Profile of SunAngel

This new 'punishing good play/ rewarding bad play' issue seems to be a residual problem from the original CoH to me. When I first started playing the game competitively I was mercilessly destroyed in the first 20 or so games, and didn't play online for a couple of years later until i stumbled onto GR. then it was more accessible to me (not that I'm that good of a player.)

But the problem was there was no information available through the game that taught you the necessary gameplay mechanics needed for anything else other than the campaign. You had to go elsewhere to learn it, and I think this is the reason we are experiencing these wierd balancing mechanics.

It seems like a pretty poor solution to a very big problem to me. I'm aware that we got 5 or so video tutorials now (thanks for that) but what's to stop relic from linking to the community (strat talks and new BO's) when you log into the multiplayer lobby?? That would begin to educate a lot more people really quickly and would probably raise the bar for average standard of players as well as teach new players what to expect (possibilities) from their opponents and fundamental gameplay mechanics. this same system could also be used to showcase tourneys to the whole playerbase as well..

If they had this they could do away with this wierd 'comeback' system and put everyone on a level playing field.

The comeback system is a good idea, it's just more powerful than it should be. Fixing it requires tweaking numbers more than anything.

I agree that Relic should be promoting community content more than they are. Heroes of Newerth was a game that always showed a livestream on the front page for you to watch, and League of Legends gives you the option to watch 5 unique mid to high-level games. Even watching games helps players get better, and most players won't take the time to download and watch a replay by themselves.

pumped

pumped

I am sorry m8 but right now , whoever wins the early game has absolutely no advantage whatsoever , what if you have contained the wehrmacht into 1/4 of the map and inflicted heavy losses they make a pak a pgren and a halftrack and they destroy your 2 t34s and concrips and what if they buff the soviets well we ll see something like 2 guards and a t17 capturing berlin by themselves .

And you know what ? Its very very reasonable because when you artificially ruberband the skill differnce between the players the faction makes the player victorious , thats not supposed to happen . Now that would not be relevant but were talking about relic , balancing is not their strong point and with a ton of doctrines bulletins maps (and bs units like snipercars) and so on its gonna be a nightmare . right now i see the staghound and think its fine and dundy MVGame

Also on comebacks , if you have too many of them they become mundane , they are not exciting they are part of the routine , kinda deafiting its own purpose isnt it ?

The game must be enjoyable either when you r winning or when your losing and games that involve any kind of competition have one basic component awarding the winner and not the one who is loosing .

Finally , LoL has been overtaken in North America by Dota2 which is especially designed to award the winner and punish the looser quite harsly too , tbh LoL didnt have much competiton anyways in its field .

I realize that there isn't a strong advantage for whoever wins the early game. That's the point of talking about upkeep. It needs to be fixed so the early game advantage actually matters.

I don't know how a pak, Pgrens and a Halftrack would beat 2 T34s and Conscripts unless you throw everything at them without trying to be tactical. Not really a good example.

Yes, faction and imbalances make a big difference as compared to base skill. That's what I said.

Yes, comebacks cannot be that common, which is another reason why upkeep needs to be reduced. I'm stating that comebacks are an important element to competitive games, not that every game should consist of a comeback.

The point is not to award the loser. The point is to give the loser a chance despite what has happened in the game, unless the skill or resource disparity is incredibly high.

This isn't the place to have a discussion on LoL vs DOTA2, but look at all the numbers for both games (consistent players, twitch viewers, twitch broadcasters, total payout across all tournaments, typical professional salary, number of countries playing the game) and tell me why you think Dota2 being more popular in North America (do you even have statistics that show this?) is a good point whatsoever, especially when a large portion of the COH and COH2 audience is European.

No offense taken, although you don't seem to have understood the intent of my original post and are making statements without backing them up with concrete evidence.

Yeah, unless you make a statement that you want this game to become a competative e-sport arena.

I disagree. Especially in esports, both players need to have fun and feel optimistic, otherwise competitive games would consist largely of stomps. One of the reasons League of Legends is so popular as an esport is the constant potential for a comeback, not that whoever wins the early game is always going to win the rest of the game. Catering to the losing player is important to make the game more enjoyable to play and to watch, as is evident by the upkeep mechanic. The upkeep is too high, though, giving the losing player too much potential for a comeback.

That's not true. They are aware that the upkeep system is still flawed, however what worries me is that they might not have the same take on how to mend it.
Atm, the game is super frustrating, because no matter how large the disparity between to opposing teams, a game will last a minimum of 35-40min.

Not sure what you mean by the minimum time for a game being 35-40 minutes. I've never had that issue if there is a skill disparity. Against a much worse player in 1v1, I'll have them pushed into their base and not allowed to take any VPs. It would take roughly 12 minutes to reduce their VPs to 0 if you hold all 3 points, so let's say 15 minutes being the minimum if you rush the VPs and hold them (gives time for construction/production). Even then, if a player has absolutely no chance, which is still the case in a game with a massive skill disparity despite upkeep, the losing player will likely surrender early.

The issue with upkeep is not separating the pros from the noobs. The issue is when player skill is relatively similar and any slight inbalance would have a great impact on the outcome.