Login

russian armor

a Discussion Balance, Flavour and #ESPORTSREADY

24 Apr 2018, 10:55 AM
#1
avatar of CadianGuardsman

Posts: 348

I'll preface this with the fact that unlike many on this site I'm a big proponent of balancing for the majority rather than balancing for the top 100 players. It's why I use #ESPORTSREADY as a tongue in cheek joke at Relic chasing the top 100 rather than say the top 500/1000 i.e. the vast majority of the player base, usually at the expense of flavour.

Now I'll admit that I'm a mid range player who got very bored of the 1v1 scene quickly infact I've only played 1v1 as Ostheer and USF. I casted a fair amount of mid tier games during the midlife of the game to help those coming into CoH 2 to get used to the game. Obviously I have a bias against balancing for 1v1 top 100.

That said onto my point, the past two balance patches, spearheaded by many contributors on CoH2.org as well as top players has seen a dramatic reduction in flavour for the game. From the abandonment of the dual soviet sniper. To Jackson's being buffed to insane levels to Riflemen losing smoke and their MG Suppression. All these changes dramatically shifted the factions towards one style of play. A very dull style of play at that.

I make a joke that "why would I play USF when I can play Assault Gren Ostheer" the only key difference is that Ostheer have a tier 0 MG to lock down territory and have an escape from MG's something the USF lost. Not to mention a better late game.

Honestly the biggest symptom of flavour loss is the mortar nerfs. Mortars needed to be nerfed. Relics #ESPORTSREADY balance method was to make them almost all identical. Balance achieved for the 1% of players in the top 100. Everybody else looses flavour and gets a free skin pack. Please choose between USF Mortar pack or Ostheer Mortar pack.

Is this a deal breaker or make the game worst on it's own? No but it's a symptom of two things, lazy balancing and further homogenisation of factions that upon release where very unique.

As I said earlier I don't expect this to be a too popular post but I felt it important to say as I see a lot of what made early CoH 2 fun disappear behind balancing for the top 1%.

TL;DR: Relics pandering to the top 1% of players harms the soul of the game and encourages homogenisation of factions. It's inability to accept slight advantages in certain areas has led to it completely ruining factional flavour and while the game is more balanced it comes at the expense of fun and flavour.
24 Apr 2018, 11:05 AM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Its not noobs playing vs noobs who scream imbalance.

Its the noobs who meet a better player who can play better.

Noobs will never learn and will always fail, regardless of the tools they have(remember first iteration Tiger Ace? People still lost, despite having basically Tiger skinned Ratte).

And when that noob will meet a better player with your way, its going to be stomped so hard and fast that his bitching on the balance will be remembered 3 generations later and the REEEEEEE will pierce the veil of universe itself.

This is why you balance stuff according to people who know how to use it.

Imagine if cars were made with people in mind who can't tell gas from break instead of actual drivers who know how vehicle works.

2nd part you're talking about is something completely different, its asymmetry and I also do not agree that asymmetry should be sacrificed in favor of balance and mortars generalization is the best example.

I believe factions should have different tools to achieve same goals, meanwhile everyone seems to be getting same toys patch to patch.
24 Apr 2018, 11:40 AM
#3
avatar of CadianGuardsman

Posts: 348

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2018, 11:05 AMKatitof
Its not noobs playing vs noobs who scream imbalance.

Its the noobs who meet a better player who can play better.

Noobs will never learn and will always fail, regardless of the tools they have(remember first iteration Tiger Ace? People still lost, despite having basically Tiger skinned Ratte).

And when that noob will meet a better player with your way, its going to be stomped so hard and fast that his bitching on the balance will be remembered 3 generations later and the REEEEEEE will pierce the veil of universe itself.

This is why you balance stuff according to people who know how to use it.

Imagine if cars were made with people in mind who can't tell gas from break instead of actual drivers who know how vehicle works.

2nd part you're talking about is something completely different, its asymmetry and I also do not agree that asymmetry should be sacrificed in favor of balance and mortars generalization is the best example.

I believe factions should have different tools to achieve same goals, meanwhile everyone seems to be getting same toys patch to patch.


The problem is that the two issues are almost always combined. Most top players will correctly identify the problem, this isn't a bad thing it's very important.

However the problem comes in when say a demo trap demolishes a vet 5 squad. In a casual game this is important but not game changing, not to mention it's incredibly fun to do. In a top tier tournament this can be brutal and cost entire games. I wouldn't consider the demo trap overpowered as it required micro or a massive investment of munitions if you put a mine on top of it and it led to some very intelligent traps.

>Balance Patch: Demo traps too strong, nerfed. All of a sudden a key tool for punishing blobs and carelessness is made useless.

Not all top tier players push against asymmetry but a fair amount do. A fair amount pushed to remove the abandon mechanics as too much RNG a few years back. I'm not saying balance the game for the newer players. But some of them have very red v blu opinions and it appears they are increasingly having the ear of Relic...
24 Apr 2018, 11:53 AM
#4
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

In general players seek out the most effective strategies. If those strategies aren't fun to play and play against then the game isn't fun and the game dies.

On one hand I can sympathise with those who don't like seeing things made the same unnecesarily: I'm not confident the Soviet sniper needs to be a one woman squad rather than just having its received accuracy change.

On that other hand people are taking this stance to ridiculous levels. I've seen people lamenting the loss of the Panzerschreck Volks Blob and the suppressing Kubelwagen in the last few days. If you consider the Volksblob unique flavour worth preserving then I don't know what to say to you.

Some things are little asymmetries worth preserving but some things were just bad in practice and needed to go.

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2018, 11:05 AMKatitof
2nd part you're talking about is something completely different, its asymmetry and I also do not agree that asymmetry should be sacrificed in favor of balance and mortars generalization is the best example.

I believe factions should have different tools to achieve same goals, meanwhile everyone seems to be getting same toys patch to patch.


I'm not sure there is a mortar generalization.

The patch notes give the impression of mass standardization because of the strange way they're written. However, the overwhelming majority of changes to the mortars were to traits that were already uniform. The only mortar being 'standardized' is the USF one and that change amounts to a normal setup/teardown speed and slightly more range.
24 Apr 2018, 14:35 PM
#5
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2018, 11:53 AMLago

[...]
On that other hand people are taking this stance to ridiculous levels. I've seen people lamenting the loss of the Panzerschreck Volks Blob and the suppressing Kubelwagen in the last few days. If you consider the Volksblob unique flavour worth preserving then I don't know what to say to you.
[...]

I have felt almost physical pain when I've remembered those abominations you've mentioned.

Clown car snipers, anyone?
24 Apr 2018, 15:57 PM
#6
avatar of CadianGuardsman

Posts: 348


I have felt almost physical pain when I've remembered those abominations you've mentioned.

Clown car snipers, anyone?


That was a memory too cruel to mention.

My personal favourite was the Priest on release. 1 barrage could lay waste to any OKW command buildings. It was a no questions asked auto purchase.
24 Apr 2018, 15:59 PM
#7
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

The community patches have mostly been a mishmash changes from a team with many conflicting opinions on how to approach problems of balance while being limited in various and arbitrary ways by Relic.

There's no designer or director to the process so while there's a lot of ideas being explored it is mostly guesswork without a plan.

And while I understand some of the complaints towards homogenizing the factions, I personally don't think this is the end of the world. But really, the entire history of CoH2 is a story of rolling back additions that were poorly implemented or poorly 'fixed'.
24 Apr 2018, 18:37 PM
#8
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

The problem is that the two issues are almost always combined. Most top players will correctly identify the problem, this isn't a bad thing it's very important.

However the problem comes in when say a demo trap demolishes a vet 5 squad. In a casual game this is important but not game changing, not to mention it's incredibly fun to do. In a top tier tournament this can be brutal and cost entire games. I wouldn't consider the demo trap overpowered as it required micro or a massive investment of munitions if you put a mine on top of it and it led to some very intelligent traps.

>Balance Patch: Demo traps too strong, nerfed. All of a sudden a key tool for punishing blobs and carelessness is made useless.

Not all top tier players push against asymmetry but a fair amount do. A fair amount pushed to remove the abandon mechanics as too much RNG a few years back. I'm not saying balance the game for the newer players. But some of them have very red v blu opinions and it appears they are increasingly having the ear of Relic...


You are confused in some facts.

1- Demo + explosives was a bug, on which damage was multiplied instead of added. Demo + mine against infantry was a stupid overkill. Demos on their own were more than not, single unit squad wipers.
IMO, demos should had retain lethality and useage, but made them more visible if not used in buildings or cover. You wouldn't need a minesweeper to see the model if it was in plain sight.

2- Abandon mechanics with functional vehicles makes no sense, if the crew can't be saved like with USF. Abandon mechanic with engine criticals are fine although some refinements could always had been done (Overkill should never allow for abandon AKA heavy offmap artillery not completely wiping artillery vehicles).

And while I understand some of the complaints towards homogenizing the factions, I personally don't think this is the end of the world. But really, the entire history of CoH2 is a story of rolling back additions that were poorly implemented or poorly 'fixed'.

+1



-People playing offmeta vs meta (always)
-Relic releasing new factions and commanders (1st pic)
-CoH2 meta before community patches. (2nd pic)
-CoH2 meta after community patches. (3rd pic)

:P

25 Apr 2018, 07:46 AM
#9
avatar of CadianGuardsman

Posts: 348


2- Abandon mechanics with functional vehicles makes no sense, if the crew can't be saved like with USF. Abandon mechanic with engine criticals are fine although some refinements could always had been done (Overkill should never allow for abandon AKA heavy offmap artillery not completely wiping artillery vehicles).


Just a quick response to this; does it make sense? I mean yes actually. Most crews would bail out the moment any damage occurred but it's a game, let's look at it mechanically.

Mechanically it does two things.

One) It creates new areas of contention and sub objectives (recover/destroy the vehicle) into the game. This encourages skirmishes in areas of the map otherwise not important.

Two)It also punishes players for going into deep with their vehicles. Not only can they loose them but they may be handing them over to their opponent who may desperately need the vehicle.

If anything the only change I'd make is that getting an engine/gun/ damage should guarantee a crew abandons with a very small abandon chance if nothing is damaged.

I agree with you on demos but it stands as an example of these community patches over nerfing things. It's now too expensive and has very little use.

Agree on that final image; very relevant. "Fun Sized" Unsatisfying, boring and barely satisfies your nutritional needs not to mention your hunger.
26 Apr 2018, 00:07 AM
#10
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

I still believe in my unsubstantiated theory that the Abandon mechanic was developed as a prescription to jeep/bike pushing of CoH1. It totally makes sense that the driver would/could get shot off before the whole thing explodes from damage. But for pieces of actual armor? Well, the gameplay implications have been described since launch.

:P
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

544 users are online: 544 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM