Commanders - Squaring the Circle

Hi.

This is a long post, I will try to tl;dr at the end.

Reading the ongoing discussion concerning commanders, something occurred to me. This something might sound obvious to some of you, but it was slightly revelatory for this call-sign. What is it? I hear you ask with baited breath.

We are all arguing about three different games. There are a number of groups of people here playing this game differently but trying to figure out how to make everything the same. It's like trying to nail jello to a wall, or herd cats.

It's a circle, I'd argue, that can be squared...

Bear with me. These groups are interchangeable, folks can belong in any of them or some (or indeed all). But nonetheless they are playing different games.

Group the First. Many of you play solely 1 v 1. You are probably more focussed on the ladder, automatch and are either an above-average player or aim to be. Your knowledge of game meta and tactics is better than most and you have an instinctive feel for balance and whether a commander sucks. Furthermore, you are disproportionately and unfairly impacted by new commanders, as the 1v1 ecosystem / meta is more fragile.

The second posse are the 2 v 2 crowd. 2 v 2 hardcore players can be every bit as skilled as their 1v1 equivalents and find new synergies in playing with a partner. They are equally as affected by commanders, as the 2 v 2 meta can easily be impacted by a new unit or ability. However, I've made them a separate group as the way in which commanders impacts on the 2 v 2 dynamic is considerably different from 1 v 1 (for example in 1 v1 you choose shocks or guards... in 2 v 2 you can have both which makes for a totally different experience).

The last and probably biggest (and most quiet - they tend not to become hardcore community members) are 3 v 3 and 4 v 4 casuals or hardcore stompers / custom gamers. I sit in this category 80% of the time and get as much of an endorphin release from playing an exciting game as I do winning one. We are also the least impacted by commanders: A decent 4 v 4 Soviet team shrugs at a Tiger ace and can bat off a Windustry T70 rush (it's still annoying and needs fixing, it does not however make the entire-fucking-sky-fall-in). These gamers are ignored by the 'elite' but they buy DLC and fucking love new commanders. I play with these guys all the time. In many ways, they are supporting the elite players as a grass-roots customer base that pumps money into CoH2.

Furthermore, many of them in my anecdotal experience hardly ever play 1 v 1 or 2 v 2. I would love to see Steam metrics on this.

Now before I suggest a solution, let me give an example of how a large gaming company admitted a mistake and radically changed a mechanic that involved *money* paid on top of a base product. Because this is what I'm going to advocate shortly.

Diablo 3. I mentionedf this in another thread. Diablo 3 had the gold and real-money Auction House (AH). You could buy uber-gear for your toon. There are many comparisons with the AH and CoH2 commanders (even though a single player game, but it has a long-promised PvP arena too). In any case Blizzard (yes, fucking Blizzard) said "sorry guys, we implemented AH as an attempt to do something cool but it's adversely affecting the core meaning of the game - killing monsters and getting loot. We're killing it. Not changing it. GETTING RID OF IT). And you know what? People more or less got it and most of us on the Diablo community are looking forward to the AH-free future with an expansion out next month.

And I'm not even advocating getting rid of commanders.

Simply make them game-mode specific. So when you buy a commander it says "this commander is for 3v3 or 4v4" or "this commander is suitable for all game modes." You simply allow Tiger Ace in 3v3 and 4v4 but it won't appear in a 1v1 or 2v2 loadout. Everyone wins. Everyone. You could make even more fucking lazer-panzer commanders for the 4v4 crowd that will sell like hookers on navy day. And the 1v1 and 2v2 people won't be impacted on the ladder.

This is so straightforward it hurts.

Quinn, in the unlikely event you read this look up the Diablo 3 re-boot. And at the end of Q1 say, "You know, we still think commanders are great. But CoH2 is a deep, multi-layered franchise. So we've made the difficult, but ultimately healthy decision to restrict certain commanders to certain game styles. This will give Relic the power to tailor and develop even more exciting content that supports however you choose to play CoH2, from elite 1v1 to large casual games with friends... and to everything inbetween!"

tl;dr - restrict commanders by game mode - 1 v 1 / 2 v 2 and higher.

Thanks for reading.

BFW OUT.

Great idea!!! But this won't happen.
You are forgeting Blizzard makes shit tons of money from other sources so they are more flexible. Relic doesn't have any other game where they can get the funding from. So tough shit guy commanders will still be available in all modes

Good idea but won't happen. It's much cheaper to say "game is balanced towards 1v1" than have separate testing processes for different game sizes... unfortunately.

Good idea but won't happen. It's much cheaper to say "game is balanced towards 1v1" than have separate testing processes for different game sizes... unfortunately.

But that's the whole point - it's not balanced towards 1 v 1. In fact, 1 v 1 is the mode that gets *most* screwed under the current system.

But that's the whole point - it's not balanced towards 1 v 1. In fact, 1 v 1 is the mode that gets *most* screwed under the current system.

I agree that it's not balanced in 1v1 but I think it is balanced towards 1v1. I started playing CoH2 mainly in 3v3 and 4v4 and that has never been balanced, despite occasional lulls in 1v1 imbalance (the period immediately prior to the introduction of Windustry and Elite Troops).

I disagree that 1v1 gets most screwed - I would say that with 1 or 2 exceptions, 1v1 is the most balanced and as you increase the number of players, the small imbalances begin to show much more prominently. This is particularly true with respect to the superiority of German armour and P2W commanders.

Anyway, I like your suggestions and it's something that I have thought of myself previously so let's hope that my scepticism is unfounded.

Hi.

This is a long post, I will try to tl;dr at the end.

Reading the ongoing discussion concerning commanders, something occurred to me. This something might sound obvious to some of you, but it was slightly revelatory for this call-sign. What is it? I hear you ask with baited breath.

We are all arguing about three different games. There are a number of groups of people here playing this game differently but trying to figure out how to make everything the same. It's like trying to nail jello to a wall, or herd cats.

It's a circle, I'd argue, that can be squared...

Bear with me. These groups are interchangeable, folks can belong in any of them or some (or indeed all). But nonetheless they are playing different games.

Group the First. Many of you play solely 1 v 1. You are probably more focussed on the ladder, automatch and are either an above-average player or aim to be. Your knowledge of game meta and tactics is better than most and you have an instinctive feel for balance and whether a commander sucks. Furthermore, you are disproportionately and unfairly impacted by new commanders, as the 1v1 ecosystem / meta is more fragile.

The second posse are the 2 v 2 crowd. 2 v 2 hardcore players can be every bit as skilled as their 1v1 equivalents and find new synergies in playing with a partner. They are equally as affected by commanders, as the 2 v 2 meta can easily be impacted by a new unit or ability. However, I've made them a separate group as the way in which commanders impacts on the 2 v 2 dynamic is considerably different from 1 v 1 (for example in 1 v1 you choose shocks or guards... in 2 v 2 you can have both which makes for a totally different experience).

The last and probably biggest (and most quiet - they tend not to become hardcore community members) are 3 v 3 and 4 v 4 casuals or hardcore stompers / custom gamers. I sit in this category 80% of the time and get as much of an endorphin release from playing an exciting game as I do winning one. We are also the least impacted by commanders: A decent 4 v 4 Soviet team shrugs at a Tiger ace and can bat off a Windustry T70 rush (it's still annoying and needs fixing, it does not however make the entire-fucking-sky-fall-in). These gamers are ignored by the 'elite' but they buy DLC and fucking love new commanders. I play with these guys all the time. In many ways, they are supporting the elite players as a grass-roots customer base that pumps money into CoH2.

Furthermore, many of them in my anecdotal experience hardly ever play 1 v 1 or 2 v 2. I would love to see Steam metrics on this.

Now before I suggest a solution, let me give an example of how a large gaming company admitted a mistake and radically changed a mechanic that involved *money* paid on top of a base product. Because this is what I'm going to advocate shortly.

Diablo 3. I mentionedf this in another thread. Diablo 3 had the gold and real-money Auction House (AH). You could buy uber-gear for your toon. There are many comparisons with the AH and CoH2 commanders (even though a single player game, but it has a long-promised PvP arena too). In any case Blizzard (yes, fucking Blizzard) said "sorry guys, we implemented AH as an attempt to do something cool but it's adversely affecting the core meaning of the game - killing monsters and getting loot. We're killing it. Not changing it. GETTING RID OF IT). And you know what? People more or less got it and most of us on the Diablo community are looking forward to the AH-free future with an expansion out next month.

And I'm not even advocating getting rid of commanders.

Simply make them game-mode specific. So when you buy a commander it says "this commander is for 3v3 or 4v4" or "this commander is suitable for all game modes." You simply allow Tiger Ace in 3v3 and 4v4 but it won't appear in a 1v1 or 2v2 loadout. Everyone wins. Everyone. You could make even more fucking lazer-panzer commanders for the 4v4 crowd that will sell like hookers on navy day. And the 1v1 and 2v2 people won't be impacted on the ladder.

This is so straightforward it hurts.

Quinn, in the unlikely event you read this look up the Diablo 3 re-boot. And at the end of Q1 say, "You know, we still think commanders are great. But CoH2 is a deep, multi-layered franchise. So we've made the difficult, but ultimately healthy decision to restrict certain commanders to certain game styles. This will give Relic the power to tailor and develop even more exciting content that supports however you choose to play CoH2, from elite 1v1 to large casual games with friends... and to everything inbetween!"

tl;dr - restrict commanders by game mode - 1 v 1 / 2 v 2 and higher.

Thanks for reading.

BFW OUT.

Ever hear the saying that makes too much sense? Great idea that would require too much work from Relic. I mean they still havent fixed the Phrase from T3 that says your getting "Medium Armor and Rocket Artillery".

Too much work for them will never happen.

Ill say it again though. Really good idea.

So basically creating a game within a game?
Won't happen.

^ It's exactly the same game. Just some commanders are locked out of loadouts depending on the number of players. Dammit, my loadouts are already marked '1 V 1 loadout' '2 v 2' loadout and so on.

Changing game dynamics directly on top of expanding on players.

A game within a game.

We have to go deeper.

A possible solution that most think wont be implemented. Cause, what Paranoia said.

This is essentially what Sepha and others suggested in THAT other thread.

I don't like the idea of splitting the community into classes of players. vCOH never had that. Sure a lot of team game players didn't do 1v1 or 2v2, but there were a lot who did.

I guess I'm one of the few who enjoys all modes, I just don't want to see it happen.

What we need...is a well-designed game that scales well as you add players instead of creating imbalances.

Where does it split the community?

And, given the current state of it, what community is there to split?

This community is in rag order.

We all play the same games. Commanders are like golf clubs - for some games you play the nine iron, for others you use the putter.

Though I like the idea, I too fear that it could split the community even more, and that COH2 would be torn between having to further adjust to these totally different playergroups.

Personally, I think some of the problem is that the factions has been stripped of several abilities that the vCOH factions had, that they later added to commanders. This whole approach of adding depth through commanders decreases the depth of each induvidual game, as youre ultimately given less tools to work with each game.

Ideally, I would love to see a rework of the whole commandersystem, and a move away from the DLC approach commanderwise. Seeing as this is hughly unlikely, I dont see there is much other choice but to try to balance the commanders we have, and release as few as possible in the future.

great idea - won't happen.
Indeed, game modes are so different that commanders just not fit every game.

i don't think this is a good idea both on a buisness level and a consumer level.

So... if you can't or won't balance a commander properly, you sell it to the 4v4 plebs?

Imagine there is a new Ostheer commander coming out next day, with Fallschirmjäger, Hetzer, Jagdpanther, Tiger II and one other unit you always wanted to have in the game. The holy grail of commanders. It is overpowered as ever (at least for a good couple of months) and only available in 4v4.

What a mess. Obviously 4v4 players that didn't buy it will complain, and every other person that prefers other gamemodes is enviously disappointed, me included.


On the other spectrum, why would you let a 1v1 commander not be available to other gamemodes? Is it too e-sports and not spammy enough for their needs?


My point is, make balanced commanders or don't. If the tiger ace or soviet industry was released with even an iota of balance understanding from the beginning (like it is after the new patch, hopefully), everyone profits.

^ You do realise that you might have only half a dozen commanders that didn't fit across the *whole* game, right?