"The Division Bell" update is now available!

[Gilmund]

2 hrs after patch release, I couldn't get a 10v10 game in Australia evening time.

I'm of the view that 'next game', there has to be a dedicated 10v10 mode, with its' own balancing and choice of maps...make it legitimate as a game mode.

Except there was just before this patch a dedicated 40min 10vs10 mode people still liked to play. It was there. You canno't expect delete 10min of play in this mode and not expect people to be disappointed.
Do delete 10 minutes in 1vs1 and other teamplay games without any overhaul whatsoever, we'll see if people isn't screaming.
It's plain simple, now you have exactly the same decks as in other modes but you canno't bring the same amount of units in 10vs10 cause your game finishes ten minutes early than the other ones. What the hell is that ? Is the 10vs10 player definitely considered by Eugen an underated player which shouldn't have the overall time the others have ? Just say it and get done with it.

 

[Think Tanker]

Looks like a fantastic patch and I will be interested to see how it plays out. Word of wisdom, I'd suggest we all do the same before we start complaining or arguing about something based upon numbers rather than actual experience. At the very least let us make informed criticism.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Really nice to see that you have finally decreased the price of the overpriced Shermans (M4A3s and Sherman Vs), as well as some of the other tanks. I can't wait to try it out!

 

[roirraw]

Can we get some response as to whats going on with 10v10s and the time limit issue? It sure would be nice to use half the battle groups in the game again, and that's not even an overstatement. My community is clearing out because of this and while we might only be about 15 people, that's 15 players this game needs right now.

 

[EUG_MadMat]

Fixing some mistakes with the 15th Scottish's changes.

 

[Bubblebox]

'Can we get some response as to whats going on with 10v10s and the time limit issue?'
+1

Hotfix please, I used to get online and play 3 or 4 10v10 games in a row and it was great fun. Now I will play one game (if one is available), get disappointed, and log off.

On a positive note the rest of the update, moving towards balancing the game somewhat was great but we now need to be able to use all of the units again.

Just ask yourself what people where talking about when the game was first announced. These where:
1) What is the release date (ignore this one)
2) Will there be Tigers, What will the Konigstiger be like, How will the German armour play?
Now we cannot even use many of the units in 10v10, and if we can it is just for 5 mins.

Please make the game FUN again, FUN is even more important than balance for most players imo. It is FUN to use the Konigstiger AND it is FUN to play as the allies and use your air-force to try to destroy these beasts.

I love your games Eugen please make it fun to play 10v10 again and lets get this game back on track.

PS: Just put some of the servers at 40 & 50 mins whilst leaving others at 30 mins as an experiment to see which people prefer and to give us some choice. Surely this would be do-able in the short-term.

 

[Eug_garnet]

Hi guys,

Based on the feedback we had, we have just made a server maintenance. 10v10 is now back to 40 minutes. We're considering other ideas to make this game mode fairer. We'll keep you posted.

 

[Bubblebox]

Hi guys,

Based on the feedback we had, we have just made a server maintenance. 10v10 is now back to 40 minutes. We're considering other ideas to make this game mode fairer. We'll keep you posted.

Nice, thanks

 

[roirraw]

Thank you. This is a big deal for us who love this game mode and it means a lot that you guys actually listen to us in any amount. Thank you again.

 

[Gilmund]

Big thanks, you're great!

 

[Gilmund]

All in all, I'm ok with the 30 min time reduction for it's a good step towards killing 10v10 and bringing back players to actual real game (from 1v1 to 4v4) where things are balanced.

Lolilol. There is actual real game and 10vs10 game which is not "actual real game" obviously. Interesting, you'll have to explain it to me. Wait, don't bother!
I've spoken enough about 10vs10 in other posts but your message is another selfish message from a person expecting to be able to play only its way. Do not speak about community then, just speak about you.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Hi guys,

Based on the feedback we had, we have just made a server maintenance. 10v10 is now back to 40 minutes. We're considering other ideas to make this game mode fairer. We'll keep you posted.

You could always reduce the KT availability. Not like Lehr and 21st need more than 2 KTs in normal games anyways. They are the main reason why 10v10 is so unbalanced.

 

[Gilmund]

You could always reduce the KT availability. Not like Lehr and 21st need more than 2 KTs in normal games anyways. They are the main reason why 10v10 is so unbalanced.

Not really, KT are nothing when constantly under bombs, as other panzers. You may of course ambush them when they are panicked. The opposite side just say the exact same thing about plane trains or multiple allied deadly offmap.
KT and panzers are mostly unbalanced in phase C destruction and you really canno't do everything about it, as phase C from german armor decks are the best native killer vehicles from the game. But you don't think a entire game about one phase in one destruction mode.
In conquest mode, allies win 10vs10 if they play well, this is not perfect (it never is nor could be) but it's pretty much fine.
Until you've 10vs10 decks, 2vs2/3vs3/4vs4 decks and 1vs1 decks exclusively with their own costs, one change for a mode will always not be ok for another mode.
The removal of the SK18 from the 17thSS is probly due to its spam in 10v10, i guess. Try now 17thSS in teamplay, without any long range artillery, facing sextons, you'll see your pain with this deck.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Not really, KT are nothing when constantly under bombs, as other panzers. You may of course ambush them when they are panicked. The opposite side just say the exact same thing about plane trains or multiple allied deadly offmap.
KT and panzers are mostly unbalanced in phase C destruction and you really canno't do everything about it, as phase C from german armor decks are the best native killer vehicles from the game. But you don't think a entire game about one phase in one destruction mode.
In conquest mode, allies win 10vs10 if they play well, this is not perfect (it never is nor could be) but it's pretty much fine.
Until you've 10vs10 decks, 2vs2/3vs3/4vs4 decks and 1vs1 decks exclusively with their own costs, one change for a mode will always not be ok for another mode.
The removal of the SK18 from the 17thSS is probly due to its spam in 10v10, i guess. Try now 17thSS in teamplay, without any long range artillery, facing sextons, you'll see your pain with this deck.

That's a big if. The players on the German team have to be considerably worse to lose in 10v10. And when you have anything from 10 to 15 KTs on the field it doesn't matter if some of them are surpressed. You seem to be assuming that the Allies will enjoy air superiority, which is far from certain, and their tanks will also suffer from German air and artillery units. It was a while ago I played 10v10 now, but I have played over 50 games in it, and purchasing all of the KTs is a winning concept almost every time and will inflict both heavy losses upon the Allies and result in ground being taken. I don't think I have ever had a KPD worse than 4:1 playing as Lehr.

Either way, I would like to know how reducing the KTs to 2 (one in B and one in C) would change much for Lehr in normal 1v1-4v4 games? I rarely see more than 2 KTs, and when I do, the game is usually decided and the extra KTs have no impact on the outcome. I don't think that they should make decks exclusively for 10v10, but this is a change that they actually could do that would go a long way to help balance 10v10 without having any negative effect on normal games. They have already reduced the Jagdpanthers to make 10v10 more balanced, which was a good move, so I don't see why they shouldn't do the same with the KTs that are infact the main problem.

 

[Gilmund]

That's a big if. The players on the German team have to be considerably worse to lose in 10v10. And when you have anything from 10 to 15 KTs on the field it doesn't matter if some of them are surpressed. You seem to be assuming that the Allies will enjoy air superiority, which is far from certain, and their tanks will also suffer from German air and artillery units. It was a while ago I played 10v10 now, but I have played over 50 games in it, and purchasing all of the KTs is a winning concept almost every time and will inflict both heavy losses upon the Allies and result in ground being taken. I don't think I have ever had a KPD worse than 4:1 playing as Lehr.

Either way, I would like to know how reducing the KTs to 2 (one in B and one in C) would change much for Lehr in normal 1v1-4v4 games? I rarely see more than 2 KTs, and when I do, the game is usually decided and the extra KTs have no impact on the outcome. I don't think that they should make decks exclusively for 10v10, but this is a change that they actually could do that would go a long way to help balance 10v10 without having any negative effect on normal games. They have already reduced the Jagdpanthers to make 10v10 more balanced, which was a good move, so I don't see why they shouldn't do the same with the KTs that are infact the main problem.

Depends what you're talking about, in conquest mode it's pretty even but i do see indeed a lot of bad players in the allied side who lose their ground when they shouldn't, then who litteraly throw away their vehicles in front of at guns and panzers like candy.
You're exagerating a bit. 10 to 15 KT ? You kidding ? When ? In the last 5 minutes ? Means you've 5 or more 5 decks to have KT and they all are going for it. It is not that common. 10vs10 brings a a lot infantry decks and all the german armor players don't wait their KT, they bring their tiger and Befehl Panther to push their luck.
I play often lehr and i almost never bring 2 or 3 KT or it is the very end of the game and i'm against a sitting player or one IA since 20 minutes.

It is not KT which make you lose or win 10vs10, as you say the game is usually decided at the very end. It is mostly sitting ducks who makes you loose. In destruction mode, noone is pushing as noone wanna loose units and you canno't let an armor german player build his strenght. You've to harass him. That is why destruction mode is unbalanced for allied players. When you do harass players you loose unit and when you do not, you loose units (as the line doesn't matter a lehr may fall back and regroup).

But in conquest, it's all about delay, you don't have to kill german panzers, you have to delay their advance time enough after you've made a lot of points in phase A and B. A german player must clear forest and tree lines before advancing his panzers or he risks to fall on ambushed 17 pounder. Good players will wait the right range for their AT guns to fire. They'll throw infantry hidden in treelines, they'll smoke, panick tanks with arty.
I assure you i've played 10vs10 when allied players do these things and win the game, they have heavy losses but who cares, they fight for terrain. Usually they don't, they play conquest like it is destruction (and do not try to push) or destruction like it is conquest (and throw their unit away)...

 

[Hidden Gunman]

I find it amazing that a big part of the community here is actually made of 10v10 gamers. It explains a lot a things though. 10v10 is so different from the rest of the modes (1v1 to 4v4) that we basicly think we are talking about the same game, but we actually live in two different worlds.

I never play 10v10. Although on paper this sounded like a good idea, it's not what I expect from tactical RTS and it is often the place of rage-quits en masse. What'smore the player base in 10v10 is generally less experimented (so they pick 10v10 to have less responsability, which is fine) and make easy preys for grouped rushers or spammers.

All in all, I'm ok with the 30 min time reduction for it's a good step towards killing 10v10 and bringing back players to actual real game (from 1v1 to 4v4) where things are balanced. However, it's not a very diplomatic way of doing things (it's alredy too late). Those who want 10v10 will rather quit the game than play standard. Community has been way too much split because of all the different ways to play, while it would have benfited from a united core gameplay like in DOTA2, LOL, COH quickmatch, or Starcraft quickmatch or ranked.

It's still funny to play the game though. We're starting to meet good players and clans while all the people are gone, and the general gamer levels are increasing accordingly. We're just setting up games like I used to do back in the 2000s. Old school Mauve Heure Feu Coeur !

Could we get a campaign mode like in Red Dragon ?

I think you need to go change the lens in your rose-tinted glasses...

Contrary to the popular misconception of the 1v1 players, the drop off from the loss of 10v10 players was not reflected in an increase in the 1v1 player base.

Seriously man, posts like yours do nothing for the community in any positive manner, and in fact cause division.

For someone who admits they don't play 1v1, you have no entitlement to an opinion for the 10v10 game...go back to your elitist lair and stop trolling people.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Depends what you're talking about, in conquest mode it's pretty even but i do see indeed a lot of bad players in the allied side who lose their ground when they shouldn't, then who litteraly throw away their vehicles in front of at guns and panzers like candy.
You're exagerating a bit. 10 to 15 KT ? You kidding ? When ? In the last 5 minutes ? Means you've 5 or more 5 decks to have KT and they all are going for it. It is not that common. 10vs10 brings a a lot infantry decks and all the german armor players don't wait their KT, they bring their tiger and Befehl Panther to push their luck.
I play often lehr and i almost never bring 2 or 3 KT or it is the very end of the game and i'm against a sitting player or one IA since 20 minutes.

It is not KT which make you lose or win 10vs10, as you say the game is usually decided at the very end. It is mostly sitting ducks who makes you loose. In destruction mode, noone is pushing as noone wanna loose units and you canno't let an armor german player build his strenght. You've to harass him. That is why destruction mode is unbalanced for allied players. When you do harass players you loose unit and when you do not, you loose units (as the line doesn't matter a lehr may fall back and regroup).

But in conquest, it's all about delay, you don't have to kill german panzers, you have to delay their advance time enough after you've made a lot of points in phase A and B. A german player must clear forest and tree lines before advancing his panzers or he risks to fall on ambushed 17 pounder. Good players will wait the right range for their AT guns to fire. They'll throw infantry hidden in treelines, they'll smoke, panick tanks with arty.
I assure you i've played 10vs10 when allied players do these things and win the game, they have heavy losses but who cares, they fight for terrain. Usually they don't, they play conquest like it is destruction (and do not try to push) or destruction like it is conquest (and throw their unit away)...

I think 10-15 KTs throughout a 10v10 game is a conservative estimate, considering there are often 4-5 players using Lehr or 21st. Lehr has 4 KTs and 21st have 3. And to make myself clear, I'm talking Conquest; of my 280+ games, I have only played Destruction once. However, I should add that I have mainly played 10v10 on Colombelles. I'm sure Sword plays better because it's actually designed for 10v10.

In theory you can delay the KTs indefinitely by bombing them with artillery and planes, but in practice the average SD player is poor at micromanagement, and even if one player on the line manages to keep the KTs at bay, a player at another part of the line will fail to do so and all of his units will be slaughtered. Using KTs, on the other hand, doesn't require much micromanagement at all; you have to make sure that the front armor faces the enemy and that's it. I have seen total beginners rack up kills and do a good job using KTs.

 

[JC_von_Preussen]

I think you need to go change the lens in your rose-tinted glasses...

Contrary to the popular misconception of the 1v1 players, the drop off from the loss of 10v10 players was not reflected in an increase in the 1v1 player base.

Seriously man, posts like yours do nothing for the community in any positive manner, and in fact cause division.

For someone who admits they don't play 1v1, you have no entitlement to an opinion for the 10v10 game...go back to your elitist lair and stop trolling people.

Where does that quote comes from in the first place ? (it's been deleted without explana

I'm working for the community by impressing reverse psychology on Eugen. I tell them they're making a great job killing 10v10 and the same day they release a quick hotfix to put it back to life.

You should thank me, not school me.

I'll certainly be moderated this time too.

Adieu monde cruel !

 

[EUG_MadMat]

I'm working for the community by impressing reverse psychology on Eugen.

Just like our dear president: "Notre pensée est trop complexe" ...