|
What are your predictions and hopes for what Noun will announce at SNF this Sunday?
Let's get the usual suspects out of the way:
1. New commanders
2. Leaderboards/Ladder
I'm hoping for a revamped replay system.
I have a sneaking suspicion of Free to Play multiplayer, so they can better capitalize on paid DLC. But at the same time I hope that they revamp the paid DLC to be super cosmetic, instead of super unbalancing and community polarizing. |
|
There is a series of podcasts where a historian named Dan Carlin really digs into the human story of the Ostfront.
Look for a series called Hardcore History: Ghosts of the Ostfront.
In it, he does a good job of not just explaining, but really presenting the human side of on the war on the Eastern Front, and how atrocities on both sides started piling up, both against their enemies and their own soldiers.
He also does a good job of showing just how ridiculously stupid the Soviet organization as a whole was. It's easy enough to say it's capitalist propaganda, but you need to remember that the Soviet Union had a way better propaganda machine going on, and it was much easier for them to erase history to fit their idea of a great patriotic war.
Now, did CoH2 represent that equally? I actually have not played the campaign to find out as I jump straight into MP for these games. But it sounds like they go a bit too heavy into the soviet situations, without focusing on the soldiers' humanity, and without showing things like how desperate it was, and why such stupid things happened. |
|
Yes. It's still being worked on, confirmed in an interview to a direct question about it.
The problem stems from the middle-ware they use. When dealing with stuff like that you have to either wait for the middle ware to patch, then integrate it, or you write your own.
There's other avenues to approach the issue, but those are just as difficult and require an incredible amount of time going through every interaction in the game with those middle-ware elements, as well as any other systems causing performance drops and input lag.
Not really an excuse, but it is an explanation of why it's taking so long. Technically this should have been done before release for a retail product.
Go take a look at the "Make Faster Game" video blogs for Planetside 2 to get an idea of how complex optimizations like this can be. |
|
I'm not sure if shooting down the plane that comes with Mark Target actually cancels the ability. Anecdotal, I think I saw the Mark Target icon persist over a marked unit after its plane was shot down. This indicates that the plane merely provides sight of the marked vehicle. I am probably wrong though.
I mainly think that's something like Mark Target is impossible to fully balance with all the variables in CoH, especially as you get into team games.
I do not think raising its cost is the best way to go about, it's already costly, and as I said already, it's wildly inconsistent in use.
I keep pointing this out, but DoW2 had the exact same ability for one of the leaders for Space Marines. Relic deemed it too powerful then, and made it into an ability used on one of your own troops, which then increased its damage output.
I'm not saying this is how it should go, but I am pointing out that there's a precedent for this kind of ability being a problem that required fixing. |
|
Yeah, I think the multiple nerfs from different directions is the heart of the issue.
Relic has always had a problem of not rolling back balance changes in one area, when balance changes in other have an overlapping effect. |
|
Yes, an MG with its long setup, wide arc, instant suppress and pin ability did get out of hand.
There was plenty of evidence of people flanking MGs properly, only to have to heavily suppress or pin 1-2 units from one angle, pack up, move, and setup again to deal with the enemy from another angle.
It was even worse when they were supported by anything, which meant you could lackadaisically reposition the MG42 as the units chasing it would take fire from its support.
And that's the reason why the MG42 was nerfed, and maybe it could use a buff now. But it definitely should not be made back to those previous levels. Thing is, any change directly buffing its suppression without another change to make it more situational can lead to the same problems as before.
You might think I don't know the problem with the MG42, and that I never want to see it hit the field again, you would be wrong. I want to see MGs in use all the time. But I also want to play a game where Soviet infantry can actually move to flank.
And that's why I'm recommending such caution when they buff the MG42 again. |
Dem soviet tanks get to cap territory with vet, so there's always that to keep in mind with soviet armor contributing to map control. It's one of the most powerful features of the Soviet faction IMO.
It's easy to think so, in fact I thought this ability would be pretty useful.
Only problem is that any Soviet vehicle not moving around and flanking is going to get caught out and killed by superior German AT units. And, if you went B3 for T-34s and the T-70, then you're going to need those tanks moving around since that's the only mobile AT.
It is useful for capping back points and exploiting situations where you're already winning, but in an even situation, if you're sending a soviet tank to cap, it just means it's a target for an AT gun from out of the fog, shrek ambush, or P4 to chase it down.
It's useful, but not incredibly powerful. |
|
Back to the issue at hand, Mark Target's problem is that it has a wildly inconsistent cost to effect ratio.
It's only 80 munitions, but with the way Mark Target works is that you could have 1 dinky thing firing on the target, or 3 SU-85s and an AT Gun all focusing on a target.
Then there's the target itself as well as positioning. A P4 will usually die from Mark Target in an even fight situation unless it retreats immediately using cover or smoke.
That loss is a big thing in 1v1, but in 3v3 and 4v4, there may be plenty more P4s and stugs. Then there's the issue of unit preservation.
Or, say your target has incredible armor, that means that it's not taking damage for mark target to increase.
Similar abilities in other RTS games work because those games have always been about units blowing up in scores. |
Defensive Doctrine seems too powerful at the moment, only because of the 0 CP DSHK, which basically works like the MG42 during the dark times of MG ridiculousness.
It requires an early counter build, which was the exact same issue I have with other things that people say are balanced due to the early counter build requirement. Railroading builds in CoH2 kind of goes against what CoH is. Sure, countering is a good thing, but not so when it dictates the entire game.
Same thing for late counter builds like trying to stop the Tiger Ace.
The all in, counter this or die, styles coming to the forefront in CoH2 go against the nature of the game. Well, at least not without more feedback to opponents that this is happening.
>>Yet wont post own playercard.
Nuff said.
You are aware of your own ignorance, yet still continues to attack others based on it.
Who is the worse man?
I'm secure in my ability to play at an intermediate level. I'm also secure enough in my arguments to not need to unzip my e-pants every time I need prove a point, or dodge the argument at hand with attacks or fake platitudes.
This isn't Soviet Russia, I don't need to show you my papers. |
And your card is? Everyone else has shown theirs.
No Nullist, I'm not going to let you continue to turn these forums into an epeen contest.
Especially how you immediately jump to attacking any perceived stats issue, ignoring your own, instead of addressing the arguments, then pretend at acquiescence when people prove their stats superiority over you.
You were the first to ask, you deal with it.
If you find my info, feel free to post it, I'm not scared of mine or anyone's stats, but I won't indulge your strange hypocritical stats elitism any more. |
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
