Profile of Kiraye

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 30

General Information


Thread: How DOTA became a successful esport4 Feb 2015, 06:45 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Feb 2015, 04:09 AMdOPEnEWhAIRCUT I typed a lovely essay on this a little earlier, but my internet went out as I was editing and my responses to a few of you were lost. My main point was that I believe CoH2 is not as successful as the top DOTAs out there currently not because those DOTAs are "F2P", but because they are more accessible. What I mean by this is that the SysReqs are not as demanding as CoH2's, the learning curve isn't as high, it's a genre that's been around for a long while and that more people are generally interested in (While the CoH franchises' take on RTS is somewhat new), divisions and leagues to determine overall skill WITHIN the game etc. etc... I can go on. Saying that CoH2's shortfall in having the following that LoL and Dota2 have was that it is not F2P is silly. If CoH2 was F2P it still would not have the following those games have, because it just isn't as accessible. F2p is significant portion of being "accessible" as a game...... Well of course SysReq are part of the equitation, but less influential. Ohh and the learning curve. A debated subject. Lets define it first: "The definition of a learning curve is the time and study that it takes to develop knowledge or skills relating to a particular subject or task." As a person playing Dota for over 9 years and CoH franchise about 6, with extensive knowledge in both games mechanical structure and technical flow, I can safely say, Dota is more complex, hands down, the amount of strategical options, composition, item composition on heroes, the roles, making the right decisions at the right time and as a team, picks and bans, etc. I understand you may see it as inferior because it looks easier at first glance, and that contributed to its success, not being actually easier. CoH2 is even made a bit more easier in terms of the learning curve than its predecessor, with streamlined statistical system. In: Scrap Yard
Thread: How DOTA became a successful esport3 Feb 2015, 12:10 PM You can say that DOTA is "f2p", but in reality most players make some sort of transaction involving any popular DOTA Ehem, ehem... "Free-to-play (F2P) refers to video games which give players access to a significant portion of their content without paying." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-to-play Dota 1 could be considered even completely free, there were ton of servers which required no legal copy of war3 to play and was aimed for Dota players mainly. Back to OP, this statement regarding similarity is false: -In terms of game evolutionary phase it is more comparable to vCoH. Dota 1 was based on SC's AoS map while CoH2 as a RTS title with squad based and point capturing mechanics had multiple predeccessor (inhouse) like DoW, vCoH, CoHO, Dow2 (and their expansions). - Icefrog listened to the community. (of course there were instances were Relic listened but that was sparse and it was mostly on balance not game mechanics and design) - Dota was available in a vastly popular game, Warcraft 3 with millions of users (plus another few millions with illegal cpoies) with a vastly popular developer. - Dota genre was made by few eager individuals. CoH2 has company backup and a publisher, so external pressure are applied to it, in terms of were it could go. - Dota genre is f2p, so every one could try it. Coh2 is a title with upfront cost, plus the DLC policy made it a bit of negative "pay2win" reputation. In: Scrap Yard
Thread: Ideas for PE/Brits rework21 Jan 2015, 17:59 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Jan 2015, 11:47 AMDarc Reaver You can't fix pe without redesigning it. That's the Problem. You can't just remove the OP/broken abilities (like treadbreaker) from PE without something to compensate. Because then you leave the faction even more broken. That's the Problem with PE. If you abuse their shit right you have an extremely strong faction, but if you try to play them different they're too weak. It's impossible to Balance this faction with all the bullshit stuff in there. And it's even worse for Brits. I disagree, it can be fixed without redesigning the whole faction. You know, the issue is the following: there are several elements in both factions which requires minimal or no interaction between the players (bugs and oversights are just bonus on top of that). Lets take Treadbreaker for example: due to its long range, severity of the it's effect (immobilization) and the fact its mounted on a mobile platform, there is not much influence the other player can apply to affect the abilities outcome, once it is in range. The Brits take it to the more extreme: You are even punished for playing different (for example: the speed penalty and no vet when out of the aura) There also a great number of abilities which also not interactive with the enemy player when in their range. In my opinion both PE and Brits can be fixed if you make those abilities more interactive (oh and the drawbacks for Brits would be removed or reduced). In: COH Central
Thread: Elite Mod Balance18 Jan 2015, 17:06 PM * Jeep didn't do any damage in any scenario, now it does a little bit, and still not all that much. It's in a fine spot, I haven't seen anything oP about it Well at the DPS front it was good against most early game WM units except Volks. And Snipers, which was one of its intended role but was quiet subpar in it and that's what needed fixing. With pushing infantry it was really good, great even, the Jeep is an utility unit, you forget that. Against PE infantry and certain light vehicles it was great even at DPS. I am not saying that the measly overall 10% dps increase made it OP, just it is unnecessary and even that not addressing it's issue against Snipers (just a tad bit, which is still underwhelming). * The long run was never the problem it's the short run that IS the problem. After an early engagement where you'd go equal on a flank US was loosing out compared to Wehr. Well -3 mp per model will not affect significantly this issue, only makes it noticeable in the long run. Reinforce cost changes kick in after a time-period, so adjusting it and hoping it will fix short term issues is naive at best. Note that Supply Yard in itself gives upkeep bonus, so you could have buffed that bonus so basic Rifle strat would recover faster in MP and would not affect strats with BARs. And what you say only gets a noticeable issue at the long run. * Maybe, maybe not. The Croc does hardcounter full infantry tactics now. (While not having any form of AT) Is that a bad thing for the highest fuel cost unit the US has as it's disposal? All changes beside the flame speed and aim time are unneeded, not because it is OP/UP, just unnecessary. The thing is, a part of the other changes(for example FHQ, cost from 260 to 250...) you made are unneeded because of this, either adding or doing nothing or at worst affecting balance in an indirect way. * I'm well aware of the Quad being OP vs PE vehicles. That's what I pointed out to Lexy aswell before my games vs him. BUT if the Quad was a useful damage/suppression tool you'd seen it more being used for sieges, yet nobody ever used it. The problem with the quad is that it's munitions heavy, and dies in 2 pak shots. Since pak is cloaked you cannot gurantee that you'll spot the pak before it first-hit strikes your halftrack. And since it's using the halftrack moving tables (aka fucked up rampage pathing) it's highly likely that the pak gets a 2nd shot off, destroying your large investment with no return. The M8 can take a 3rd shot at less ammo cost, that's why it's more useful/more generally used. Imo the only chance to remove this issue would be to nerf the pak accuracy against halftracks significantly. On spot, except the less RNG based tweak would be the damage table, tweaking it so that vanilla halftrack would still die to 2 shots and with the quad upgrade it would take 3 (note that quad upgrade also gives +60 hp, I think even Relic devs intended to make it to take at least 3 shots but did not take the PaK camo damage bonus into the calculation). In: COH Central
Thread: Elite Mod Balance18 Jan 2015, 06:21 AM - Jeep underperforming against Sniper So instead you changed weapons stats which alter other scenarios in which is a Jeep is used, which quite frankly it not necessarily needed. - US MP bleed in the long run You took the short term route (adjusting reinforce cost) which affects the balance between the early US vs WM. The SY and its upgrades are meant to lessen this bleed in the long run... - Croc underperforming in its role as a AI unit vs infantry The aim time and flame speed were enough, the other changes were unneeded. At let me reply to a previous pm: The Quad dps for example: you send those charts months ago: was quite a bit weaker than the M3's 50cal for example. I buffed the Quad's dps. To be similar at close range. (and quite a bit better at long) so it truly becomes an upgrade. (Apart from that +60hp) Furthermore Quads burst and cooldown were very random and it's reload really long. This was really hampering the reliability of the weapon. You forget that to that 50cal to function you need at least 140 mp sitting in it. Plus you neglect that, the weapon feature is to provide long range dps(which is better amd it has a longer range than the 50cal(40m)) with better suppression and no units to be occupied in it. So it was already an upgrade. The damage value change will mess up the PE matchup also, its +40% increased dps vs the light vehicles against which it already performed really well. By this example I just wanted to point out that you are rather short sighted which (in)directly led to the points Purlictor and others made. My analysis is far from complete but I don't have enough time nor patience to analyze all changes, this was just scratch on the surface. Of course there are valid changes but the others are either unneeded or just messing around with no regard of indirect (or even direct) effects. In: COH Central
Thread: Ideas for PE/Brits rework18 Jan 2015, 06:02 AM I haven't made any changes to the British faction yet because I feel their faction design is so flawed they need a complete overhaul and doing that is beyond my limited modding abilities. Well if all the changes you made to PE are not considered a complete overhaul, I am curios what falls under that category by your standards, because reading through these changes, this is a complete overhaul. In: COH Central
Thread: It's time Relic to finish the job with coh!30 Jul 2014, 20:38 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Jul 2014, 19:38 PMGeneralCH Most retarded idea ever. Tov reward unit system is broken and thus will deteriorate the competetive automatch, which is already altered by brits and PE to the worse. Pls no coh2 stuff for coh1! It's not the system that is broken, only the ToV units are, too a certain degree. Also the OF factions are a buggy mess and would be fine with a few tweaks. In: COH Central
Thread: Elite Mod Continues - Version 2.2+29 Jul 2014, 18:27 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Jul 2014, 17:11 PM12ocky Yes that is possible: it's called Can_harm_shooter I might put it in, but doesn't it affect the gameplay around nades too much? It's also possible to fire Panzerfausts out of houses what would people think of that? I think he meant damage to friendly units in general, not self-damage from explosives. Actually most AoE weapons do more damage to friendlies(which are enabled ofc), because it does full damage to them at every damage-range, while against enemies most AoE explosives decrease as AoE range increases. In: COH Central
Thread: Call to action - Let's Be Awesome Together14 Feb 2014, 17:20 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Feb 2014, 16:44 PMCieZ Wall of text A few comparison between those games and Coh2: All games you listed was more fun to play(and have more depth) than this mediocre s**t you call Coh2, and games that are fun to play will attract audience and the larger the audience, the greater e-sport presence it will likely to have. Dota(WC3 technically) was even free (many free-to-play servers where available outside battle.net) enabling even greater audience. SC had an enjoyable single player for its time, Coh2 does even have that, so it has no attractiveness if its multiplayer area lacks. In: Lobby
Thread: Elite Mod Continues - Version 2.2+12 Feb 2014, 15:15 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Feb 2014, 14:29 PMAmiPolizeiFunk Great to see you continue to work on this, Kolaris. Your perception of COH game design has always been spot on, and I agree completely with the poster that mentioned you have a great "trust-aura"! IMO you shouldn't worry about whether or not Relic may accept this patch and make it official, as we all know the chances are slim. IMO you should do whatever you feel will make COH the best and most competitive game that you can. I would love to see more tourneys on this mod in the future. I'm really interested in how your OBSmode looks with the enemy units appearing within the FoW. Do you have a youtube vid, or has someone made a cast yet using this new feature? Is it possible that modders could add other obs features like enemy resources display, enemy army display, and/or production tabs? Well I've been heavily extending the OBS mode on my own. I've been able to add Observer abilities for changing team whenever they observer want it, plus manpower resources display for both player. (plus minor things like camera starts at the original map start location not at the maps edge, observer resources stay at 0, etc) As my SCAR knowledge deepens every day, I will be able to add more fun things to it. Here's few screens: http://kepfeltoltes.hu/140212/relic00018_www.kepfeltoltes.hu_.jpg http://kepfeltoltes.hu/140212/relic00019_www.kepfeltoltes.hu_.jpg (the second screen is taken few seconds later) In: COH Central