I enjoy the asthetical part of coh very much. Both in single- and in competitive multiplayer (the latter only enjoying through streams/shoutcasts, though). If people don't mind when one ostheer commander goes crazy and attacks another general, ok, but for me that's bursting my suspension of disbelieve (and it's tested by silly stuff in coh, as others have said).
So as an option: I why not. As a standard: no please.
Greets
Schepp himself
P.S.: To many posters, pls reconsider that many many people play coh (and coh2 in the future) that want different things out of the game. I feel that there is much exclusion in some of the posts here (quoting randomly: "who cares about 2vs2 and up anyway?!"). People play comp-stomps, people play 4vs4, people play the single player, people play highly competitive, people play the scheldt. Deal with it. And please look around and don't think your way of playing is the only right way to do it.
Greets
Schepp himself
Most of those users stopped playing coh years ago. The people keeping this game alive is the competitive community. |
Arguing that mirrors will magically make the game more competitive is silly. Good mirrors will make the game more competitive; bad mirrors, on the other hand, will drive players away.
If Relic can design factions that lend themselves to interesting and dynamic mirror matches, then mirrors should be in the game. If they can't, then mirrors shouldn't be added either.
Outside of some quasi-marketing arguments (which nobody here can make since nobody here has access to THQ's marketing and focus group materials), it comes down to pure gameplay. And because we can't discuss specifics of gameplay on these forums, any arguments one way or the other are completely baseless.
yes |
|
actually fast t4 was soooo strong in SvS. |
Has Relic actually been very successful? I thought CoH was a bit of a sales failure, the Homeworld titles were always niche, and the WH40k games sold as much as you'd expect licensed games to sell but not much more. And I don't know anything about The Outfit or Impossible Creatures but if they had been big successes wouldn't we have seen sequels or something like we saw for all of Relic's other games (except Space Marine)?
As for the talented team of people, haven't a lot of people left Relic since them?
I'm sort of worried for Relic. RTS games aren't big money makers and they are what Relic mostly makes.
WH40k was a big success I thought. |
i dont think mirror matches are that bad, it gives you more different gameplays in team games, i tried it in alpha and its not the big deal, sure its not historicly acurate but the gameplay is epic
Agreed. I loved in COH how there were not mirror matches, and I was quite hesitant about mirror matches. After playing Alpha I loved them. They add another strategic match. I would rather have mirror matches over some bad OF factions. |
|
Cant you pick the players by their automatch rank? All tie breakers go by most wins. Top 4 players get to play for each country. |
I find it strange that people don't always understand their role in something. This was an Alpha Stress Test. YES, feedback was welcome, but it was not mandatory, nor priority. To all naysayers, here's a clue:
Alpha Stress Test
Its not meant to balance the factions, its not meant to gather our opinions on the new mechanics. They are certainly open to them by their responses, but its an added bonus, not a first-on-the-list. Alpha testing is mainly to test server capacity, and gamebreaking bugs. That's gamebreaking bugs, not "shreks are too powerful". That only comes until Beta stages.
They gave us a chance to get a small piece of the experience in exchange. We have no rights to demand anything of them. Hell, for all we know, the actual updated build of the game was way more advanced, and the Alpha was an October/November version.
I suspect that community feedback is not gonna be a big issue for Relic anyway. Just based on what they plan for this game. |
I am not worried at all for Relic.
Some fans will remember that, when Relic started out, it was a developer that pretty much had to search for their publishers(e.g: guys with $$$$). This is why Homeworld 3 was never released, because Sierra had the rights (which have been reacquired. OH LONG JOHNSON!). Impossible Creatures was published by Microsoft, for instance.
So this time around it is different, because THQ actually owns Relic Entertainment. However, in the worst possible scenario, THQ will restructure and sell itself in parts to the highest bidder, Relic being one of them.
Why am I not worried? Relic has a very successful portfolio of games, they've always had a talented team of people together which is worth pure gold AND they have a dedicated community of loyal clients/fans*.
*Any decent, moneygrabbing, employee-exploiting company will value the costumer base as an added bonus
I dont think anyone is worried for Relic really. |
I think the biggest number of players who play ranked play 2vs2 xD
Yea b/c it is easier to blame your partner then yourself  |
|
Love how Jim is being brought into these forums. LoL |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
