Looking at the more competitive 1v1s and 2v2s, the current state of balance between all matchups is truly excellent. We are at 49-51% Win Rates for all factions in both modes.

One year after release, with the huge diversity in factions, units and battlegroups, a pretty amazing state to be in.

Thought I give a little thank you to Relic. One of the last companies sticking to their game no matter what. This commitment also made CoH2 from a hot pile of sausage at release to one of the best RTS ever created. 

<3

PS: Relic - I would love to reward you with buying your store empty, but you got to release more skins for that x)

Disagreed. You can't just base yourself on a faction winrate to conclude balance is excellent. This doesn't tell you how each side usually win too. The game still has a lot of units overperforming with others underperforming.

warwolf2029 wrote:

Overall, the game is balanced in 1vs1 and 2vs2, but some units are still overpowered and need reworking.

UNITS

1. Nebelwerfer: This unit is in artillery role but has no fuel cost and deals both impact and burn damage, which is higher than the flame bomber. It can even penetrate tanks, including the Black Prince. It can counter any defensive line or team weapon play in one barrage. (also can kill Arty emplacement in 1 barrage)

2. Ranger: This multipurpose infantry unit deals very high damage to anything when fully upgraded. They has a significant drawback early but no unit should be capable of both effective anti-infantry (AI) and anti-tank (AT) roles in the same build.

SYSTEM

1. Machine Guns (MGs): The setup and pickup time for MGs is too fast. Even if you flank them, they quickly turn to face your direction. This also allows them to evade mortars easily after hearing the mortar sound.

Rangers? You need good RNG to get good weapons. And on average, you need to spend around 1000 munitions to get the required build.
And if you mix AI and AT on one ranger squad. Then you're in a world of pain. Hence why most high elo games as axis are:
See rangers in enemy team? Rejoice. For the price you are paying. I'd say you are getting your money's worth. But are still reliant on RNG.

Nebel is also not OP. It's great, but hardly OP.

I find the nebel far too inconsistent, last game fired it 3 times at mg, all 18 rockets missed... it's scatter is so much it's just useless in my opinion... needs a slight accuracy increase.

Rangers still need a nerf, people make all sorts of points about their abilities but when so many players go the same build every game you know something up and it's always rangers for US and grants for Brit...

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

warwolf2029 wrote:

Overall, the game is balanced in 1vs1 and 2vs2, but some units are still overpowered and need reworking.

UNITS

1. Nebelwerfer: This unit is in artillery role but has no fuel cost and deals both impact and burn damage, which is higher than the flame bomber. It can even penetrate tanks, including the Black Prince. It can counter any defensive line or team weapon play in one barrage. (also can kill Arty emplacement in 1 barrage)

2. Ranger: This multipurpose infantry unit deals very high damage to anything when fully upgraded. They has a significant drawback early but no unit should be capable of both effective anti-infantry (AI) and anti-tank (AT) roles in the same build.

SYSTEM

1. Machine Guns (MGs): The setup and pickup time for MGs is too fast. Even if you flank them, they quickly turn to face your direction. This also allows them to evade mortars easily after hearing the mortar sound.

Rangers? You need good RNG to get good weapons. And on average, you need to spend around 1000 munitions to get the required build.
And if you mix AI and AT on one ranger squad. Then you're in a world of pain. Hence why most high elo games as axis are:
See rangers in enemy team? Rejoice. For the price you are paying. I'd say you are getting your money's worth. But are still reliant on RNG.

Nebel is also not OP. It's great, but hardly OP.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that Rangers aren't OP in general. They come with a lot of drawbacks in terms of economics.

However, in my opinion, the Nebelwerfer is OP, especially when compared with other units in the same role. The Nebelwerfer's impact damage is in the same range as other artillery, but it also has burn damage. The Nebelwerfer can excel in its primary role and can also be used to counter any artillery unit (one hit deals 60% damage to a Bishop). which is unfair.

Fatal_Thoughts wrote:

I find the nebel far too inconsistent, last game fired it 3 times at mg, all 18 rockets missed... it's scatter is so much it's just useless in my opinion... needs a slight accuracy increase.

Rangers still need a nerf, people make all sorts of points about their abilities but when so many players go the same build every game you know something up and it's always rangers for US and grants for Brit...

People go rangers because they are fun to play. And are great in lower ranks. Since people don't know how to counter it.

They have a great design for an infantry unit.

Extremely expensive. But also extremely strong. You get what you payed for, but you did pay a lot.

And the mechanized company is pretty weak ATM. E8 is nothing to write home about. And the combat engineers are quite weak overall. Mainly because of the TTK. A lot of CQC units are weaker then they are on paper, mainly because of that TTK.

And the special operations is mediocre. Advanced infantry is currently the only viable BG for US, and it's not hard to play. It would be great to see winrates dependent on the BG chosen.

It's a build that goes fully into infantry. Infantry support center is a must.

Considering the Nebel. I wouldn't call it OP. It's also RNG dependent. It's quite strong, but also quite vulnerable to pretty much anything. And the damage/burn is offset by the scatter.

I agree, I play all factions and I am happy with the state of the game atm, sure there is room for always improving, but I having been playing for a while, I consider COH3 to be at the right place now, I could never turn games around with DAK before, now I can. Or with Allies I am enjoying more and more what they can bring to the table and I tend to use upgrades I would have never considered a year ago, making my choices harder thus more interesting..

the 2v2 TOURNAMENT  have shown ally is OP, because same player, ally have much more winrate than axis.

warwolf2029 wrote:

It can even penetrate tanks, including the Black Prince. It can counter any defensive line or team weapon play in one barrage. (also can kill Arty emplacement in 1 barrage)

I keep hearing people say this, but based on my experience it seems kind of BS. A few games ago I fired at fairly close range at a sherman, multiple direct nebel hits seemed to barely scratch the paint, so idk where this "it can pen the black prince" is coming from

I self agree- it's much better now. Maybe some tweaks here and there but it's working good in 1v1. People who complain so much about 2v2 or 3v3 should first start playng 1v1. It's so annoyng when they start raging in game in 2v2 and 3v3 ...