RO2 I think i know how TWI can fix axis stack problem.

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

aaz777

Active member
Jun 30, 2013
1,840
3
38
Russia, Pushkin
Today i played war thunder first time for probably 7 months, And i was very surprised by mixed nations even in realistic/simulation modes. I asked my friend why did they do this, and he answered that it was done because no one played on german vehicles, and this happened because german vehicles were very unfairly and unrealistically nerfed.

And then i realizied that this method will perfectly work for RO2 too.
Seriously, ro2 has an axis teamstack that happens at least on some servers. I didnt play vanila ro2 for probably year or 2, except some testing, but i know it from this forum. And really, mixed nations will perfectly solve the axis teamstack because there wont be a need to have strongly germans vs soviets, so germans will fight with germans.
 

Raven1986

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 24, 2014
1,067
9
0
Sounds like Call of Duty's Deathmatch mode. I hated the fact that whether you joined Axis or Allies you'd waste your "team mates". Sounds a bit like anarchy.
I may have mentioned it before, some of my countrymen, I wouldn't care if they are dead but there are many good Germans (Turkish who live here are Germans too in my eyes) also.

I experience that Axis are often winning but I tell you why. First if you grabbed the offensive once you want to keep it. Meaning you vote for easy maps. Maps like Appartments cannot be won by the defenders in +90% of times played.
Bleeding out the enemy once you cornered them by choosing to defend. Here you do something risky though as your opponent could choose a map that is easy to attack and you might lose the battle. Yet people often choose the wrong maps to attack. After bleeding your enemy they are unable to make an attack for long and even if you lose an attack round you just go back in there and try a second time.
If maps were placed differently the campaign could be different. Over at 40-1 we are currently discussing how a new scaled campaign could look like. Maps in the Allied territories are often played whilst others located to the North are played quite rarely.

The next thing is weapons. If people believe the MG42 is a sexy weapon, let them. I choose the MG34 again, the MG42 is an eye catcher, particularly for enemies. So if weapons were restricted to teams and mappers could decide over exceptions it would work out nicely.

Yes, RO mod and Ostfront's saw the same ridiculous whining how allies are favored. Well, I'd say it is normal that Germans run around with German weapons and Soviets with Soviet ones. The PPSh was in German use but only until when ammunition was no longer captured. Why carry a gun which needs ammunition that is not produced by your country?
Pictures from Germans armed with PPSh are from 1941, '42 and '43, the time when they were conquering production facilities and still held them.
A Soviet MG gunner with an MG34 is not very fitting. How would he get the ammo for it? He'd be in constant peril to find German ammo crates as his army would and could not provide him with the ammo.

Second great idea, I recall from browsing the forums for this issue is: unequal amounts of SMG classes and also increase the amount of Allied players. Why not make 70 players? That is 6 more for Allies.
However Soviet assault class would become the most endangered species, any German with a bolt would try to get one of the PPSh.
Germans keep their LMG's and Soviets get like 6-8 assault slots per map.
If the Soviets then would be so stupid to let their SMG's fall into enemy hands, the Germans would end up with 75% of them armed with PPSh'z. If this is the case Germans deserve the victory more than ever before.
 

morticore

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 13, 2012
643
5
0
Łęczyca, Poland
In War Thunder we have 5 nations with planes and only 3 with tanks (Russia, US, Germany). I am only playing Ground Forces

For Arcade Battles both teams have random tanks (every team have tanks of 3 countries determined by players choise).

For Realitic Battles in the past was no problem - just Germany vs Russia
Now player have chance to take part in battles:
Germany vs Russia
US vs Russia
US vs Germany
and mixed
US and Germany vs Russia (because German guns are seriously nerfed/certain Russian armor have more bugs etc... :rolleyes: )
Germany vs US and Russia
As far as I know there is no Germany and Russia vs US...
Everything is made by matchmaking, player don't have influence on enemy team nation.

I don't know that mixed teams are existing in Simulator Battles.
I am also not sure how could we add to RO2. We already have Heroes running with enemy firearms :cool:
 

Kleist

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 3, 2009
2,034
333
0
Deutschland
Today i played war thunder first time for probably 7 months, And i was very surprised by mixed nations even in realistic/simulation modes. I asked my friend why did they do this, and he answered that it was done because no one played on german vehicles, and this happened because german vehicles were very unfairly and unrealistically nerfed.

And then i realizied that this method will perfectly work for RO2 too.
Seriously, ro2 has an axis teamstack that happens at least on some servers. I didnt play vanila ro2 for probably year or 2, except some testing, but i know it from this forum. And really, mixed nations will perfectly solve the axis teamstack because there wont be a need to have strongly germans vs soviets, so germans will fight with germans.

Haha nice joke :D (or? :eek:)


But it
 

PsychoPigeon

Grizzled Veteran
Mar 11, 2006
1,303
392
83
In Unreal
You can learn some things from this forum, learning about the actual truth about imbalance isn't one of them. Look at the Rakowice thread, you have hardcore committed people saying it's so imbalanced it's so terrible, then others say it's fine.

Also, does anyone notice a change in attitude regarding RO2 compared with RO1? When playing RO1 it never seemed to be about 'winning' but just fighting, in RO2 people rage if they lose more than 2 rounds in a row, like they're entitled to win and the result is people using the term imbalance.
 
Last edited:

=GG= Mr Moe

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 16, 2006
9,791
890
0
56
Newton, NJ
Also, does anyone notice a change in attitude regarding RO2 compared with RO1? When playing RO1 it never seemed to be about 'winning' but just fighting, in RO2 people rage if they lose more than 2 rounds in a row, like they're entitled to win and the result is people using the term imbalance.

Yes yes yes!
 

Kleist

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 3, 2009
2,034
333
0
Deutschland
Full agree with Pigoen,

I think one of the reasons for this problem is the unlock, level, progression system.

In old games Like RO1, SuddenStrike etc. The people just play to have some fun. No matter if they loose or win at the end.

And the second reason is player have changed... in the "good old days" people join a game to play it to the end. Today people join a game and rage quit if anything isn
 

OttoFIN

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 14, 2014
26
0
0
Quote from my Steam RO2 review:
"Balance:
Shut up, its all about the teams."


Sorry if anyone found that offensive, it was meant as "its funny because its true"-joke.
 

CptFoley101

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 18, 2012
390
1
0
Sofia,Bulgaria
Also, does anyone notice a change in attitude regarding RO2 compared with RO1? When playing RO1 it never seemed to be about 'winning' but just fighting, in RO2 people rage if they lose more than 2 rounds in a row, like they're entitled to win and the result is people using the term imbalance.
Thats because of the unlocking system.You know - losing means no/fewer points towards progression.
 

Cwivey

Grizzled Veteran
Sep 14, 2011
2,963
118
63
In the hills! (of England)
Thats because of the unlocking system.You know - losing means no/fewer points towards progression.

Losing means about 10 less points. Which is equal to what, a single kill in an objective of an enemy in the objective. So I don't think its about the points at all.

Thy Pigeon said most of what I was about to type about feelings of entitlement. But following on; if people think something is inherently unfair (E.G TeamStack, Guns or Map Layout) then darn right they're going to be at least somewhat upset, they feel like they've been robbed of at least a decent chance of winning or enjoying an even handed match where they can get some good game-play going, without the permadeath of dying moments after respawning.


Myself, I tend to play to win but enjoy the actual playing so along the way, so longs as I feel that things are fairly even handed and we're not getting stomped. I will b**** and moan in a server the second I feel like something unfair happened though, but will reduce the rage when it comes to typing something on the forums. :p
 
Last edited:

Jank

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 6, 2007
1,188
8
0
Redwood City, CA, USA
I just can't see mixed teams... what, would some germans be in feldgrau and some in pink or something? How would you tell the difference when you have to identify enemies by sight, unlike War Thunder?


It's already much harder in this game to identify friend&foe, I can only imagine how difficult it would be if we had Russians or Germans on both sides...
 

Jean_Luc_Picard

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 7, 2014
254
0
0
The PPSh was in German use but only until when ammunition was no longer captured. Why carry a gun which needs ammunition that is not produced by your country?
The Germans didn't have to capture ammunition from the PPSh as 7.63x25 Mauser works just as good as 7.62x25 Tok. The latter was designed from the former. Fun fact: the reason why the short barrel Mauser "Broomhandle" were called Bolos because the Bolsheviks used them so much.

Pictures from Germans armed with PPSh are from 1941, '42 and '43, the time when they were conquering production facilities and still held them.
After '43 the Germans were on the defensive and weren't capturing guns as much as before and the ones in German hands fall apart from lack of spare parts or their owners get killed.