In east europe and europe servers game is pretty balanced. Why evryone says japan losing everytime ?
Yeah but cant say it for na servers tough
I keep my server settings set to all regions when I play USA and most matches are stomps. Japanese faction is weak currently.
1 Like
Because Japanese weapons are very poor
2 Likes
the equipment can get the job done, playerbase on the other hand can be very very retarded; just look at CBT moscow axis then at OBT moscow axis for an example
2 Likes
It is best not to discuss objective factors such as player skill level when discussing the strength of a faction
doesn’t matter what the strengths are, if the players aren’t there or are decent-good then they will always lose. again look at CBT moscow to OBT moscow
Differences between players do not mask imbalances in weapons
1 Like
no it does, because a bad player will do poorly with good equipment, while a good player can do well with bad equipment. also back during CBT moscow had germans curbstomping the soviets, then normandy game out and the germans started to lose for a bit but what sealed the deal for them was the move to OBT where they would rarely win yet most of the levels during OBT where the exact same as CBT moscow with the ONLY change being the switch of fighter 1 and attacker 1
1 Like
It’s easy to blame player skills but the facts are that Japanese automatic weapons and tanks are very poor compared to American counterparts. Dosen’t help when Japan mostly gets bot matches
4 Likes
If everything uses the pros and cons of players to cover up the difference in weapons, there will be no balance. Even if you are holding a bamboo pole against a heavy machine gun, it can be counted as a difference in player level.
1 Like
There is not much difference between my Japanese army and the US military’s win rate, but I still feel that the Japanese army is weak and needs to be strengthened, because the player’s skill level is not the goal of balance from the beginning, which is a problem that game developers cannot overcome
But weapon differences can be overcome, modified, strengthened or weakened
1 Like
i could go be lazy and just say “a poor craftsman blames his tools” though you haven’t explained how germans could swiftly 180 from curbstomping to being curbstomped despite the equipment being “inferior”, remember only attacker 1 and fighter 1 got switched, with a similar thing happened to normandy where CBT normandy was pretty equal for both sides though OBT had allies curbstomping the axis until September of last year where it did a 180 and the allies got curbstomped despite their equipment being the same as during the time they were curbstomping…a bit curious isn’t it 
same with me though interestingly my average kills a game as japan is 80 while US is 70, which means i pull more kills with japanese guns (i don’t really us vehicles as japan) than i do with US equipment
1 Like
Player distribution. Players will flock to a side that is currently stomping.
2 Likes
exactly, because what matters the most is the playerbase because if you have more, usually better because it’s a feedback cycle, than the other then the side with the players will win. though this could possibly be solved with incentives like maybe 1k gold for completing the underpopulated side campaign, though this could be replaced with gold orders or have it so an underpopulated side an exp boost like in H&G
Not blaming the tools, but only the tools can improve, what can you expect game developers to do with those noobs?
A better balance can only be achieved by shortening the weapon differences as much as possible
For example, previously people were grinding for the silenced squads. Skilled German players and skilled Allied players flocked into Normandy and Tunisia, and suddenly average players who did everything right (attacks/defends objectives, building stuffs using engineers), found themselves outgunned and outnumbered against players in squads, armed with endgame weapons and vehicles, while these average players find their team to be new players and bots with basic gear (and they’re most likely the one with soundest mind on their team), it truly creates feeling of helplessness, and keep feeding into this vicious cycle of one side being devoid of skilled players who knew the game well.
1 Like
if i am understanding this correctly you want a symmetrical balanced game, is that correct?
By no means do the Japanese always lose.
With three Greek-style helmet decorator players, the winning percentage is 100%.
Without them? Hmmm…
not just the greek style helmets, but usually any event flairs can do the trick
Literally every single campaign is like that. The most fun matches always are the ones with equal amount of engagement from both sides…