Login

russian armor

the Fall Balance Preview has been put on hold indefinitely.

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (9)down
25 Aug 2017, 16:38 PM
#61
avatar of Svalbard SD

Posts: 327

The community have provided a lot of the maps for the game, a vast amount of skins (which Relic have financially benefited from a lot for almost no work on their end), and set up their own tournaments for years.

Given all that time and effort the community have put into the game, to keep it alive and relevant. I think the least Relic can do is let the community know what their plans are for the future of the game.

Will they be releasing any more patches, and if so what exactly will they be for?

Very well said. I see some people talk like a developer that neglects its community should expect not to be criticised for its attitudes and work. This community has been spending money on the game, organising tournaments, testing balance patches and otherwise supporting CoH2 for longer than most games are played, and the other side of that has been the shocking state of balance at game launch and incoherent, sparse support for ongoing balancing work.
25 Aug 2017, 19:12 PM
#62
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1664

Wow, most of you guys behave like little children in this thread, wtf is wrong with you?
If I read stuff like this



I imagine someone like this



now crying in his mom's basement into his Obersoldaten Waifu pillow because it is sooo unfair.

Get yourself together, if somebody told me some years ago that AoE4 will come, I would have cried tears of joy. I'll be so unashamed and quote myself from another post I wrote some minutes before.




Relic gave us a five year plan... that they never actually showed us. Seems rather disingenuous, no?
25 Aug 2017, 21:04 PM
#63
avatar of GhostTX

Posts: 315

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2017, 01:31 AMBudwise
I should quote myself in one of the previous balance patch threads where I said "You are at the tail end of the lifespan and should be fine tuning now, not making monstrous changes or else you may get caught at EOL with a half baked solution."

And here we are. RIP COH2, or the COH franchise imo. I don't see myself supporting Relic games ever again.

We should create PUBG.org now :D



I was thinking of buying pugb already, it seems like im gonna have to now ^^

I got tired of the imbal teamgames as USF (my fav side), so I shelved the game and moved to PUBG as well (not very good, but love the heck out of it) hoping to come back to COH2 when the patch came out.

Looks like COH2 is falling to the wayside for me like COH1 did. :(
26 Aug 2017, 00:18 AM
#64
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1



Please do explain how one is to become a better balancer when Scope is involved.

Honestly the right to do might have been to step down from the balance team as soon as they introduced the scope. Don't blame you for not doing it, probably would not have done it myself...
26 Aug 2017, 01:34 AM
#65
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742



Please do explain how one is to become a better balancer when Scope is involved.


Funny how the Scope never limited bug fixes.
26 Aug 2017, 03:12 AM
#66
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



Please do explain how one is to become a better balance when Scope is involved.


the scope was definitely unfortunate, but it's important to have realistic short terms goals as well as long term goals.

even without the scope in place it's important to pace changes to the game so each patch is a "stable" point. Was it really that important to change anything and everything in scope? It feels like a lot of the change implemented were waiting for a future enlargement of scope that never become truly fulfilled.

or recognize that a change might not fit the "vision", but it fit the reality and need. If a change to a in scope unit require a complimentary changes to an out of scope unit, the safer option would have been to shelve it or implement something different.
26 Aug 2017, 03:37 AM
#67
avatar of dOPEnEWhAIRCUT

Posts: 239



Funny how the Scope never limited bug fixes.


Brutal.

Honestly this needed to happen. The changes that were being proposed were more fitting for a mod (which ironically they started out as) rather than a patch to the live game. The mod team shot themselves in the foot by never fully understanding what Relic intended for them to do, and tried to push far too many design changes when they should have just been tweaking unit performance ever so slightly and fixing bugs. It was obvious this project became a "How do I buff my favorite army while nerfing the army that's my least favorite to play against" and the vocal minority perpetuated this ideology significantly on this forum. It was getting so bad that those who disagreed started becoming inactive in the community, and those who supported the mod team quickly took up mod positions on this forum - which in turn was very unhealthy for any discussion opposing the changes proposed by the mod team.

If anything I'm just bummed that our chance at true community balance patches were blown on a team that was incapable of realizing the scope of the changes Relic had intended for them to make.
26 Aug 2017, 04:12 AM
#68
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13



Funny how the Scope never limited bug fixes.


Bug-Fixes require far less in terms of A interacting B that also somehow interacts with C and I don't see how limiting bug-fixing does anything.

I mean, does something like this really need to be in tested as extensively as say tank destroyers adjustments that it requires its own thing to be placed in?

-Infantry units can target their snares at de-crewed/abandoned vehicles.


Should we just not bug-fix things that have been in the game?

26 Aug 2017, 04:22 AM
#69
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742



Bug-Fixes require far less in terms of A interacting B that also somehow interacts with C and I don't see how limiting bug-fixing does anything.

I mean, does something like this really need to be in tested as extensively as say tank destroyers adjustments that it requires its own thing to be placed in?

Should we just not bug-fix things that have been in the game?



You missed my point and went in an entirely different direction.

Kappa.
26 Aug 2017, 04:26 AM
#70
avatar of dOPEnEWhAIRCUT

Posts: 239



You missed my point and went in an entirely different direction.

Kappa.


That's gonna go over so many heads. Underappreciated comment.
26 Aug 2017, 04:26 AM
#71
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13



You missed my point and went in an entirely different direction.

Kappa.


Well, alright, please specify your point then.
26 Aug 2017, 05:01 AM
#72
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

You know, this website has logged me out from posting many a lengthy response on these forums.

I think this time it is for the best.

Thank you for the work put in implementing bug fixes and QoL changes that have gone a long way to help future proof this game for as long as it can muster without actual designers or developers.
26 Aug 2017, 07:01 AM
#73
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1389 | Subs: 1

One does not simply release FBP. I have waited this patch so much, not this announce :(
26 Aug 2017, 07:28 AM
#74
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



Well, alright, please specify your point then.


You should have act on the balance as you acted on bug fixing. Fixing the balance, not trying to change the gameplay between factions.

Penals are a great example of failing to fixing the balance and instead changing the gameplay around their usage like givinh them PTRS and sticky satchels while a balance fix would have been removing the FlameThrower or to link it to a late tier or upgrade + reduce a bit their non-vet stat.
The M36 Jackson is another example moving it from a long range TD to a dive-in expensive TD just because of Jagtiger and Elefant.

I'm not saying what you did wasn't good but wasn't requested by Relic.
26 Aug 2017, 08:49 AM
#76
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17



the scope was definitely unfortunate, but it's important to have realistic short terms goals as well as long term goals.

even without the scope in place it's important to pace changes to the game so each patch is a "stable" point. Was it really that important to change anything and everything in scope? It feels like a lot of the change implemented were waiting for a future enlargement of scope that never become truly fulfilled.

or recognize that a change might not fit the "vision", but it fit the reality and need. If a change to a in scope unit require a complimentary changes to an out of scope unit, the safer option would have been to shelve it or implement something different.


For neither WBP nor GCS were we able to set the scope ourselves. We were just given a list of things to change. It's only FBP patch that we were able to set the scope ourselves; we gave Relic a list of 11 high-priority items, and we were allowed to fix the top 5 of them, kind of.

For WBP, the scope was a bit more abstract (aka Light Vehicles and Infantry scaling). Despite repeated pleadings throughout the entire process we never managed to convince Relic to include call-in changes and OKW infantry; therefore the patch was already rigged to fail from the get-go. Nevertheless, at the end of WBP, Soviets had Maxim cheese and UKF had Cromwell/Comet cheese, so it's not like Vet5 would make a dent to either faction.

Then, GCS came and we were given a very restrictive list of units we were supposed to fix. Everybody had already seen Cromwell/Comet nerfs a mile away and we were waiting for it. However, by the time we had finished WBP, we were considering it would be completely absurd to ask the team to touch maxims without doing anything at all about Conscripts or Volksgrenadiers (let alone the entire OKW infantry line-up). So, yet again, the patch was rigged to fail.

A lot of mistakes were made in the process. e.g.,:
- The unfortunate handheld AT bug
- Being unable to convince more people to try out Penals (top player kept assuring us they never saw the point of going Penals anymore... when they could go for Maxims instead)
- Failing to adjust Luchs moving scatter and accuracy vs vehicles in time (though this one was overshadowed by posts crying out that PTRS Penals would make Luchs irrelevant; lol)
- Setting PIAT range too low (though that was before Cromwell nerfs, and amidst pagefuls of terrible off-the-mark feedback about enabling PIAT blobs)
- Failing to realise we could have reverted some Guards nerfs to keep them relevant after GCS patch (WBP guards were balanced according to OP maxims)
- Not pressing hard enough to completely lock M4C Sherman and Command Panther behind tech (the only two call-in vehicles in GCS patch scope..)
- Failing to realise, in time, that the only people that bothered to test GCS Maxims were doing so with bulletins stacked (which may be bugged).

However, given the restrictions of the scope, and bar those mistakes that are now easy to spot in hindsight, I don't think it was possible to do something more decent than this; we could have done a different kind of bad, however.
26 Aug 2017, 11:13 AM
#77
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



RELIC "requested" the modder work for them for free.

Just think about this.

You complaint about a free blowjob?

Obviously someone (relic) did not pay and we all end up suffering.


There is nothing to think about. If you ask me to paint your house in blue for free and I accept and then I paint it in green, you have the right to complain. Doing things for free doesn't mean people can't complain about it.

26 Aug 2017, 13:19 PM
#78
avatar of Bravus

Posts: 503

Permanently Banned
Soviet crazy guys with flammer in a car since games launch in 2013.

Just a example.

Waiting forever for better game engine/balance.

RIP coh2 competitive, just 4fun and funny moments.
26 Aug 2017, 15:19 PM
#79
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

All the belly aching over the community balance team is such wasted effort, and so misguided. They were trying to fix a game while having both hands tied behind their back, and in spite of this did a great job at fixing a number of balance problems.

This is a great example of how not to treat an active and engaged community from the Relic end.
26 Aug 2017, 15:25 PM
#80
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Thank god we got around to patching sticky satchells into the game and making penals the only viable option in the Soviet faction :snfPeter:
PAGES (9)down
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

565 users are online: 565 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM