I agree with this, the hard counter of heavy air over melee is just too strong, yet i would like to see a nerf of magic dmg to heavy armor to 150% dmg instead of 100% as you suggest, otherwise the opposite will happen aswell. In addition normal dmg could benefit of a 150% dmg to light armor (almost all air units) , so that they can dmg better ensared /webbed air.
But sadly i’m sure classic team doesn’t have the knowledge nor the experience to balance team gameplay, they re already doing an awful job in 1v1 scenario already.
In addition i agree with @SouL guy: im massing blindly rifles and gyros with a tanky tavern hero (Pitlord/alchy) in almost everygame and can’t deny im doing much better than when i was trying to go for complicated/not worth strategies like AM+casters. In every game there are at least 1 UD massing wyrms, and also a lot of elfs seem to like mono hipporaiders right click armies aswell.
4vs4 is already a mixed bag, thats why people plays it. In solo, you pretty much have to use the same strategies as pros if you want to be competitive. In 4vs4, you can use all sorts of strategies and still be successful. Thats what makes the gamemode so fun, and thats why people plays it.
With your extremely limited game knowledge, and your narrow mind, it would be a joke to say that you understand the game to its fullest.
If you tech straight to mass air in 90% of your games like a noob, and your opponents are hitting you hard midgame with higher level heroes and stronger units, you are going to lose most of your games.
I dont think you would be able to survive in a situtation like that, so unless you are EXTREMELY lucky with your team mates carriying you, or your opponents are really, really bad, then something in your story doesnt add up.
Quirkyturtle…lol! Keep on being a mouth breather my friend.
Defenders advantage, it’s in every RTS and can work wonders for you. Ofcourse i imagine you are the kind of player i can beat with me feet so i dont even know why i entertain you. If you would like to test your metal, let me know.
What people have been trying to tell you several times by now is that if you tech straight mass air like a noob, you will lose most of your games. Your awful strategy doesnt work against semi-competent opponents. But you seem to be somewhat in denial.
And what i am telling you turtle, i can tech with you KNOWING i am teching and you cant win.
Prove me wrong in a real game.
Funny that we got rank 1 with me straight teching to air. Playing against people who are far better than you…yet its impossible. I guess we got lucky 36 games in a row.
The difference here is i and several others on this thread are offering opinions of value while people like quirkyturle spouts nonsense. Sadly i imagine the claasic team has a hard time figuring out what is what.
i used to play 4v4 RT when host bots were alive all the time, it was my only casual w3 gaming. 250games, 70%winrate.
And i dont agree that air is the only way to go in 4v4. It is easily counterable and we won many games by countering air regardles of skill level of allies/enemies. I dont see meta problem.
However what is significantly stronger in 4v4 RT is siege dmg and building harras due to thenature of 4v4 random team where coordination is harder. If you have 1 ally who is going bats, chims or tanks (tanks after nerf are ok i think) and “split pushing” bases win ratio is quite high.
I don’t think many of you read the entire post. I go on to say how easy it is to counter and beat mass air. That does not take away from the fact that you see it, every, single, game.
HOWEVER, when we get a new shipment of noobs for the slaughter house when reforged is launched, we will see many of them quickly leave because of how poorly 4v4 is balanced. Basically, 50% players will be CRUSHING noobs, getting them to follow the same rhetoric of “blizzard sucks”.
If blizzard does not do something to make 4v4 more micro-intensive over mass intensive, they are missing a major opportunity to make the game better than it already is.
I know the concept of having balance changes just for the 4v4 gametype is almost heresy for some reason, but it NEEDS TO BE DONE.
Well, most of us read your post, its just that you are completely clueless about this game, and what we are telling you is not what you want to hear, thats why you have issues accepting it.
Bro its the truth lol. I dont think im the best in the world but there is a very high chance no one here is on my level.
Thats how its always been. Usually good players don’t post to much, but sometimes they do. Thats why im not 100% but if i were a betting man, it would be a bet i would take.
When mediocre to bad players flood the forums, blizzard gets the
wrong kind of feedback.
Its just a game, i dont care how bad or good you are, but if you are bad, and you say things that just are not true, even though you believe they are, it still does not make them true.
And in this case of 4v4 balance, you and 1 or 2 more are DEAD WRONG…while others on this thread genuinly get it.
you must be in a low level if every game is won by mass air
in high level 4v4 RT, every game has at least one player ready with gyros and/or bats or otherwise anti-air specific (every UD is fiends, but hawks/hippos/gargs see some usage), and at that point air is immediately worthless. Orcs transition into hard air counter so easily that its never safe when they’re in a game. Meanwhile maybe 75%+ of players go mass ranged units, ie archers/fiends/hh/rifles. And they absolutely shred air armies. You can assemble an 80 food deathball of wyrms if you want, you cannot attack into a ranged army and you die instantly when a ball of gyros sneeze on you
Air still has an important place in 4v4 and people go it often, but the reason is because the mobility and collision pathing warp 4v4 balance. Ranged units scale into team fights while melee units don’t because of the limited engagement space, so mass ranged units easily beat mass melee units despite the armor/damage type advantages. Meanwhile air armies can hit and run and destroy bases and simply outmaneuver ground armies. A HU+UD ground army of rifles/casters with fiends will just obliterate an army of HU+NE gyros+chims because even with splash damage your chims are vulnerable to slow/polymorph/web and at a type disadvantage, but those gyros/chims can just fly around tree lines destroying mains all day long and even mass towers won’t fend them off.
The result is that air isn’t overpowered in fors. Melee however is incredibly underpowered. There’s a healthy balance of strategies of light air, heavy air, ranged, casters and siege. But any time you see someone say knights/aboms/tauren/bears, you know they’re going to be a useless lump all game.
Drayen is right that heavy melee units are bad in general and especially in fors, and it might even make sense for a cap on bat splash- although that might make gyros oppressive.
Yep. Mass air is so hard countered its not even funny. Bats, gyros with flag canons, mass gargs with vampiric aura, regular hippos, etc. You need to be versatile to be successful in 4s.
Two people agruing in chat, then one says “1v1?” to prove they’re right. They create a custom lobby and suddenly the whole chat gathers to spectate while keeping the sh*t talk on.
I agree with OP. Too many games are decided with mass air or countering air. Late game needs more diversity. Magic damage on heavy armor and hero armor needs to be lower.
You’re shooting fish in a barrel and complaining it isn’t challenging enough, all while bragging how good you are at it.
TBH it sounds like a MMR problem compunded by the lack of a competitive 4v4 community. If you’re #1 and still matched with noobs massing air, then you’re shooting fish in a barrel when the real duels are happening in the 1v1 scene.
In the context of this thread… You want to make Shooting fish in a Barrel more competitive because you’re so good at it.
4v4 is WC3’s version of $$BGH$$. People know it’s not balanced and play it for the purpose of massing tons of units with little care for counterstrats.
you could change the numbers for 4v4 only and radically improve heavy ground melee units and they’d still be worthless. The best thing they can do is be anti-building siege like tanks that try to overwhelm static defense and ignore attacking units, and uh, tanks already do that. As long as heavy ground units are vulnerable to spells and air and easily kited yet can’t apply their dps in crowded engagements, then you could double the hp, damage & armor of abominations and they’d still be bad at combat, you’d just make them overpowered at bumrushing buildings. And you could tweak the game to make heavy melee better at killing buildings with some kind of upgrade or whatever- but would you want to? Its degenerate enough with tanks even if its not terrible successful in 4s.
Heavy melee just doesn’t fill a good niche in this game in 1v1 and is awful in 4v4. I don’t think you can change that so simply as tweaking numbers or armor type %. An army of Tauren lose against an army of rifles + casters even though they already have huge advantage in both base stats & damage/armor types, because they just get slowed/polymorphed and kited, dependent on their own vulnerable casters/raiders to land any hits, even with 2x scroll of speed. But when the number of units is so large that they physically cannot occupy the space to attack the ranged units, its not even close. And that’s besides an army of chims blowing them up instantly.
The only thing we need to change in 4vs4 is tanks. They are still too good for what they cost, they had rockets buffed and they still destroy your buildings easily.
