our asses kicked playing Ostheer despite the community saying we were playing with a mega OP faction at the tiem). It was in CoH1 as well. When you win it feels like you were skillful usually, when you lose it feels like the game is bullshit. Even if we could get the game in a state where there was (statistically) good balance, it would still be filled with all sorts of irritating BS that infuriates players when it happens. Every game tells a (rage induced) story.

It's hard to say exactly what the root cause is, but I think it's firstly that many factions are balanced only in the sense that they all have their share of OP / unfair units at different tiers and phases of the game. In my humble opinion the Flak halftracks for both factions and the Panzer II are totally bullshit units. I hate them so much. But the factions they're in aren't necessarily OP because of other bullshit and cheese balances it out in the end.

The second factor is the prevalence of RNG and the seemingly contrary game design philosophies of unit preservation and dramatic random events (which often can cause instant or extremely fast squadwipes). There is a significant degree of 'fuziness' in most unit matchups where a moderate mathematical advantage in an engagement could always turn south due to dice rolls. Flame crits, flamer explosions, plane crashes, any AOE weapons with random scatter, unit clumping causing wipes that should be impossible etc. Every fight is an exercise in gambling. And depending on how your luck goes, you can genuinely be fucked by the RNG.

I'm not sure I consider the Tiger I to be a mistake necessarily, it has a niche in terms of assaulting prepared defences - a breakthrough vehicle. But I think the Panther should have been a lighter vehicle, and ideally it would be more reliable too. On a strategic level having more panthers that weren't quite as tough on their frontal armour and maybe has a slightly shorter gun would have been a net positive. Not enough to win the war though, so it's moot ultimately.

I have discussed in the past the amusing contradiction that the Germans had their greatest successes when they had arguably inferior vehicles to their opponents. The German AFVs from 1942 onwards started to take a gamble on what you might call a "specs war" (to borrow from smartphone terminology); an attempt to have a qualitative advantage by having the best guns and the best protection, but I don't think it paid off.

I have no idea what this is aside from being the greatest thing ever

It's from Danger 5, an amazing Australian TV series available on Netflix. Go watch it right now.

Tiger Ace, even if we get it to a properly and completely balanced state, is one of those things that just should have stayed on the drawing board. More ultra high end tanks, especially ones with a really strange resource gimmick attached, were not what the game needed. It should just have been a regular Tiger call in, IMO. If you want an ace, then spend the fuel to vet it up.