• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
You consider play time a metric for balance understanding, not me. I mean, look at the FM mod, they even removed a coalition because it was too broken.
I mean did EUGEN put some ground-breaking units in the game that was a bit imbalanced, sure. Was 10-man Maglan imba, sure it was, was it good enough to guarantee an Israeli win, hell no.
 
I mean did EUGEN put some ground-breaking units in the game that was a bit imbalanced, sure. Was 10-man Maglan imba, sure it was, was it good enough to guarantee an Israeli win, hell no.
PTW doesn't actually mean that you always win, if you got the paid good. It means that when two perfectry equal players fight, paid superiority overcomes ingame random in most cases. It can be even worse, when it allows clearly less skilled player to win for money, or even horrible, where monkey with money wins against a decent player.
As i do think, WRD is from the first option - jews are a faction that can resolve a tie in your favor, but if you got some advantage, it won't be wasted that easily.
 
Last edited:
Actually you implied the very opposite about two posts above ...

If it makes you feel better I even implied that it was not designed as p2w but probably just rushed.

I mean did EUGEN put some ground-breaking units in the game that was a bit imbalanced, sure. Was 10-man Maglan imba, sure it was, was it good enough to guarantee an Israeli win, hell no.

Maybe your definition of P2W is different from mine but afaik the consensus is you pay to get an advantage. And that's how it is. But you if you consider P2W, pay to get a straight victory then ok they are not P2W.
Btw the problem, IMO, is not that faction X has a unit similar to faction Y but 10% better. The problem is some new units, due to the stats or the price, removes a lot fun from the game.

Do you really want to drag this on?
 
But what will we do without a proper panic button?. Will we need to actually prepare intelligent defensive lines and mobile reserves intead of air spamming? A big part of the wargame community will have to l2p again :D
 
Maybe your definition of P2W is different from mine but afaik the consensus is you pay to get an advantage. And that's how it is. But you if you consider P2W, pay to get a straight wictory then ok they are not P2W.
Btw the problem, IMO, is not that faction X has a unit similar to faction Y but 10% better. The problem is some new units, due to the stats or the price, removes a lot fun from the game.

Do you really want to drag this on?


sure making false claim and telling people to calm down when getting challenged.
do whatever you want man.
looks like WRD is getting DDOS again since last night.
now I can't even play the game.
 
Guys, play nice ;).
If you want to address issues one on one do it in a PM thread, not here. Stay on topic or this will end up getting locked.
 
He just stated that he's got enough experience to judge the game. As for me anyone with above 200hrs played has right to not only express opinion but to have it being listened to.

That's absurd logic.

I've seen 10v10 only players come into 1v1 Ranked balance discussions all the time and give preposterous suggestions. Context is paramount.

For me, if I see a well-argued point with excellent logic and reasoning, I don't care how many hours in the game you have. Hours in the title is a good experience gauge (and even so, players can just AFK with the client on), but strictly not an indicator of intelligence or skill.
 
Yeah, airstrikes will probably be a lot less deadly. More reliable but less powerful. AA will be there to make them shaken and reducing accuracy, thus protecting your dudes.
That's one of the great things about WW2 CAS, unlike the late cold war's standoff PGM fest a WW2 CAS aircraft had to get down low into the range of rapid fire light AA just to locate, let alone accurately engage ground targets. I think it's going to heavily reduce reliance on aircraft as a primary unit removal tool
 
LOL, what? Wargame is a cult classic of its own, arguably with better legacy than World in Conflict. Even failed experiments - like navy combat f.e., are the results of devs trying to do a NEW stuff instead of keeping the same formula all the time. And how exacly Paradox may suffer from that? They published already few games with arguable quality and they are still here.

I think they should keep that reassuring resilience of playerbase in mind and not try to reinvent the wheel with this game, from the articles and scarce information so far it seems like a promisingly simplified version of wargame set in WW2, holding out hope that they just stick to wargame's historical strengths and the examples of what worked from previous expansions.