Because the "attacker" of any given mission is almost always the historic victor?

Check out Main Defence Area mission of Makin campaign, it's totally in favour of Japanese. So much, that I'm pretty sure it has to be patched.

Originally posted by TimTheEvoker:

Because the "attacker" of any given mission is almost always the historic victor?

And? There are campaigns where defending armies win yet those matches mostly end up
being a loss, unless you try hard it. Whats the point in playing a losing team, when you want to hold the line and win. It sad to see how pathetic the ai acts when defending. Also why not change some history, do what didn't happen instead of doing whats already been done.

Originally posted by OBSERVER:

Originally posted by TimTheEvoker:

Because the "attacker" of any given mission is almost always the historic victor?

And? There are campaigns where defending armies win yet those matches mostly end up
being a loss, unless you try hard it. Whats the point in playing a losing team, when you want to hold the line and win. It sad to see how pathetic the ai acts when defending. Also why not change some history, do what didn't happen instead of doing whats already been done.

Because it makes defeating the odds gratifying?

"Historical victory" is not a good excuse for maps being unbalanced. It's an insult to the men who fought bravely and gave their lives to secure said victory, as if the odds were so stacked that the ones who lost their lives actually died meaningless deaths.

But OP, I think the recent Pacific campaign reworks have shown that the dev team is trying to balance the maps more, as they used to be borderline unplayable as Axis without resorting to cheese methods. You might have better odds of getting heard if you pointed out the specific map(s) that are annoying.

Originally posted by shiggy:

"Historical victory" is not a good excuse for maps being unbalanced. It's an insult to the men who fought bravely and gave their lives to secure said victory, as if the odds were so stacked that the ones who lost their lives actually died meaningless deaths.

But OP, I think the recent Pacific campaign reworks have shown that the dev team is trying to balance the maps more, as they used to be borderline unplayable as Axis without resorting to cheese methods. You might have better odds of getting heard if you pointed out the specific map(s) that are annoying.

And pretending war is "balanced" isn't a bigger insult?

Originally posted by TimTheEvoker:

Originally posted by shiggy:

"Historical victory" is not a good excuse for maps being unbalanced. It's an insult to the men who fought bravely and gave their lives to secure said victory, as if the odds were so stacked that the ones who lost their lives actually died meaningless deaths.

But OP, I think the recent Pacific campaign reworks have shown that the dev team is trying to balance the maps more, as they used to be borderline unplayable as Axis without resorting to cheese methods. You might have better odds of getting heard if you pointed out the specific map(s) that are annoying.

And pretending war is "balanced" isn't a bigger insult?

I would say maps like Omaha Beach where Allies can simply stroll up to the Axis fortifications are a big insult to the lives given on that day, yes. Are you implying otherwise?

Heavy MG is your friend. Find a position to lie down with a field of fire not blocked by the infernal grass waving around in the wind, then mow down the attackers. Your greatest enemy on defense is not the enemy army; it is the grass and plants. Ironic that I love grass & plants in real life and in other games.

Originally posted by Huitzilopochtli:

Heavy MG is your friend. Find a position to lie down with a field of fire not blocked by the infernal grass waving around in the wind, then mow down the attackers. Your greatest enemy on defense is not the enemy army; it is the grass and plants. Ironic that I love grass & plants in real life and in other games.

True. Grass blocking your view is the true enemy.

Originally posted by shiggy:

Originally posted by TimTheEvoker:

And pretending war is "balanced" isn't a bigger insult?

I would say maps like Omaha Beach where Allies can simply stroll up to the Axis fortifications are a big insult to the lives given on that day, yes. Are you implying otherwise?

And the ability for the Luftwaffe to come in and sink all the landing craft before they reach shore is insulting to all the lives lost in the Allied strategic bombing campaign, launched in an effort to defang the Luftwaffe and insure the skies of Western Europe belonged to the Allies.

We could probably go back and forth like this all day if we tried.

Originally posted by Huitzilopochtli:

Heavy MG is your friend. Find a position to lie down with a field of fire not blocked by the infernal grass waving around in the wind, then mow down the attackers. Your greatest enemy on defense is not the enemy army; it is the grass and plants. Ironic that I love grass & plants in real life and in other games.

That or any form of tank, was able to defend the entire Nanking campaign that way and spawncamping the ♥♥♥♥ as much as possible

Originally posted by TimTheEvoker:

Originally posted by shiggy:

I would say maps like Omaha Beach where Allies can simply stroll up to the Axis fortifications are a big insult to the lives given on that day, yes. Are you implying otherwise?

And the ability for the Luftwaffe to come in and sink all the landing craft before they reach shore is insulting to all the lives lost in the Allied strategic bombing campaign, launched in an effort to defang the Luftwaffe and insure the skies of Western Europe belonged to the Allies.

We could probably go back and forth like this all day if we tried.

Now you're just grasping at straws to justify design flaws in the game. Yes, the presence of the Luftwaffe at Omaha Beach is unrealistic. But admitting to cheesing unbalanced maps by killing the landing crafts before they reach the shore doesn't change the fact that the maps themselves are unbalanced enough for the players to want to resort to such a thing.

The new Pacific campaign reworks where the players don't actually have to resort to gamey tactics like these are a step in the right direction.

Originally posted by shiggy:

Originally posted by TimTheEvoker:

And the ability for the Luftwaffe to come in and sink all the landing craft before they reach shore is insulting to all the lives lost in the Allied strategic bombing campaign, launched in an effort to defang the Luftwaffe and insure the skies of Western Europe belonged to the Allies.

We could probably go back and forth like this all day if we tried.

Now you're just grasping at straws to justify design flaws in the game. Yes, the presence of the Luftwaffe at Omaha Beach is unrealistic. But admitting to cheesing unbalanced maps by killing the landing crafts before they reach the shore doesn't change the fact that the maps themselves are unbalanced enough for the players to want to resort to such a thing.

The new Pacific campaign reworks where the players don't actually have to resort to gamey tactics like these are a step in the right direction.

But it's not being balanced with good map design, just a different flavor of cheese. If anything the map design is worse.