Login

russian armor

4 things that would make CoH2 instantly better

PAGES (19)down
23 Apr 2013, 20:26 PM
#21
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182

I was told that the code has been completely overhauled for the UI, making future tweaks far easier. The only reason Relic would do that is to allow for UI adjustments.
Also, afaik the UI wasn't a chief concern until recently.
23 Apr 2013, 20:28 PM
#22
avatar of MaestroRackam

Posts: 21

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2013, 18:21 PMcr4wler

The UI still is a clusterfuck in my opinion. I literally cannot play more than 1 game before being so disgusted by the way the game is treating me. If they hid the resources in a collapsible overlay and you had to solve a sudoku first to have a glance at your resources, it wouldn't be much harder than it is right now.


Awesome, I've got myself a signature.
Couldn't agree more, this giant useless UI covering a fourth of the screen.
While we are talking about aestetics:
I have the constant feeling to have awkwardly zoomed in on those tall trees now covering my view on the battlefield and I am not able to zoom out.
And then there is the sector lines, unfortunately those aren't green like in the press picture below and look especially ridiculously when bright red and blue in the snowmaps and bright white in the summermaps.


No bad words to the devs though, coh1 still is the best game I've ever played.
23 Apr 2013, 20:30 PM
#23
avatar of Spanky
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1764 | Subs: 2

I was told that the code has been completely overhauled for the UI, making future tweaks far easier. The only reason Relic would do that is to allow for UI adjustments.
Also, afaik the UI wasn't a chief concern until recently.


If that is true, id like to see something posted about it by relic devs. That would be sweet!
23 Apr 2013, 20:34 PM
#24
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2013, 20:21 PMTommy
The UI and doctrine system, as a lot of you have pointed out, are probably bigger issues than these. But what I really wanted to highlight was stuff that not only should, but can quite easily, be fixed, and stuff that isn't going to lead to the detriment of the game in any way. As far as I can tell from the developer feedback, the UI just isn't changing, we've basically been told to get used to it. That doesn't stop be disliking it, but if it's a no-go zone then it's a no-go zone. Same with doctrines, it's been categorically stated that they're not changing. So, yeah, in an ideal world I'd like to see those things changed too, but these 4 areas are, at least to my mind, relatively straightforward fixes and should be done.


you're right, though i think they have not explicitly stated that they're not going to change anything about the UI, but simply implied it (mainly the change to the resources... other stuff is still subject to change).
i would have liked to have more developer feedback than "thanks for your input, we'll consider it". at least quinn gave a very, very, very rough roadmap as to what they want to change... something like that, especially for the UI is something that i would like to see.
23 Apr 2013, 20:37 PM
#25
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182

@Spanky: I agree that Relic could be more overt about their post-beta plans.
23 Apr 2013, 20:59 PM
#26
avatar of TheSoulTrain

Posts: 150

Agree, but I would put a lot more points as HUGE issues in there, like having a proper UI not the shit we have now... and so on.
23 Apr 2013, 21:14 PM
#27
avatar of ApeMen

Posts: 65

i totaly agree with you tommy but right now i would also add as additional points the massive use of arty units (which is for the gameplay pretty bad) and the current sector system (i still dont like how it works right now)

23 Apr 2013, 23:28 PM
#28
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

1. Change the upkeep system. I would agree that the upkeep system is a bit restrictive in places. However stating that it outright punishes unit preservation is not a very valid argument. Unit preservation will lead to vetted squads that will outclass new squads from your opponent. The system is also not that restrictive that you wouldn't be able to buy an atg or tank if the "loosing" side saved up for a tank.

However I do agree that it is a bit too restrictive and it would be nice to see the mp income be influenced by the strategic points held. This would also increase their value apart form building an OP to get more resources.

Global veterancy was a way to sink mp not improve your income.

2. Let us see what is actually happening. Couldn't agree more.

3. Blizzards. +1 for less visual obstruction of the screen.

Coltech and it's effect are a rather nice change though.

4. Fix the vehicle critical system. I would expect a shot in the rear to be able to damage the engine even if the hull is at full health but if the shot is hitting the front, I agree that it shouldn't possible to damage, much less destroy an engine.

The damaged engine caused by fires can easily be avoided. Everyone knows that it will happen if they drive over it and everyone can decide whether it is worth to do in a certain situation or not.

Edit: Corrected an odd sentence.
23 Apr 2013, 23:51 PM
#29
avatar of SunAngel

Posts: 104

1. Change the upkeep system. I would agree that the upkeep system is a bit restrictive in places. However stating that it outright punishes unit preservation is not a very valid argument. Unit preservation will lead to vetted squads that will outclass new squads from your opponent. The system is also not that restrictive that you wouldn't be able to buy an atg or tank if the "loosing" side saved up for a tank.

However I do agree that it is a bit too restrictive and it would be nice to see the mp income be influenced by the strategic points held. This would also increase their value apart form building an OP to get more resources.

Global veterancy was a way to sink mp not improve your income.

2. Let us see what is actually happening. Couldn't agree more.

3. Blizzards. +1 for less visual obstruction of the screen.

Coltech and it's effect are a rather nice change though.

4. Fix the vehicle critical system. I would expect a shot in the rear to be able to damage the engine even if the hull is at full health but if the shot is hitting the front, I agree that there shouldn't be a damaged, much less a destroyed engine.

The damaged engine caused by fires can easily be avoided. Everyone knows that it will happen if they drive over it and everyone can decide whether it is worth to do in a certain situation or not.



@Damaged engine caused by fires: I don't always have the time to watch my tanks as they come on the field, so I typically give them a move order to the position I want them to be in then go around microing my other units. I expect my tank to get to the point without any issues, not run over a firepit and be slowed considerably because the AI didn't realize it is supposed to avoid the firepit (or as is common, the tank freaked out because an allied infantry squad was nearby and decided to turn directly into the fire). Having to babysit units that aren't anywhere near a fight or important objective is fairly poor in any game.
24 Apr 2013, 00:11 AM
#30
avatar of GeneralCH

Posts: 419

The ability of T34 tank to insta damage gun of german tanks is so ultra broken. Pls pls relic fix that!
I mean what were the devs thinking? You tech up to tier4 to build a tiger, in order to turn the game around for axis and it gets useless, the time it enters the battle.
As Tommy said in his initial post: Developers who really consider such things as a "feature" are scary :P

EDIT:
Just watch the latest RnP cast, where the T34 trys to ramm the Elefant. You activate the ability and nothing can stop it, no river, no house, no corner,...
Hux
24 Apr 2013, 00:13 AM
#31
avatar of Hux
Patrion 14

Posts: 505

the upkeep system in CoH is wonkey as fuck at times.


amazing sentence.


I'm loving this thread. I'm glad we can talk about it here now and not on those damn sega forums.

Someone on this site should call Relic out. Get an interview with Duffy or whoever is willing to talk (probably nobody will)... I mean I'm all for voicing opinions but there's not even been acknowledgement over here of these issues AFAIK. I guess in the interest of fairness its only right that relic should get to defend themselves and their decisions from community flak. But still, I think there definitely should be an interview with someone to raise these points and ask what is being done about them... I mean other than the being 'taken on board'.

If I could remember the password for the damn Sega forums I'd run the gauntlet of lunacy myself to paste this thread's URL as a new thread in there and to leave my feedback for Pripyat in the map feedback thread (a solid 2/10.. there just weren't nearly enough bridges or large river crossings to grind the game to a halt...)

EDIT: Yeah, the T34 ram thing is amazing. I watch that R&P cast with Marinez playing The Walt and his t34 literally tries to ram around a fence, has to stop and go around it, then from no more than 6 feet away (bearing in mind we're talking about a tank that weighs 26 tonnes) builds up enough speed to hit a 65 tonne tank resulting in the same damage to both vehicles?? GOOD CALL
I mean come on.. lets get real. The T34's ability should be more realistic than that. It should be able to go back in time (at vet 3) to eliminate Ostheer tank crews from ever existing
24 Apr 2013, 02:18 AM
#32
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

Agree 100% with basically everything everyone has said in this thread (except Bentguru. Silly Bentguru :D ) and I just hope that some or all of this stuff gets fixed at some point. Great post, Tommy, and it's good and bad to see everyone agreeing so much and adding lots of other good points. It's good because there's at least some consensus about what needs work and what it would take to fix a lot of the issues that represent low hanging fruit, but it's bad because right now CoH 2 isn't in a great place. I could understand if this were the first CoH game, but after all the experience we've had with the first CoH and years of learning about that game, it's unfortunate to see Relic making a lot of the mistakes that they're making with this game.
Joe
24 Apr 2013, 05:08 AM
#33
avatar of Joe

Posts: 34

I'm with Bentguru.

I don't have problems seeing whats going on. I think the upkeep system works ok. I like blizzards giving me a chance to be sneaky. I don't think tanks should be 1 hit immobilized (it is pretty realistic the chance occurring when you get hit in the side), but I am fine with the crew shock making the tank stop for a bit when its ambushed properly, especially from multiple directions.

I think players will eventually adapt and play a little different with the new system, which I quite enjoy aside from the beta UI.
24 Apr 2013, 08:55 AM
#34
avatar of S73v0

Posts: 522

I agree with everything but the thing on blizzards. I actually really like blizzards and think that it was the one thing relic definitely got right and it adds alot to the game. I don't have any problem seeing things in blizzards and don't see what you're all complaining about.
24 Apr 2013, 09:14 AM
#35
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

I agree completely Tommy except for blizzards. This will require time to make right and its good to see they are tweaking it. Vechiles getting busted engines is actually necessary imo, otherwise it will be HT rush and go to your opponents fires and road kill them all prior to the blizzard. Would be way to annoying and easy.

The white wash on the screen though is pathetic and destroys my eyes, really gives bad eye strain.

I agree extensively about the upkeep system aswell. This is stuffing up early game play and making it almost redundant. I feel this is just a ploy to get people playing faster and not get bored, its stupid though.

Like you said, most this stuff is beyond the point of change. It is some what sad to see such fundamentaly sound things in CoH1 took the turn in the bad direction though :(
24 Apr 2013, 09:51 AM
#36
avatar of SunAngel

Posts: 104

I agree completely Tommy except for blizzards. This will require time to make right and its good to see they are tweaking it. Vechiles getting busted engines is actually necessary imo, otherwise it will be HT rush and go to your opponents fires and road kill them all prior to the blizzard. Would be way to annoying and easy.

The white wash on the screen though is pathetic and destroys my eyes, really gives bad eye strain.

I agree extensively about the upkeep system aswell. This is stuffing up early game play and making it almost redundant. I feel this is just a ploy to get people playing faster and not get bored, its stupid though.

Like you said, most this stuff is beyond the point of change. It is some what sad to see such fundamentaly sound things in CoH1 took the turn in the bad direction though :(


If fire pits didn't cost MP, or costed much less, destroying them wouldn't be as much of a problem. Besides, if a halftrack is running through your points destroying firepits, it shouldn't be too difficult to trap and destroy it.

I agree that the upkeep system seems to get people to play faster and remain engaged despite what has happened in the match, and also that it's used to keep the losing player optimistic (games are closer, so the loser doesn't feel like they're horrible at the game).
24 Apr 2013, 09:59 AM
#37
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

Yeah I do agree they must have a reduced cost on the firepits. I think a system that would work nice would be they cost like 20-40 MP. Build rate is dependant on the weather, so in blizzards they build slower incomparsion to normal weather. This still forces planning and unit time efficency but not make it impossible to lay the fire and produce some what campy play if you dont have a HT.

24 Apr 2013, 10:07 AM
#38
avatar of The_Riddler

Posts: 336

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2013, 17:06 PMTommy
I am seriously concerned about CoH2's future.


Then you shouldnt really use terms like "massive load of utter bollocks", "shit" and "totally retarded" if you want to be taken seriously.

If your suggestions will be incorporated, CoH2 will be a near copy of CoH1,as most of the things changed in CoH2 seem worse than it was before. Instead, wouldnt it be better if they changed the current problems with innovative (non-CoH1) ideas?

After all, if you dont dare to change what was good about CoH1, then there is very little reason to play CoH2.
24 Apr 2013, 10:18 AM
#39
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934



Then you shouldnt really use terms like "massive load of utter bollocks", "shit" and "totally retarded" if you want to be taken seriously.

If your suggestions will be incorporated, CoH2 will be a near copy of CoH1,as most of the things changed in CoH2 seem worse than it was before. Instead, wouldnt it be better if they changed the current problems with innovative (non-CoH1) ideas?

After all, if you dont dare to change what was good about CoH1, then there is very little reason to play CoH2.


No no they can change this game a lot with blizzards, vaulting, true sight and new units are all fantastic ways to lift the game to a new different level. The fact remains that core components of the game have been changed in terms of the UI and the ease of gainning information from the game. These are core components they don't have to be revitalised because they are simply things that should be built with the mindset of function over form. At the moment appearence is put ahead of functionality with those two issues, making it for the most part a complete fail.
24 Apr 2013, 10:19 AM
#40
avatar of SunAngel

Posts: 104

Yeah I do agree they must have a reduced cost on the firepits. I think a system that would work nice would be they cost like 20-40 MP. Build rate is dependant on the weather, so in blizzards they build slower incomparsion to normal weather. This still forces planning and unit time efficency but not make it impossible to lay the fire and produce some what campy play if you dont have a HT.



I really like the idea of making firepits take longer to build in blizzards. Campy gameplay in an otherwised fast-paced game is quite dumb, and it doesn't seem that anyone does anything really cool in blizzards anyway. Giving the player the ability to build fires in the blizzards would let them keep up the offensive, while the reduced building speed would be an incentive for players to prepare for the blizzard instead of completely screwing over the players that didn't think about it.
PAGES (19)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

Board Info

264 users are online: 2 members and 262 guests
Smaug, Mr Carmine
38 posts in the last 24h
410 posts in the last week
1402 posts in the last month
Registered members: 27090
Welcome our newest member, neelu115
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM