|
I can't really blame them for not answering to a post that can be seen as insulting to their employees, or that you got banned for it, even if there is a discussion to be had on the subject (assuming you even wanted a discussion).
Strip away the cynicism and you're left with something like: "Relic should have hired someone with experience of the game".
But we don't really know that to be true or the measure in which it is true. They seem to think that whatever coh2 experience is required, they can learn on the job.
Can you prove them wrong? |
|
I'm a bit confused at the lack of reaction from Relic and their community managers regarding this topic.
There's 3 of them now, you'd expect a bit more responsiveness. |
You will never be able to fully avoid griefing[..]
But you can alleviate the problem and an ELO based system is the most effective way (assuming the playerbase is big enough).
Youre afraid that lobbies would give the game a bad name. I know for a fact that the absence of such features already have, as a lot of people have left the game because they dont like the gamemode they are being forced to play, or the maps, or the gamebreaking lagging in larger games. Considering all the negative feedback in different foras in response to the lack of lobbies I would say not having lobbies hurt the image a lot.
Relic's inability to deliver on all the features expected by players is likely due to their lack of funding during development and the whole THQ ordeal.
That being said, they have shown a great willingness to continue improving their game. So a choice of gamemodes and specific maps could still be added to some form of casual (custom) automatch. These features are not tied to lobby games, only one thing is: the ability to choose your opponents. That's the issue here as far as I'm concerned.
About the lag issues, and if you're interested in making the game better, I encourage you to join the Alpha and help Relic iron out the kinks. |
A few will, like they can in automatch, most will continue playing custom games and have a good time. Its not like anyone would force any of you to play anything other than automatch, but a lot of people dont like lagging, they like being able to play the maps they like and to play the gamemode they preffere. How would those players having a good time hurt you?
I would be for any custom match system that matches players based on ELO rating and against any system that allows players to manually filter other players.
Again, the point is to avoid griefing and impose a level of fairness. I want players to have a good time just as much as you, but I want to make sure (as much as possible anyways) it's not at the expense of others.
Traditional game lobbies wouldn't hurt me if I play automatch only but I do believe they would hurt the image of the game, if left unchecked. So no, I don't want them back. Not the way they were before anyways.
|
|
Relic needs to do a better job incentivizing players to join alpha. |
Simply put, youre wrong.
Those of us who actually play custom games through lobbies, and not just bitch about them, and want it back have had a lot of great and balanced games on the maps we favour and with the gametype we like. You may claim that the public lobbies was all about stomping noobs, but then you clearly did it wrong.
Lets look at the facts: Smurfing is gone and there is no visible stats, so reintroducing lobbies wouldnt satisfy those who wanted to troll noobs. On the other hand, you can "smurf" by joining and quitting automatch games, and you can have your friends on teamspeak and automatch together if you want easy wins.
Lobbies allowes people to play the maps they want, the gamemode they want, they can talk with the other players and do some basic planning and you can filter out the players that would make the game lagg. Sounds like a great deal to me.
And if you dont like lobbies there is an extremely easy solution: Keep playing automatch. How would others having fun hurt you?
Stats ARE visible. Bring up a player's steam account, get Steam ID, paste in coh2.org ladder search.
The point is that if lobbies allow you to choose your opponent then it's a gateway to griefing. Whether you do it or not doesn't matter, plenty will. |
I dont understand why everything must be about winning/competivness(thats automatch for insn't it?).
In life everything is about that, thats why some people (me and others) choose to play GAMES (you know games? not real life) to have FUN and not trying to be the best. I dont want to destroy my nervs because i have to micro like crazy to get a win!!! I want to have FUN. I want to see where my Arty-shells land so i can enjoy the grafics of the game. So everyone who wants to be competitive (to be a Pro) can kiss my A.. because i (and others) don't want to.
I want to have FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNN.
And therefor give the Pros the Automatch and give the rest (as you pros say "the Noobs", because everybody who plays anything beyond 1v1 Automatch is a Noob as the "Pros" say) the Lobbys they want so EVERYBODY is happy. All the Games have Maybe i don't know, 2000-5000 Pros (depants on the Game) but the Noobs are more....
So i rest my Case.
I dont want that COH2 becomes only a "E-Sport-Game", i can be but it can be also a "Having Fun-Game".
Come on.. you can't be that naive.
The reason why lobby games are the pits is because it gives the hosting players the ability to choose their opponents, and they're looking for easy pickings. So really you're either looking to swindle some noobs to join a game so you can troll them or you're naive and you're setting yourself up for a big disappointment.
Once in a while you might get lucky and find a game where you get to build your pretty arty and watch the fireworks but you'll still have to swim through shit 90% of the time. |
|
Relic needs to set this alpha up as a separate application in Steam and add some incentives for people to try it: a free faceplate or skin should do. |
Thread: ETA28 Jan 2014, 21:00 PM
My gripe with the current situation is not the lack of communication but the slowdown in patch releases. I think it was Brad, back in December, that said they were sort of happy with the current balance and were going to slow things down, and that call was premature.
What happend to their initial policy of small incremental changes? Now we're waiting on this patch because the changelist got too big?! Meanwhile, there are bugs around that were identified back in November and they're still not fixed.
They adopted the model of a "Game as a service" which is great, but I'm pretty sure one of the biggest features of that model is an agile deployment pipeline. You're not supposed to slow down or have to wait on QA/Balance team because the patch got too bloated.
Wasn't this part of the lessons learned from the vCoh days?
|
|
It sounds like an interesting tradeoff but I think it's the wrong approach.
If the data shows it's a problem unit, I'd say add more counters instead. The unit feels good as it is and adds some really interesting dynamics to the game.
If it's really too versatile, then it makes for yet another argument for the addition of some handheld non-doctrinal AT upgrade for Sov. |
0
RtN. Havoc
Strategos
Strategos
PanzerGrenadierAngreifen
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
