what if the game engine wasn't able to do that stuff though
what if greg wilson comes into your cubicle after you propose that idea and says "no that's too expensive we would have to overhaul the engine and time/cost to do that is too high"
Like I think it's great that you guys are such ideas people but frankly none of you are practical and don't really seem to understand that your ship isn't always afloat and in fact is constantly sinking. Just because whiteflash's ideas were ignored or whatever that doesn't mean they weren't good, I prefer the reality that the idea was considered, then deemed impractical to implement.
This recent patch disaster was a result of priorities and "what's seriously the best thing we can do right now" and not "wow let's just ignore the community". It's a procedural failure, I think, and it's easy for you fucks to play monday morning quarterback.
This is entirely possible, and most probable and there is nothing wrong with not having enough resources given the companies size...although SEGA could back them more if they wanted but thats not Relics fault.
But if thats the case...just tell us and I will stop feeding Relic ideas that the entire community support, ill stop making maps, ill stop expecting a better game from them, ill stop expecting progress, ill stop expecting anything more than occasional patches and commander releases which complicate an unbalanced fairly shallow commander system and unbalances the game even more.
Thats groovy, just TELL ME if Relic doesnt care about COH2, because not putting resources into a game and not caring about the game as much as the fans do are the same. If Relic doesnt care, or have the money to care let me know. |
Commander overlap isn't a problem though it's just a game design choice
there's bound to be useless choices when there's so many commanders. Even then sometimes just one commander ability can radically change how a faction is played.
also picking a tech up branch isn't that tactically deep lol it's only two choices
Disagreed entirely |
damn this chart blows chunks although i'll kind of forgive it for the fact that it's 3 years old and people got good over the years + changing game
agreed its OLD, gime some incentive and ill make it sexy as hell. but again. no incentive. |
"HEY SHOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A NEW JOB SINCE THE PEOPLE THAT CUT OUR CHECKS ARE GOING OUT OF BUSINESS."
If you going to do something do it right.
If your going to go down anyways, you might as well take risks to see how good you can make the game, not pitter out the lowest possible form of what COH is.
Relic never had a goal for the game. Its always FELT like its in some sort of disarray. "If you never have a target you wont hit it"
I have to say, the two patches before the brits came out the game was real fun and felt a lot better, but as usual if you just add factions and commanders it puts the game back into disarray. They dont get to a good place in balance then say OK BALANCE IS SOLID LETS GET THE MAPS THIS GOOD, or OK BALANCE IS SOLID LETS GET EPIC ESPORTS MOMENTUM GOING BY DOING X Y AND Z, they throw more content in and we go back to disarray.
Have A Goal |
|
patch notes? link? |
(voted other)
Honestly, become MUCH more transparent.
Right now, Relic is essentially acting as a mystery box; it's like this:
1. The community asks for stuff
2. Wait a month or two
3. Fix 1/10 things the community asked for
4. 9/10 random stuff
It just feels like there's very little connection between Relic and the community; biggest example being the last two major patches.
First, the community states that Brits are weak (they were), and the AEC was a notable candidate for improvement. Relic then over-buffs the unit, pushes the patch live, and leaves it in "unit eraser" more for about a month.
Now we have the current patch, where the fixes seemed like a good step forward, but didn't address everything. Regardless, the patch came out, broke a ton of stuff, was then partially reverted (before a weekend, no less), and then left (now we're waiting). And all of that could have been avoided with a 'beta test' patch. Release the patches on Thursday in BETA (i.e. that optional DL thing on steam), let people test them, and then review that feedback. If everything is good, release the patch on Monday/Tuesday, leaving 3-4 days to fix anything that slipped through the beta. If things are broken, well then it's just a beta patch. The live version is fine.
Then there's the question of actual game design and changes. Even with relic's weekly stream, it's REALLY hard to figure out what their actual "end-game" goal is. What is OKW supposed to be; a Volks-shrek blobbing faction with powerful late-game tanks? Or is this just a symptom of the current meta overriding the faction's design? Same goes for pretty much every faction (SOV Maxim Spam? USF Dual-upgrade blobs? Etc.). In the ideal world, where perfect balance is a thing, how are these factions SUPPOSED to play?
Then there's the whole "overbuff/overnerf" thing that's going on. What is the intent behind some of the massive stat changes in some patches? I understand that the AEC was overperforming, but were changes to the main gun, cost coax, burst and RoF really needed? That's five changes to fix one problem - that's a lot. On the other hand, the 222 change was done (IMO) correctly; it was weak, so they buffed ONE stat. If its still weak, they can buff a (single) different stat. If its now too strong, they know EXACTLY why it's too strong (HP change too great); only 1 stat needs to be adjusted to get the unit to the right place.
Once we have a good idea of what relic actually wants to do, and what their thinking is behind certain things, we can move forward much more efficiently.
+1
No goals = No Progress |
Ideas is always good on paper. I suggest you make a mod similar to Europe in Ruin for either CoH1 or CoH2, and then let Relic play it. That will actually make them think again.
But if all you can do is just writing out, then you can expect Relic might use your idea in future version at best, and completely ignoring your idea at worst.
Yep, they are not your slave, they are normal human as you are.
i am indeed a normal human, and they arent anyones slave that im aware of. thanks for that one.
making a mod to flesh out the best design for coh2 would only splinter the community more, thats not the way to build an esports scene.
im not the only one to come to relic with genuine improvements to the game that the entire community supports and would benifit everyone. im just using what i came up with as an example because i am the most familiar with that concept. |
I completely agree with you. Constructive feedback is always good. I think the key word that keeps getting ignored on this forum is "constructive".
One problem is when constructive feedback is posted, and the entire community backs the ideas in a big way. Relic still doesnt take notice. For the 10000th time i will refer to this. https://www.coh2.org/topic/11064/commander-overlap-a-serious-problem
EDIT: and after playing coh for this long i could refine the hell out of that original post to flesh that out to be much better than the original. but again, relic shows no interest so why would anyone put effort in |
I believe relic needs more positive feedback on things they are doing right rather than what they're doing wrong.
Constructive feedback is always good. (negative feedback) If its presented well and has validity to it, with agreement from other experts in whatever field your presenting (modding mapping balance)
But your 100% right i agree and im guilty of this too, Relic doesnt get enough positive feedback. If they did they might not change things that DONT need changing as much, i honestly dont know.
Relic you did a kickass job setting up automatic map integration into COH2. No question there. 
Having said that i stand by the whole 3 years wtf scenario that has played out. |
@WhiteFlash What I stated before is the common problem in almost all software development on the level of CoH. It doesn't affect independent devs when the guy(s) who wrote the actual blocks of code from scratch try to change it.
The current problems with Veterancy is engine related apparently. That engine was written several years ago and I bet non of the people who wrote the original lines are still around.
And if Relic is like 96% of the Software developing world documentation is lacking or non-existent. Probably the latter.
I don't know how Relics code is working I'm not a coder I just work in the industry and it is always a major bitch with any application/system older than 2 years cocks up for some reason because the guys who wrote it quit and when his/her replacements are trying to fix it they always mess something else up.
"if Relic is like 96% of the Software developing world documentation is lacking or non-existent"
If this is the case, and it very well could be, i sympothise with paperwork nightmares I would say as an engineer who deals with mountains of paperwork every day and still gets the job done i would say...
Start documenting how your own game code works I cant beleive i have to say this to a company thats been around for over a decade but yea this should be a no brainer, if a company plans on a life span of a game of 10+ years it better have documentation for the future of the game, this should be on their bucket list DAY 1 of development.
If management is the problem, if your statement is at the core of the lack of quality in COH2 (i dont think its the core, but its most likely a part of it) then so be it, just so damn sad seeing so much potential in disarray. |
United States
Relic Entertainment
