Supply - in-game currency

i do not understand ppl defending relic preemptively when talking about balancing 3v3+ (4v4 primarily). and it isn't as drastic as reinventing a wheel, balancing 3v3+. relic hasn't even tried half-arsely and i think it is at least partly due to these preemptive relic defenders when it comes to 3v3+ balance. its not like the ppl don't have good points but let relic try at least ffs.

i.e. they nerfed opel blitz truck in a way it has no impact on sacred 1v1 mode, and balanced 2v2+ where opel blitz+ caches allowed germans to shit resources out of their ass.

if you play 3v3+ quite regularly, it is blatant, almost offensive how obvious some game breaking shits are.

next step should be making caches only affect one player in 3v3+ or just disable that shit. there are 10 normal resource points and 8 freakin players ffs.

anyway. can't wait for this supply thingy. got me hyped a little.

It might be a little bit off-topic but:

The easiest way to balance 3s and 4s is to create another game settings for them (i.e 3v3 and 4v4 mods) with different incomes, units costs etc. QDuffy said that "it might be a good idea but he is not sure about the outcome". Well, I'm sure about the outcome. Again, I know you can't compare CoH2 with DoTA, LoL etc, BUT all those games have different settings for different game types. LoL in particular, you have less starting money, can't buy some items and it seemed like they were actually changing each champion for different game types (I have not played it for like 1.5 year).

So a mod which changes the unit cost, income and the performance of some units would totally balance 3s and 4s, and it's not hard work. If relic is willing to balance "The most played game mode" they can easily discuss this option and change the game setting in larger games.

Sorry for going off-topic.

You can't have seen game not yet on the market....

Boxing was invented long ago, and they were people saying that not other sport or team sport could be as interesting or evenly possible... later other sports came... like they will in E-sport. History is repeating itself... Common...Stop saying nonsense.

Don't try to go throuh the tangent. I ask you something simple. Since we are talking about the competitive and all the things around, please name me RTS games focused on teamgames who had success on the competitive scene.

-CoH caster have already said that it's a nightmare to try to cast a 4v4 since it's too chaotic.
-Show me how many 4v4 tournaments were made for CoH2 in comparison to other formats.

CoH might become a popular competitive teamgame, on a distant future, with "lots of casters, tournaments and players", but it's not going to be CoH2 on it's actual state.

i do not understand ppl defending relic preemptively when talking about balancing 3v3+ (4v4 primarily). and it isn't as drastic as reinventing a wheel, balancing 3v3+. relic hasn't even tried half-arsely and i think it is at least partly due to these preemptive relic defenders when it comes to 3v3+ balance. its not like the ppl don't have good points but let relic try at least ffs.

i.e. they nerfed opel blitz truck in a way it has no impact on sacred 1v1 mode, and balanced 2v2+ where opel blitz+ caches allowed germans to shit resources out of their ass.

if you play 3v3+ quite regularly, it is blatant, almost offensive how obvious some game breaking shits are.

next step should be making caches only affect one player in 3v3+ or just disable that shit. there are 10 normal resource points and 8 freakin players ffs.

First, for the game to be balanced, it needs another different patch (and they said on the past they weren't going to make 2 different balance modes).
Second, while you can fix economy inflation, you can't change the fact the way how 3v3+ is played makes some things completely imbalanced by simple the amount of units on screen and the number of abilities being able to be cast.

This lead to something simple: if they can't balance 1v1, how do you expect them to create another setting for different unit performance and cost for 3v3+

...
First, for the game to be balanced, it needs another different patch (and they said on the past they weren't going to make 2 different balance modes).
Second, while you can fix economy inflation, you can't change the fact the way how 3v3+ is played makes some things completely imbalanced by simple the amount of units on screen and the number of abilities being able to be cast.

This lead to something simple: if they can't balance 1v1, how do you expect them to create another setting for different unit performance and cost for 3v3+

i am aware of relic's capabilities. i remember it took them half a year+ to nerf opel blitz and there were months when 4v4 players had 4 maps to play on for months. and that new vielsam map is just wtf. right half of it doesn't even look finished ffs.

i am also aware 1v1 would be easier to balance and probably good for the game in terms of pure longevity and some cred in terms of esport status of the franchise.

i have problem with these ppl who say 3v3+ is impossible to balance therefore don't even give it a look etc etc. that is a rubbish attitude that just shits on most of the playerbase who probably generated more money for relic so they can do patches and shit for sacred 1v1 players.

there is never going to be a time when 1v1 players are going to go "oh well, 1v1 is fairly balanced, why don't you fix 3v3+ now?" and i accept that. but to go as far as shielding relic from 3v3+ balance concerns even before they even tried is just wtf (not in this thread and not even from you specifically but from what i read on coh2.org last year and half).


on topic kinda: so will supply and other things be implemented before MWNL2? or after? looks like relic wants to add a lot of new stuff and there are still big balance problems with unfixed bugs.

Repair? Like Warspoils and Commanders and Skins?

WTF is this now, World of Tanks ripoff?

Best course of action right now would be to abandon coh2 entirely and start building coh3 from the scratch with all the neat features like obs mode available from the get go. Make it free to play for all I care, as long as things like faction design and commanders are better thought out. In my dreams I guess.

Except they will just make a half-decent port-over and spend the next three years after patching it. Building a new game from scratch with the same crew and same problems yield the same results, especially if it's just a sequel.

I agree with Inverse: if the system doesn't irk anyone then no one would bother paying more than they already hve. Relic has no interest in making that system work like that. The system has to either favour the consumer or the producer. It is not possible to just benefit both, because the interests of both parties are entirely opposite: one wants your money, the other doesn't want. There is no compromise. In that regard why the hell would Relic want to give us that information to jump ship? It makes total business sense to do anything but, and that includes not telling you the truth. What's the point of coming up with this nonsense if not entirely for profit? Did they base this on research on what the community wants? lol Id like to see that document with my own eyes.

If there is no demand there are two things businesses do: fail or manufacture it. In this case, there is no demand if they provide supply that is not necessary. So they have to manufacture it. And they do that by limiting access to what you can get.

I don't care if the predicted outcome becomes reality: the idea sucks for me and for a lot of people and is not meant to benefit me at all. Whether or not we're just all under false hype is irrelevant on that point. If Relic already knows good for them and don't even think about it.

@ pigsoup - the force is strong in this one.

As others have said, a resource tweak (especially fuel) for 3 v 3 and 4 v 4, slowing the game down, is all that's needed. It also, at a stroke, corrects the USF = high micro / OKW = low micro imbalance.

Like, duh.

@ pigsoup - the force is strong in this one.

As others have said, a resource tweak (especially fuel) for 3 v 3 and 4 v 4, slowing the game down, is all that's needed. It also, at a stroke, corrects the USF = high micro / OKW = low micro imbalance.

Like, duh.

Not as easy as it sounds. This makes clowncars run rampage without counters and call ins even more attractive in comparison to tech.
Changes have to be done but on a huge scale.

Team game format is the future of COH2, its where (with cpu stomp) the player base is. The numbers speak for themselves.

I'm pretty sure Relic/Sega know that and that will make the moves that are the most rewarding for them.

Fear of change is a powerful thing, powerful enough to make people sweating just by thinking that they may need to adapt when their favorite game evolve. Powerful enough to make them say a lot of emotional assertions disguised as facts.... But it's not them who speak it's only the fear of change.

But fear not, rather embrace changes. You will keep your leadership and still be a few steps ahead of those who haven't yet.

Long live to COH2, the king of all team RTS game !

Is it a language barrier thing maybe? Because you're using a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.

A closed mind won't see anything even if it's 3 inches away and under bright light.

I'm not here to convince you, i'm just trying to refute all the fallacious argumentation that people use when they go out of their comfort zone.

But i don't want the last word, i just want everybody to have a fun and interesting game to play. I'm sorry if anything i wrote have offend you. No need to attack may language or my place of origin.

Team games is just the big thing for the majority of us. And our rights to have fun seen to disturb those haven't commit to it seriously enough. I can understand that. The feeling of being left behind, loneliness.

You can vocalize you opinion as strongly as you want, it' won't change anything. It's now a well known fact that 1vs1 players are a minority. However they are entice to have a great game too. But not to the detriment of the majority who like the bigger things.

So instead of arguing about which game format has the brightest future, we should focus on how to have the best game for everyone taste.

Long live to COH2, the king of all team base RTS game.

Long live to COH2, the king of all team base RTS game.

Hahaha, to the king of brokenness!

Hahaha, to the king of brokenness!

That's a good one !!! ahaha

All these assumptions and counter assumptions.

I do a very simple thing, and I guess, you all could do the same (except Inverse, because he doesn't play coh2 ).

I open my steam inventory, I click on coh2 once, and I note my total hours played. I then divide the price I paid for the game, by the number of hours I have played. I then come to the conclusion I have had my monies worth (I bet it's the same for all of you).

So, I know that win, lose or draw (with future Relic decisions), I can't really complain. We all know how the world works, and we all know that for a company to continue supporting a product (whether that be gaming or any other venture), there has to be a revenue stream.

People weren't happy with p2w commanders. So, serious question: What do you want Relic to do? Do you want them to wash their hands with coh2, or do you want them to try to find a way to continue supporting this game, you all love to criticize, yet rarely seem to put down?


EDIT: For those interested, I paid 2.862595419847328 pence, per hour of gaming. Yup... People need some perspective.

This currency system can either be extremely great(Dota 2 or CS Go type of system) or it can be incredibly awful and put the final nail in the coffin for CoH2. I'm looking forward to see if Relic screws this up or if they succeed; either way it'll be fun to experience it.

Dota 2 and CSGO actually don't have in-game currencies. You just buy shit with normal money and get the items forever. That's part of why their in-game economies are so successful IMO.

Almost time for me to sleep. Anyways, that's what I meant when I said "currency system"; a system that's pretty much like Dota 2's. Really, there's no patent on the economy model Valve uses for Dota 2, so why doesn't Relic just use Dota 2's model? The game has potential to earn a substantial revenue just by selling skins, unit, weapon models and etc. I've spent $80+ in Dota 2 because the content they put out I feel is worth it; Relic just needs to make quality unit models/skins, vehicle skins and etc and people will buy it, as long as it doesn't affect gameplay.

Almost time for me to sleep. Anyways, that's what I meant when I said "currency system"; a system that's pretty much like Dota 2's. Really, there's no patent on the economy model Valve uses for Dota 2, so why doesn't Relic just use Dota 2's model? The game has potential to earn a substantial revenue just by selling skins, unit, weapon models and etc. I've spent $80+ in Dota 2 because the content they put out I feel is worth it; Relic just needs to make quality unit models/skins, vehicle skins and etc and people will buy it, as long as it doesn't affect gameplay.

that's pretty much exactly how the system works right now. you buy with real money, you get to keep the stuff you bought. there is the possibility that this "new" system might change something about that.

CoH1 and CoHO had questionable 2v2 balance; 3v3s and 4v4s were completely garbage in terms of balance, and were never played competitively. The same goes for games like Starcraft, Warcraft, etc.

You can enjoy team games more than 1v1s, I never said you couldn't. But there's a reason the vast majority of RTS competitive play is in the 1v1 space, just like there's a reason the vast majority of MOBA competitive play is 5v5.

Actually COH1 was pretty well balanced for 4v4 (most of the time)

But not on all maps and only annihilate mode. Just changing starting position from top to bottom on most maps would turn pretty well balanced map into 7 minute absolute romp. Mostly because of cut-off points, position of houses and most importantly you cannot run around map capping and de-capping points like in 1v1. Once you lose first engagement for point its extremely hard to get it back. Hence why 4v4 automatch was total failure in VCOH.

As far as balancing 4v4, it's a lot easier to balance then 1v1. Most of balance issues that are breaking 1v1 balance can be overcome by team builds and strategy. 4v4 only needs to be balanced with sledgehammer to get it to decent state.
However, units need to be designed with 4v4 in mind.
Problem in COH2 is that one army has extremely strong mobile armor and lethal AT infantry while other side has gimmicky slow moving armor that either needs combined arms or be set up in ambush to be useful. Add to that non-lethal AT infantry.
Tho both designs are deadly in 1v1, it's pretty obvious which massive shortcoming, team with durable mobile armor, will exploit.
That core design can never be overcome with tweaks to balance COH2 4v4.

As far as competitive 4v4, I completely agree. Most people who play 4v4 will go play 1v1 and 2v2 if they feel like being competitive because 1v1 just feels more competitive environment and not many games have truly balanced team games for competitive play.
Most of my COH 4v4 buddies and I did so.

for inevitable 4v4 haters: Most people I played 4v4 were top 200-300 1v1 players so don't even start with bagging, in all likelihood it was you that was noob. Thanks for restraining from unnecessary flaming.

People need to take a look at this thread and then read this one. We are looking at one piece of the puzzle.

http://www.coh2.org/topic/30476/custom-commanders

A very, very bad idea in general

People weren't happy with p2w commanders. So, serious question: What do you want Relic to do?

I'd be content with relic just releasing a balance patch, maybe a couple of new automatch maps (they can take community made maps) and then leaving the game to work on something else. I don't need hundreds of DLC and new features.

I grew up in an era where computer games were made like that. They released a demo and then the game itself. If there were bugs a couple of patches were released and if the game was successful they released an expansion or two and then they went on to different games.

Today developers instead release half finished and empty "platforms" and then releases DLC after DLC to improve the experience. You end up paying many times more then a game would have cost 10 or 15 years ago and it's ruining gaming for me. Perhaps i'm just getting old but this new way of making money is making me not want to get new games, with a few exceptions. It's sad, gaming used to be my biggest hobby and i have so many great memories but today the companies are driving me away from their games rather than luring me in.

For me games used to be an art form similar to books or movies or music but today it's just a business and it's tiresome.

As far as balancing 4v4, it's a lot easier to balance then 1v1. Most of balance issues that are breaking 1v1 balance can be overcome by team builds and strategy. 4v4 only needs to be balanced with sledgehammer to get it to decent state.
However, units need to be designed with 4v4 in mind.
Problem in COH2 is that one army has extremely strong mobile armor and lethal AT infantry while other side has gimmicky slow moving armor that either needs combined arms or be set up in ambush to be useful. Add to that non-lethal AT infantry.
Tho both designs are deadly in 1v1, it's pretty obvious which massive shortcoming, team with durable mobile armor, will exploit.
That core design can never be overcome with tweaks to balance COH2 4v4.

Good point, I never thought of it that way. That makes a lot of sense actually. It's definitely all about the design. CoH2 would need major changes on that front to work competitively in large team games, I definitely agree with that.

Almost time for me to sleep. Anyways, that's what I meant when I said "currency system"; a system that's pretty much like Dota 2's. Really, there's no patent on the economy model Valve uses for Dota 2, so why doesn't Relic just use Dota 2's model? The game has potential to earn a substantial revenue just by selling skins, unit, weapon models and etc. I've spent $80+ in Dota 2 because the content they put out I feel is worth it; Relic just needs to make quality unit models/skins, vehicle skins and etc and people will buy it, as long as it doesn't affect gameplay.

That's the problem though, the supply/durability system described here is nothing like the system used in Dota 2 and CSGO. If they straight-up copied Valve's model that would be amazing. Paying for cosmetic items is totally legit, because it doesn't give you additional gameplay options and it's totally not necessary to do if you just want to play the game competitively. What isn't legit is paying for more gameplay options (different topic though) or paying to continue using your items over time.

If it's limited to only dropped items, it turns off the large number of people who play for that carrot-and-stick incentive of getting a drop after the game. Just look at the anger over the War Spoils system, and the backlash against Valve recently for their changes to the Dota 2 drop system. That's the best-case scenario, and it's still a major negative for a large portion of the community.

Worst-case scenario, they give durability to items you've purchased from the store. That's straight-up nickle-and-diming, and it flat-out discourages store purchases because nobody wants to pay more to maintain their virtual items. Valve's system works because they don't nickle-and-dime people, and instead release a constant stream of content that compels people to keep purchasing items, instead of taxing the items they've already sold.