Thread: Damn it17 Apr 2015, 14:03 PM
Fuck it |
|
Hey,
I just wanted to share what I do to help me play a little better. One of the biggest problems I had was I kept moving my hand from the letter buttons or mouse to the arrow buttons to shift the map; it slowed me down a lot. This same problem happened with the tactical map, where, for some reason, it uses the 0 button on the numpad.
I got the program Autohotkey to help me out. Basically, once you download it, just use a text editor (usually notepad), and save the file as a .ahk
Then just double click on the script whenever you want to use it (it'll run in the background). Also, mine is setup so that it only works when COH2 is on; that way, you can run it whenever, and it won't interfere with normal tasks.
My script is set up to rebind the keys so that shift wasd reflect all of the arrow buttons, and shift e opens the tactical map. That way, i can do all of those things without moving my hands around. (I also turned off classic hotkeys in COH2 and use the gridkeys).
This is the script I use if anyone is interested:
;Start of Script
SetTitleMatchMode, 2
#IfWinActive Company Of Heroes 2
+e::Numpad0
+w::up
+s::down
+a::left
+d::right
;end of script
|
|
Captain tech with infantry |
|
The Ostheer Sniper, I feel, is very effective against Soviet t2, because then they have no counter snipe. I don't feel that it's a very good build against T1; instead, a fast scout car with 222 upgrade is generally a good way to deal with T1 because the scout car, snipers, and penals cannot really damage the scout car.
I personally agree that the MG42 needs more suppression. In COH1, if you got caught, you got suppressed. In COH2 it's almost useless.
Minds are useful, you just need to use them differently from COH1 mines. Instead, put S-mines in retreat paths or hard to see areas (ex: small crevices between buildings, or a retreat path of a flank). Teller mines are very effective later on in common choke points or base entrances or something.
Against soviets, Ostheer is actually pretty balanced. Against USF, it's pretty rough early and mid game. |
|
I want to add 2 things to Romeo's translation: a metaphor, and a solution.
Imagine that in soccer, there was a random chance that one side could randomly lose 4 players to red-cards out of nowhere. Or maybe, if a player scores, if their wife's middle name starts with a M, they get 3 points instead of 1. Or, imagine that in football, when one team scores a touchdown, it only counts for 4 points instead of 7, depending on the position of the Sun.
This metaphor, I think, makes it clear why these kinds of situations don't exist. They make the game worse for both sides because they cheapen the game. It's frustrating to play, knowing that freak incidents can decide a game, and it's less to fun to watch as well.
Now, my solution. If Quinn Duffy and Relic think that drama, and the ability to make a "comeback" are necessary, there are plenty of ways do this through in-game mechanics. I think the most obvious is to add more "high risk, high reward mechanics." The best example of this is OMGPOP's OKW play. Last tournament (the Wachts $1000 one), he played ultra-aggressively against Aimstrong, placing his forward HQ and schwerr HQ in the center of Semois. This was high risk, fun to watch, forced many engagements, and was dramatic. Eventually, Luvnest punished his aggression in semis, and won that series. This mechanic of the mobile HQ require you to calculate risk-reward, and has few RNG elements, but creates a huge amount of drama, and is genuinely enjoyable for everyone.
There are other, smaller examples of this, such as the strategy of going double flamer cars in the past.
High risk, high reward mechanics create the kind of drama that Relic and Quinn Duffy are talking about without cheapening the game or frustrating the player in the way that pure RNG mechanics do. |
critical hits are frustrating. but I like them. The risk of getting criticalled adds interestingness to your battles. You can't rely on the same tactics in the same situations every time- because RNG always adds an off chance for something unforseen to happen, so you have to include contingency plans for everything.
I'm always in favor of making RNG as player influenced as possible, (ie how infantry RNG is based on cover modifiers). But it still works even if the scenario is only lightly influenced by player actions (such as critical hits on tanks)
If you want to win, you have to have a mindset of "whats my contingency plan" not "i hope i get lucky"
I think that you already need contingency plans in most situations without RNG crits. Things like, what if the engagement doesn't go my way because shots deflect or my opponent brings support. RNG crits give players that don't properly account for those risks a get out of jail free card, and frustrate players that do. Watching a tiger that gets away with as crit is so frustrating when you take so much effort to flank it and have at gun support.
Plane crashes are just insane. Its not possible to prepare for, " oh what if a plane crashes into my forward retreat point and kills 3 squads."
I agree with your premise that RNG can be good, just that RNG that can't be influenced by players in any way, I think, is more frustrating than beneficial. |
|
Yup Yup Yup |
|
It's an interesting game. |
|
There's a ninja paratrooper squad that goes for a tiger ace kill. Watch for it. |
|
This is a specific US strategy that I use to finish off Langres as fast as possible. |
0
|ROGUE| Antilles950
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
