By RNG, you mean the randomnmess of accuracy and critical hits evening out because both sides hold the same statistics, and it boils down to bare luck?
Mirror Match
27 Dec 2012, 07:05 AM
#301
Posts: 642
28 Dec 2012, 01:49 AM
#302
5 Posts: 25
It has to go. It's not starcraft. It doesn't suit this game completely. Relic talked for hours about authenticity, i hope it only stays in alfa/beta.
Agreed. It's a historic WW2 RTS not space marines. Mirror matches totally ruin the realism that is the underlying basis for the game. Relic has done so much historic research and by allowing mirror matches or mixed matches, would undo all this work.
28 Dec 2012, 04:12 AM
#303
Posts: 3293
this thread is becoming the equivalent of the GR balance forums. 
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!
28 Dec 2012, 04:16 AM
#304
Posts: 429
this thread is becoming the equivalent of the GR balance forums.
yeah...
28 Dec 2012, 04:30 AM
#305
Posts: 6
Relic is planning on creating two styles of maps right? Competitive maps that are more symmetrical and balanced, and Battlefield maps that are asymmetrical like the classic coh maps.
Just create two ranked ladders, one will be authentic axis vs allies battles that are strictly on asymmetrical battlefield maps, while the other ladder will be for competitive players to play with teams free on the competitive maps in 1v1.
Just create two ranked ladders, one will be authentic axis vs allies battles that are strictly on asymmetrical battlefield maps, while the other ladder will be for competitive players to play with teams free on the competitive maps in 1v1.
28 Dec 2012, 05:02 AM
#306
Posts: 429
having two ranked systems will defeat some of the purposes of mirror matching
28 Dec 2012, 05:13 AM
#307
Posts: 6
How so? I don't see how it's any different from having separate ladders for 1v1 and 2v2.
28 Dec 2012, 05:41 AM
#308
Posts: 3293
having two ranked systems will defeat some of the purposes of mirror matching
instead of a sperate ladder id rather see a stat for all your non mirror match reocord. instead then you can sort who has the best non mirror match record instead of a whole ladder. sperating the game pools is a bad idea.
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!
28 Dec 2012, 06:13 AM
#309
Posts: 6
The players that are going to be playing these asymmetrical maps are not going to be interested in playing mirrors or using the symmetrical maps. They should have an automatch they can use to find like minded players as well.
28 Dec 2012, 07:27 AM
#310
Posts: 13
Splitting the community is far worse than having mirror matches. It's not a way to go. The question for me is "can they do a balanced enough (for ivory tower dwellers) asymmetrical game?" If the answer is "Yes" then I'm strongly against mirrors for the reasons stated already. If "No" - well, that's sad.
28 Dec 2012, 11:31 AM
#311
3 
Posts: 368
this thread is becoming the equivalent of the GR balance forums.
We're not quite there yet m'thinks.
Splitting the community is far worse than having mirror matches.
+1
/Uninstalled
29 Dec 2012, 20:54 PM
#312
Posts: 61
The worst case senario of having mirror matches is that payers become, solely wehr or purely Russian. That would ruin the community, It great that top players have to play both factions and gives them a better prescriptive when dealing with balance.
30 Dec 2012, 03:58 AM
#313
Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2
Yes, just like Starcraft and Starcraft 2 have been ruined by competitive players only playing one race instead of 3.
Signature by Ginnungagap
30 Dec 2012, 08:41 AM
#314
Posts: 13
If SC is such a great game, why don't you play it instead of CoH? My worst nightmare is that CoH would become another SC-clone.
30 Dec 2012, 12:02 PM
#315
Posts: 4
Agreed. It's a historic WW2 RTS not space marines. Mirror matches totally ruin the realism that is the underlying basis for the game. Relic has done so much historic research and by allowing mirror matches or mixed matches, would undo all this work.
Agreed. All those zombie grenadiers made in the WWII would turn in their graves, if they heard about unrealism like this.
Also, shoutout to vehicles made in the 1930-1945 cycle. Even when hit by a huge piece of artillery on their side, they could still keep going at full strenght by only getting their turret damaged. People can't make stuff like that anymore.
At least people have evolved into being able to climb over sandbags these days.
Don't touch the realism on COH games please!
30 Dec 2012, 12:24 PM
#316
Posts: 93
This thread evolves into a sarcasm-mudwrestling... Abandoning!
Greets
Schepp himself
Greets
Schepp himself
30 Dec 2012, 17:09 PM
#317
15 
Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2
I personally want mirrors since it makes organising tournaments much easier so we don't have to use the VP leader rule in the deciding matches and even use BO1 for the early rounds.
Now for those guys who don't want mirrors what fairer solutions can you come up with than what we currently have.
Now for those guys who don't want mirrors what fairer solutions can you come up with than what we currently have.
30 Dec 2012, 18:04 PM
#318
Posts: 134
I personally want mirrors since it makes organising tournaments much easier so we don't have to use the VP leader rule in the deciding matches and even use BO1 for the early rounds.
Now for those guys who don't want mirrors what fairer solutions can you come up with than what we currently have.
How about letting the VP leader choose the map or faction, and then the other player chooses the other item. E.g. the leader chooses Ango (from a pool of allowed maps), then the other player chooses Wehr, so the leader has to play as Allies. Or the leader chooses USA, and the other player chooses Semois and PE.
Twitter: Relaxxer
30 Dec 2012, 18:42 PM
#319
Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2
If SC is such a great game, why don't you play it instead of CoH? My worst nightmare is that CoH would become another SC-clone.
Why yes, that is a perfectly relevant response to my point that mirror matches do not destroy competitive play by causing players to specialize in one race and thus have no sense of balance. I'm glad you've managed to argue against me effectively and I hope we can now all agree that I am wrong and wait hold on nope you're an idiot.
Just because I wrote "Starcraft" in my post doesn't mean I want CoH to be a SC clone. If you had any idea what we are talking about or why we are making the points we are making maybe you would have been able to realize that.
This entire thread is 40% good discussion, 30% unsupported claims, and 30% people attacking points that nobody is arguing for because they don't understand the discussion. It's frustrating but hey, welcome to the Internet I guess.
Signature by Ginnungagap
30 Dec 2012, 18:50 PM
#320
Posts: 41
That is a good idea. And adding mirror matches just¨for tournaments??
You still think Bear Grylls is not in COH?
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.921405.695+5
- 5.634229.735+8
- 6.276108.719+27
- 7.306114.729+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.1045675.608+3
- 10.722440.621+4
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1237
Board Info
501 users are online:
501 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49195
Welcome our newest member, fitena
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, fitena
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM