Coh2 Ranking

So I asked specifically about servers and ladders when I was in Vancouver. Greg Wilson answered me. He said that Relic is already running servers in-house that are serving information to Steam servers for matchmaking. They are fully aware of how much we want ladders and I hope that we can see some robust and moderated ladders in the near future. There will always be difficulties with keeping a P2P game free of cheats, and those will have to be dealt with as the system is implemented.

It was a question of budget. First they needed to finish the game and give it the kind of polish that the franchise deserved, hope it made money (which is looks like it is), and then go to work on the features that we are requesting to make it a better game for competition.

I simply have to agree with most things. A ladder and a good ranking system is a must have for any RTS and should not have been, at any time during the development, be an afterthought. The game was delayed for 6 month and still they didn't bother to put a simple ladder into the game.

Noun said that implementing this feature would cause certain trade-off, like a less functional game. If thats true, I don't want to know how the game would have shipped if the original THQ management was still in place.

In a year from now everyone will be lvl 100 and you cant tell good from bad. I'm not a pro player, usually between lvl 12 and 14. But even for me it was fun just to maintain this lvl. Because in the beginning I couldnt get beyond lvl 8 and as my skill grew, so did my rank. Now it doesnt matter at all. There really is no insentive, no reason to be proud of you rank and the cool symbol that comes with it. No longer do you get respect just because some fancy lvl 16 shows up in the enemy team.

I would love to see a system similar to SC2, with leagues and seasons (probably not enough players for that, but we'll see). Its probably the one thing that would make me want to play that game again.

Relic needs to realize that there are casual players who like that linear progression, while others love the more competitive approach. Blizzard implemented a progression system with unlocks in HoTs. But that doesnt mean they gave up on the eSport aspect and it doesnt ruin the game for either side.

The fact that the first thing about the game I realized when I played it yesterday, was the absence of a ladder show alot for me. Its not just a feature for the top 20 players. Its an incentive for alot of players to keep playing and keep getting better.

Plz, for the love of god, make that your number one thing on your to do list, because right now, I couldnt even rage about sync errors or bugs or balance issues, since it doesnt matter at all. And an online game without rage is like sex without a parter, a pretty one handed approach (yeah doesnt make a lot of sense, deal with it).

edit: If money was the problem they should think about priorities. Is a ladder system a very basic feature that should be implemented (imho: yes). Are the theater of war thingies something desperately needed in an RTS (imho: no, but they do make for some good DLC that doesnt cause threads about potential imbalances, like commanders do)

Tbh, despite the fact we've given them our money already, its really quite backwards. You dont release half a game, then wait for money, then see if you can fund the rest later. I know its not all in their power to do that but still, just sayin.

Tbh, despite the fact we've given them our money already, its really quite backwards. You dont release half a game, then wait for money, then see if you can fund the rest later. I know its not all in their power to do that but still, just sayin.

totally agree u, but didnt they realise at the the preorder numbers that they get thewir money and as a reaction to push out a ladder + rank system. I think the game itself is with its features horrible programmed like where is pause option or a reconnect like in other games.

I think people are forgetting something very large here. Relic went through a management switch. For them to even release a game of this quality while having to change publishers and owners is amazing. I myself work in the gaming industry and have lots of friends in this industry and it is not easy to go through. Yes I do agree with what you guys are saying with polish and things being an afterthought. But Relic is one of the best developers around and I know they will do everything in their power to implement the things we want. For those who don't know, sometimes they don't get the final say, SEGA does. SEGA is a business, if the launch was a failure and the game was a failure Relic would probably be another studio getting shut down here in Vancouver. My two cents, haters going to hate and I get this a lot at my studio too. Forums seem to always be full of people who complain but not enough of people who appreciate the product.

Solid gamer i think people are trying to appreciate and support this game but they get frustrated and annoyed , most likely due to a lack of understanding of how the system works.

Personally i have no knowledge of how a game studio works and there are times i wish sega/relic would pull there thumbs out and get these features in but i try to remember what people here say and try to enlighten myself as to why this is happening.

Most importantly i remember the people working on this great game want to make us happy and are trying there best within the constraints imposed by reality

IPK has the right mindset in that the true pros know who they are. There are a few "wanna be" Pros... and I'm guessing they aren't getting enough attention to make them happy. Tourneys are the true ladders. They always are because you can't hack/cheat etc.

And honestly, I'd rather someone know my name, then my rank, which essentially is a big fat number...whoopee. But your name...something like Kodachrome or Darwin....oh man...Darwin...he was good but a tool. Now Kodachrome was a great player who in the early days seemed to play very competitive, yet after he reached his goal on the boards he basically played for fun. Me and him played a few good games together but honestly, I lost more with him than I did win because he just didn't really care to play conventional. In 1on1 is where he really shined and although he is not playing COH2... His spirit lives on. Lots of guys I remember from COH1 but his name stands out for me probably because he was not a rage quitter, 95% of the time, 0% with me. I think a few people got under his skin....but and one who takes the game too seriously I try to avoid.

Tbh, despite the fact we've given them our money already, its really quite backwards. You dont release half a game, then wait for money, then see if you can fund the rest later. I know its not all in their power to do that but still, just sayin.

Unfortunately, that is how the world works. You have deadlines and you have to pay your staff. These features are the first to be canned if money is short. Of course you can potentially make more money with more investment but you need to have that money in the first place.

I think overall with the sales of CoH2, I know if SEGA had any doubts those doubts are now gone. We will see these features I am sure. Due in time ladies and gentlemen.

For me the ladder is a MUST. I realize there are many players who are not competitive and for these players there are always basic games and single player stuff, now they have a theater of war as well where they can play coop. But the rest of us who are competitive the ladder is necessary to value our skill and to see our skill progress. There are around 10k + players in game every time I look and the tourneys can not rank that much people. The only way you can rank them is by ladder. The other thing the ladder gives you is incentive to play more an get better and better and see when you are roughly good enough to apply for the tourney.

The other thing the ladder gives you is incentive to play more an get better and better and see when you are roughly good enough to apply for the tourney.

Personally I don't intend for my tournaments to be only for the top 100 players. I want everyone to take part because a tournament is a completely different set up. You play your opponent at least twice, completely different from ladder play when it's one and done.

after playing various other games I use the auto matcher and ladder solely for practice to try out strats, combo timings, different characters etc. but I enjoy playing in tournaments more even though I don't do well, sometimes going 0-2.

Personally I don't intend for my tournaments to be only for the top 100 players. I want everyone to take part because a tournament is a completely different set up.

I understand what you are saying at but imagine if you have 10 tournaments and on each you get 100 different people to play that's 1k people which is not that much in competitive community. After 10 tourneys you still wouldn't know anything about the players skill lvl, and from COH1 we know it takes a lot of time to organize 10 tournaments.

So I asked specifically about servers and ladders when I was in Vancouver. Greg Wilson answered me. He said that Relic is already running servers in-house that are serving information to Steam servers for matchmaking. They are fully aware of how much we want ladders and I hope that we can see some robust and moderated ladders in the near future. There will always be difficulties with keeping a P2P game free of cheats, and those will have to be dealt with as the system is implemented.

It was a question of budget. First they needed to finish the game and give it the kind of polish that the franchise deserved, hope it made money (which is looks like it is), and then go to work on the features that we are requesting to make it a better game for competition.

still waiting

i dont understand what all the fuzz is about , ppl want to see their progression , coh and other games a lot older than coh2 had this feature , QD comes in and tells we re gonna get it , end of story .

still waiting

Translation: "CoH2 did not sell well enough."