Main game mode to balance COH2?
16 Apr 2014, 01:35 AM
#21
Posts: 8
I would prefer they focus on team games. CoH is just more fun playing with friends.
16 Apr 2014, 06:15 AM
#22
Posts: 150
i think a negative resource modifiers for team games (2v2,3v3,4v4) could be really cool in terms of balance.
and we have a winner !
Relic did exactly what you said in DOW2, and it worked really well. 2v2 was excellent, and 3v3 was very good too.
Actually, what was really bad in team games in DOW2 was the lag, but Relic fixed that for COH2.
But it also depends on map btw. Having map for 1v1 and 2v2, 2v2 and 3v3 etc etc, is a bad bad bad idea imo.
16 Apr 2014, 07:15 AM
#23
Posts: 708 | Subs: 1
Game is not balanced even in no one mode.
16 Apr 2014, 08:16 AM
#24
Posts: 476
i wish there was a way to make resources work better in 2v2 3v3 4v4 maybe the more people the less resources you get
and i also think that alot of casuals love spamming units and something that alot of players did in coh1 and loved it so taking that way might be sad for them.
I totally agree^^ The Fix for 3v3/4v4 balance would be to make it so that everyplayer gets as much income as he would in a 1v1. But on the other hand: Thats why people play 4v4!
ETShutter, would you approve my "fix" for 3v3/4v4?
I play mostly 1v1 and my post are with 1v1 in mind.
16 Apr 2014, 09:28 AM
#25
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
Im against the idea of negative income multipliers in bigger teamgames.
Why?
Because it takes the biggest aspect of them away : The big battle, giant clusterfucks of units. A lot of players love that. And let them be.
There is a competetive and a casual scene and i dont think you should try to tailor the 3s and 4s to a competetive kind of look or feel. Balancing the bigger gamemodes is pretty much impossible. But theyre playable and theyre not that broken like how some people tend to portray them.
Even with the negative income multipliers, the bigger gamemodes wont be balanced. It will just take away their charme. If you want balance, try to focus on 1v1 and 2v2 as these 2 gamemodes are undeniably the competetive ones.
If something is balanced in the competetive scene, its usually balanced in the casual one aswell.
Why?
Because it takes the biggest aspect of them away : The big battle, giant clusterfucks of units. A lot of players love that. And let them be.
There is a competetive and a casual scene and i dont think you should try to tailor the 3s and 4s to a competetive kind of look or feel. Balancing the bigger gamemodes is pretty much impossible. But theyre playable and theyre not that broken like how some people tend to portray them.
Even with the negative income multipliers, the bigger gamemodes wont be balanced. It will just take away their charme. If you want balance, try to focus on 1v1 and 2v2 as these 2 gamemodes are undeniably the competetive ones.
If something is balanced in the competetive scene, its usually balanced in the casual one aswell.
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
16 Apr 2014, 09:56 AM
#26
Posts: 829
I can't think of a single RTS that had well-balanced team modes.
VCOH was pretty well balanced in team games.
It was called custom game lobby, ranks and few good maps. But yeah, automatch cannot tweak tams nor settings to make the game balanced
16 Apr 2014, 10:27 AM
#27
Posts: 17884 | Subs: 8
VCOH was pretty well balanced in team games.
It was called custom game lobby, ranks and few good maps. But yeah, automatch cannot tweak tams nor settings to make the game balanced
I like your way of saying "sheldt artyfest with tank traps everywhere".
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
16 Apr 2014, 10:42 AM
#28
Posts: 829
I like your way of saying "sheldt artyfest with tank traps everywhere".
No I was talking about tweaking the settings and players,
For example Axis had very little chance starting from top with low resources and VP, but it had good chance starting from bottom with high resources and annihilate.
If you balance out the players so slightly better players are on axis team starting from bottom on Montarigis, you got yourself balanced game that often lasted well over an hour.
Automatch doesn't do that.
On Sheldt note, never liked that myself. But who ever played it, played it because they enjoyed it.
You think you are better than them? Congratulations, I am sure they don't care
16 Apr 2014, 10:43 AM
#29
Posts: 509 | Subs: 1
1vs1 and 2vs2 are the most competitive and skilled modes, so it should be like in COH that both ones were rather balanced.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
29 | ||
 |
|
|
24 | ||
 |
|
|
19 | ||
 |
|
|
107 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.29144.869+1
- 4.275110.714+13
- 5.259143.644+3
- 6.249150.624+10
- 7.19265.747+5
- 8.14138.788+16
- 9.18878.707+2
- 10.669423.613+5
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
736
Board Info
474 users are online:
1 member and 473 guests
Support Sapper
Support Sapper
0 post in the last 24h
30 posts in the last week
142 posts in the last month
30 posts in the last week
142 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44954
Welcome our newest member, Mtbgbans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Mtbgbans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM