Login

russian armor

Well that stream was... *sigh*

PAGES (13)down
Only Relic postRelic 18 Jan 2015, 01:18 AM
#161
avatar of pqumsieh
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 267 | Subs: 8

In hindsight, playing and trying to do a QA likely was not the best idea. It was very difficult to answer questions meaningfully and play the game itself. I figure its worth clarifying a few points incase they weren't clearly communicated in the stream itself.

Regardings Volksgrenadiers and the Shrek, we recognized this as an issue. However, we noted that the removal of this weapon would likely have adverse effects on the factions performance. As such, we are working towards a solution which minimizes this adverse effect while resolving the tactical breakdown this strategy has created.

Regarding the Pack Howitzer, I did not understand the question when it was first stated. The point relating to its target size is fair, its definitely something we can look into.

Regarding RNG, there are definitely cases where RNG has resulted in a negative experience for players. In cases where counterplay is maintained, we feel RNG works well to create a positive environment. In instances where counterplay is non-existant, we feel RNG's impact on the game can come across as arbitrary and is worth addressing at some point in the future. One example related to stray shells wiping a squad, this is definitely an area we want to improve on.

Regarding Panzergrenadiers, it was noted that they are over performing relative to their cost. But, given their timing their overall performance is limited. Basically, if the unit was fielded at the 0 minute mark it would likely be viewed as an over performer, its not and therefore its performance is considered to be on par or slightly below par. That is all that comment was meant to point out.

Regarding the call-in meta, it was noted that we recognize the cost efficiency of call-ins and their impact to the meta. However, we feel that a solution to call-ins cannot occur until we remove the reliance Soviet players have on these units. This likely means some changes to make Soviet core units more appealing/viable.

Hope this clarifies some of the point we sought to make in the cast. We will definitely consider going with a separate QA section next time.

PS. The point about the Sherman Bulldozer was meant to be some light humour.
18 Jan 2015, 01:22 AM
#162
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

thank you for the clarification peter
18 Jan 2015, 01:26 AM
#163
avatar of sir muffin

Posts: 531

wow, now i feel satisfied that the developer acknowlaged some problems, and i feel a lot more robust mentally, i might not even shitpost on coh2.org anymore

could relic be learning PR? surely not...
18 Jan 2015, 01:28 AM
#164
avatar of BabaRoga

Posts: 829

I don't understand what people expected from stream:

Information? :facepalm: Do you ever get any information from stream? No, why expect any at all.

Answers? :lolol: You know you are only getting answers to questions that don't have negative implications on quality of COH2. Why bother asking at all?

Expecting that your insightful view on state of the game will suddenly make Relic devs realize their beliefs and views are wrong? They have same strong belief that their way is the right way as you feel strongly about your views. Don't bother typing

Expecting good balanced E-sport game to be priority? I think Relic has made it perfectly clear that that isn't what they want the game to be. Single player campaign and cool units and abilities with nasty super strong tanks that can troll everything in comp stomps is where the money is...
If they have time and resources, sure they will have a look at balance and MP.

Have problem with NDA? Then voice your displeasure and stop watching streams until they loosen NDA. If enough people do that, then Relic might do something about it.

I Have no problem with streams because I don't watch useless 'we are excited about cool new stuff but cannot give you any info" Why would I watch it.

I still have faith that things will turn around :jk:



18 Jan 2015, 01:32 AM
#165
avatar of spam.r33k

Posts: 503

In hindsight, playing and trying to do a QA likely was not the best idea. It was very difficult to answer questions meaningfully and play the game itself. I figure its worth clarifying a few points incase they weren't clearly communicated in the stream itself.

Regardings Volksgrenadiers and the Shrek, we recognized this as an issue. However, we noted that the removal of this weapon would likely have adverse effects on the factions performance. As such, we are working towards a solution which minimizes this adverse effect while resolving the tactical breakdown this strategy has created.

Regarding the Pack Howitzer, I did not understand the question when it was first stated. The point relating to its target size is fair, its definitely something we can look into.

Regarding RNG, there are definitely cases where RNG has resulted in a negative experience for players. In cases where counterplay is maintained, we feel RNG works well to create a positive environment. In instances where counterplay is non-existant, we feel RNG's impact on the game can come across as arbitrary and is worth addressing at some point in the future. One example related to stray shells wiping a squad, this is definitely an area we want to improve on.

Regarding Panzergrenadiers, it was noted that they are over performing relative to their cost. But, given their timing their overall performance is limited. Basically, if the unit was fielded at the 0 minute mark it would likely be viewed as an over performer, its not and therefore its performance is considered to be on par or slightly below par. That is all that comment was meant to point out.

Regarding the call-in meta, it was noted that we recognize the cost efficiency of call-ins and their impact to the meta. However, we feel that a solution to call-ins cannot occur until we remove the reliance Soviet players have on these units. This likely means some changes to make Soviet core units more appealing/viable.

Hope this clarifies some of the point we sought to make in the cast. We will definitely consider going with a separate QA section next time.

PS. The point about the Sherman Bulldozer was meant to be some light humour.


+1

i might actually change my signature now :D
18 Jan 2015, 01:37 AM
#166
avatar of B.Lastbar

Posts: 41

Thank you for the answer, pqumsieh, it shows that you do care about us and the game. Let us hope 2015 brings the best for Coh2!
18 Jan 2015, 01:48 AM
#167
avatar of Jinseual

Posts: 598



Regarding the call-in meta, it was noted that we recognize the cost efficiency of call-ins and their impact to the meta. However, we feel that a solution to call-ins cannot occur until we remove the reliance Soviet players have on these units. This likely means some changes to make Soviet core units more appealing/viable.



Does this also mean you are considering changing the teching organization of the Soviets? That would be very welcome since the Soviet teching system is very unsatisfactory at the moment.

I believe early game vehicles should be moved to later tiers or moved to commanders because currently Americans don't have an answer to skilled kubelwagen usage and the Ostheer don't have an answer to skilled M3 cars until both factions moved towards the next tier which they normally lose map control before that happens and these units can easily be abused. Something needs to be done about this at least in vCoH the jeep and schrimmwagen are easily damaged and have low dps so they couldn't kite a whole army while inflicting heavy damage.
18 Jan 2015, 01:49 AM
#168
avatar of Mortar
Donator 22

Posts: 559

Thanks Peter. This one post was worth more than the entire chat from yesterday. Don't stop communicating with us here or on Twitch. Good things will come of it!
18 Jan 2015, 01:57 AM
#169
avatar of Jackiebrown

Posts: 657

In hindsight, playing and trying to do a QA likely was not the best idea. It was very difficult to answer questions meaningfully and play the game itself. I figure its worth clarifying a few points incase they weren't clearly communicated in the stream itself.

Regardings Volksgrenadiers and the Shrek, we recognized this as an issue. However, we noted that the removal of this weapon would likely have adverse effects on the factions performance. As such, we are working towards a solution which minimizes this adverse effect while resolving the tactical breakdown this strategy has created.

Regarding the Pack Howitzer, I did not understand the question when it was first stated. The point relating to its target size is fair, its definitely something we can look into.

Regarding RNG, there are definitely cases where RNG has resulted in a negative experience for players. In cases where counterplay is maintained, we feel RNG works well to create a positive environment. In instances where counterplay is non-existant, we feel RNG's impact on the game can come across as arbitrary and is worth addressing at some point in the future. One example related to stray shells wiping a squad, this is definitely an area we want to improve on.

Regarding Panzergrenadiers, it was noted that they are over performing relative to their cost. But, given their timing their overall performance is limited. Basically, if the unit was fielded at the 0 minute mark it would likely be viewed as an over performer, its not and therefore its performance is considered to be on par or slightly below par. That is all that comment was meant to point out.

Regarding the call-in meta, it was noted that we recognize the cost efficiency of call-ins and their impact to the meta. However, we feel that a solution to call-ins cannot occur until we remove the reliance Soviet players have on these units. This likely means some changes to make Soviet core units more appealing/viable.

Hope this clarifies some of the point we sought to make in the cast. We will definitely consider going with a separate QA section next time.

PS. The point about the Sherman Bulldozer was meant to be some light humour.
Thank you Peter, because when you said the joke about the Sherman Bulldozer it blew my mind lol.
18 Jan 2015, 02:00 AM
#170
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned


PS. The point about the Sherman Bulldozer was meant to be some light humour.


Not funny.

I (for one) have been begging for a USF heavy
18 Jan 2015, 02:24 AM
#171
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1664

Oh thank you PQ for going back and figuring out what the Pack howitzer questions meant. This is one of my favorite units and it's severely hampered by this bug/over-sight.
18 Jan 2015, 03:29 AM
#172
avatar of Enkidu

Posts: 351

Thank you for that response PQ. That's exactly the kind of info I've been dying for. It doesn't need to be overly specific but just some insight into what you guys are looking at goes a long way.
18 Jan 2015, 04:41 AM
#173
avatar of morten1

Posts: 368










best thing ive read all night +1



Barton's question


18 Jan 2015, 04:44 AM
#174
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

text


maybe you should just stream the text next time. it's harder for issues to happen
18 Jan 2015, 05:24 AM
#175
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jan 2015, 07:56 AMwuff
NDA is standard for video game developers.

Like it or lump it, they cannot talk about anything that has not been flagged.

So if PQ or whomever won't answer questions it is because they don't want to lose their job.


sadly this is true, very true. :(
18 Jan 2015, 07:58 AM
#176
avatar of voyager

Posts: 70

Still, why do you ban people for asking questions?
18 Jan 2015, 08:24 AM
#177
avatar of Stafkeh
Patrion 14

Posts: 1006

YES! They are looking into it! :snfCHVGame:
18 Jan 2015, 08:34 AM
#178
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

We will definitely consider going with a separate QA section next time.



That's what I wanted to hear, Thank you.
18 Jan 2015, 09:01 AM
#179
avatar of Para

Posts: 103

that stream was a slap in the face to everyone who cares about the game, it's 2015, they dodged questions by saying they can't talk about them when the reality is they probably have no idea about what they're going to do. as a guy who's only been in this community for a few months even i feel insulted.


+1
18 Jan 2015, 10:19 AM
#180
avatar of Chigurh

Posts: 12

James Hale? Are you the bloke who is / was possibly the worst moderator in the history of the Internet?


Broke my chair laughing, thanks Wombat, made my day
PAGES (13)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

879 users are online: 879 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49087
Welcome our newest member, samudrabet808
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM