Profile of Madok

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 101

General Information


Thread: Leaderboard matchmaking system broken?21 Oct 2013, 14:55 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Oct 2013, 13:27 PMLe Wish @Topic I think it would be interesting if you could actually check a box or something, where you accept long waitingtimes for better ELO matches. +1, I'd like that too. It's not going to happen though. That would be like admitting that the player base ist too small. A death knell for any (competitive) online game if there ever was one. Personally I am playing purely for fun, I don't give a damn about my ladder rank. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Elefants20 Oct 2013, 19:53 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Oct 2013, 16:14 PMThunderhun Lame as hell? Well yes, it is lame - as in slow. I guess MoerserKarL was referring to the movement speed not the overall performance. Jump back to quoted post20 Oct 2013, 16:14 PMThunderhun Also with spotting scopes it's ridiculous how far it can see. I agree. The combination of focused sight and scope is a problem. (A lot of forum members have commented on this already.) My guess is that the general sight bonus of the scope is hardcoded and cannot be easily patched. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Leaderboard matchmaking system broken?20 Oct 2013, 12:00 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Oct 2013, 10:40 AMMajorasLiepa To play versus good players are much better, then play versus top1000.Atleast you can learn samethink. While it might be an honor to play against a top player (and lose horribly) once in a while it does seem to happen rather frequently. I've had some ranked games in 1v1 against Top 50 players and let me tell you: As a mediocre player (800-1000) I didn't learn that much - even after studying the replays. Except, I do now know the following: Top players can micro 4+ simultaneous engagements - I cannot. So surprise! They outmicroed me right away. Those games were lost after the first 5 to 10 minutes and thus hardly any fun at all, for either player I think. Would be nice to have some sort of indication as to the skill level of your opponent like in vCoh. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Counter against 120mm Sovjet mortar18 Oct 2013, 18:10 PM I've found myself using the mortar halftrack regularly in my 1v1 builds. Mainly because the incendiary round offers a reliable way to clear buildings and to scare off 120mm mortars. As previous posters already commented the design decisions concerning the 120mm seem questionable. It's basically a light mobile artillery piece that's as survivable as infantry. Mobile artillery Squad wipes on full health units do happen if RNG so desires. Does a ton of damage to light vehicles. It's range enables it to cover strategic spots and in some cases enemy cutoffs from inside the base (or just outside of it) Same survivability as infantry It benefits from retreat modifiers unlike AT guns or light vehicles. Can be recrewed if the team dies. Now don't get me wrong: I am not calling for a nerf it just seems to break the usual unit pattern. .. and it can be pretty useless in 1v1s if your opponent is not using weapon teams and RNG hates you as you will have a hard time gaining vet for it. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Suggestion for German Mines10 Oct 2013, 20:38 PM +1 This would bring some much needed variety to the early game. 30 Munitions seems a bit steep though. Unless we get rid of the telltale signs that s-mines are in the area - in that case then a price tag of 30-35 would be appropriate. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Game breaking items6 Oct 2013, 16:28 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Oct 2013, 13:48 PM=][=mmortal My issue with buildings isnt the RNG aspect, its the imbalance in tier0-1 between soviet molotovs and the germans lack of an equivalent hard counter. That's not exactly a balance or design issue - its rather an expierence issue. As you said: Its counterable if you know what you are doing. I will grudgingly admit that vCoh had a significantly steeper learning curve. At one point I really thought wher bunkers with a mg 42 squad in it were unassailable My personal gripe with the current design is that there is no narrative as in vCoh. The early-, mid-, lategame advantages/disadvantages coupled with doctrines and teching choices allowed for those everchanging tides of battle that made vCoh so enjoyable. With CoH2 an early game lead (especially annoying if the RNG god has been unkind or your units die because of pathing/input lag) easily transitions into a significant mid/lategame advantage that a solid player will use to win the game. Also, there is no noticeable escalation on the battlefield: Infantry > light vehicles > tanks [medium tanks > heavy tanks > doctrinal super heavy tanks] It often took 30 minutes or more of intense fighting to see the first vCoh turreted tank on the field. Medium tanks at the 11 minute mark are not an uncommon sight in CoH2. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Game breaking items6 Oct 2013, 09:50 AM I agree with the OP. Jump back to quoted post6 Oct 2013, 07:35 AMLe Wish About input lag and pathing, I really do feel that they go together in a way. Sometimes it feels like the input lag when it isnt. Its the stupid 6th/4th member of a squad that is far away from the rest of the team. And for some reason, movement seems to require units to be closer togheter, meaning that the far away model needs to get back to the others before the squad moves. This annoys me as well. A LOT. Units being unresponsive (without any enemy interference) is a major flaw. In vCoh if a squad was spaced out too far (for whatever reason) the separated squad members would automatically "sprint" (move faster than normally) in order to catch up. This lead to capwalking (which I consider an exploit) - but at least the quads responded promptly! I would much rather deal with bastards using exploits like capwalking or ghostwire then feeling frustrated because my squads decided to make 2 stops when advancing over an open field. .. and thats just infantry movement dont get me started on viehicles. On a sidenote: I still cannot believe ghostwire made it through the beta and several patches despite reports in early beta. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: So, what is the Multiplayer 'narrative' in Coh2?3 Sep 2013, 21:33 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Sep 2013, 19:23 PMOnkelSam Can't tell, yet. But i really hope they end up with Ost~Sov at all stages of the game. I never liked how you almost knew you lost as US when you reached the late game and were behind, but still had to fight on because of this tiny chance of your opponent to fuck up. .. well yes except when you went armor. I pummeled more than one WM player into oblivion using Callies Anyway, despite Albus arguments is there any indication that relic is indeed aiming for OH~SO in all game phases? Are there any comments/interviews by the devs regarding faction design? After far more than a hundred 1v1 games however OH~SO does not strike me as a good idea. Currently loss of vital map presence/territories for more than a couple of minutes often results in one side gaining a significant and sustained unit/tech advantage (once the first tank hits the field). There are no 'comeback mechanics' (for either faction) in place like in vCoH. I do not think that can be addressed by tweaking unit stats or prices. The thrilling comebacks as the battle waged back and forth made vCoH enjoyable to play and watch. Sadly exciting Coh2 casts seem to be sparse... In: Lobby
Thread: So, what is the Multiplayer 'narrative' in Coh2?3 Sep 2013, 19:19 PM This is not about balance as such. This is more about the general ideas behind the factions. In vCoh there is a 'narrative' in a typical multiplayer game. (If you played vCoH you might want to skip this) In a nutshell: Early game: US > WM Mid game: US ~ WM (depends on the actual battle) Late game: US < WM In words: (Generally speaking - ignoring the vitally important doctrines for one thing) The US faction has the early advantage and thus the initiative. As a result the US player tends to apply heavy pressure to the WM player. While the WM player does not need a high resource income (early on) to stay in the game he/she still has to tenaciously defend some points. The intricate game design of vCOh prevents the US factions early lead from 'snowballing'. Higher US unit upkeep costs (US faction slowly bleeds MP compared to WM) Purchasable global WM Vet for entire unit groups (to counteract early unit losses) ... I am unwilling to explain all of subtle nuances of vCoH so I'll stop here, you got the general idea. A lot of vCoH game design/balance issues are still being discussed - however the general consensus is that vCoH is now pretty well balanced. So, what is the Coh2 MP narrative? I cannot discern one - I am really unable to do so. Call me dumb, simple minded, ... - go on, take your pick. Afterwards however, please explain to me how the narrative of CoH2 will/should play out once the balance issues are resolved. I simply dont get it. .. and please, please refrain from rants about your favorite faction being (currently) UP in each phase of the game. In: Lobby
Thread: Why would I build a Panther?2 Sep 2013, 17:42 PM I agree with the OP. The advantages gained by teching to t4 are negligible compared to the investment (an investment so crippling you rarely see German T4 in 1v1s). I am not complaining. Its just that P4s seem to be the more sensible option. Here is why: In 1v1s and 2v2s there is hardly any change in the 'pace' of the game itself usually associated with teching and thus the arrival of new units . Allowing for equally skilled opponents: The German player(s) invested heavily and gained access to specialized and more expensive tanks (well just panthers, brumbar is not feasible currently) - good for him/her/them. As competent Soviet commander's SU-85s will have already hit the field or are at least being teched/built - the Soviet play style will not change that much. (Well, possibly by building an additional SU-85 or two which might have been a smart move anyway.) The Panzerwefer is the only truly unique/new unit gained by reaching T4. In general terms: Panthers, (Brumbar)? - nice to have but late and expensive arrivals. I do not want to complain about unit costs or even stats - just like the OP I do not see the point of investing and waiting for panthers when playing OH. For me the P4 is just the more sensible option. In: Ostheer Strategies