Why imo the use of L2P is not constructive.

L2P - Fanboy - Playercard should be banned from this forum and changed with the word "pudding"
Is it possible to implement this? ^^ I pay for it

Oh yes it is! I will prove this with a simple question:

Why do we see a bazillion balance rants every day from players who are around Rank 500-1000, but players like Jesulin, Luvnest or Jove rarely even post balance rants (if I remember I haven't seen either of them post one)?

Jove doesn't even speak English and I see the resident twitch e-celebs making balance threads all the time, usually after a salty loss that hurt their precious ladder ranking.

...
You can't blame people for dismissing suggestions from mediocre players out-of-hand; there's just too much crap out there to sift through...

Well actually the majority of dismissing is made by people who are mediocre themselves and it seems that you have no problem with that. With your logic (and I do not agree with it) only top players should be allowed to "dismiss suggestions from mediocre players out-of-hand"

You don't have to be a good player to realize that mediocre players will, in general, make less valid points about balance that top players. That's just common sense. I'm a mediocre Starcraft player and I laugh when other mediocre Starcraft players make balance demands because I know they're no better than me, and I'm clueless about balance relative to pros who have invested thousands of hours more than me.

If you're a mediocre player who thinks your balance opinions are more valid that those of other mediocre players because you're somehow "different" then you're a hypocrite, which is an entirely different issue that doesn't detract at all from my point.

I'm a mediocre Starcraft player and I laugh when other mediocre Starcraft players make balance demands because I know they're no better than me, and I'm clueless about balance relative to pros who have invested thousands of hours more than me.

Well I cant say I agree with someone laughing at others people "balance demands" if he is incapable of actually evaluating the "balance demands" themselves. A word comes to mind and that is prejudism...

If you're a mediocre player who thinks your balance opinions are more valid that those of other mediocre players because you're somehow "different" then you're a hypocrite, which is an entirely different issue that doesn't detract at all from my point.

I on the other hand believe that every one is "different" yet, equal and their opinion and views should be respected (even if they are wrong).

On the other hand I have to respect your opinion...I simply disagree with it...

1) Forum rules do not make such a distinctions...
2) Roughly what percentage of L2P comments come from Top players? 1%? 5%?
the majority of them seem to come from a handful of people who actually are not top players
3) Brings us to the most important problem, who decides that someone is entitled to use the term L2P or not...

I said that conscrutive "l2p" is allowed. This mean somebody will say you why your opinion in that thread is bad and how you can improve.

I think only ones that can make l2p are real pros (jesulin an co.) that lack time to look at every thread and write article about your bad game understanding

I said that conscrutive "l2p" is allowed. This mean somebody will say you why your opinion in that thread is bad and how you can improve.

Once more forums rules do not make such distinction...there is ling read them pls...

I think only ones that can make l2p are real pros (jesulin an co.) that lack time to look at every thread and write article about your bad game understanding

Again rules do not make such distinction, in addition pls try to avoid using "you" and pls use "one's" instead since, I am guessing that, you are not referring to me in particulate in this sentence:
"write article about your bad game understanding"

On the other hand, PLS take the time to point this out to those (accept jesulin an co.) that use the term repeatedly without actually being top players...

Horrible post. Takes L2P out of its context.

Well I cant say I agree with someone laughing at others people "balance demands" if he is incapable of actually evaluating the "balance demands" themselves. A word comes to mind and that is prejudism...


I on the other hand believe that every one is "different" yet, equal and their opinion and views should be respected (even if they are wrong).

On the other hand I have to respect your opinion...I simply disagree with it...

It's not prejudism, it's pragmatism. Maybe I'm jaded, but if someone lacks the self-awareness to realize that maybe they lack the expertise to make judgements or suggestions about certain things, I don't have much sympathy for them. I'd never tell someone off for expressing an opinion, but at the same time I've never in my life engaged in a public balance discussion because 99% of the people who participate just spout bullshit. You trust a doctor with your health or a dentist with your teeth because there aren't enough hours in the day to investigate everything yourself, and it just makes sense to trust experts more than some random guy on the street. If I had to choose between watching a group of tournament winners discussing balance and a group of rank 1000 players discussing balance, I'd choose the tournament winners every single time, and I'm pretty sure almost everybody else would too. There's just more confidence that the outcome will be something useful, interesting, and accurate.

I disagree that every opinion is equal; if that were true we wouldn't trust professionals and experts any more than the idiot who lives down the street. I do, of course, agree that every opinion should be respected, and in an ideal world every silly suggestion would be countered by a reasoned explanation. But nobody has the time, patience, or willpower to do that for every single ridiculous idea. As long as people insist on talking about things they aren't qualified to talk about, other people are going to flame them. It might be disrespectful, but that's just the way things are sometimes.

Once more forums rules do not make such distinction...there is ling read them pls...

Again rules do not make such distinction

"Often used as an dismissive insult. Use on the forums is discouraged and may prompt moderation".
Often is not always. Discouraged is not prohibit.
Just like any "insult", it's just a word. What matter is not the word per se, rather than the context, as always.

"It's not about winrates or anything like that, those kinds of stats need to be aggregated across the entire playerbase because you need a huge sample to see anything useful. And winrate stats are very good at telling you a problem exists but very bad at telling you what the problem actually is, or how you would go about fixing it. For those answers you really need players who have a very deep understanding of the game."

In the hypothetical example I posted it was for the entire playerbase, rather than the top150 or 250.

I agree that diagnosing the problem might be problematic however that is why I asked you what winrate difference between the Brits and other faction you would consider to be acceptable across the entire player base.

Or Ostheer etc... What figure would you put on it? 48-52? 49-51??

Currently coh2charts is showing the Brits on .58 compared to the Soviets .72. This however is not terribly useful as all factions show that the top150 players win more than 50% of the time.

Across the entire playerbase win rates other than .5 would indicate either imbalance of that one faction is more difficult to play than others. This too would be acceptable if top players were able to get good results from it, would just make it a faction that required more skill to use.

So as you are a coder show us the stats and let us make our own minds up... As I say total for all 1v1 plus total for ranks 5 and under, 10 and under etc.

Would be useful for nubbinses like me any and I'm sure Relic would approve if it turned out that US was the easiest to play until level x etc as it would likely result in more faction and commander sales.

Bit like chess, different openings ( factions, build order and commanders in COH2) will work for different levels of ability.

Another factor worth considering is the overall game length.

WAD would see longer games favouring the Brits and Axis, and shorter games favouring the Soviets and US.

If however longer games favoured the US then that would highlight a potential issue. If on the other hand the number of short games was exceptionally high then likely the slower starters are too slow to start.

Simple stuff really and I hope I'm not teaching grandma to suck eggs. The data is the key though, whether x thinks only the world champion should be asked is irrelevant if the data shows the opposite.

Simple stuff really and I hope I'm not teaching grandma to suck eggs. The data is the key though, whether x thinks only the world champion should be asked is irrelevant if the data shows the opposite.

Balance is most important for the higher levels, sounds cruel but thats just the way it is. If the game is tuned for high level play, and by some miracle its also fairly balanced for the lower level players (that aren't correctly using important units and make poor strategic decisions) well that is great. But there is a high chance we will cure cancer before we make a RTS perfectly balanced across the board for all skills.

You misunderstand me Basilone...

Seeing the stats would allow someone to make an informed decision. Some people like a challenge and would choose the hardest to play faction ( generally my way of doing things) whilst others want an easy ride and to climb the ladder rankings and would choose the easiest.

Us nubbinses aren't stupid.

"But there is a high chance we will cure cancer before we make a RTS perfectly balanced across the board for all skills."

Hell if you play Ostheer and beat the average win ratio up to level 10 then you'd be happy if you were a competitive sort, if however you play Ostheer and can't even break even then likely other titles in your steam library are going to start looking very tempting.

The only difference between someone giving it up as a crap game and persevering in such a situation would be having the data to hand.

But there is a difference between being stupid and being unskilled, and no one is calling anyone stupid.

Oh....boy...myself at it again...

I am sure this thread will be constructive....

since the coh2 playerbase is fairly small, imbalanced matchups (in terms of skill) happen pretty regularly. when you get stomped a couple times by X faction, you may think that theyre OP when it mights just been that the player better than you is just straight up better at the game.

Allergenic to L2P? then L2Adapt.

Simply put just don't make threads assuming people will agree with you and then get angry when they don't.

this, good sir, is the best thing i have ever read in this forum.

thumbs up!

I think you mistake this place for Tumblr, good sir!

'tips