Well that stream was... *sigh*

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 for the clarification peter

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...

I don't understand what people expected from stream:

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

Answers? 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

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

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!

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.

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!

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.

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

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.

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.

Show Spoiler

best thing ive read all night +1

Show Spoiler

Barton's question

Show Spoiler

text

maybe you should just stream the text next time. it's harder for issues to happen

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.

Still, why do you ban people for asking questions?

YES! They are looking into it!

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

That's what I wanted to hear, Thank you.

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

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