Login

russian armor

Will COH2 get more 1v1 players ?

ntd
17 Jul 2013, 16:59 PM
#21
avatar of ntd
Admin Black Badge

Posts: 790 | Subs: 2

I believe they only show players searching at your own skill lvl in 1v1s.
17 Jul 2013, 22:26 PM
#22
avatar of Z3r07
Donator 11

Posts: 1006

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2013, 16:59 PMntd
I believe they only show players searching at your own skill lvl in 1v1s.


ahh that would make sense
17 Jul 2013, 22:26 PM
#23
17 Jul 2013, 23:08 PM
#24
avatar of Grund

Posts: 49

Ok, I am going to break something down here. I am Australian and in my prime playing time there are about 3000 people on. According to Steam stats only 2.9% of player have played over 25 automatch (AM) games so roughly 29 for every 1000. This equates to roughly 87 (say 90) playing AM games when I search. If we break this down further too 1v1,2v2,3v3 and 4v4 and assume they have equal player bases (which they dont, more people play team games) then there are roughly 22 players in each mode. When I search 1v1 I get about 6 players, when I search 2v2 with a mate we get about 12 players. Given that half the players would already be in game this sounds about right. For a game that is only a few weeks old this is horrible. 2 nights ago my team mate and I played the SAME guys 5 times out of 6 games and it wasn't even a fair game, we won all quite convincingly...wtf. Game is dead sorry. I have to say it, sorry Relic but you have dropped the ball BIG time on this one and without some kind of lobby system you are turning newer players away. These types of games made up a good 80% of your player base in COH 1. Bad design decision there along with alot of other ones has meant this game is being bad mouthed everywhere and for good reason.

Look just get some kind of lobby system and leaderboards into the game. If they don't work correctly at first who cares, at least you will have a basic framework in game to show people you are listening to what they are saying and a guide players can see and evaluate your progress on. On a side note when is the beta test server going up to test new changes, this was reported to be happening so when? in 2016? or soonish. Pull your fingers out guys if I treated my customers like this I would be out of business just like THQ and if you guys don't start making some improvements you will be too.

Now I know there are the fanboys on this site with their heads that far up the butts of the relic crew that they cant see the sun shine (that being absolute game flaws) and I know you are going to flame me hardcore now but that is fine. I am a big boy I can take it and its a public forum, I am only voicing the major concerns I have and they are very problematic, I am adamant there are alot of others out there who agree with what I am saying.
18 Jul 2013, 01:33 AM
#25
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293

was taht really necessary the whole insulting anyone who disagrees with you ro has a different opinion.
18 Jul 2013, 01:58 AM
#26
avatar of Grund

Posts: 49

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2013, 01:33 AMWiFiDi
was taht really necessary the whole insulting anyone who disagrees with you ro
has a different opinion.


Yes may have been going a bit too far but the state of the game is so 2nd rate, well not even more like 3rd rate. The most active forums are the steam ones and you would be lucky to find 1 positive post out of 100. I have made a few myself even defending certain aspects of the game but the more I play the more I realise it is a piece of shit in its current state and should never have been released the way it is now. I am not saying it wont be good down the track but as it stands right now it is absolutely pitiful.

No lobbies, No leaderboards, Complete changing of the core COH mechanics (cutoff points, no fuel from strat points, the f-ing cover system is useless now, gameplay imbalances and bugs i.e strafe etc and the list goes on) I feel I am very justified to tell it how-it-is mate and you are justified to feel however you want too aswell because I couldn't give shit anymore.
18 Jul 2013, 03:17 AM
#27
avatar of Z3r07
Donator 11

Posts: 1006

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2013, 01:58 AMGrund


Yes may have been going a bit too far but the state of the game is so 2nd rate, well not even more like 3rd rate. The most active forums are the steam ones and you would be lucky to find 1 positive post out of 100. I have made a few myself even defending certain aspects of the game but the more I play the more I realise it is a piece of shit in its current state and should never have been released the way it is now. I am not saying it wont be good down the track but as it stands right now it is absolutely pitiful.

No lobbies, No leaderboards, Complete changing of the core COH mechanics (cutoff points, no fuel from strat points, the f-ing cover system is useless now, gameplay imbalances and bugs i.e strafe etc and the list goes on) I feel I am very justified to tell it how-it-is mate and you are justified to feel however you want too aswell because I couldn't give shit anymore.


jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2013, 01:58 AMGrund

No lobbies, No leaderboards


I agree. This sucks but they confirmed that they will be adding the leaderboard. Lobbies ? I sure hope so but they didn't say anything.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2013, 01:58 AMGrund

Complete changing of the core COH mechanics (cutoff points, no fuel from strat points, the f-ing cover system is useless now


The game does need some kind of change.


  • I still cutoff my enemy all the time, not sure what you are talking about.


  • There is fuel from strat points, not as many but I do find this is a positive, it creates areas where the battles are more intense. You can also add fuel to any strat point which can also be strategic, lose one and you've just lost 200mp.


  • Why is the cover system useless? I'm always using it and if you don't you are in trouble.


18 Jul 2013, 06:08 AM
#28
avatar of Grund

Posts: 49

With regards to cutoff points, what made COH great in this respect was that there was only munitions and fuel available from the actual munitions and fuel points. They could be cut off on any map by taking a key location. In COH 2 its gone basically, ok you can cut off the +7 fuel on some maps (not all) but they still get +3 fuel from every strat point anyway. Its a dumbed down version trying to favor a comeback but it doesn't work and makes you feel as though you aren't making as much progress in a game as you should be in terms of a resource advantage.

The cover system now pales in comparison to COH 1, yes you may avoid an instant suppression if you are in green cover but all small arms damage is so low it matters little if I am shooting at you from negative cover on a road and you are in light cover. This can be fixed by just increasing small arms damage and increasing the defensive cover bonuses aswell to compensate. When COH came out alot of the reviews raved about the cover mechanic and it was fresh and innovative, why change it so much? Get all small arms damage and cover rates back to COH levels ffs. Make micromanaging your troops actually necessary because at the moment they can just fight the battle themselves pretty much as long as you can retreat in time it matters little where you are standing. On a side note the low small arms damage does help (and may be intended to compensate for other poor programming) to survive when moving away from grenades etc when it takes 2-3 seconds response time but that is another matter all together which desperately needs attention too aswell.

To get back on topic sorry no, well not in its current state will the game get more 1v1 players. In fact it is losing more players by the day. Until some of these changes, in particular lobbies are added there is no way the player base will increase until an expansion (if Relic survive that long on this fail). Or a massive steam sale has it for like 10 bucks or something.
18 Jul 2013, 08:33 AM
#29
avatar of goonie

Posts: 4

I couldn't agree more grund . This game Doesn't have the luxury of getting things right in the next 6 months . People are turning away from it already . The fact the game scored in the low 80's didn't help the cause . Too many thing's seem to be missing from the release .
I know games are never perfect on release . But why change soo many things that made coh , coh ?
Would've been better to cut & paste vcoh to coh2 & change a few things =)
18 Jul 2013, 09:23 AM
#30
avatar of Mortality

Posts: 255

We don’t show players their Elo+ rating.

- Why?


Smurfing is a term the community used in the original Company of Heroes because our system allowed players to create as many Profiles with unique Elo+ ratings as they wanted on their account.

- LOL? This is not true. You could create up to 5 Profiles on one account.
18 Jul 2013, 09:33 AM
#31
avatar of Mortality

Posts: 255

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2013, 08:33 AMgoonie
...
Would've been better to cut & paste vcoh to coh2 & change a few things =)

.this
18 Jul 2013, 12:03 PM
#32
avatar of alexctd

Posts: 44

Yeah agreed. by the time all the MP stuff is fixed (if ever) no one will be playing. I will struggle to justify buying another Relic game as I am only interested in Multiplayer.
18 Jul 2013, 12:19 PM
#33
avatar of bummbummbamm

Posts: 22

Its really simple - to get new players to make this game competitive u only need a ladder - nothing more or less - ofc balance is also a good thing.I cant understand whay they made a game,a game whitch has good potential without a fck ladder. Its like lets make not competitive game and lets make a game for 200 ppl insted of 50 000.
18 Jul 2013, 12:26 PM
#34
avatar of Weeman

Posts: 15

Its really simple - to get new players to make this game competitive u only need a ladder - nothing more or less - ofc balance is also a good thing.I cant understand whay they made a game,a game whitch has good potential without a fck ladder. Its like lets make not competitive game and lets make a game for 200 ppl insted of 50 000.

They didn't make a game without the ladders. It simply wasn't ready yet. As it was stated before, a third party was hired to build those ladders and that third party messed up and didn't make the deadline. Simple as that.

It's coming, just be patient.
18 Jul 2013, 12:31 PM
#35
avatar of PaperPlane

Posts: 173

As already mentioned 1v1 is quite 'boring' in CoH2. Then there's 2v2, which is lagging like hell and contains even more spam than CoH1. I feel like you are being forced down this path in CoH2. There ain't many options at all which is quite sad...
18 Jul 2013, 13:01 PM
#36
avatar of bummbummbamm

Posts: 22

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2013, 12:26 PMWeeman

They didn't make a game without the ladders. It simply wasn't ready yet. As it was stated before, a third party was hired to build those ladders and that third party messed up and didn't make the deadline. Simple as that.

It's coming, just be patient.



Seems legit : )

anyway what u ppl think about Coh2 got only 2 nations (ger/russ) ?
18 Jul 2013, 13:21 PM
#37
avatar of Cyridius

Posts: 627

To answer the title;

Not likely. Games don't grow. That's why releasing unfinished or WIP games is the worst thing you can ever do in this business. But I do foresee CoH2 lasting maybe 2/3 as long as CoH1.
18 Jul 2013, 13:47 PM
#38
avatar of starwolf64

Posts: 44

I heard there's a shipment of new players coming in on Tuesday. Seriously though for a game to grow it needs a good community on top of fun and addicting game play, I think coh2 has some of both. Currently though the game can be frustrating as only about a fraction of the units are worth using and aside from the forums there's very little community interaction in the game besides actually being in game with players. Coh 2 definitely still feels like work in progress, not much has changed since beta.
18 Jul 2013, 13:47 PM
#39
avatar of Con!

Posts: 299

To answer the title;

Not likely. Games don't grow. That's why releasing unfinished or WIP games is the worst thing you can ever do in this business. But I do foresee CoH2 lasting maybe 2/3 as long as CoH1.

yea that's why minecraft failed so hard...

I think most of you are thinking that this game is going to be supported like a normal release, whereas what I've heard from devs they seem to plan to provide support for this game for a while. Yes things are missing, are they working on it? yes. is it possible that something happens ands they don't end up providing support for as long as they planed or as well as we wish? possibly.

Games grow because people grow it. Yes having certain features that currently don't exist help people to grow it, but at the end of the day this game will grow or die because of the people who play it and how they effect others. Not because we didn't have leaderboards 3 weeks after launch.
18 Jul 2013, 13:54 PM
#40
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

150k concurrent viewers for SF4, that game doesn't have online leaderboards that are fit for purpose.

150k concurrent viewers for UMvC3, that game doesn't have online leaderboards that are fit for purpose.

150k concurrent viewers for Smash: Melee, that game doesn't have online and Nintendo tried to shut down the stream and tournament.

100k concurrent viewers for KoF13 that game barely works online

etc.

Yeah it's 2013 and games should have good online features but they definitely don't build competitive scenes.

1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

431 users are online: 431 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM