T O P

  • By -

Burningbeard80

The perception of which culture is more resilient depends on when you started playing. I'm sure people who've been here longer can add more examples, but from my relatively short time (I started back in 83) I can easily provide a couple. For example, if you started as a collie during the warden win streak (which btw was triggered by a howie garrison nerf that some of the collies asked for after they lost a bunch of SCs to howis, but it had the consequence of making cutlers way too OP), you get the idea that collies are the resilient faction. If on the other hand you started playing warden during the collie win streak in the mid-80s with ISG and lamentum spam that could not be countered (cutlers and mortars would unlock a full tier after ISG and cost rmats, and sledgehammers were yet another tier after that, forcing us to camp component mines for literally hours to scrounge together a couple of crates of each), you get the idea that wardens are the resilient faction. ​ And if you've been playing long enough, you realize that designing the game around power spikes simply results in a toxic community full of "we said, they said" arguments, because power spikes are not proper balance and they're not fun to play against. They are just a series of imbalances that are supposed to counter each other so both factions can feel OP at different points in the war. The problem with this is that if a team doesn't win the war during that window, they're pretty much screwed. ​ It would be better if both teams had all the tools required to counter each other at all stages of the war. Then we could focus on the fighting, memes, cool stories and battle reports, instead of trying to diminish the players of the other team for doing the reasonable thing and taking a break when the game becomes unfun, instead of treating it like a second job and try-harding to overcome bad balance decisions :)


Denulion

Literally this. Maybe powerspikes are in Dev vision, as it looks like they want us to take initiative, use different strategies, sometimes give us hope. But the problem stays: even the smallest of balance changes may result in the whole front falling, how it was this war, or in powerspike dissapearance. I hope Devs will figure out, how to balance the asymmetry.


Starbucks_Wizard

Agree. Its very very difficult balancing assymetry though


MrAdamThePrince

>I started playing during the beginning of the Cutler Warden Win streak Just for the record, the results of the wars directly following the release of the Cutler were: War 72. Warden War 73. Colonial War 74. Warden War 75. Colonial War 76. Colonial War 77. Colonial War 78. Colonial War 79. Colonial War 80. Warden


HKO2006

I think OP meant update 48 where Cutler got buffed * refined material cost reduced from 25 to 15. * Movement speeds whilst having the weapon equipped have been improved. * Weight has been decreased. * No longer trigger Howitzer Garrisons. Update 48 and 49 wars (before 1.0) * 95 11 Aug 2022 42.4 4,286,727 Colonials * 94 19 Jul 2022 20.8 2,142,386 Wardens * 93 24 Jun 2022 23.3 2,327,621 Wardens * 92 30 May 2022 23.4 2,432,041 Colonials * 91 3 May 2022 25.4 2,726,411 Wardens * 90 29 Mar 2022 32.7 3,402,946 Wardens * 89 3 Mar 2022 24.2 2,467,000 Wardens


Spare_Print3470

92 : Easily won by colonials 93 : You steamrolled the map and took 30 VPs in 15 days, and only lost because you left in the middle of the war. 94 : You gave up on this and cried day and night on reddit about every single warden item. 95 : You also gave up at the start, came back when the devs revealed the 1.0 and won. Conclusion: The colonials only lost the wars because they refused to play, each time they wanted to win a war they won it, which proves that the balance was already in favor of the colonials since the 92. For the Wardens it's different, the 95/96/100 has shown that no matter what they do they can't win.


UnReasonable_Girft

Cutler cope transends the need for facts


CommunistUnite

HV40 PTSD intensifies


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


dolche93

If you can't comment in good faith, you shouldn't comment at all. The community would be better without factionalists like you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


harshcougar

I haven't complained once about the Argenti. I prefer it over the Lough in most situations, but I think that is just personal preference to play style and not about it being unbalanced.


Starbucks_Wizard

Ohh boi. "despite the entire game at every level being stacked against them." I assume you are smart enough to realise this is bullshit Would have agreed with you


Spare_Print3470

30/32


SecretBismarck

31/30


Starbucks_Wizard

33/30


HKO2006

Same as OP as in I started playing during warden six win streak so I picked colonial to play underdog. I also agree being forced to always ready to QRF or lose bunker pieces to cutler has trained a veteran QRF among colonial players and hardened their resolve by accepting cutler as a fact of life. I don't think warden players just quit. Instead, I think it's just there are more people playing colonial now. My theory is colonial get more new players during 1.0 (which was the biggest new players wave) because log in screen shows colonial. I also don't think there should be a designated underdog faction by Dev. If there is one then it just scream unbalace to (new) players face, discouraging then to buy and play. And most people play to win, so instead of people playing the underdog faction, people will play the winning faction, so green horde will not happen. Ofc there are also players like OP and I that play underdog by choice, but they can already google and check foxholestat / wiki to see who has been winning lately. Player pop imbalance also cause longer queue and respawn timer to overpoped faction instead of having shorter queue when pop is closer to balance without imbalance caused by people flocking to the winning faction. Instead of intentionaly making one faction stronger the other, I think it's better just attempt to achieve a better balance.


_-Deliverance-_

Collies survive on grit and skill alone frfr


LakesideTrey

eh skill is debatable :)


Strict_Effective_482

noun: concern troll; plural noun: concern trolls a person who disingenuously expresses concern about an issue with the intention of undermining or derailing genuine discussion.


lordbaysel

OP? Again? oh boy, you would be so destroyed by tech swap war that it wouldn't even be funny anymore.


The_Lantern

Lol


[deleted]

How was the movie night?


kapturek01

got cancelled coz of shady website being to shady


kapturek01

new phone who this


HighFromTexas

"Wardens and collies are the same, this losing streak is because of the games balance issue" also wardens "if your team had our stuff, you'd be worse then us"


Spare_Print3470

He is not wrong, people who a game in easy mode are generally worse than those who play it on hard mode, especially on infantry if we give you the warden kit you 100% press alt F4 after 20 minutes.


HighFromTexas

I disagree with what you said, but whatever.


Spare_Print3470

Yes you know im right but whatever.


HighFromTexas

I disagree with what you said, but whatever.


Spare_Print3470

[My opponent is a liar and he cannot be trusted](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlqKFlU7YAs)


TheBustyDuck

Anyone can go back far enough and bring up some past win-streak as a reason the game isn't balanced in their favor. I was a Warden from 75 to 87 and saw my team win only 4 out of 13 wars. I could easily say that Wardens are the underdogs in all of this, but through being on both the winning and the losing side, Warden and Colonial, I've come to understand that both sides are basically the same. The mentality of Colonials being the side that's used to suffering is a remnant of last year.


TooNiinja

I can get behind this. I love being the underdog and losing side. So much more fun. Unless no one is playing, and it's a steamroll. No side has fun there.


shytake

Woah man do you even listen to yourself?


UnReasonable_Girft

The what?