Profile of elchino7

Removed flaming post.
I'll have to but i wont invis the following quotes so please edit your comments.

TBH not that hard to confirm. Just stick a squad of say riflemen in the massive swamp in the north of bryansk forest and give an ostheer pio a flamer and kill the 3 models with MP40s. If the flamer does half damage, 100% confirmed. It's in the mod tools so I assume it's factual anyways.

True, although his remark was true. Negative cover is "negative". Water (if applies) is "water" but both are "red cover".

/thread title amended,

hope it will save this thread before it´s too late ...

I just did a "reset" cause it seemed further posting was blocked.


Ontopic: you won't ever seen a commander been removed so forget about that.

Also i think that stand fast is just better. Advance emplacements is heavily mp wise, can be countered through constant pressure or completely ignored if on 3v3+ and map dependant (arty depends heavily on spawn position).

Design wise, it's just cancer design

In 2v2 a jagdtiger hurt more the axis team than it helps, at guns are here to counter Fireflies and Su-85, and shreks

But when you are facing the possibility of party cover, CalliOP, Land mattress, you don't want to rely on AT guns to be your main source of anti tank.

A single JT saying "YOU SHALL NOT PASS" is easier to use than positioning correctly an AT gun wall (and it doesn't bleed).

I don't think they needed to rethink every mechanic and to getting it to perfection (design wise? implementation wise?) is nearly impossible.

You should read this article.
http://kotaku.com/10-big-myths-about-games-debunked-by-the-people-who-ma-1737839268

That still doesn't justify/answers the problems with COH2. I consider Relic (on CoH2) been doing 2 steps forwards 1 backwards with too many high-lows for this last 4 years.
You can make the excuses you want, which might be realistic and out of their hands, but at the end of the day what it matters are the results. If it's due to spaghetti code, UP employees, low numbers of them assigned to the project, lack of QA or a problem on how the work flow is done, for the consumers it won't matter.

I'll do a revision from what IRC. I'll skip the goods (the game, battle servers, constant "reworks" even if they were at a low pace, etc.)

1-You can't justify them implementing commanders when CM say months before released that there wasn't gonna be gameplay changing elements behind a paywall.

2-Giving them the middle finger to those who bought the "REAL" collector/limited edition.

3-The mess we have with EFA commanders because THAT WAS A REAL lazy/money grab decision.
A smaller core set of commanders for "ranked" multiplayer and leaving the rest for ToW and custom games would be good. Instead we have 20+, many of them never seen, and all or most of them having the same repeated abilities. This was rectified with the new factions.
Note: the supply system was god sent but unfortunately arrived a bit too late.

4-Bulletins and Blizzards were interesting features badly though/implemented. Blizzards had like 0 priority in order for it to be less frustrating/balanced/dynamic gameplay wise (just take a look at the changelogs). Disabled due to probably lack of manpower to work on it.

5-For +2 years, the whole design direction of "every plane crash tells a story" aka BAD RNG. This kinds of RNGs are expectable on something like Hearthstone, not on an RTS which can have an avg of +25mins games.
Ex:
Show Spoiler
I can get a REAL bad roll on having an AT gun miss of fail to penetrate a certain vehicle. That's part of the "good" RNG. Now, if i call a recon run, my opponent has AA, shoots the plane and then it suddenly kills my opponents whole vet 3 main line infantry and i win the game due to that. Neither of the players is gonna feel really well cause neither had influence or intention on doing that.

6-REAL SLOW times on fixing game-breaking bugs. Slow decision on fixing/balancing latest DLC commander/faction (TA/Windustry 6 months of reign). I don't expect patches every week, not even monthly patches, but 4/6 months is quite a time lapse specially with glaring issues.

NOTE: i can understand something as the gun shoot sound bug been hard to detect for example. That is justifiable.
What I don't get why they kept releasing "old builds" with new patches, which introduced several ninja changes which were already fixed/dealt with in previous patches. AND i'm not talking of complicated mechanics. Think about how on the WFA beta, we had SwS truck crush removed and then it was implemented on the live build because someone problably used an "old" build.

NOTE2: you can't be taken seriously when a single guy from the community (at that time it was only Cruzz) checks your game, gives you a list of all the changes applied which are not mentioned on the changelog and tells you what they broke.

7-Communication and community handling.

i gave side armor as example: someone at relic decided it was fine to not have it. that is stupidity or lazyness, no other option....

OR because of how the game plays (dynamics, handling, mechanics, engine) it might not make too much sense on having it? IMO it would be a layer of depth which doesn't really add to much due to how positioning and projectiles and handled.

Example:
On an FPS such as Battlefield, i think they handle this well and it makes sense since you have FINESSE control of both the vehicle and the projectile. Positioning and more so angling is important. It's not the same hitting the rear armor at 90° than doing so at 15°. Since on that game there's no "deflection" this is just reflected on pure different damage values.

On CoH2, IMO, this not worth it, cause you'll had to implement a new mechanic and stress the PC even more to handle the respective position between the damage dealer and the victim target. Right now, it all depends on what part of the tank, the shell lands. If the vehicle lands an accuracy role, it would most probably land right on a straight line to the vehicle. But when not and with scatter, what would be a "frontal" shot can transform into a "rear" shot with enough RNG. If side armor was implemented this would be even worst. Not to mention it would mean more work, test and headache to balance properly.
PD: and i didn't even mentioned how bad and frustrating sometimes is too handle vehicle pathing.