|
I'm primarily a 2v2 gamer, so I thought I might elicit some opinions on how the 2v2 balance is going from the community. My perspective is limited as since WFA I've been playing double USF consistently. Initially we were getting crushed, after getting some tips we did a bit better and now since the Rifle commander went in rotation and on sale we've been able to win a bit more (Easy 8 is a great tank).
In general, I feel that OKW / Ostheer is a very strong combination. Double OKW is also very good. Double Ostheer doesn't feel very threatening to me, since T4 is under-performing (IMO) and USF has the tools to effectively deal with T3 in a reliable manner. In games against OKW, it seems more like a ticking timebomb. If we can't secure an early-mid advantage, we usually lose. The lack of USF heavies and the fragility of the M36 are part of the reason, and the other half is the way in which infantry evaporates when obersoldaten start to appear.
In 1v1s this is not so much a problem, since the early-mid advantage that USF enjoys thanks to their strong and versatile core infantry + AA halftrack can be exploited to secure a win. In a 2v2 this is much less realistic - the game is more forgiving in general and it's much easier to survive till later on when they can play more to their strengths. It's not like it's totally inevitable to lose late game, but I think it's unambigously tilted towards an axis victory in those circumstances. I'm not very fond of this kind of balancing at all, assuming that is "working as designed".
Now that I've stated my perspective, what are yours? |
|
To be frank the biggest issue is that the archive becomes obsolete every month because of the update frequency and the absence of replay versioning in the game. |
Crossing in the woods is great because I usually win it
 |
|
Make them spawn with 2x FG42, 2x K98k. Buff the damage of the FG42 a little bit (but not a crazy amount) and give them a 90muni upgrade that swaps out the remaining 2x K98k with 2 more FG42s. Thus, on initial spawn from a building they are not quite so powerful, but after an upgrade they scale a bit better into the late-game. |
|
Pershing, Calliope, Rangers pls.
|
|
The Jackson is currently fine. Absolutely no AI ability, and if any of your tanks can get close to it, it's basically over. In particular it's artificial intelligence is moronic, frequently charging headlong into enemy tanks when you give the attack order and getting itself killed. This is particularly problematic on urban maps. It definitely does good damage and has good penetration, but that's about the only thing it has going for it. Prior to the Easy 8 doctrine being in commander rotation and going on sale, the USF were basically hopeless late game because it was so micro-intensive to get any good use out of your swarm of fragile vehicles. |
|
Once again, the history argument doesn't really matter. But for the record it's 20 Pershings that *saw combat*, not 20 deployed. It was closer to 200 deployed, but most of them didn't ever see action. |
|
Haven't used them but when I switch my US AAHT to "Anti Aircraft Mode" it stops firing at aircraft. When I flipped it back to normal it started firing at the aircraft again.
I was like "WTF?" |
|
The Easy 8 is basically a Pershing lite - finally a tank that can take a couple of hits and deal solid damage. The Pershing would be slower firing, slower moving and more expensive, but also have higher armor, more HP and the same 90mm gun that the Jackson has.
I fear that if we do get Pershing, every single USA team will just go Persh doc / Easy 8 doc as a tag team though, lol.
Bring on the Calliope doctrine too pls. |
|
This is a biased test, however the Panther does need some love. It's been pretty underwhelming since before WFA came out. |
0
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
