Login

russian armor

What happened to blizzards?

13 Jul 2014, 11:18 AM
#21
avatar of Senseo1990

Posts: 317

Im rather sad that Relic decided to abandon the whole blizzard idea.
I agree that they are more annoying than fun in their current iteration, but I wouldve prefered a change in the blizzard-mechanics instead of just getting rid of blizzards alltogether in newer maps.

There were countless suggestions on how to improve blizzards and make them an interesting gameplay element. But well, other stuff seems to be more important...I just think it had great potential
13 Jul 2014, 11:33 AM
#22
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2057 | Subs: 1

Blizzards are no fun at all. So glad they removed them on most of the maps.
13 Jul 2014, 12:00 PM
#23
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1593



I don't recall soviets getting magical cold resistance that the Germans don't.

In fact, only OKW get that upgrade.


It's not about cold resistance.

Just the fact that soviets could sneak up to the german lines and wreack havoc. Blizzards helped the soviets to get up close and break the german forces. I lost countless games and won more thanks to blizzards.
13 Jul 2014, 12:00 PM
#24
avatar of Spin

Posts: 85

Blizzards were good on some maps. If they were less frequent then they'd be more welcomed. For example Faceoff at Rostov has a very low frequency, you'll come across 2 or 3 blizzards in a medium-long game. When blizzards came every 8 minutes it was annoying.
13 Jul 2014, 12:05 PM
#25
avatar of The amazing Chandler

Posts: 1355

I like Blizzards.
13 Jul 2014, 14:04 PM
#26
avatar of _underscore
Donator 33

Posts: 322

Repeated blizzards are boring but in general they are a great idea, IMO. There should be one raging blizzard per match, landing late-game as measured by the VP counter, possibly with stronger effects than the current one. Timing the blizzard with the VPs will increase urgency, as the arrival of the storm heralds the oncoming final assault, whether it be done in haste ahead of the weather or meticulously executed under the cover of snow.

People will complain about games they lose because of the blizzard, but people complain about everything, so whatever.
13 Jul 2014, 14:06 PM
#27
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1593

Repeated blizzards are boring but in general they are a great idea, IMO. There should be one raging blizzard per match, landing late-game as measured by the VP counter, possibly with stronger effects than the current one. Timing the blizzard with the VPs will increase urgency, as the arrival of the storm heralds the oncoming final assault, whether it be done in haste ahead of the weather or meticulously executed under the cover of snow.

People will complain about games they lose because of the blizzard, but people complain about everything, so whatever.


Sorry to tell you that balance applies to maps as well. Every game needs balanced maps, I hope you know why.
13 Jul 2014, 14:23 PM
#28
avatar of _underscore
Donator 33

Posts: 322

If you're implying that certain factions have an intrinsic advantage that's no doubt something worth taking into account. But you realise they're still in the game at the moment? Sounds like you must veto all the blizzard maps because you think they're terribly unbalanced.

edit - Great, since you do veto them I'm not sure why you would condescendingly dismiss ideas about improving a mechanic that you don't currently like.
13 Jul 2014, 14:31 PM
#29
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1593

If you're implying that certain factions have an intrinsic advantage that's no doubt something worth taking into account. But you realise they're still in the game at the moment? Sounds like you must veto all the blizzard maps because you think they're terribly unbalanced.


Yep, blizzard maps are a pain in the ass and I hate when the games defeats me, not my opponent, that's why they should be changed/removed. It's frustrating to fight on a map where your opponent has the upper hand from the start. Apart from that not only the blizzard maps, I veto those maps that are against my played faction.

Stalingrad (Ty for removing that map) - Why would I play on that map with Ostheer?
Semois - One of the worst map for USF, I avoid it
Minks - Very Axis favored IMO and has limited flanking routes, why would I fight on this map?

PS; the veto system not always works.
13 Jul 2014, 14:40 PM
#30
avatar of Nickbn

Posts: 54

Blizzards we're hugely advertised before coh2 came out. A lot of people reacted positively on them as a gameplay element they do add for interesting moments to say the least. Blizzard conditions are ideal for scouting, placing traps / mines / making new strategies. To this day i still like them. I can see why people would dislike them tho, but blizzard maps are easily veto'ed so you won't have any problems if you disslike them that much. They should not be removed.

tl;dr if you hate blizzard maps just veto them. Problem solved.
13 Jul 2014, 14:40 PM
#31
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

If they removed the freezing mechanic and made it so that units didn't slow to a crawl blizzards might work. It's just a facepalm mechanic right now because they want to encourage you to flank or sneak attack or whatever but you can't because everything moves slow as crap and your infantry freeze after they take like 5 steps... I still doubt that I'd like them but maybe I could tolerate them if they only reduced visibility.
13 Jul 2014, 20:22 PM
#32
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1383

I think if they doubled fire pit radius, they'd be fine. The radius is stupidly stifling.

Infantry don't freeze to death that fast, and you can always just build a firepit. I really enjoyed how reduced visibility made attacking the enemy easier (Suddenly emplacements became less effective), transports and garrisons became more important for visibility and warmth, deepsnow and ice added depth to pathing your units around the map intelligently etc etc.

Seems to me like none of you who hate them bothered to actually adapt to them properly and just ran your units around with their heads cut off through the snow.
13 Jul 2014, 21:19 PM
#33
avatar of NorthWestFresh

Posts: 306

I like blizzards
13 Jul 2014, 21:37 PM
#34
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3051 | Subs: 15

They make me lag violently to the point my units wont even respond, so all blizz mapes are auto-veto'd.

And even if i didnt lag,all the deep snow,ICE RNG,freezing to death, and just overall BS that comes from being in a blizzard would make me veto them.

Theyre fine,and cool,in a custom game. Not in any
competetive sense.

13 Jul 2014, 21:52 PM
#35
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

Like most things added in CoH 2, they sucked, but unlike most things added in CoH 2, they turned out to be pretty easy to remove.
13 Jul 2014, 22:20 PM
#36
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3545 | Subs: 2

I don't often say this, but if you cannot cope with a blizzard, then:

L



2



P




If all you do in a blizzard is sit around trying to keep warm not freezing to death then you deserve to get attacked by someone who uses it


I know that people don't like RNG, and they don't being restricted in their movements (hence also the hate for mud), but if you are unable to deal with adverse conditions then you might not be as good as you think you are.
13 Jul 2014, 22:28 PM
#37
avatar of Ohme
Honorary Member Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 889 | Subs: 1

I don't often say this, but if you cannot cope with a blizzard, then:

L



2



P




I'm sure most people cope with it just fine, that doesn't make it fun, and it doesn't mean its compelling game play. I could tolerate the mechanic if it only reduced vision, and perhaps didn't reduce it as much as it does now.
13 Jul 2014, 22:46 PM
#38
avatar of 1[][]

Posts: 172

I used to veto every winter map I could, until I rose in the ranks and eventually MG/Maxim spam became a thing.

Now Minsk pocket and that river crossing map stays vetoed out. No exception. Semois is the only map I tolerate though, not by much.

Maps like Moscow outskirts are classics though. But OKW (German brits) ruined that.
Hux
13 Jul 2014, 22:52 PM
#39
avatar of Hux
Patrion 14

Posts: 505

Oh hey yeah, remember all those summer maps with rivers running through the middle and chokepoints everywhere!? I loved all that compelling and fun gameplay... *Semosky summer is a shite map*


Blizzards are mint (not performance wise, granted) they promote a different kind of gameplay and tactics to the norm. They demand another level of micro on top of the normal game (but not an unfathomable amount as has been hinted at in this thread). Performance issues aside, I think they should be brought back. They give a player who is willing to micro and prepare for them a chance to really strike out against players who see them as something to be simply (excuse the pun) weathered.

Personally, I'm more concerned about map design and imbalance in that area than with blizzards (hell.. at least blizzards don't last an entire game)...

here's to you, Double OKW on Road to Kharkov!
nee
14 Jul 2014, 01:45 AM
#40
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

I believe blizzards are meant to be part of the Russian winter theme; France didn't have any blizzards during WW2, for example.

I think that they should have a milder form of blizzard though. It would still have the mechanic but of course the effects are lowered.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Diversity Cup Grand Final

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

240 users are online: 2 members and 238 guests
TheGiftLucas, rumartinez89
15 posts in the last 24h
111 posts in the last week
491 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36390
Welcome our newest member, shaunta1871
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM