Login

russian armor

Relic: Please hand over the balance to the community

4 Sep 2016, 11:02 AM
#21
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1


The best fix for the mortar pit would be to replace it with a normal mortar squad and make the pit a garrisonable emplacement which gives the mortar some sort of bonus like it's with the Vickers when garrisoned and Vet 1.


Emplacements are the feature of UKF and they won't be removed if you like it or not. Plus it's not the topic for this thread.

Hiring the people (for really small amount of money) who knows the game and they have plan how to fix it like Cruzz while meantime Relic still earns is the way to give the game maybe even a second youth. Chances that it will happen are smaller than winning in a lottery.

I have small, just a little tiny hope that we will see some good actions (according balance/new map pool) from Relic side in Autumn.
4 Sep 2016, 13:28 PM
#22
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2016, 11:02 AMStark


Emplacements are the feature of UKF and they won't be removed if you like it or not. Plus it's not the topic for this thread.

Hiring the people (for really small amount of money) who knows the game and they have plan how to fix it like Cruzz while meantime Relic still earns is the way to give the game maybe even a second youth. Chances that it will happen are smaller than winning in a lottery.

I have small, just a little tiny hope that we will see some good actions (according balance/new map pool) from Relic side in Autumn.


Not removed, re-purposed, the Royal Engineers would still be able to build the emplacement but it will not come manned, it will be the same as the Tommy Trench.
4 Sep 2016, 14:01 PM
#23
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1



Not removed, re-purposed, the Royal Engineers would still be able to build the emplacement but it will not come manned, it will be the same as the Tommy Trench.


ok now i see your point. ;) Don't think is the realistic change though
4 Sep 2016, 14:13 PM
#24
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2016, 14:01 PMStark


ok now i see your point. ;) Don't think is the realistic change though


I'm not sure I understand you correctly but in terms of realism it would be more realistic than having the crew pop out of the ground to man the weapon.

You can also already test it in one of Svanh's mods on the CoH 2 workshop.
4 Sep 2016, 14:15 PM
#25
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1



I'm not sure I understand you correctly but in terms of realism it would be more realistic than having the crew pop out of the ground to man the weapon.

You can also already test it in one of Svanh's mods on the CoH 2 workshop.


No, you don't understand me Kappa

It's not realistic that Relic implement that ig.
4 Sep 2016, 14:16 PM
#26
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670

Wait, so you believe the miragefla patch wasn't coh2's 2.602?
4 Sep 2016, 14:57 PM
#27
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2016, 14:15 PMStark


No, you don't understand me Kappa

It's not realistic that Relic implement that ig.


You're probably right.

Wait, so you believe the miragefla patch wasn't coh2's 2.602?


Stop with the "dead gaem" memes, it wasn't true or funny a month ago, it's not true or funny now.
4 Sep 2016, 15:05 PM
#28
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353

I hope this is reason why i can buy Dawn of war 3 without worry about balance
plz
4 Sep 2016, 15:43 PM
#29
avatar of FichtenMoped
Editor in Chief Badge
Patrion 310

Posts: 4785 | Subs: 3

Just give us proper Mod Support with Custom Models etc like in CoH1.
4 Sep 2016, 16:07 PM
#30
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

I hope this is reason why i can buy Dawn of war 3 without worry about balance
plz


lol no.

Just give us proper Mod Support with Custom Models etc like in CoH1.


This.
4 Sep 2016, 18:10 PM
#31
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276



Yeah let the official forums vote on this too. Good idea :snfPeter:


better than lelic deciding it all by themselves...
4 Sep 2016, 18:21 PM
#32
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

From the guy who wrote that,
I know that the rant of some Axis fanboys here is way too much over the edge but I honestly think that you have to be a fool to say that Axis and Allies are on the absolute same level in terms of winning possibility right now.

If you simply ignore all Katitof + Australian Magic posts, I think this board can develop some very interesting conversations. Sadly there are no many topics where they are not.


We can guess the dream team is about the people thinking the same way you are and ignoring anybody having a different point of view. Remembering me a team listening only half of the community comments to build their balance patch.
4 Sep 2016, 21:26 PM
#33
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

I think it could work. It's actually been done, too. Natural Selection 2 (a strategy-focused FPS game) switched to "community development" in 2014. The initial plan was to release a final patch to fix the major flaws of the game, but they've gone on to release over 40 patches (and counting).

It came from a similar situation: the dev team (NS2's was very small) didn't have time to work on their new project and also work on NS2.

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2016, 09:51 AMRMMLz
We can only discuss our part in this, and I don't think Relic would be willing to leave the game to us because people are gonna start "LEL DAED GAEM" threads.


I honestly don't think so. We'd be going from 1 major patch every ~3 months to (possibly) a minor patch every week or so. While those on the forums might say "lol dead game, they let fans do their work", the vast majority of players aren't actually involved in any forums: they'd just see that suddenly the game is getting lots of updates.

I don't know about you, but when I see a "dead game" I have suddenly start getting updates, I'm inclined to try it out again.

On top of that, you'd also (hopefully) have an increase in quality. While the initial reaction from some players might be negative, I don't think they'd complain about frequent improvements and updates with clear communication.



So here are a few questions:
-How would we (or Relic) choose candidates for a "Dream Balance Team".

Active modders focusing on improvements, high-level players (tournament winners), and people they already talk to for feedback (iirc they do that).

-Who would we (or Relic) choose candidates for a "Dream Balance Team".

I assume you mean "who would we chose for a dream team"? In that case, I'd say the same as above.

-Who has the final say in that team?

Ideally, no one. It's supposed to work by consensus, not veto. Either way, it would be important to keep a balance mod active to be able to test ideas they aren't sure on.


-Does being a good player mean good understanding of game mechanics and a "Balance Insight"?

Top tier players are almost always top tier with all factions, so yes. Being a good player requires a good understanding of how everything works.

-How can they co-ordinate with Relic about number of patches, fixes (which are actually more important than balance).

No idea.

-And finally, how would we respond to their decisions?

Likely quite well.

Wait, so you believe the miragefla patch wasn't coh2's 2.602?


More like 2.301.
5 Sep 2016, 00:41 AM
#34
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779

Someone said "Final"?
So is it start dying and rotting like the old 2.602 patch?
7 Sep 2016, 11:29 AM
#35
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

I think it could work. It's actually been done, too. Natural Selection 2 (a strategy-focused FPS game) switched to "community development" in 2014. The initial plan was to release a final patch to fix the major flaws of the game, but they've gone on to release over 40 patches (and counting).

It came from a similar situation: the dev team (NS2's was very small) didn't have time to work on their new project and also work on NS2.

-I've played NS2 but I had no idea about what you said! It's sounds interesting, but I'm not sure about the outcome (whether the community like the changes or not). But still, I think NS is far more easier to balance than CoH. NS2 is also not a competitive game (as far as I know), but CoD is. People on the balance team would then be unable to participate in Tournaments and arguments. They would also be the target of hate and rage, I don't know if anyone is willing to do that. Look at the amount of unconstructive criticism (hate) aimed at Miragelfa and Cruzz, and all they did was release mods!



I honestly don't think so. We'd be going from 1 major patch every ~3 months to (possibly) a minor patch every week or so. While those on the forums might say "lol dead game, they let fans do their work", the vast majority of players aren't actually involved in any forums: they'd just see that suddenly the game is getting lots of updates.

I don't know about you, but when I see a "dead game" I have suddenly start getting updates, I'm inclined to try it out again.

On top of that, you'd also (hopefully) have an increase in quality. While the initial reaction from some players might be negative, I don't think they'd complain about frequent improvements and updates with clear communication.

-Increase in quality is ALWAYS welcome, so is increase the number of active players




Active modders focusing on improvements, high-level players (tournament winners), and people they already talk to for feedback (iirc they do that).


I assume you mean "who would we chose for a dream team"? In that case, I'd say the same as above.

-I meant both How to select and Whom to select. Is it even up to us?

Ideally, no one. It's supposed to work by consensus, not veto. Either way, it would be important to keep a balance mod active to be able to test ideas they aren't sure on.

-We would never have consensus, that's why the team should have a tie breaker (Odd number). But again, a lot of good players contradict each other on the forums left and right. Their play style, the meta, and a lot of other factors affect balance (Duuuh), and the players perspective and play style should be counted as an important factor. Based on what I've seen, I think (simply an opinion not a fact) that we would not have consensus.



Top tier players are almost always top tier with all factions, so yes. Being a good player requires a good understanding of how everything works.

-Don't completely agree with this. I don't wanna name anyone, but we have top 50 players who are good at the game, but their discussions regarding balance are illogical and biased.



I think we have dedicated people to work for free (don't even imagine about a Dev "outsourcing" the balance to the community. Specially Relic) But I don't know if we could have a balance dream team.



7 Sep 2016, 16:03 PM
#36
avatar of wouren
Senior Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 1281 | Subs: 3

Hey let's keep this away from specific changes and keep it about the broader idea.
7 Sep 2016, 16:54 PM
#37
avatar of ABlockOfSalt

Posts: 70

I think putting it entirely on the modding community is a mis-step (these guys have jobs and lives and such outside of this game) I think having a cabal of 10-15 guys who are capable of expressing opinions in a constructive way is a good start.

They're basically the farm-team as far as balance goes. They can look at ideas, play with them in the editor and suggest actually viable changes that aren't "add side armour" tier work.

I am 90% certain they already have a pool of people they call on for balance stuff and it's not likely they'd make it more transparent.

I think what we "as a community" could use is more transparency/roadmap sort of stuff that we can all bicker about like children. Smaller more frequent updates are preferable to March Deployments (as good as it was over all) because they let people acclimate and see what small changes do to the game as a whole.
7 Sep 2016, 18:18 PM
#38
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Sep 2016, 11:29 AMRMMLz
-I've played NS2 but I had no idea about what you said! It's sounds interesting, but I'm not sure about the outcome (whether the community like the changes or not). But still, I think NS is far more easier to balance than CoH. NS2 is also not a competitive game (as far as I know), but CoD is. People on the balance team would then be unable to participate in Tournaments and arguments. They would also be the target of hate and rage, I don't know if anyone is willing to do that. Look at the amount of unconstructive criticism (hate) aimed at Miragelfa and Cruzz, and all they did was release mods!


The outcome has actually been very good, at least from what I've seen; and the community seems to agree. They've changed/added things such as new UI scaling, a new server browser, hit-box fixes, new maps, new 'alien vision' modes, as well as a large amount of well-deserved balance changes. I can't speak about the NS2 competitive scene, but playing on a standard server is much more competitive than something like CoD, and arguably even COH2's 3v3 and 4v4 modes (team-strategy is required, as are knowledge of counters, certain tactics, etc.)

There is definitely a problem in getting people involved with a 'patch' team, though. I'm really unsure as to how things would be handled regarding tournaments, debates, etc.


I meant both How to select and Whom to select. Is it even up to us?


Community vote? I'd say have a minimum bar of entry: top-20 with ALL factions in 1v1, and/or an existing and maintained balance mod. They can get added to the list of candidates, and from there the community can vote on it. I would say limit it to about 8-10 people total. Of course, the devs would end up having final say on who is in, but I would hope they would be reasonable.


We would never have consensus, that's why the team should have a tie breaker (Odd number). But again, a lot of good players contradict each other on the forums left and right. Their play style, the meta, and a lot of other factors affect balance (Duuuh), and the players perspective and play style should be counted as an important factor. Based on what I've seen, I think (simply an opinion not a fact) that we would not have consensus.


I would have to disagree; consensus, at least among the team would almost be required. These players wouldn't be "one faction" players - they would be experts with all of them. If Player A thinks A is OP and B thinks it is fine, A could demonstrate how it is OP. After several trials (as well as consulting other team members), a decision could be made fairly easily as to if the thing in question as OP or not. In essence, a top-tier player won't be beaten by the same strategy over and over again, provided that it is balanced.

A great example is 'PioSpam' from CoH1. When it was first mentioned on a forum, people said "yea, easy to beat it". IIRC the creator (Mags? Something like that) then beat every single challenger, and went on to play auto-match, announcing "I'm going to PioSpam" at the start of each match... and continued to win.

Of course, not everything is going to be as insanely overpowered as PioSpam, but in those cases, the team can trial SMALL changes (+/-10% type changes) in a balance mod.


Don't completely agree with this. I don't wanna name anyone, but we have top 50 players who are good at the game, but their discussions regarding balance are illogical and biased.


Unfortunately, since COH2's competitive community is so small, top-50 isn't all that amazing (IMO). It's definitely good, but I can't think of a single time when a top-50 player won a tournament over a bunch of top-10 players; there's just too big of a skill gap.

7 Sep 2016, 23:28 PM
#39
avatar of Grittle

Posts: 179


Community vote? I'd say have a minimum bar of entry: top-20 with ALL factions in 1v1, and/or an existing and maintained balance mod. They can get added to the list of candidates, and from there the community can vote on it. I would say limit it to about 8-10 people total. Of course, the devs would end up having final say on who is in, but I would hope they would be reasonable.


Well, I know that sounds absolutely foolproof, but let me tell you. nothing is foolproof

Best Case Scenario: let everyone here barf out 1 or 2 reasonable and thought-out balance suggestions and have those suggestions get picked apart by the people here until mostly everyone can mostly and seriously agree on what is what and who wears the turtle onesie pajamas for the week (I vote A. Soldier for next week FYI)

Then have it go through relic, who will then pick out all the fun and creative parts that were actually tested and properly thrashed by this community and shove a giant bugged 81mm turd in the middle of the patch and call it a day. Have us complain like the happy couple we are and hotfix it. rinse and repeat.
8 Sep 2016, 02:18 AM
#40
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

it has to be top players. watching WPC, many people who spend a lot of time on the forum might be surprised to many, many of the strategies deployed by the top players. a great example would be the games where barton relied on rakentenwerfer and ostwind to beat shadowada and almost beat Jesulin (or did he barton win that game)? the two units that are time and time again regarded as "UP", "trash" or "useless" were Barton army's backbone and it challenged even the biggest names in this community.

relic should analyse with the data gathered from WPC top 32 and talk to 10-20 top players to make the patch.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Sweden 72
Netherlands 16
Germany 757
Russian Federation 182
unknown 1

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

474 users are online: 474 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48731
Welcome our newest member, may88forex
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM