exactly no i mean everything is perfect no need for change
( only the obercommand med fob :3 )

Originally posted by longboi:

you nerds. that's literally the entire point of the game. the factions are asymmetrical, their units are supposed to be completely different. allies receive a lot of strong early game options (good early infantry, good mgs, good light vehicles) while axis tend to be more of a slow burn to a powerful late game. if you want a perfectly balanced, symmetrical rts, play a different game. The core design philosophy of this game from the start has been an assymetric rts design

this is dumb lol. The issue isn't that things are 1 to 1 balance wise, the issue is how the asymetrical balancing works. If your whole faction is only good early game, than your gonna get steamrolled late game, and if your enemy is decent all game + OP late game your basically donzo, unless you secure a serious early advantage. Simply having 1 side suck late game but great early game compared to another who sucks early and is great late game is not good asymmetrical balancing.

While I think the factions are mostly balanced, I think some fundamental core design issues with the factions will always give certain faction advantages others seriously lack. Issues that get even worse when you do team games, where late game factions snowball there opponents who have little recourse.

Also the core design philosophy of this game is 1v1 sweaty nerds balance anymore.

Originally posted by eclodgo:

Originally posted by longboi:

you nerds. that's literally the entire point of the game. the factions are asymmetrical, their units are supposed to be completely different. allies receive a lot of strong early game options (good early infantry, good mgs, good light vehicles) while axis tend to be more of a slow burn to a powerful late game. if you want a perfectly balanced, symmetrical rts, play a different game. The core design philosophy of this game from the start has been an assymetric rts design

this is dumb lol. The issue isn't that things are 1 to 1 balance wise, the issue is how the asymetrical balancing works. If your whole faction is only good early game, than your gonna get steamrolled late game, and if your enemy is decent all game + OP late game your basically donzo, unless you secure a serious early advantage. Simply having 1 side suck late game but great early game compared to another who sucks early and is great late game is not good asymmetrical balancing.

While I think the factions are mostly balanced, I think some fundamental core design issues with the factions will always give certain faction advantages others seriously lack. Issues that get even worse when you do team games, where late game factions snowball there opponents who have little recourse.

Also the core design philosophy of this game is 1v1 sweaty nerds balance anymore.

thats not specific to this game, no game can truly be balanced like that
you can take games that are tailored for esports like popular mobas and you'll still see there are different player selections (champions, heroes etc etc depending on the moba) that are strong early and fall off late, or scale very well and such are stronger late etc., no game will ever or has ever attempted to be 100% balanced since not even chess is

Originally posted by rex:

Originally posted by eclodgo:

this is dumb lol. The issue isn't that things are 1 to 1 balance wise, the issue is how the asymetrical balancing works. If your whole faction is only good early game, than your gonna get steamrolled late game, and if your enemy is decent all game + OP late game your basically donzo, unless you secure a serious early advantage. Simply having 1 side suck late game but great early game compared to another who sucks early and is great late game is not good asymmetrical balancing.

While I think the factions are mostly balanced, I think some fundamental core design issues with the factions will always give certain faction advantages others seriously lack. Issues that get even worse when you do team games, where late game factions snowball there opponents who have little recourse.

Also the core design philosophy of this game is 1v1 sweaty nerds balance anymore.

thats not specific to this game, no game can truly be balanced like that
you can take games that are tailored for esports like popular mobas and you'll still see there are different player selections (champions, heroes etc etc depending on the moba) that are strong early and fall off late, or scale very well and such are stronger late etc., no game will ever or has ever attempted to be 100% balanced since not even chess is

Well duh lol. My point is that having such extreme asymmetrical balance can very much make games insta win for one side. If a faction is so strong late game that all they need to do is survive, than its gonna suck for faction who is only good early on fails. And thats a major problem, because factions in COH2 shouldn't be only good in one area, they should be decent all around and specifically excels in certain areas. And since the person of this post was like "dOnT cOmPlAiN aBoUT BalANCe CaUsE AsyMmEtRICal" is just a bad way to go about balance, because by that logic, I can make the germans a 100% winrate faction and it would be asymmetrical.

You are never going to get a perfect balance, but you gotta at least strive for a balance where each faction is at least roughly 40/60 going to win, no one wants to play a faction where your basically going to lose 70-90% of your games, even if your better than your opponent. And with games like chess, the only major disadvantage anyone has is that black starts 2nd, which is only a huge issue with Sweaty Chess try hards, or masters/grand masters. Since most casual players probably can win just as easily as black than as white.

Originally posted by eclodgo:

Originally posted by rex:

thats not specific to this game, no game can truly be balanced like that
you can take games that are tailored for esports like popular mobas and you'll still see there are different player selections (champions, heroes etc etc depending on the moba) that are strong early and fall off late, or scale very well and such are stronger late etc., no game will ever or has ever attempted to be 100% balanced since not even chess is

Well duh lol. My point is that having such extreme asymmetrical balance can very much make games insta win for one side. If a faction is so strong late game that all they need to do is survive, than its gonna suck for faction who is only good early on fails. And thats a major problem, because factions in COH2 shouldn't be only good in one area, they should be decent all around and specifically excels in certain areas. And since the person of this post was like "dOnT cOmPlAiN aBoUT BalANCe CaUsE AsyMmEtRICal" is just a bad way to go about balance, because by that logic, I can make the germans a 100% winrate faction and it would be asymmetrical.

You are never going to get a perfect balance, but you gotta at least strive for a balance where each faction is at least roughly 40/60 going to win, no one wants to play a faction where your basically going to lose 70-90% of your games, even if your better than your opponent. And with games like chess, the only major disadvantage anyone has is that black starts 2nd, which is only a huge issue with Sweaty Chess try hards, or masters/grand masters. Since most casual players probably can win just as easily as black than as white.

there seems to be a pretty good distribution of win percentages in coh2, all things considered, and that's also nullified in any serious tournament because people play both factions so all in all it's all going well

Originally posted by eclodgo:

(snip)

company of heroes asymmetricality really isn't that extreme though. biggest differences between most of the factions is in unit quality, price, and tech up methods.
"If a faction is so strong late game that all they need to do is survive, than its gonna suck for faction who is only good early on fails"
yeah and all you need to do to win the game is hold the three points for 10-ish minutes but it always ends up being a bit more complicated than that. Also aside from soviet armor i'm not sure where you're getting the idea that the factions suck in every aspect except their strongest? For the most part all the factions get a wide spread of units with decent capabilities.

Originally posted by longboi:

Originally posted by eclodgo:

(snip)

company of heroes asymmetricality really isn't that extreme though. biggest differences between most of the factions is in unit quality, price, and tech up methods.
"If a faction is so strong late game that all they need to do is survive, than its gonna suck for faction who is only good early on fails"
yeah and all you need to do to win the game is hold the three points for 10-ish minutes but it always ends up being a bit more complicated than that. Also aside from soviet armor i'm not sure where you're getting the idea that the factions suck in every aspect except their strongest? For the most part all the factions get a wide spread of units with decent capabilities.

well that is true, it is really complicated. Alot of games are won or lost on things that aren't wholly dependent on balance and stuff. And all factions have the capacity to do fine within all areas of the game.

My bigger issue is how some factions have some pretty severe advantages and disadvantages in certain sections of the game where your faction either gets snowbally or snowballed late game.

Like Americans have always felt like a Early game faction, who if they didn't do well early on, its gonna be rough late game. This however is true with all factions, but some more than others.

German factions always seem like they have such good late game units, which have very few flaws like panthers, who basically are perishing but you aren't limited to one. Or that both factions get default Rocket based arty without needing any commander. Which is fine, but these sort of asymmetrical choices can really be imbalanced if not done well. And since COH2 is mainly balanced for pro 1v1/2v2s anymore, 3v3 and 4v4 matches can very much get the brunt of those imbalances as units that aren't imbalanced in certain modes and circles of play are widely imbalanced in more casual circles.

Id say its just tricky overall lol. very complicated and tricky and its hard to balance.

You want balance? Only play 1v1. The OKW for instance, lose any and all weakness by being partnered with a whermacht. Theyre whole thing is fuel consumption, goes out the window as soon as a WHER makes extra fuel points. Otherwise, cant really complain whatever the outcome is, allies or axis.

Originally posted by Born to Coomina:

The problem arises when one side gets all the good units and the other side gets all the bad units.

Nobody would complain if say, axis tanks are better but allied AT is better.
Axis infantry is better but allied artillery is better.

Nobody would complain.
Sadly its not the case.
Axis AT is better Axis Tanks are better Axis Artillery is better Axis infantry is better, axis Engineers are better Axis MGs are better Axis tech order is better Axis grenades are better Axis mines are better.


Thats just it.

clap clap clap

add that all these better units deploy at almost the same cost as allied units

I want to play asymmetrical, but I also want to play balanced. You play OP units? ok
you pay 2/3/4 times more than allied ones

So it's good to play

Originally posted by 2nd_Rngr-Pjeep:

Originally posted by Born to Coomina:

The problem arises when one side gets all the good units and the other side gets all the bad units.

Nobody would complain if say, axis tanks are better but allied AT is better.
Axis infantry is better but allied artillery is better.

Nobody would complain.
Sadly its not the case.
Axis AT is better Axis Tanks are better Axis Artillery is better Axis infantry is better, axis Engineers are better Axis MGs are better Axis tech order is better Axis grenades are better Axis mines are better.


Thats just it.

clap clap clap

add that all these better units deploy at almost the same cost as allied units

I want to play asymmetrical, but I also want to play balanced. You play OP units? ok
you pay 2/3/4 times more than allied ones

So it's good to play

another issues is popcap.
many situation in real gameplay allies need more than 1 unit to counter 1 axis unit.
such as to kill panther you need atleast 1x su-85 with 1xAT or with 1x AT infantry meanwhile axis can use just 1x panther to kill t34-85 or su-85.