Intelligence Bulletins
18 Dec 2012, 00:35 AM
#81
Posts: 43
Whoever plays better in that particular game... we're not robots and people make mistakes. Same answer in CoH as well, except that there's ALSO luck involved.
18 Dec 2012, 00:37 AM
#82
Posts: 35
"As a competitive gamer the hardest thing to do is to acknowledge your mistakes and learn for them instead of making endless excuses." Daigo Umehara
Proceeds to get 6-0'd by Infiltration.
18 Dec 2012, 00:41 AM
#83
Posts: 100 | Subs: 2
Whoever plays better in that particular game... we're not robots and people make mistakes. Same answer in CoH as well, except that there's ALSO luck involved.
If one player plays better than the other, then they are not equally matched.
18 Dec 2012, 01:56 AM
#84
Posts: 43
Then there is no such thing as an 'equal match' by your definition. It's only a theoretical match where 2 clones fight each other.
If two games are identical except for the fact that in one game, the soldiers have 100% accuracy, and in another they have 50% accuracy, it should be pretty obvious how such luck could be the deciding factor in some games, even if the players are 'equal'.
If two games are identical except for the fact that in one game, the soldiers have 100% accuracy, and in another they have 50% accuracy, it should be pretty obvious how such luck could be the deciding factor in some games, even if the players are 'equal'.
18 Dec 2012, 10:41 AM
#85
Posts: 3293
I think this is starting to leave the relm of reality and enter into the world of philosophy.
Failure is always an option. 
It's a happy massacre?! (yes, yes it is!)
Caffeine illegal for WiFi's to ingest in 48 states, 2 colonies, and 1 providences. 
To make most awesome thing in universe combine Bears and Nicholas Cage! 
and remember kids, we didn't start the flame-war!
19 Dec 2012, 06:06 AM
#86
Posts: 55
To give a good example of how luck simply can't be removed from strategy games and is an integral part of them wherever uncertainty is present, I just watched a vCoH replay where the Axis player had cleverly laid mines next to some heavy cover where his Volks were holding back some rifles. To extricate the Volks from their cover, the Allies player charged forward and dropped a grenade on his foe... triggering the mine and massacring all but one Volk!
The American player had no idea the mine was there and the Wehrmact player did not know his opponent had grenades. Later that same game a machine gun team ran past over some mines, which were simultaneously triggered by some riflemen, causing an explosion which slew the entire MG.
The American player had no idea the mine was there and the Wehrmact player did not know his opponent had grenades. Later that same game a machine gun team ran past over some mines, which were simultaneously triggered by some riflemen, causing an explosion which slew the entire MG.
21 Dec 2012, 11:03 AM
#87
Posts: 102
To give a good example of how luck simply can't be removed from strategy games and is an integral part of them wherever uncertainty is present, I just watched a vCoH replay where the Axis player had cleverly laid mines next to some heavy cover where his Volks were holding back some rifles. To extricate the Volks from their cover, the Allies player charged forward and dropped a grenade on his foe... triggering the mine and massacring all but one Volk!
The American player had no idea the mine was there and the Wehrmact player did not know his opponent had grenades. Later that same game a machine gun team ran past over some mines, which were simultaneously triggered by some riflemen, causing an explosion which slew the entire MG.
Wow, just like real war, I liked
21 Dec 2012, 16:25 PM
#88
Posts: 1550 | Subs: 7
Well that is less luck and more poor planning
21 Dec 2012, 17:31 PM
#89
Posts: 55
Not really, he was sort of ambushed by the rifles. By the time he tried to get his volks away from the mine, it was too late. Had the attack occurred anywhere else, he would not have lost most of the squad.
27 Dec 2012, 16:37 PM
#90
Posts: 41
But when you place a mine, you should not even be in cover somewhere around it, because whatever the opposite player knows or doesn´t know that it is there, it might give him an advantage. So a move like that is actually a mistake. Like in real life - it´s a danger zone - even though it´s your own mine.
You still think Bear Grylls is not in COH?
27 Dec 2012, 23:45 PM
#91
Posts: 486
I think there is a difference between if you made a conscious move to do something, and the outcome was affected by luck, as opposed to making a conscious move and having the outcome depend on luck. If I place a mine and run over it and happen to get ambushed that was lucky of him (because he didn't know about the mine)
but if I place a artillery barrage perfectly infront of a blob and they still charge through with all the shots going wild, then I've done all that is possible within the realm of the game to make that artillery hit, but I still miss because luck said nope.
Most luck can be negated by proper planning, but some luck in this game (mostly crits and artillery) still play a bit too big of a role to make the game feel competitive.
Though I cant stress enough, luck and chance is something that makes CoH incredibly exciting. I utterly HATE games were you can measure everything and easily calculate how something will end. (Prime reason Blizzard games doesn't click with me)
but if I place a artillery barrage perfectly infront of a blob and they still charge through with all the shots going wild, then I've done all that is possible within the realm of the game to make that artillery hit, but I still miss because luck said nope.
Most luck can be negated by proper planning, but some luck in this game (mostly crits and artillery) still play a bit too big of a role to make the game feel competitive.
Though I cant stress enough, luck and chance is something that makes CoH incredibly exciting. I utterly HATE games were you can measure everything and easily calculate how something will end. (Prime reason Blizzard games doesn't click with me)
No spreading out, no fancy stuff, just smash through. Let's see how those degenerate sophisticates handle a healthy dose of pure unreasoning violence.
28 Dec 2012, 16:37 PM
#92
Posts: 65
I think there is a difference between if you made a conscious move to do something, and the outcome was affected by luck, as opposed to making a conscious move and having the outcome depend on luck. If I place a mine and run over it and happen to get ambushed that was lucky of him (because he didn't know about the mine)
but if I place a artillery barrage perfectly infront of a blob and they still charge through with all the shots going wild, then I've done all that is possible within the realm of the game to make that artillery hit, but I still miss because luck said nope.
Most luck can be negated by proper planning, but some luck in this game (mostly crits and artillery) still play a bit too big of a role to make the game feel competitive.
Though I cant stress enough, luck and chance is something that makes CoH incredibly exciting. I utterly HATE games were you can measure everything and easily calculate how something will end. (Prime reason Blizzard games doesn't click with me)
Thats what could make this game great IMO. People love watching games where you can never be sure who is gonna win. Why people love the NFL so much.
Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.
2 Jan 2013, 19:07 PM
#93
2 
Posts: 538
I do like the general concept.
It could force you to stick to variations in gameplay. In current CoH for example, artillery in 2v2 can get really annoying. But if you get some bonus for your infantry after the enemy keeps spamming arty on you for 10minutes that forces him to change tactics. That is good.
Or if you know, somebody just loves Tigers and has an excellent Tiger play. Then you might be able to take some anti-tiger bonuses into the game.
Not sure how to implement, it sounds to me like another idea of countering strategies that focus one single unit / tactic. That is good.
It could force you to stick to variations in gameplay. In current CoH for example, artillery in 2v2 can get really annoying. But if you get some bonus for your infantry after the enemy keeps spamming arty on you for 10minutes that forces him to change tactics. That is good.
Or if you know, somebody just loves Tigers and has an excellent Tiger play. Then you might be able to take some anti-tiger bonuses into the game.
Not sure how to implement, it sounds to me like another idea of countering strategies that focus one single unit / tactic. That is good.
Greetings from Nürnberg - always happy to increase our local COH pool for local events - more glory: Rankade ladder
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
47 | ||
 |
|
|
4 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.620222.736+5
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.919405.694+3
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236