State of balance

[Ben_D⚜]

So I'm wondering what the community's take on the current state of balance is. It doesn't seem to be easy to find a cohesive thread, and what can be found (such as tier lists) are only representative of a very small amount of players who consider themselves elite. In my opinion, what they seem to think is effective doesn't seem to correlate with what many more average players would agree on.

If there is a tier list based on the current patch (40696), what are your thoughts on it? What units and/or divisions do you think are in a good place, and which ones that are too effective/ineffective? What do you think the realities are in 1v1 matches, as opposed to 2v2 to 4v4? 10v10 matches aren't something I take into account...

I have my own opinion, obviously, but I also admit that no one is free of bias.

[seashell]

more like infantry and aa meta
so those who don't have good infantry will be screwed in 1v1

looking at 116 panzer
have you noticed that every division containing a panther does not contain stg 44 except armia krajowa

like pzg are good at 750 mm
but the other infantry selection are just meh and too few

eugen should just put less 4 or 5 point slots in infantry tab

also 52p spam beats panther
that is funny thanks to the he hp mechanic

and how much success do you have with flammenpanzer and rso?

[Ben_D⚜]

I don't play the divisions that have them. I've played against the rso & flammenpanzer, and it was give & take vs those units.

[Protoss|]

Feel free to create your own tierlist here. :)
https://tiermaker.com/create/sd-2-all-divisions-till-black-sunday-562999

I also have mine on YT, Allies atm are better in all well coordinate games becasue of cost efficency of their infantry and tank tabs and the microablity of Sherman tanks. Balance in every single multiplayer game out there is made around the "elite" how you call it.
If people aint fast/experienced enough to use stuff it still doesnt mean that stuff is imbalanced (like loosing stuff to KTs on 2000 m etc.).
so yes team games have to be considered, but balance cant be done around all skill levels so it only makes sense to do it for the best as it will then also somewhat work out for lower skill levels.

Take SC2 for example were voidrays are the ♥♥♥♥ till platinum and NOBODY played them above it. Now blizzard buffed them, sure now gold and silver league plaayers there will have to "suffer" under it even more but this is only so because they ahvent figured out how to counter them yet. Its somewhat similiar with tanks like panthers and is2s in SD2.

[Sluggger]

The Meta depends on what type of game you're in. 1v1 is all about infantry, offmap arty and air, German divisions can't compete. In 4v4 or 10v10 Panthers and Tigers are very strong, only IS2s can deal with them so German divisions have an advantage.

Balance will always be about individual opinions and play styles. My play style is geared towards armor/mechanized attacks so it sucks being overrun by infantry spam and bombers but thats the game in its current state.

[Sluggger]

Originally posted by Protosszocker:

Feel free to create your own tierlist here.
https://tiermaker.com/create/sd-2-all-divisions-till-black-sunday-562999

I also have mine on YT, Allies atm are better in all well coordinate games becasue of cost efficency of their infantry and tank tabs and the microablity of Sherman tanks. Balance in every single multiplayer game out there is made around the "elite" how you call it.
If people aint fast/experienced enough to use stuff it still doesnt mean that stuff is imbalanced (like loosing stuff to KTs on 2000 m etc.).

I saw your recent tier list and was wondering if maybe for Steel Division League it would be OK to allow fewer bans on German divisions. Instead of 5 bans for German side maybe 4 or 3 so we get fewer Allies vs Allies battles.

[Protoss|]

Originally posted by Sluggger:

Originally posted by Protosszocker:

Feel free to create your own tierlist here.
https://tiermaker.com/create/sd-2-all-divisions-till-black-sunday-562999

I also have mine on YT, Allies atm are better in all well coordinate games becasue of cost efficency of their infantry and tank tabs and the microablity of Sherman tanks. Balance in every single multiplayer game out there is made around the "elite" how you call it.
If people aint fast/experienced enough to use stuff it still doesnt mean that stuff is imbalanced (like loosing stuff to KTs on 2000 m etc.).

I saw your recent tier list and was wondering if maybe for Steel Division League it would be OK to allow fewer bans on German divisions. Instead of 5 bans for German side maybe 4 or 3 so we get fewer Allies vs Allies battles.

What we will do for next season is that you ban divisions before picking factions, so like 7 bans taht people have to split between axis and allies. so if more divisions are banned on allied side you pick axis. Also makes it save from balance shifts in patches.

[Sluggger]

Originally posted by Protosszocker:

Originally posted by Sluggger:

I saw your recent tier list and was wondering if maybe for Steel Division League it would be OK to allow fewer bans on German divisions. Instead of 5 bans for German side maybe 4 or 3 so we get fewer Allies vs Allies battles.

What we will do for next season is that you ban divisions before picking factions, so like 7 bans taht people have to split between axis and allies. so if more divisions are banned on allied side you pick axis. Also makes it save from balance shifts in patches.

Awesome idea Proto, I'm looking forward to next season.

[Ben_D⚜]

Originally posted by Protosszocker:

Feel free to create your own tierlist here. :)
https://tiermaker.com/create/sd-2-all-divisions-till-black-sunday-562999

I also have mine on YT, Allies atm are better in all well coordinate games becasue of cost efficency of their infantry and tank tabs and the microablity of Sherman tanks. Balance in every single multiplayer game out there is made around the "elite" how you call it.
If people aint fast/experienced enough to use stuff it still doesnt mean that stuff is imbalanced (like loosing stuff to KTs on 2000 m etc.).
so yes team games have to be considered, but balance cant be done around all skill levels so it only makes sense to do it for the best as it will then also somewhat work out for lower skill levels.

Take SC2 for example were voidrays are the ♥♥♥♥ till platinum and NOBODY played them above it. Now blizzard buffed them, sure now gold and silver league plaayers there will have to "suffer" under it even more but this is only so because they ahvent figured out how to counter them yet. Its somewhat similiar with tanks like panthers and is2s in SD2.

Thanks for the reply Protoss. I appreciate your SC2 reference; I used to play myself, but stopped shortly after LotV.

What do you think is the threshold for a player to be considered competent & worthy of being heard? Does that include the W/L ratio, game modes used, actual hours played, community involvement and/or divisions used? (This is a semi-rhetorical question.)

Is your statement about infantry corroborated by those of higher skill in the community? My experience is that Axis infantry are superior, because they're more lethal and have as much availability, generally speaking. The Commonwealth divisions struggle in this department in particular, ironically, given that they're infantry divisions as well. As for Shermans, most German armour deal with them with ease; even P4s trade 1:1 with them. There are many ways to eliminate those tanks. The nerfs that Eugen brought to the 3rd Canadians (rifle squad availability) and Shermans (from 60 to 65 points) in general are quite bewildering to me, because I haven't experienced advantages from those before those changes. My opinion is that German armour needs a price nerf, but of course that just what I think.

Also, can you post a link to your list? It's perfectly fine if you'd rather not.

Originally posted by Sluggger:

The Meta depends on what type of game you're in. 1v1 is all about infantry, offmap arty and air, German divisions can't compete. In 4v4 or 10v10 Panthers and Tigers are very strong, only IS2s can deal with them so German divisions have an advantage.

Balance will always be about individual opinions and play styles. My play style is geared towards armor/mechanized attacks so it sucks being overrun by infantry spam and bombers but thats the game in its current state.

1v1 might be all about those things, but I just can't see how Germans can't compete. To me, they seem to have an answer to all of those things because they can bring much of the same thing, if not better.

I think you might be correct there... It might be an impossible endeavour to please the entire playerbase.

[Protoss|]

Originally posted by Ben_D:

Originally posted by Protosszocker:

Feel free to create your own tierlist here. :)
https://tiermaker.com/create/sd-2-all-divisions-till-black-sunday-562999

I also have mine on YT, Allies atm are better in all well coordinate games becasue of cost efficency of their infantry and tank tabs and the microablity of Sherman tanks. Balance in every single multiplayer game out there is made around the "elite" how you call it.
If people aint fast/experienced enough to use stuff it still doesnt mean that stuff is imbalanced (like loosing stuff to KTs on 2000 m etc.).
so yes team games have to be considered, but balance cant be done around all skill levels so it only makes sense to do it for the best as it will then also somewhat work out for lower skill levels.

Take SC2 for example were voidrays are the ♥♥♥♥ till platinum and NOBODY played them above it. Now blizzard buffed them, sure now gold and silver league plaayers there will have to "suffer" under it even more but this is only so because they ahvent figured out how to counter them yet. Its somewhat similiar with tanks like panthers and is2s in SD2.

Thanks for the reply Protoss. I appreciate your SC2 reference; I used to play myself, but stopped shortly after LotV.

What do you think is the threshold for a player to be considered competent & worthy of being heard? Does that include the W/L ratio, game modes used, actual hours played, community involvement and/or divisions used? (This is a semi-rhetorical question.)

Is your statement about infantry corroborated by those of higher skill in the community? My experience is that Axis infantry are superior, because they're more lethal and have as much availability, generally speaking. The Commonwealth divisions struggle in this department in particular, ironically, given that they're infantry divisions as well. As for Shermans, most German armour deal with them with ease; even P4s trade 1:1 with them. There are many ways to eliminate those tanks. The nerfs that Eugen brought to the 3rd Canadians (rifle squad availability) and Shermans (from 60 to 65 points) in general are quite bewildering to me, because I haven't experienced advantages from those before those changes. My opinion is that German armour needs a price nerf, but of course that just what I think.

Also, can you post a link to your list? It's perfectly fine if you'd rather not.

Originally posted by Sluggger:

The Meta depends on what type of game you're in. 1v1 is all about infantry, offmap arty and air, German divisions can't compete. In 4v4 or 10v10 Panthers and Tigers are very strong, only IS2s can deal with them so German divisions have an advantage.

Balance will always be about individual opinions and play styles. My play style is geared towards armor/mechanized attacks so it sucks being overrun by infantry spam and bombers but thats the game in its current state.

1v1 might be all about those things, but I just can't see how Germans can't compete. To me, they seem to have an answer to all of those things because they can bring much of the same thing, if not better.

I think you might be correct there... It might be an impossible endeavour to please the entire playerbase.

Here you go, this is my rather subjective list :) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_e9kNKmFek

Rifles were super cost effiecnt and in canadians you easily were able to fit 150+ of them in.
Inf fight 1v1 sure goes the german way often enough, but inf fight is all about numbers atm and the german 15 and 20 p inf is inferior to their Allied counterparts. It got better now due to Kazaki ans Strelki nerf, but it is still there. The issue of alot of axis divisions (all tank divisions for example) is the lack of 20 p in and with that the issue of not being able to contest the enemies numbers all over the map.
Shermans aim time bonus gives you a huge advantage in every tank fight, if you micro them well you will win against p4s for sure and they also have the highest dps against inf which makes them a perfect suppport tank.

The less decicive people are the less cost efficency and the more raw power of a single unit matters. This is why you will not see Kingtigers in Top league games (even though you might see 21st Pz because of shermans and airtab), but they are often seen in team games. Team games on paper could also play out like top level 1v1 (even with narrower map per player) but coordination in team games + average skilll level is lower, which makes it look different.

I think you can bring up concerns if you see them but you always have to reflect that you might just not be experienced enough and your feedback might be flawed. We too often have balance "discussions" with people being 100% convinced that their standpoint is right.
The strike team for sure aint flawless but you gotta accept that it includes some of the best players we have in SD objectivly (both for team and 1v1 games) and that the chance that they get it right is bigger than with most other people. if you show me though some specific cases were Eugen and the strike team might have overlooked a speficic point or match up or synergy that might end up broken etc. feel free to point that out any time. :)

[Ben_D⚜]

@Protosszocker
I watched your video. I guess I'd have to cross-reference a few things to come up with a detailed answer to it. Naturally, I disagree with a few of your decisions there. I'll try to give you an answer why later on.

I wouldn't know how to show what my concerns are, except for the way I'm doing it now. I hope I'm not coming across as someone who's convinced he's correct. I'm just looking for some insight, which I'm thankful that you're sharing.

To add some context and good faith, I'll state a few things about what my experience with SD2 is.
I play mostly team games, but I do play the occasional 1v1. I win a little over half of my games at the moment. I play as the Allies the vast majority of the time. When I do play as the Axis, I play as Finland. I have my personal reasons why... I know that puts me in a precarious position when it comes to judging the game, but I am at around 600 games as of this post.