An un-supported Tiger is a dead Tiger (in reality aswell as ingame  )
Not necesarily. Requiering a screen of grenadiers in order to protect a Tiger from being disabled by frontal attacks by single T-34s is nothing short of daft. Likewise seeing a Tiger rush away like a little girl at the sight of a T-34.
I think the ram should fail if the tank received damage equal to a well placed shot from the Tiger, because it would requier a certain amount of skill and tactics to pull it off, yet make it that much more rewarding when you did.
|
What are you talking about?
All you need to do is cover your tanks with Gren squads and your heavies should never get rammed, ever.
Also, teller mines are your friend
Am I the only one who find it awkward that "the fearsome Tiger" needs grenadiers and mines to protect it from a T-34? |
|
I have to agree with your points. While I think some randomness is a good thing that rewards players who can adapt, too many abilities are governed by pure dumb luck. Making ram and faust/nade actually require some skill to pull of would make the game more tacticly challenging yet more rewarding and remove some of the feeling of cheapnes that abilities like ram has. |
The problem is, lobbies shrink the player pool even more. It was impossible to get ranked 3v3s/4v4s in vCoH because everybody who played those modes made lobbies and kicked anyone that was too good or too bad. The best part of CoHO was being able to find a 3v3 on Red Ball in like 3 minutes. It was great.
CoH2's playerbase is just too tiny. I think it's smart to limit the ways to find games currently, because it forces everybody into the same pool of players and makes finding games a lot quicker. When you only have a few thousand people playing your game at any given time, and when the majority of those players are playing campaign or AI skirmishes, you need to avoid fragmenting the playerbase as best as you can.
That is simply not true. I have played a lot of great and fair game through the lobby, and I still do. Yes you have some players who make unfair teams, and in COH2 you have the same kind of players quitting upon loading and matchmaking with theire clan, resulting in the similair problems.
If implementing a lobby would kill the automatch because people would choose lobbies, then automatch obviously isnt all that great or populair. THe playerbase is tiny, as you say, and will probably continue to shrink as long as vital features like lobbies are gone. Its not like all the people who hate VP or dont like random matches are going to play automatch. A lot of people, most?, simply leaves the game. |
As for more dead horse lobby talk:
It's not always apparent when the lobby is getting stacked, or any other kind of shenanigans. It's also not the job of the player, eager just to get in a game, to do all the work to find a fun game.
Lastly, I have a regular gaming group, but they're not available to play at all times. Not only that, different people have groups of different skill or preferences.
No lobbies, ever. People need to be directed straight into automatch, not sitting around in lobbies encountering toxic players and toxic game setups.
You have public chat, needs a bit more work, but if you want to make a lobby, invite people or make friends there to invite later.
The easy solution, if you were unhappy with lobbies, would be to continue to play automatch, easy as that. If you think finding a game is to hard, then dont. Noone would be forcing you. I have had a lot of great balanced games using the public lobbies in vCOH and I am sad to se that option gone in the sequel. |
This is why lobbies should be implemented giving people the choice , there is no need to choose one or the other, people should have both.
One thing I hate about CoH 2 are the restrictions ,either automatch 500 vp with someone from china or go through a timely, unproductive and frustrating process of adding every single player you want to play to your steam friends list.
You can now invite players to games but its still a hassle and will never be as easy or user friendly as a proper lobby.
I agree. Right now automatch has too many, to me, gamebreaking limitations, and im tired of laggy games, random maps and a gamemode I dont like that much. I think the game would have more players if they included such basic features.
Whats annoying me the most is how Noun and Relic played the whole "lobby-thing", pretending like nothing hoping people would buy the game before realising it didnt even have a basic public lobbies. |
|
I would be happy with a basic lobby system so you could filter out players with bad ping and performance, like we could in vCOH.
If one of the main reasons behind the lag is some animations having to finish, how is it possible to make such a blunder, and npt figuring out before half a year has pased? Am I missing something? |
|
A basic lobby system would be great, though I dont have too high hopes. |
I think what you're saying here is quite typical for all those of you non-russian who question Relics version of the Red Army.
Basically you have no beef with any russian. You may even know and like some. You side with them and see no reason to offend them.
That's a natural and good attitude towards other humans. I like that.
But you must try to divide your relation to present russians from your attitude to the russian history. Understand that condeming stalinism is not an attack on your russian friends (unless they belong to the minority of present stalinists ofc.).
It's exactly the same as with germans. Noone fears or hates germans today, but it doesn't stop us from condeming holocaust and make movies and games about nazism during WW2.
It's the same thing with the SU.
Im not saying that Relic should rewrite history out of fear of hurting anyone, but I think it was a wasted oportunity, and that the game could have had a lot of success in Russia if they had chosen an approach more similair to vCOH. |
|
The Soviet union did a lot of terrible things and was a horrible regime in many ways, no doubt.
As I see it, there are two main issues with the storyline.
1: You are repeatedly told during cutscenes and dialogue that everything you do is a waste, and that your victories are meaningless. That doesnt give me any further motivation to play the not-so-interesting campaign.
2: While the Soviet union did a lot of horrible things, focusing as much on those as the game does was guaranteed to chase away a lot of russian players, simply because its not fun to be told that your history sucks, over and over againg, and russians seems to have a hard time accepting theire history. Again, vCOH handled this excelently by focusing on the story of the soldiers.
Adding to point 2: I think its hard to make a singleplayercampagin, from the Soviet commanders point of view, that tries to have a certain degree of realism and historical accuracy, while still keeping it fun. Playing a side that is based on supperior numbers and expendability will always be less fun than playing the tacticly and skillwise better army. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
