Have Relic abandoned the game?

I can keep going, but you should see the pattern here.

yup, no doubt about that. but please, even if just for the sake of entertainment, keep going. it would, however, be beneficial to know the respective skill bracket in which you've spent the majority of your 2.5 years gaming experience to put your in-depth analyis into perspective.

The bias is strong with this one.

Indeed

The bias is strong with this one.

But don't worry 'cos it's objectively wrong.

I do agree with some of his points, such as,

Tanks easily wiping AT gun, meanwhile I can be feet away from a AT gun with an oswtind and I'd be lucky to decrew it

SC- tho I wish it was bullet proof, and tho I acknowledge that as OH is FORCED TO GO TIER 2 every game, SC is cheap. Bullet proof would make it OP. I would gladly accept a price change to make it bullet proof tho so it would maybe just maybe make the allies have to react to a first threat

Something needs to be done with OH armor scaling especially vs infantry, as of now allies have the most durable leathal infantry that have virtually no real punishment to unskilled lmg blobbing.

They haven't abandoned it. They've just utterly failed at developing it.

Just look at the Winter Balance Patch.

It's taken them TWO AND A HALF YEARS to address model positioning/bunching that's been making the Wehrmacht unplayable against anyone with any semblance of skill due to instant wipes.

And every major balance patch over the past two years has been buffing the Wehrmacht and OKW because of how utterly wrong the USF faction game design is (Riflemen: five model squad with insane durability that rewards the player for rushing directly into enemy fire and into an enemy infantry squad's face in a tactical game where all other factions have to use cover to have any chance).

As someone above said, Relic are, in fact, their own worst enemy.

They haven't had a single proper game designer on their team since DoWII.

• Instant squad wipes from AoE
  
• Broken formation mechanics
  
• Instant first model death upon engaging any threat even in cover (WM 4-man squads with no armor or health boost to compensate)
  
• ENTIRE SQUADS THAT DO NO DAMAGE (WM Pioneers, OKW Volksgrenadiers)
  
• Units that lack survivability to such a degree that certain units simply couldn't be used for ages (222 still takes bullet damage)
  
• Utterly unusable upgrade distribution (such as the Panzerschreck upgrade being on Volksgrenadiers for TWO YEARS)
  
• Anti-tank guns hard countered by tanks (this years after releasing a game where AT weapons properly snare vehicles)
  

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. All these kinds of issues have either been fixed extremely slowly in previous major balance patches, are about to be fixed in the Winter Balance Patch, or have yet to even be addressed and may never be.

Any other game developer failing this hard would've been laughed out of the gaming industry ages ago.

Agree, but CoH is in the "kid RTS" genre (SC, DoW.etc) so you can't expect too much from it. It is good for what it is.

Show Spoiler

I'll have to say that complains about design are valid but damn, there isn't enough cheese to accompany that wine.
While it's unfortunate that "every plane tells a story design" has been changed a bit too late, there are several issues which are only seen and mention through a single side.

I'm sorry you miss the opportunity to use some of this:
Show Spoiler

Can we stop with this whole BS of "my side and their side". Every side has it's BS, it's just that they are either more popular/meta or more niche, easier to use or cheesier to do, in the vanilla roster or army tech or behind a comander pay/supply wall.

I'm sorry you miss the opportunity to use some of this:
Show Spoiler

...are you seriously implying that veterancy has anything to do with proper design?

If you are, I'm not sure anything I say, or any evidence I present, can sway your position.

You do NOT, under ANY circumstances, EVER design characters/units/classes/factions/etc. based on specific, mandatory use patterns.

When designing a VIDEO GAME, you are not creating a finite, consumable product like a movie, TV series, book, etc. -- you are designing a SYSTEM that users must be able to use fairly.

• 222 ARMORED car not being armored while the other factions' ARMORED cars are is unfair.
  
• Instawipes due to objectively wrong game design that they have ADMITTED TO in the patch notes for the upcoming Winter Balance Patch (if you refuse to believe me and you refuse to believe when Relic admit to their own failure, then there's really nothing more I can say to convince you) are unfair.
  
• Some infantry units being able to run directly into enemy fire and lose no health or models, while others lose their first model instantly even in heavy cover -- that's also unfair.
  
• etc. etc. etc.
  

Do you see the pattern here? It's objectively wrong to design a game that makes things unfair for players at ANY stage of the game, in ANY situation, EVER.

I MUST be able to use every unit effectively without needing to exert unjustifiably larger effort than my opponent using the same kind of unit, and every unit must be potent enough to perform its role no worse than similar or equivalent units in my opponent's army. (And before anyone chimes in with another fallacy, none of what I just said means the factions have to be identical -- they can be different but equally potent, which is objectively correct game design.)

Also, "Wehmracht is a defensive faction that relies on its tanks" is NOT AN ARGUMENT. That is objectively wrong game design, yet when Relic released those infographics classifying factions as either offensive or defensive, people ate it up, because most people don't know any better and believe the cancerous lies Relic and many other devs spew to cover up their ineptitude.

• My infantry should never be inherently inferior to enemy infantry.
  
• My armored cars should never be inherently inferior to enemy armored cars.
  
• And yes, my tanks should never be inherently superior to enemy tanks.
  

In simple terms, the rule is: if any player is ever unfairly at a disadvantage due to the mechanics of the game (something the player has no control over), the entire game is objectively incorrectly designed.

Until Relic either realize this (if they really are so incompetent that they don't understand correct game design) or admit it (if they've been intentionally hiding it and slowly fixing one issue at a time due to not giving enough of a damn about delivering a correctly designed product), the game will continue to receive questions like the one asked in the title of this thread.

Everyone forgets COH1 had target tables, which enabled individual units to have more or less power vs other specific units, ie., infantry couldn't do a damn thing to light vehicles (I think if you had about 20 flame pios you could eventually kill an M8 though).

The simplification of the database is part of why COH2 has less depth. They just couldn't do things like give jeeps a bonus against snipers. So enough bullets from infantry will even damage a tank...

Everyone forgets COH1 had target tables, which enabled individual units to have more or less power vs other specific units, ie., infantry couldn't do a damn thing to light vehicles (I think if you had about 20 flame pios you could eventually kill an M8 though).

The simplification of the database is part of why COH2 has less depth. They just couldn't do things like give jeeps a bonus against snipers. So enough bullets from infantry will even damage a tank...

They were also a mess to code (IIRC) and made the game had even less balance patches.
Also, your 2nd statement is bullshit. LIGHT VEHICLES DO HAVE bonus against snipers and we do have target tables but those are rarely used at all. No amount of bullets (unless incendiary rounds) will damage a tank, because hits with less than 3%(?) to pen are ignored.

snipe

I'm implying that you are trying to hide an acceptable argument of bad game design behind "allies have always been OP, Axis UP!".
The pics were part of showing how every side had bullshit depending on which patch are we talking about. Your comments seems biased, people seems to think so. I would be surprised if you could show us a balanced distribution of faction play or a high level replay. Before this comes as an elitist comment, i think you should check how much does it cost the 222 in comparison to either ANY light car/tank.

Before going on detail about it, i'm gonna say that i recognise what Relic tried to do and why IMO it was bad and HOW it's been changing in the last patches.
Relic gameplay design was that each faction should had power spikes which would force the game to go into a back n forth state (from unit timing, to vet, upgrades or call ins). PROBLEM is that this can only be applied when you are making a game with only 2 factions. Throw up more variables and the whole concepts get's thrown out of the board. This is why SU vs OH has always been balanced and in some way USF vs OKW. When we mixed USF vs OH (it was a USF steamroll in 1v1 on release) or SU vs OKW (maxim spam or OKW infantry outscaling whatever you could throw at them). This doesn't even account for spawn or map balance.
So there's has been a normalisation of WFA (and soon UKF) to be in line with EFA while at the same time, upping the power of the old factions.

-222 ARMORED car not being armored while the other factions' ARMORED cars are is unfair

222: 210MP/15f You know what does it have a similar cost? The M3A1 scoutcar from soviets which get's utterly destroyed. The USF dodge cost 240mp/20f and is even worst. M20 cost 340mp and 20f and requires a munition upgrade to gain some armor which won't help against the 222. At least you get a zook, which won't help if someone boomrush you and attack commands the vehicle to later run away.
Do we jump to the Greyhound? 280mp/40f and get's destroyed by the 222.
Things that will destroy it 1v1 but not 2v1: USF AA HT (350mp/50f), AEC (280mp/60f + tech unlock cost) and T70 (200mp/70f). THE vehicle which will wreck it 100% of the time is the Stuart.
ATM 222 is OP for cost and one of the things which holds OH atm (in sum with the sniper).

DESIGN WISE: yeah, you could argue on why not making it a pseudo P2. Thing is, 222 is there to put a stop to SU T1 play and light harass. It's cost and timing are too soon for it to be any "stronger".
The PUMA, doctrinaly introduced, was the "armored" unit to deal with light tanks in a fight fire with fire solution.
222 is there to be an extra soft counter to all the light vehicles. This is why there's no longer a muni upgrade for it, so you can use faust, schrecks and tellers in conjuction with a pak if necessary.

INSTAWIPES: i haven't make a single statements against the changes nor i'm in favour of maintaining most of the ones which are in the game.

INSTA single model kills: this is your lack of understanding of game mechanics. Whenever a unit has LOS and is in range of another one, it will start shooting at the first model that it's in range. If you have units outside of cover or moving forward, it's very likely that a single model is gonna be targeted first. Not frequent but there is something called RNG. Shit happens. Most common thing is seen this with conscript squads with a lucky roll since each weapon has 16dmg. 16*5=80.

INFANTRY running and having no casualties: either the squad they are facing has low DPS or they have high veterancy which is not offset by simil vet and/or they are running through craters which grant light cover. The bane of mid/late game infantry play.

It's objectively wrong to design a game that makes things unfair for players at ANY stage of the game, in ANY situation, EVER.

I wholehearted agree with the idea behind this but THIS IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO BALANCE a game nor is the magic solution to have a popular/good game.

To give an example:


Relic is between Blizzard and Valve. We are now moving into RIOT stage.


TL;DR: i agree with some of the basic design problems you bring up about the game but if you want to have a good discussion with people taking you seriously, then leave aside biased opinions about whatever factions. You are just getting labelled as a "X Fanboy".

PD: IF you think you can do better then please present us a mod. If it's good and popular Relic will make it into the live game. IF not, the words are just gonna be blown up by the wind.

Snip...

+1000 to this.

Relic invested into ESL then fired their entire dev teams shows the true purpose of ESL: To give them the ability to say they are a competitive esport instead of actually being a competitive esport.

Warpaint existed to sell skins. When the tourny organizer goes on vacation after the opening rounds, which had more hype and viewers than the finals, it shows warpaint was a way to drum up skin sales.

Having the community make the patch is just a final apathetic move to keep that skin money a rolling. The least they could do is to actually allow the patch to come out instead of dicking around with penals for months when the much needed sniper, stugE, and t70 nerfs are being held up.

Relic is between Blizzard and Valve. We are now moving into RIOT stage.

PD: IF you think you can do better then please present us a mod. If it's good and popular Relic will make it into the live game. IF not, the words are just gonna be blown up by the wind.

Relic aint moving into the riot stage because riot actually balances a game. CoH2 has a ton of bugs and poor "number" type balance(such as increase/decrease cost of unit or buff/nerf unit performance), which is stuff that can be easily fixed. However Relic's big picture philosophical balance is extremely poor. For example, their asymmetrical balance has many flaws. Take the armor and AT difference between allies and axis. Axis has some of the best late game armor AND the best AT. The pac40 has high pen and a stun shot, which can deal with most of allies' weaker armor. pgrens get two schreks while USSR doesn't get any handheld AT and the USF equivalent is significantly weaker then schreks. If you're going to give axis the best armor, allies should have the best AT.

There is also the blatant missing of key component "asymmetrical balance": Flamers are the hard counter to buildings but USF, brits, & OKW (volks atleast have nade) dont get them, USF lack of late game arty (took years for T0 mortar), usf lack of sniper & sniper counter, USF lack of mines, USF lack of late game armor, USF weak AT nade, brits lack of AT nades, brits lack of early & late game arty, OKW lack of early game arty(this is why maxim spam owns them), ect. There is a reason the most competitive factions are OST & USSR since they are the ones with the most components. If you want to be cynical, they leave the gaps in the factions so they can sell commanders to plug up the holes but you run into the problem that you can only go one commander so youre still stuck with holes.

Also the dumb RNG, which is 100% counter intuitive to balance, is still in the game. Random weapon drops, vehicle crits, and vehicle abandons are still in the game. Model drop is still inconsistent.

Lastly your point of "if youre a better balancer, make a mod and prove it", it is Relic's job to balance their game. I'm against the whole idea of having community members creating balance mods & balancing the game since Relic should HIRE devs instead of exploiting free labor from the community. Even if you think community mods & balance is a good idea, the winter balance patch isn't out when there is only two weeks left of winter so even if your ideas are good, it will take forever to get into the game. Personally I've offered my insight to Relic, which they've never accepted, and it doesnt matter since the competitive community is pretty congruent with the current problems and how to fix them but they remain unfixed. We can quibble about the big picture philosophical issues but when there are countless bugs & simple "number" issues that takes HALF A YEAR TO FIX ONLY SOME OF THEM, the game be dead or at the very least, the esports scene is dead.

Every time one of these thread pop up questioning relics competence I immediately think of Alec Baldwin impersonating Donald trump on SNL.

So enough bullets from infantry will even damage a tank...

This is not true.

Relic aint moving into the riot stage because riot actually balances a game. CoH2 has a ton of bugs and poor "number" type balance(such as increase/decrease cost of unit or buff/nerf unit performance), which is stuff that can be easily fixed.

Could you give us a list of your top-10 remaining bugs in the game that WBP has yet to address?

when game developper has to rely on players to fix bugs/balance, you know how shitty this game company is.

Could you give us a list of your top-10 remaining bugs in the game that WBP has yet to address?

I don´t know if they all were fixed but here are gamebreaking bugs.

• USF crew hopping bug - to save manpower and popcap
  
• Tank phasing - tanks can move throught tanks
  
• Ost incing shot bug (or feature)
  
• Tank pathing, light vehicles have problem to turn around because of cover problems
  
• OKW mines do not supress
  
• British bugged tank abilities
  
• Both OKW and USF halftracks are still moving like retarded unless you micro them like crazy
  
• MGs sometimes dissapear when crew die, mostly when shot by artillery fire. MG´s still have enaught health. There isn´t even HMG wreck afterwards.

• Ghostwiring still exists, you can wire kubel off for example, or ghost part of cover while sitting on the other
  
• Motocross bug - light vehicles sometise do 360 degree drifts, losing speed and dying.
  
• Few vehicles can get stuck into own carcases (eg 444 - remaining 222 get stucked into dead 222)
  
• Reloading bug, HMG´s and oswinds aren´t able to reload while out of combat often resulting into 1 burst and then long reload, giving enemy option to flank HMQ or kill oswind
  
• Deathloop

• HMG´s overshotting their max range (range you can see when you click at hmg) while being in house

• Elevation bug - tanks often cannot shot on infantry that is on hill, ISU152 have biggest problem with this - makes it almost useless at langres .

• artillery "doubleshot" bug artillery pieces (mortars,light howies) can shot 2-3 rounds in very quick succesion because they fire normal round, barrage round and normal round, often resulting into squadwipe

• Firefly tulips are often missing kingtiger. No matter how I try, I always miss second tulip, even when kingtiger isn´t moving

• Weapon stucking bug - you can stuck 2x lmg34 on obers or flamer and sweeper on royal engineers

• Royal engineers flamethrower incosistency
  
• Capping flags still block tank pathing
  
• Light vehicles can push infantry out from cover, giving OKW clear advantage with kubel
  
• Kingtiger being uncallable until you chose doctrine
  
• There is still heavy snow around buildings on many maps
  
• you can still block units retreat path via ghosting
  
• USF dissappearing nades
  
  These are all bugs I can give you now, If I think a bit more maybe i will find more of them, but still you can see how many bugs are there. Bold ones are gamebreaking

when game developper has to rely on players to fix bugs/balance, you know how shitty this game company is.

-EVERY GAME DEVELOPER RELIES on players for FINDING bugs. Same with PROPER feedback for balance concerns. Problem comes with TIME between patches AND players actually fixing them.

snip

If you weren't as butthurt to constantly repeat the same message and read what i wrote, you'll realise i'm not saying Relic is transforming into Riot, but the idea behind how to balance a game.
A) You make new flavour of the month OP unit and making either Axis/Allies OP, B) Give each faction something broken to abuse C) Nerf whatever is overpowered in order to bring them in line with the other units/abilities

Not going to expand on design and RNG cause there are parts on which i agree and disagree.

For your last paragraph, have you read the message i responded to? My complain could be resumed to be as you say: "Make a mod and show us". If you want to go a bit more deep it would be: if you have the knowledge and time to do a mod do so, if you have the knowledge and time to write about it do so BUT in a constructive manner, if you don't have the time just play the game and post replays.
Whining on a forum cause XYZ are OP is not gonna change the game.

it is Relic's job to balance their game. I'm against the whole idea of having community members creating balance mods & balancing the game since Relic should HIRE devs instead of exploiting free labor from the community.

I've agreed with this sentiment when the game was released or had a year or 2 of lifespawn. Right now you should be realistic. Most if not all companies drop support in between the first year or 2 after releasing the game.
Not everyone is Valve/Blizzard/EA which has their own platform on which they can release updates at their will.
Games with constant support are F2P which relies on constantly updating the game and releasing content, mostly cashing on whales. OR a low pay 2 entry with huge amount of skins sellouts such as CS.

Could Relic have done better absolutely. But keep looking at the past and complaining is not gonna check the actual situation. The game is in life maintenance, and whatever it gets, is from the community for the community.