I find it strange that you say that the average Allied player plays better than the Axis player. I think the stats should equalize that.
Not sure where I said that, but I can kind of see where you can get that idea from my post. That wasn’t what I was trying to say at all, just that there are more experienced allied players actively playing, and that it is easier to play Allies at low levels than it is to play Axis.
You say that, but less than half your rather impressive kill list… Don’t even count as objective defense kills. What you’re saying also doesn’t translate well with the other screenshot you mentioned.
you can tweak this thing when they will implement a sort of matchmaking, so im not stuck with level 4 that dont even know where they are and what they are playing.
Skill based mm so I can finaly play against tryhards because sometimes I have a good match? No thanks.
But it’s for the other discussion.
I have killed far more in every game than any other, whether on point or off point.
i would prefer sweat every single game insted of becoming so frustrated with my team that i need to change game, and all my will to play enlisted disappear when i think that i need to do more than 120 kill and capture and hold the point alone.
You need a team to hold the point.
You killing hundreds of the enemy won’t matter if they make it past you.
Rallies mean that it isn’t just you fighting on the front, or on the point, but your entire team.
So you would rather sweat when playing against terminators than sweat when your team is bad.
Imo both sound equally bad but in the 2nd option I can at least kill someone.
Buddy, in all games except the third respawn point were set. The problem is the insane 250 tickets for capturing the point. There is no such thing in Moscow and Berlin.
i prefer to be mediocre in my team that needing to single handendly win the game.
I agree. I’d rather be in second place on a team and not sweat the max, me jersey 4 times per game (just kidding) than play 40+ minutes at max on a team with weak players and a high probability of lose.
I come in here to relax, not work.
Caps already slowly turn back. its just pretty slow
To be honest, I’ve noticed this a couple of times when a point was captured just a little bit, but I thought it was a visual bug.
In any case, this effect, if any, is extremely negligible to really affect the game.
The opposing team is more likely to run out of 1,000 tickets before you can “clear” at least one point captured by a quarter!
yes but they are so slow but they decapture is almost irrelevant.
it happens lose you can lose even if you almost won it often happens there is nothing so strange in these cases it happens that pure luck makes the difference a respawn too long, a bomber / artillery that hits at the wrong time, a squad that is killed immediately , a wrong grenade throw, an enemy not killed immediately, an unbuilt / destroyed rallypoint point etc. maybe you have never noticed it but the battle is won by the team if a component is wrong even if it may be irrelevant at the moment, it can become the reason for the defeat, for example you can’t destroy a tank, and he then acts as a bridge-head, at the last control point decreeing the enemy victory.
Yes, my friend, I understand. I just highlighted that it was not a level playing field. It wasn’t a game where everything was decided in the last seconds because of one shot. The opponent won with 300-400 points, although in terms of kills in the second screenshot was losing by 30%, the respawns were in excess of our team. The problem is the large number of tickets for capturing a point and the fact that 1 attacker can capture a point very quickly. Well, and the design of the maps.
ah the ticket sorry I quickly read the topic too long, you’re right in normandy the attacker has too many tickets this unbalances the battles too much in favor of the attacker, but I think the problem is felt only because the Americans attack and the Germans defend, if the attack / defense rate would be the same for the two factions, it would probably be less noticeable
Yes, it would improve the win rate balance, but still the attackers would win often. People would be inclined to get out of matches by playing defense, so despite what I wrote
I think the defense side should be stronger. When I attack Le Bre for Axis, it’s a 90%+ probability of victory. When defending for Axis it is very difficult to win.
you intend to merge assault and invasion, why not! i love territory from rs2 if you mean this would be great for the game
It’s very simple. Points are capped too quickly and attackers spawn too close to the point.