Is it a game design that russians are supposed to lose more ?
- Thread starter MadGelo
- Start date
Guys, the game is unplayble, and i am not talking about the insane pings/crashes/bugs.
the maps are terribly balanced, the game is a 100% axis favourited when it comes to actual gameplay (most of the trailers and screenshots are focused on the soviet side - but there it ends) the axis weapons are much better, the maps are much easier for them to win, and it looks like some national socialist followers created it just to have some easy matches with the germans, sorry, but it's true.
the next patch should be focused on balacing the teams, the weapons, the spawns and the map design. no one should have easy victory, especially when it comes to Red Orchestra. so untill then, see you on other games
the maps are terribly balanced, the game is a 100% axis favourited when it comes to actual gameplay (most of the trailers and screenshots are focused on the soviet side - but there it ends) the axis weapons are much better, the maps are much easier for them to win, and it looks like some national socialist followers created it just to have some easy matches with the germans, sorry, but it's true.
the next patch should be focused on balacing the teams, the weapons, the spawns and the map design. no one should have easy victory, especially when it comes to Red Orchestra. so untill then, see you on other games
Upvote
0
Exaggerated post is exaggerated. I've seen plenty of Allied victories in the last few days, and I've been responsible for a number of them.
The game was playable in beta for a lot of people, and that's a fact. And it's very playable now.
Upvote
0
they really really need to re balance most of the Maps
on the good maps the Russians lose 6o% to 70% of the time
mostly just because of how the maps are laid out
I hate to say this , but who ever made most of the maps must really like playing the Germans
There no other season for the lay out of most of these maps
on the good maps the Russians lose 6o% to 70% of the time
mostly just because of how the maps are laid out
I hate to say this , but who ever made most of the maps must really like playing the Germans
There no other season for the lay out of most of these maps
Upvote
0
Anyone who thinks the MP40 is better than the Ppsh-41 is nuts. 
I play Allies almost exclusively and I will take the Ppsh-41 over the MP-40 any day. And yes I have picked up and played with the MP40. I still prefer the good ol' Pawpawshaw.
I play Allies almost exclusively and I will take the Ppsh-41 over the MP-40 any day. And yes I have picked up and played with the MP40. I still prefer the good ol' Pawpawshaw.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
When joining a server I always as a courtesy, join the side that has least participants. 90% it's Russian, so I'm assuming most people are joining Axis because of the weapons and it's easier to win. I find it a bit easier on Axis which is why I'm happy to go Allied......
Upvote
0
Wrong. What loses matches is that the allied team is usually filled with people playing in a less cohesive manner, having no commander (or a bad one which is almost worse) and then people leave during the round and so it's like the Allied team is constantly being fed fresh raw recruits.
I believe it's a combination of weapons modelled as closely as possible to their real-world counterparts creating some percieved imbalance especially in those 1:1 encounters and a desire to create real-feeling ebb/flow on each map creating this asymmetry. I for one love it. I also believe these intentional game mechanics only serve to give the player more options while playing and keeps the game feeling fresh for longer.
For example, attacking with German side feels a lot different than attacking with the Russians, both of which feel different yet on different maps. Now start using different weapons and or tactics and you've got many different possible outcomes for each individual round played. In my opinion no FPS game-DEV can hope to do more and TWI have given this community a hell of a lot more for 39.99 than most (if not all) other FPS-DEVS give you for 59.99.
The bugs, performance issues and other niggling issues will be worked out. I have have faith in TWI (I just wish sometimes they'd communicate better but I guess one can't have everything
With every hour that passes that I'm playing this game I'm simply reminded more and more why the 39.99 spent on this game will end up being the best 39.99 spent by me on a game this year.
I'd be willing to bet in clan-play (where the teams are both staffed by comepetent players aspousing team-cohesion) you will see the battles going either way. It's more about the player and the rest of the team than the individual guns. RO and RO2 were never about those 1:1 encounters. Unfortunately most "pub-play" (thanks largely to other big-name FPS's) has become about 1:1 encounters. I sincerely hope TWI do nothing to artificially balance anything, at least until the clan-play area has had a chance to give them some decent feedback. Nothing should ever (especially in a game touting asymmetric balance) be "balanced" according to the whims of a pub player. Ever.
Upvote
0
Right...because only noobs play Allies...
Not at all what I was saying. Since the Germans are precieved as having better kit many "noob" players simply wait on the Russian team (that equals camping in a spot, trying not to die......essentially NOT really helping the team) until a spot on the German team opens up.
Now do you get what I was saying?
Upvote
0
Not at all what I was saying. Since the Germans are precieved as having better kit many "noob" players simply wait on the Russian team (that equals camping in a spot, trying not to die......essentially NOT really helping the team) until a spot on the German team opens up.
Now do you get what I was saying?
You've got everything figured out don't you.
Upvote
0
You've got everything figured out don't you.
Just like you eh?
EDIT:
Plus it doesn't escape me how you simply ignored the rest of my post, something I should have really done to your reply.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I'm not going to read all 5 pages, but I will say this hoping not to conflict with any other post.
During the beginning of the Battle of Stalingrad the Russians were being pushed back towards the Vulga river during the winter the Germans were weakened then by the end surrounded. Battles that take place earlier (in game would be autumn maps) were meant to be won by Germans maps the take place later (in game would be winter) would be meant to be won by Russians. Yes the maps may be one sided but you have to work harder to change history!
During the beginning of the Battle of Stalingrad the Russians were being pushed back towards the Vulga river during the winter the Germans were weakened then by the end surrounded. Battles that take place earlier (in game would be autumn maps) were meant to be won by Germans maps the take place later (in game would be winter) would be meant to be won by Russians. Yes the maps may be one sided but you have to work harder to change history!
Upvote
0
Just like you eh?
I don't think I was the one who claimed that allied players cower in fear just waiting for a spot on the german team to open.
again, I don't get where you think that these behaviors are exclusive to those apparent morons who play Russian. (We all know Germans have "better kit" and not one single server has seen a ****tard on the Nazi team)
Upvote
0
Funny how SS-Fannies pick up the only easy map to the argument. I have tho couple of times won this map on krauts side, but it's challenging.
Other maps are not challenging for krauts (when I play, feels very noobish with so many kills), so I am playing on Allies side.
So vote for more balanced maps from me too, so I can enjoy playing on SS side too...
Hah. Well said indeed.
Upvote
0
i would be ok with maps being biased to one team or the other, if they would simply swap sides for players, so that russians defend once on the map and then attack for the other.
That would be optimal balance, and would also be more fun.
The other unbalanced thing about the game is that from what i have noticed, The attacking team always has massive amounts more teampoints at the end of the matches, in the case of a tie, the win goes to the team that was attacking because they from what i seen have 500-1000 more team points. Its never even close.
The attacking team spends more time in both points attack and defending than the defending team does. skewing the team point totals way favorably into the attacking team.
That would be optimal balance, and would also be more fun.
The other unbalanced thing about the game is that from what i have noticed, The attacking team always has massive amounts more teampoints at the end of the matches, in the case of a tie, the win goes to the team that was attacking because they from what i seen have 500-1000 more team points. Its never even close.
The attacking team spends more time in both points attack and defending than the defending team does. skewing the team point totals way favorably into the attacking team.
Upvote
0
Like the winter Commissars House map where the Germans get to spawn camp all game?
Or Pavlovs house where history was actually against the Germans...but they can still spawn camp...
?
Upvote
0
Hey I didn't say the maps we're made right I'm saying how the maps should play out... historically... unless my knowledge of the battle isn't as accurate as I'd like it to be and there was some major back and forth action.
Upvote
0