|
@Kinki
I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe that the points you mentioned are attributed to balance, and are fixable. I don't believe that because you don't have mirror matches means you cannot have balanced teams (It's weird because you can have mirror matches in COH2 custom games, not that I recommend it). Some bulletins will be definitely more popular than others, but that doesn't mean it would be unbalanced. By choosing a specific set of bulletins, you adhere to a specific strategy in which you use the units the bulletins benefit. For example, if you choose 3 bulletins that favor the maxim machine gun, your maxims will be very strong, but at the same time you lose out on other bulletins that could have benefited other units.
The situation you mentioned about is more of a logistical problem than anything else. While it is not the players fault that for whatever what reason he cannot access his account, it would be up the tournament organizers to decide what to do. I would imagine it would mean he/she would play under sub-optimal conditions, but that would hopefully be a rare case and the only other options would be to delay the entire tourney to solve the issue or disqualify the player.
Personally I like the idea of giving your armies perks based upon what you like using. It's not like its an invisible thing. During the loading screens you can see what the opponent bulletins are. I truly hope that COH2 will have a large competitive scene than vCOH, and if that was the case most RTS tournaments feature a best 2 out of 3, where you can change your strategy/loadout to better suit fighting your opponent.
@Hirmetrium
I was not aware of that point that Duffy said, thanks! I love the historical stuff about the soviets and germans (I find WW2 in general to be fascinating) I agree with you that vCOH (and to an extent, COH2) was not built to a competitive Esports game at the core, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be. That said, I believe the main cause of preventing it from being a competitive game is not the balancing issues (although it will be if relic does not address them) but random factors or chance factors in the game. 50% chance for entities to die in a vehicle. #% to critically hit a unit. These factors make some game units unreliable and inconsistent. I find that most competitive games attempt to reduce random factors.
P.S. Also in a tourney (would need relic's help on that) have accounts that unlocks all items for the tourney player. So all bulletins and commanders would be available during the tournament. However this is all speculation and is not at all what relic may or may not do. It would be cool though. |
Sorry if this sounds snotty, but i fail to understand the connection that you are making. Balance is the spice of life, a game in this case, and makes said game more interesting but consequentially impossible to balance.
Starcraft, however, the game you decide to use as an example of this is quite possibly the most balanced RTS of all time featuring three very distinct factions and a win spread of nearly 33%. (Source: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all)
Intel Bulletins are not an example of racial diversity fyi.
If so then I did a bad job explaining what I mean. no apologies needed.
No, I did not say Balance is the spice of life, diversity is. I use starcraft as an example because despite having 3 radically different and unique playable factions/races, they do an amazing job of balancing. My point was to say that it is possible to have asymmetric playable factions with balancing, just that it is harder to do so. I am advocating for the stay of asymmetric factions. Balance != diversity. I feel intel bulletins also push diversity because it increases the asymmetry while also granting the player options. It just makes it that much harder to balance.
Bottom line is that I feel intel bulletins can increase diversity/asymmetry but does not make it impossible to balance, just harder. I feel I should mention the core of this is that I disagree with you when you mentioned imbalance was built into the core of the game. I think asymmetry is built into the core, not imbalance. |
I love how every thread, T-70 included becomes an argument about maxims 
Only where mjsegaline is concerned. Also it's due to him spamming the exact same post into multiple threads. |
|
That's no different from the Ostheer where they build their first building "off the bat", leaving no units to capture. |
|
I point to my previous post |
We cannot build the maxim immediatley, germans can build the mg right off the bat. Germans will have mgs on the field way faster then a russian will have a single maxim. If the fuel points dont have mg42s on them before the maxims arrive, then the german player is not playing right
That is simply incorrect. The soviet player can build the maxim just as quickly as the MG-42. Both units require a building to produce. Both factions can build said building immediately with their first engineer/pioneer. |
I can see how mulitple maxims set up facing ur infantry can be an issue, but this is very resource heavy for the soviet and makes him very suceptable to any form of armor, light or otherwise, not to mention a good microed german can easily come up from behind and stay on top of the maxims with his infantry, or outright rush the maxims. The pack up time is not so fast that u dont have time to countinue running circles around the maxim. not to mention scout cars, and halftracks chew up maxims. Once your armor is on the field the maxim spammer will be at a huge disadvantage.
It's actually not as resource heavy for the soviets as you describe. It costs as much as a conscript squad, and handles infantry better than conscripts. It is not unfathomable to see 4-6 maxims on the field within the first 5-6 minutes of the game. hubewa also mentions a couple of good points. With the maxim spam you can easily control the entire map, denying your opponent fuel for any armor. You also have AT guns and conscript's AT nades to prevent any vehicular approaches. You have to not only consider the combat effectiveness of the unit, but also the speed of deployment, as can build the maxim immediately. |
You are assuming the maxim was designed to be used like the mg42 as a defensive unit, it was implicitly stated by relic that it was designed as an offensive unit to be moved with infantry on the go. Hence its speed and packing time, yet bad suppression and terrible firing arc.
If you cant flank a maxim then your micro is terrible. Two squads, run toward the maxim (dont even need to bother flanking it outright) one or both will be able to run right past it without being suppressed, if he starts packing up, move behind him, repeat and repeat until hes dead or retreats. Its not rocket science, it happens to me all the time.
I would refrain for saying someone is bad when you don't understand the full situation. It's very hard to flank something that can pick up very quickly and turn. The situation you describe has valid points, but implies that I have more infantry than he has maxims. It's very hard to flank when they spam maxims and have as much as you have infantry. They can do so because they know they can toe to toe against any Ostheer early infantry, and its far easier since the Ostheer only has a 1 second (pre-patch) window before the maxim can pickup and setup. StephannJF mentioned this in another post, but the lack of infantry small arms damage also gives the maxim plenty of time to move away and set-up again without needing to retreat. With grenades also being somewhat unreliable, the amount of skill and practice required to defeat this strategy is not proportionate to the ease of spamming maxims.
Also, you mentioned it yourself when you described the maxim as an offensive SUPPORT unit. The pre-patch (I am not sure of the post-patch capabilities) maxim was able to be an offensive INFANTRY unit, where as they could replace conscripts with maxims with little to no detriment. |
You guys talk about mg spam, but the germans can pump out mgs way faster then the russians can, as russians have to build an extra building before the ability to make maxims. The mg42 also has a lot better suppression giving it greater lock down ability, coupled with mg bunkers which russians dont have.
Am i the only one laughing a little inside when germans have all that crap and are bitching at russians for maxim spams?
I don't think that's a valid argument, that you have to build an extra building to make maxims. I could say I have to build an extra building to get grenadiers while soviets can get conscripts right away. Both MG teams require a building to produce, and both can build that building immediately if they so choose to do so. |
|
Some of the early RTS games had near identical units in every aspect. This lead to some very boring (my opinion) games as there was no diversity. Diversity is the spice of life. Sure it makes balancing a nightmare if not impossible, but it makes the game more interesting. It's what makes Starcraft a good game. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
