It's never going to happen with such a small playerbase because it affects the players who don't care what region their opponents are from just as much as it affects the players who do care. You can't fragment the automatch population at all because it would be nigh-impossible to get matches. Most people don't want to wait 20 minutes for a game. |
So what you're saying is, if you're vastly superior to your opponent, you can beat them even with poor latency? Colour me shocked.
There were dozens upon dozens of SC2 tournaments where matches were skewed in favour of slightly lower-skilled players because of cross-region latency issues (see NASL, TSL3, and lots more). It was a big enough deal that some top players refused to play tournament matches in other regions because of latency. Tournaments would grant higher seeds their choice of region because they realized how big a deal it was, and still is.
Latency is huge when you're playing any RTS competitively. It's already hard enough being fast enough to catch everything and do everything you need to be doing at once. If I react correctly to a situation, I damn well better get properly rewarded for that reaction and not screwed over by latency recording the command a second later.
Any ping over 150 is incredibly frustrating to play with if you're trying to compete, regardless of the game. |
You can't play an RTS competitively with 300 ping. There are just too many situations that require quick reactions (dodging grenades, reversing vehicles away from AT guns, dodging infantry, dodging mines, etc.). Even 150 ping is stretching it a lot of the time. |
There are a lot of reasons for that though. There's no deep snow in vCoH, so your infantry always have a constant speed. The grenade throw animation is a lot longer in vCoH, so you have more time to react. Animations are different, so you don't have some squad members waiting until after an animation completes to follow the next command.
That last issue is the biggest, and was likely implemented because it makes squad movements look better and more realistic. Which is what my post was about. |
thank you
but yet again, so this patch worth as much the zero in math, however they have their own value
its broken, again...
Yes. |
It makes a lot of sense. It makes the game look better, because animations look more fluid and the movement of units looks more realistic. Seeing as Relic's target audience is players who likely value appearance over responsiveness, you can start to see why the tradeoff was made. |
If anyone has any issues with sharing our content on YouTube please let me know.
SEGA does not have a policy on monetizing content, and it's left up to studios to work with their fans.
Creative Assembly has a good program for registering fans who want to monetize content to help protect them from things like this. We're looking into it to see if it would work for us to help protect you.
Interesting. I've read a lot about how SEGA does not allow individuals to monetize videos of their games...
http://alloyseven.com/component/k2/item/115-monetize-gaming-videos
But if this policy has changed, good news. |
This isn't new, it's been happening for years. That article (which is painfully terrible btw) doesn't say anything about change, it just quotes a few people claiming they've heard of change. SEGA has publicly stated they don't allow individuals to monetize videos of their games. The only real way to get around that is to be small enough for them to not know you exist. |
Do you know what network latency is? No netcode can overcome the laws of physics. If you play someone on the other side of the world, you're going to have a delay. |
It's a game with drastically limited strategic options. It's not a strategy game, it's a tactical game. If you enjoy winning or losing based largely on your ability to micro and control your units, it's a great game for you. But if you're looking for strategic depth and interesting mechanics beyond simple unit control, you're going to be disappointed. |