Day9 streaming COH

Some streams have nothing to do with the game but more about the person who plays them. Some people are attached to the streamer and their personally, the show, his comments or knowledge. vCOH or COH2 had nothing to do with the 3.5k viewers in this case.

Another example is this guy:

http://www.twitch.tv/dansgaming

No mater what game he plays, he will get 5 to 10k viewers


EDIT:

While looking through his highlights, I thought this was pretty funny:

[twitch=dansgaming]chapter_id=4440374[/twitch]

What a fool...

Hard to tell if Day9 liked it as a whole or not, it was obvious he felt a little overwhelmed most of the time, but I think he liked that excitement in multiplayer.

I need to re-watch his "wrap-up" because it seemed like he had a really hard time putting what he thought into words. Honestly I think his brain was just turned into scrambled eggs while he was playing.

pretty much, it seemed like it was sooooo different to what he was used to that he could barely even wrap his head around it haha

My overall impression was that he enjoyed the game for its cinematic qualities and its attention to detail. The artillery, the gun-facing, reload animations, or even just grenades were very immersive and the action on screen had a chaotic feel. The tanks exploding or men ragdoll-dying had a lot of weight to it, and compared to SC2, much more intense.

On the other hand, CoH being so dramatically different structurally than the traditional RTS, coupled with Relic or tutorial's non-straightforwardness in how the game dynamics worked, meant that he was often confused with many of the elements. (Take this with a grain of salt - he sucked at Amnesia!) For example, he was thoroughly confused with upkeep, because it was simply never explained in the tutorial or any of the tooltips! Then, even the roles of units, the unit matchups, or even weapons upgrades or abilities were not always apparent or readily digestible. In SC or SC2 where it is a game of hard numbers, something like the BAR "increases DPS and the rate which Riflemen gain veterancy" means very little. Sean had a bit of difficulty understanding what it did, because the description was very vague. It's impossible, from an outsider/newbie's point of view, to gauge the cost-effectiveness of such an upgrade. What if it were Neosteel frame, which nobody got? You'd be wasting resources.

Then there's the unit dynamics or matchups, which were never explained. In SC2 all units could damage other units (except cloak), even if they did so badly (queens off creep). In CoH, infantry that do not have AT weapons deal zero damage to vehicles. This is realistically logical, but not readily apparent in game. The Greyhound, you wouldn't understand the need to upgrade skirts because the vehicle would literally get one-shotted by a PaK, unless you were already into the game, read a few guides, and poked around with the stats. A new player would also not understand its 37mm gun would fail to penetrate the bigger tanks. The tutorial teaches you about rear armor and the need to flank, but never really goes in-depth of the tech progression of infantry - light vehicles - tanks where the latter almost always crushes the former.

All in all, I feel he enjoyed the game and had lots of fun, but could not understand the reason why things happened, or why X unit sucked or Y unit was good, or why he was winning or losing. That confusion put a dampener in what otherwise would be an enjoyable afternoon.

Show Spoiler

I'm fairly certain this is why the COH2 playerbase is smaller than it could be Relic is good at designing unique and interesting games but not so good at explaining how they work to the players, they should work on that

Stream was great though!

You are right tengen. The tutorial is a inadequate. There are many things it wont tell you. I don´t play SC so i can´t compare the situation but CoH is poorly documented.I Never understand why exact numbers are hidden and you got just a vague description.

It's a problem with CoH1 and CoH2. The in game documentation is pretty vague which makes it hard for new people to learn the game, the only way to get good is just to play loads with a big slice of trial and error.

Then when you look at the in game stats there are so many parameters it can be very intimidating. Here's the M1 Garand as an example, look under raw stats. Yes it's the CoH2 version but both games share the same parameters with regards to small arms weapons.

The tutorial already teaches you alot in small steps. Its actually well made. However it stops too soon.
Day9 reviews alot of games, so i doubt he is gonna play coh on a regular base.
Im happy though he played coh1 and not its ugly step brother.

It's a problem with CoH1 and CoH2. The in game documentation is pretty vague which makes it hard for new people to learn the game, the only way to get good is just to play loads with a big slice of trial and error.

Then when you look at the in game stats there are so many parameters it can be very intimidating. Here's the M1 Garand as an example, look under raw stats. Yes it's the CoH2 version but both games share the same parameters with regards to small arms weapons.

True. The Question is how can Relic improve the tutorial and how can we as a community help the new people? I tried to set up a CoH1 Tutorial but it´s really hard (what do you when explain?) and it´s a lot of work as well.

It made me smile when Day9 started the 4 v 4 and asked what a Pershing was. At that moment, I had visions of certain spittle flecked posters from this board, gripping their pitchforks and attacking their monitors.

Yeah we didn't get much info from the start of the game but ...
The problem with this documentation is: COH is pretty darn complex (a beautiful kind of complex though. Players might get confused about all that information thrown into their face, before they even start playing the game. (Especially single player players don't require all this info.)

Once you get into multiplayer it becomes relevant. (But how many GR guides didn't a person read before he understood something more about the game?)
Isn't there a fun/exciting factor learning all this information how the game works and how complex it is?


Day 9 used a lot of mortars in that 4v4, which obviously failed despite his best efforts: The mortar just doesn't pack that punch you'd expect it would. And he talked about windup animations: which is probably the worst (longest) on the mortar. I think there is where he lost a bit of motivation. That and: The lack of green cover usage to draw mg fire in the single player campaign. xD The not upgrading the Greyhound. Greyhounds only perform with their upgrades: a lot of new players just don't know this.

There is actually no rts where it's enough to play tutorial to play the game, the tutorial is prepared to give you enough abilities to play the first mission of the campaign, then you learn step by step in every single mission and after all you play some comp stomps and do that one big step to dive into multi, it's designed that way and it works that way. Coh and Coh2 are not exeptions of course but I have never seen an rts with different learning system. It's just not enough to go through tutorial.