Ballancing Suggestions -1 reply

Please wait...

ottozeimer

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

28th September 2008

0 Uploads

47 Posts

0 Threads

#1 11 years ago

Hi, I always get these small issues that get under my nerves.

1. Crete. This map has tons of AAs and none of them is mountable by axis. Why axis cant mount the same AA Britons do? the game is off balance when 3 AAs from the airfield are pounding every hill surrounding them. If Britons can mount German Flaks, on every map, please include possibility of mounting Bofors, when playing axis on Crete. Current state is neither historically correct, nor helps the game play.

2. Tobruk - great map, but even when axis possess 6 flags and allies only 1, the ticket bleed is not happening. - Make Brits bleed.

3. Alam Halfa (probably badly spelled) - great map, again, but often when axis control the 2nd line western flag (in the valley) the British crusader keeps spawning.

4. And the last balancing suggestion - the Sidi Razegh (or whatever) is way too complicated and too hard to play axis. - at first, Brits attack against a small detachment of anti tank guns (2flaks 18 + 3 pak 50mm) and have minor ticket bleed + huge bonus to tickets. After Brits capture the flags (inevitable except if Brits are complete morons and never use artillery), axis have an immense ticket bleed until they cap all the flags. Please bear in mind that when Axis have to counter attack there are much more anti tank guns placed (+3 two pounders) + every former axis gun + 5 tanks in the 3 flag sector). That is exactly twice the amount the Brits had faced. Don't you think that this is over the top? in the end I have to take pzIII or IV and camp infantry spawn points, because there are too many anti tank shooting positions.

Thanks




Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#2 11 years ago

on 1) are you talking about crete-1941 here...?

Axis dont need to mount AA as there are no brit planes.




ottozeimer

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

28th September 2008

0 Uploads

47 Posts

0 Threads

#3 11 years ago

The point is that AA is just as effective anti personnel gun. Much more effective than those cans of the wheels - Vickers. So if you let axis mount machineguns, let them mount this uber infantry killer too.




GoldFingero

Swedish spy

50 XP

15th June 2008

0 Uploads

155 Posts

0 Threads

#4 11 years ago

1. Anti-tank guns = Uber bofors killer.;) So, now is the first problem fixed.




Uberhauptstormfuhrer

Dread pwns me!

50 XP

17th August 2006

0 Uploads

459 Posts

0 Threads

#5 11 years ago

1. I would keep it the way it is now, because otherway(?) everyone keeps spamming the bofors and ruins this beautiful map. Right now its not that bad. However for the amount of flak that is on this map, i would suggest to increase the number of stuka's and 109 (say one stuka and one 109) and let a sniper rifle spawn where the matilda spawns.

2. I don't agree, right now the brits mostly loose. So keep the bleed for axis when the 1ste line is not entirely captured and give the matilda's when the first line falls.

3. no comment

4. i agree with this, if axis loose all three positions, the bleed on axis side is unfair. It should end when 2 out of 4 flags are captured. And the 88's should also be locked for the allies.




Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#6 11 years ago

ottozeimer. the problem you adress is not that axis can't mount the AAs, the problem is that the allies can use it against groundtroops....

So, a better solution than yours is to block the view for the AA so it cant shoot groundtroops..

It is axis job to secure the flagzones and destroy the AAs.. that's the objective of the map, when you have taken the flags as an axis, the job is done... if the AAs are removed or blocked too much, the point of the map disappears.... get the picture? Its hard because it was hard as hell for the axis paratroopers to attack crete. The AAs represent that difficulcy.

Happy?




ottozeimer

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

28th September 2008

0 Uploads

47 Posts

0 Threads

#7 11 years ago

I am happy on not mounting the AA as long as they cant kill infatry on every corner of the map




Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#8 11 years ago

But on the other hand, the satisfaction of capturing one of those flags and blow the AA to hell is much higher than on a normal map! :D




SERG

50 XP

20th August 2008

0 Uploads

37 Posts

0 Threads

#9 11 years ago

As far as FH2 is more tactical game, it will be better to let axis capture and use such veapons as AA's and AT's because it's actually an open vehicles, not like tanks.




Panzergrenadier Karl

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

8th May 2005

0 Uploads

31 Posts

0 Threads

#10 11 years ago

Point 1: Crete was always, even in FH 1 unbalanced. I dont get why the devĀ“s never tried to alter the map back in FH 1 and its just the same for FH2.

If you are on the axis side you lose in 90% of the matches. Its just too hard to take 3 or 4 flags to stop the bleed and to keep em save + conquer 1 or 2 more for the allied bleed.

The bofors is in FH 2 just ridiculous powerful. Even more than in FH1. Half the amount would be enough for the allies.

Point 4: Sidi Rezegh need more german tanks or fewer allied tanks or a ticketchange. I agree with you. Its basically the same as on crete right now. An MG 34 for a LMG class could help also.

To stay fair there are other maps that favours the axis. Just as if the devs could say: Look at Mareth line, Tobruk (the germans rock on that map even with no ticketbleed for the allies) and Aberdeen (i know it got fixed with the Grant gun but nontheless) Axis are always winning there.

just my 2 cents :smokin:

P.S. Dont bet they change anything because we rant about it. We did in the past and they dont listen, evil evil devs.