Yes okey I am no noob I don´t blob them. Mostly I play with 3 Shooters at the beginning and then I don´t add some. But when the first shooter is out you going cap an then there is the Kübel who pinns you and in consideration to the Heroic pioneers the first shooter squad needs to retreat.
Yeah, why is that TWO OKW units working together, Sturmpioneers and the Kubelwagen, can force ONE American unit to retreat?
|
|
Needing a PAK 5 minutes into a 1 v 1 game is really shitty for the Wehr player, though. It'd be a different story if the AA HT arrived like 2-3 minutes later. |
|
No duplicates + you always get something would fix it. As it stands, if you have everything except one commander unlocked, your chance of getting him is like 1/200 for every 3 hours of playing.
Getting rid of duplicates would at least create a steady sense of progression.
|
As to studies on reward/punishment incentive systems, they are being misrepresented and misunderstood.
I guarantee you, that if I place a gun to your head, you will perform atleast as well, if not better, than if I offer you 1million bucks
Totally not what I was talking about. I'm talking about the effect of adding a system of rewards ... and how it can reduce the inherent value of an activity. I don't know why people keep bringing up negative reinforcement - the point I wanted to raise is that positive reinforcement by itself can create unintended side effects. |
|
Sorry, I wrote than in a misleading way - the stars weren't "taken away," it was just that they stopped giving them out, so they never lost their rewards, just stopped getting new ones. The conclusion: giving out the stars motivated the kids, but trained them to place less value on reading itself.
You know when people say "I played for three hours and got nothing but a stupid face plate, why bother"? That's what I mean. They were playing before with no possibility of a reward, but with random rewards thrown into the equation, the playing itself loses some of its value for some reason.
edit:
Maybe this is a psychology experiment?
"What if we took something that people already did for fun, and then attached an aggravating award system to it?" It's actually fascinating. |
|
Well, it is silly, but there was a study where the researchers took a group of kids and gave them a "reward" system for reading, with stars or some shit like that, paired with a control group that didn't have such a system in place. The kids who got stars temporarily read more than the control group, but when the stopped giving out stars, the experimental group began reading LESS than the control group.
Basically, when you setup a reward system, it fucks with peoples' motivations in weird ways. I blame war spoils for doing just that, in what I think is mostly a negative way.
Not sure if anyone really like the paid DLC, but they bought it, at least, so it seemed to me like it was working well enough. My response to it was simply to wait until the game/DLC went on sale - no objection to the principle, but I want a good portion of the content, and full price that ramped it up to somewhere around $80-$100 which is too much IMO. Instead I waited and got what I wanted for around $40 in total. Works for me.
edit - clarity. |
|
It reflects the game's emphasis on balance over realism - it makes no sense, but it keeps smoke useful, etc. I mean, is it really that much sillier than homing AT grenades and P-fausts? |
|
These don't do it for me anymore since I learned German, but I agree with the points raised.
Well, okay, a few moments were actually funny anyway - don't really like Hitler reaction meme, but this is a good one. |
I think WF is too blobby, but even so, it's waay less blobby than CoH 1 - airborn, anyone? I wouldn't really look into CoH 1 because it didn't handle blobbing well at all, and like Katitof mentioned, putting CoH 1 MGs into the game without all the crap that annulled them will probably lead to weird results.
Also, would everyone at least agree that blobbing has become more viable since WF came out, even if you don't think it's a problem?
Look, me and others have given several tips all over the thread. You can consider some of them and try to improve your play, or stay on the forums and wait for everything you don't like to be nerfed. But only the first option will improve your chance to win.
Speaking for myself, I don't believe I've lost any games due to blobbing, but rather to other things ... I just think blobbing is more viable than it should be. |
If you think I got to rank 8 at soviet 2v2 by blobbing, feel free to keep thinking that.
But soviets don't really have much blob potential, it's more of a US/OKW thing ... not unbeatable or even overpowered, just more viable than it should be.
Again, no is suggesting that a lone HMG should defeat a blob, just that it should impede one more than it does. As it is, a well composed blob can walk over an HMG supported by a few squads without flanking, which is silly. |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
