Login

russian armor

An Old Schooler's Rant and Observations

PAGES (8)down
18 Jun 2020, 03:55 AM
#1
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 857

I used to be actually pretty ok at COH2. If you look at my stats, I had a few good years (or at least good 2v2 partners). Pretty crazy how easy it was. There was stuff to be exploited for sure, before they turned everything over to the community and now we inch, every patch. closer to mirror matches. Which is also ironic, because I always wanted to see mirrors in competition. Skin the units differently, it feels better I guess? It's really the only solution, because no one on in this community mod team, or Relic (whatever remains of Relic) has the big picture vision to understand asymmetric balance and strategic, vs, by-the-numbers, unit-vs-unit balance. This is an aside, but COH1 will be remembered 50 years from now for getting that. COH2 doesn't. Most other RTSes don't.

Then came the patches, most particularly the patch, I think, in 2016, that increased lethality a lot, making manpower about 5x more valuable than fuel or ammo, whereas before I'd say it was 2-3x more valuable. Before that, I beat Symbiosis (old schoolers will know who that was) in 1v1 once (see my Twitch). This isn't really widely remembered , but that patch turned the game, finally, and irrevocably, in favor of two types of players: 1) people with fast reflexes and 2) ultra-cautious tacticians who are still fast enough with multitasking to react to situations across the map (Luvnest is your hero and guide here).

That's when I really started sucking. It destroyed me, because my age was starting to show. Just don't have that CPM or multitasking. Just couldn't deal with the changes. And it was about this time when even sub-intermediate rank 500 players started chasing retreating units. I think there might have been another patch that encouraged this, by reducing the damage reduction to retreating units? That REALLY started ruining the game for me. Just the lamest fucking gameplay ever, 2v2s turned into a battle where the players were basically just jockeying for position to get retreat wipes after the initial engagement. If you're still a noob and are looking for a winning 2v2 strat, just do this - cap what you can, then go help your mate by flanking from behind. Even top 100 you don't always see this, but it's the easiest way to win a 2v2. Wipe all that stuff, win game. It really is that simple and that stupid a game now.

I guess this is just to say, it was a good time. But the combination of the lack of strategic gameplay plus the total emphasis in the last 3 years on reaction time has meant I just can't play anymore, not seriously. Maybe I'll pop in once in a while to screw around but I know I can't do what I used to, because I'm not at that level really anymore, and the game has definitely made it harder to play at that level. But always remember, the level of competition we've gotten to is ONLY tactical, not strategic. And that's not the fault of the players, that's the fault of the game.

GGs everyone.

Noise of Carpet


18 Jun 2020, 04:11 AM
#2
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 311 | Subs: 1

This is what the Germans must have said when they didn't watch their flanks in Russia.
18 Jun 2020, 04:12 AM
#3
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2223 | Subs: 4


Then came the patches, most particularly the patch, I think, in 2016, that increased lethality a lot, making manpower about 5x more valuable than fuel or ammo, whereas before I'd say it was 2-3x more valuable. Before that, I beat Symbiosis (old schoolers will know who that was) in 1v1 once (see my Twitch). This isn't really widely remembered , but that patch turned the game, finally, and irrevocably, in favor of two types of players: 1) people with fast reflexes and 2) ultra-cautious tacticians who are still fast enough with multitasking to react to situations across the map (Luvnest is your hero and guide here).

Yea that patch was in early 2014... the game had only been out for like 6 months when that happened.

The game is older and the community skill level increases over time through practice. You have been left behind.
18 Jun 2020, 04:17 AM
#4
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 857

Sure, I understand why you'd say that. I'm just trying to be honest - I know my own tactical failures would be thrown in my face if I just critiqued the game. What would be interesting if a pro agreed, but if you're good at the game, you probably enjoy the game and don't have a reason to see it change (logically.) But I do think the emphasis on reaction time rather than strategy in the past few years is something that needs to be looked at. Of course, if you have the reaction time, you don't care. You want the game to be the way it is. You don't want strategic choices, you want more opportunity to show that you retreat faster than the other guy.

18 Jun 2020, 04:36 AM
#5
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 290

My old schooler observation was that you were a complete prick in 2v2 and seeing your name pop up on my team was enough to alt-f4. You did it when you were on the other team and often times your name popping up ruined what little time I had to play at night.

That being said you did seem like a decent player but the mini map blips and calling people noobs and raging or going afk was pretty bullshit.
18 Jun 2020, 04:57 AM
#6
avatar of Pervitin Addict

Posts: 29

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jun 2020, 04:36 AMKoRneY
My old schooler observation was that you were a complete prick in 2v2 and seeing your name pop up on my team was enough to alt-f4. You did it when you were on the other team and often times your name popping up ruined what little time I had to play at night.

That being said you did seem like a decent player but the mini map blips and calling people noobs and raging or going afk was pretty bullshit.


going afk, go win the war teammate
18 Jun 2020, 05:08 AM
#7
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 857

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jun 2020, 04:36 AMKoRneY
My old schooler observation was that you were a complete prick in 2v2 and seeing your name pop up on my team was enough to alt-f4. You did it when you were on the other team and often times your name popping up ruined what little time I had to play at night.

That being said you did seem like a decent player but the mini map blips and calling people noobs and raging or going afk was pretty bullshit.


Lol, sorry, can't say I remember you. I do have a bit of a problem being alt-tabbed, but that's only because I'm a filthy casual now. I don't rage that much, I hope.


18 Jun 2020, 05:41 AM
#8
avatar of Baba

Posts: 509

i dont know how i feel about someone calling himself an "old schooler".. i mean you could just aswell have replaced it with Original Gangster.
not the kind of title you give yourself
18 Jun 2020, 06:07 AM
#9
avatar of Partisanship

Posts: 232

18 Jun 2020, 07:13 AM
#10
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1360 | Subs: 3

18 Jun 2020, 07:47 AM
#11
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2127 | Subs: 1

That's pretty hilarious coming from you.

I still remember playing against you after they buffed Jägers to insanity and all you did was spam and blob them as hard as you could. I still remember your cancer playstyle to this day that's how stupid it was. Then after Jägers got nerfed your rank went down a lot and you stopped playing (or fell out of my elo range, idk) and now you blame the game because you can't abuse OP crutch units as easily and need to actually micro?

Ridiculous threat.
18 Jun 2020, 07:53 AM
#12
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2127 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jun 2020, 04:36 AMKoRneY
My old schooler observation was that you were a complete prick in 2v2 and seeing your name pop up on my team was enough to alt-f4. You did it when you were on the other team and often times your name popping up ruined what little time I had to play at night.

That being said you did seem like a decent player but the mini map blips and calling people noobs and raging or going afk was pretty bullshit.


Same, I still remember the cancer games I experienced because of him when Jägers were OP and he tried to get a high rank without being able to actually play the game by spamming and blobbing them as hard as he could. This and as you said the toxic behaviour.
18 Jun 2020, 08:03 AM
#13
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8533 | Subs: 1

Lets try to focus more on what he is saying about the changes in the game and less bout the person.

Although I do not agree with everything there are some good points.
18 Jun 2020, 08:25 AM
#14
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2424 | Subs: 5

the big picture vision to understand asymmetric balance and strategic, vs, by-the-numbers, unit-vs-unit balance. This is an aside, but COH1 will be remembered 50 years from now for getting that. COH2 doesn't.


Company of Heroes will always be remembered because it was jaw droppingly revolutionary. Company of Heroes 2 just did more of the same. Which doesn't make it worse, only makes it stand out less. However by this time I would say it is much more polished and balanced than vCoH ever was. vCoH will definitely not be remembered 50 years from now for how balanced it was, because it really wasn't. It was full of brokenly overpowered and toxic strategies for the entirety of its life.

Panzer Elite, vCoH Brits and the release versions of CoH2's USF, OKW and UKF prove that pure asymmetrical balance just doesn't work and generally only leads to toxic and overpowered strategies while also being defenseless in certain other situations. That wasn't really fun for anyone.
18 Jun 2020, 08:30 AM
#15
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 1093 | Subs: 1

I am not sure which game version you are talking about and also how good my memory is because I did not play CoH in 2016 and 2017. But from what I remember the TTK in 2015 when I picked up CoH2 was way shorter than it is now. Obersoldaten wrecked everything, and mortars could cause squad wipes on full health squads. Repairing a building under barrage was not a few lost models like it is now, but it was almost a guarantee to throw away a squad if you desperately need to repair that building. Bascially all AoE damage was way stronger even until 2018.
Tanks driving over infantry like crazy and mediums often killing 2-3 decently healthed models with a single shot, not even starting with heavier tanks.

At least compared to that version of CoH2, the game has focused a lot more on consistency. I can't argue about your feeling about "mirror matchups" because I tend to agree. Unless you're talking about even earlier versions that I never played, I don't see where the game has accelerated that much.

Overall I'd like to see a CoH style game that is slower and more tactical than CoH2. You know, where a fortified MG in a small village actually means that you need to rethink your whole approach rather than just getting one or two squads suppressed. I think CoH2 was originally planned like this as we can see from dead features like transport vehicles and the blizzard mechanic. But CoH2's maps are too small for that. There is (especially not in team games) not much space for maneuvering, even infantry traverses the entire map very quickly. If it weren't for base MGs, you could sneak an infantry squad into the enemy base in next to no time. I think this is the main reason why CoH2 must be a faster paced game. If damage was lower and shoot outs took longer, you could just skip the enemy forces and move through them to more important targets and still retreat without major losses. But the small maps and the high density of important targets do not allow this. Also there are not that many units to manage simultaneously, so in order to force mistakes the time you have to react must be comparatively small.
18 Jun 2020, 08:36 AM
#16
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1300

Company of Heroes will always be remembered because it was jaw droppingly revolutionary. Company of Heroes 2 just did more of the same. Which doesn't make it worse, only makes it stand out less. However by this time I would say it is much more polished and balanced than vCoH ever was. vCoH will definitely not be remembered 50 years from now for how balanced it was, because it really wasn't.

IMO UI of the vCoH is still much better in comparison with CoH 2. Can't say about text polish, but according to my own expirience - text system in CoH 2 is full of problems, and i am still collecting them with hope, that somebody will pay attention to them. Agreed about balance though.
18 Jun 2020, 09:20 AM
#17
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8533 | Subs: 1

Company of Heroes will always be remembered because it was jaw droppingly revolutionary. Company of Heroes 2 just did more of the same. Which doesn't make it worse, only makes it stand out less. However by this time I would say it is much more polished and balanced than vCoH ever was. vCoH will definitely not be remembered 50 years from now for how balanced it was, because it really wasn't.

Panzer Elite, vCoH Brits and the release versions of CoH2's USF, OKW and UKF prove that pure asymmetrical balance just doesn't work and generally only leads to toxic and overpowered strategies while also being defenseless in certain other situations. That wasn't really fun for anyone.

To me that is arbitrary conclusion, asymmetrical balance can work. There where balance problems but that had little to do with asymmetrical part of balance.
18 Jun 2020, 09:37 AM
#18
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 814

Aren't you the same guy that called allies OP while building a giant ball of Jaeger's in the cancer patch

I'm going to say your idea of balance gas some issues, most cheese for an easy wipe have been moved out of the game (indirect, mines) and suppression platforms have been buffed. The game is slower now
18 Jun 2020, 09:43 AM
#19
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15454 | Subs: 7

Company of Heroes will always be remembered because it was jaw droppingly revolutionary. Company of Heroes 2 just did more of the same. Which doesn't make it worse, only makes it stand out less. However by this time I would say it is much more polished and balanced than vCoH ever was. vCoH will definitely not be remembered 50 years from now for how balanced it was, because it really wasn't.

People for whatever reason can't stop looking at coh1 through pink glasses of nostalgia, it was a complete and utter balance mess at all points in time.


Panzer Elite, vCoH Brits and the release versions of CoH2's USF, OKW and UKF prove that pure asymmetrical balance just doesn't work and generally only leads to toxic and overpowered strategies while also being defenseless in certain other situations. That wasn't really fun for anyone.

Asymmetrical balance works if the tools allow do do the same things, but in different way.
Completely removing certain tools, giving nothing to cover that certain field and forcing a faction to rely on crutch solution that inevitably will be nerfed/removed with little compensation in the future only leads to more problems.

I would say DoW2 did asymmetrical balance right as not a single faction felt like it lacks something completely and even if it did, it was compensated adequately for it. It wasn't perfect, but it was incomparably better then CoH series expansion factions.

Enforcing asymmetrical teching leads to much more problems I believe, especially if that teching is crutching on not allowing access to all factions units as it was the case of old soviets and USF.
Imo, PE had the best teching this series have seen and given how USF and partly OKW teching changed, its only confirmation of that. Not best unit composition, but teching definitely delivered.
18 Jun 2020, 10:18 AM
#20
avatar of James Hale

Posts: 573

I used to be actually pretty ok at COH2. If you look at my stats, I had a few good years (or at least good 2v2 partners). Pretty crazy how easy it was. There was stuff to be exploited for sure, before they turned everything over to the community and now we inch, every patch. closer to mirror matches. Which is also ironic, because I always wanted to see mirrors in competition. Skin the units differently, it feels better I guess? It's really the only solution, because no one on in this community mod team, or Relic (whatever remains of Relic) has the big picture vision to understand asymmetric balance and strategic, vs, by-the-numbers, unit-vs-unit balance. This is an aside, but COH1 will be remembered 50 years from now for getting that. COH2 doesn't. Most other RTSes don't.

Then came the patches, most particularly the patch, I think, in 2016, that increased lethality a lot, making manpower about 5x more valuable than fuel or ammo, whereas before I'd say it was 2-3x more valuable. Before that, I beat Symbiosis (old schoolers will know who that was) in 1v1 once (see my Twitch). This isn't really widely remembered , but that patch turned the game, finally, and irrevocably, in favor of two types of players: 1) people with fast reflexes and 2) ultra-cautious tacticians who are still fast enough with multitasking to react to situations across the map (Luvnest is your hero and guide here).

That's when I really started sucking. It destroyed me, because my age was starting to show. Just don't have that CPM or multitasking. Just couldn't deal with the changes. And it was about this time when even sub-intermediate rank 500 players started chasing retreating units. I think there might have been another patch that encouraged this, by reducing the damage reduction to retreating units? That REALLY started ruining the game for me. Just the lamest fucking gameplay ever, 2v2s turned into a battle where the players were basically just jockeying for position to get retreat wipes after the initial engagement. If you're still a noob and are looking for a winning 2v2 strat, just do this - cap what you can, then go help your mate by flanking from behind. Even top 100 you don't always see this, but it's the easiest way to win a 2v2. Wipe all that stuff, win game. It really is that simple and that stupid a game now.

I guess this is just to say, it was a good time. But the combination of the lack of strategic gameplay plus the total emphasis in the last 3 years on reaction time has meant I just can't play anymore, not seriously. Maybe I'll pop in once in a while to screw around but I know I can't do what I used to, because I'm not at that level really anymore, and the game has definitely made it harder to play at that level. But always remember, the level of competition we've gotten to is ONLY tactical, not strategic. And that's not the fault of the players, that's the fault of the game.

GGs everyone.

Noise of Carpet


I remember you well and certainly recognised the avatar! I just want to say that I well and truly echo your sentiments, and that's before we get onto the 'look at all the stuff they've managed to break' side of the debate. That said, if the majority are happy then it's probably for the best people like you and I shut up, as we're only going to annoy people. You will always get the 'balance has never been so good' arguments and the feeling that change - of any kind, good or ill - is considered progress. I disagree, but there you go. You know what they say about opinions.

I was never a tournament player and so I won't pretend to share your experiences of beating some of the top players of the day (and of course I remember Symbiosis; I wonder, does Ir0nRoman still play too?) but I certainly share your general sense of confusion. A friend of mine who used to be in the Alpha with me years ago shared my astonishment at the idea that Panzergrenadiers are now trained at the Ostheer HQ, and we both find the inconsistency between units being called in off-map or trained at base simply baffling. I hate that units are now trained at base by default, something which .ORG folks strongly argued against during the original public Alpha.

Vanilla, to me, is now a mixture of 'oh, that's interesting' and 'wait, seriously?' along with general disgust at the number of bugs and glaring UI issues/missing text. Whatever the merits of the current balance team - and I know nothing about them or who they are - they are evidently not people concerned with polish or professionalism. One of the things that irritates me is the fact that numerous abilities are incorrectly ordered on the commander UI - this is a very simple thing to fix in AE but apparently not something they bother with. I'm also at a loss as to why vehicle descriptions seem to have randomly disappeared; was that an intended visual change (if so, why?) or just another weird bug?

*shrugs*
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag Reto.GarGamel
  • The British Forces flag °NOOBMarkov.-
uploaded by Augustine

Board Info

94 users are online: 7 members and 87 guests
SneakEye, Katitof, Sander93, blvckdream, YoungRutra, Yukiko, thekingsown10
128 posts in the last 24h
922 posts in the last week
4348 posts in the last month
Registered members: 24669
Welcome our newest member, tyigsop
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM