I dont think posting within 24 hours of the last post is considered bumping, is it..? 
Dunno, you be the judge. |
@Kinki
I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe that the points you mentioned are attributed to balance, and are fixable. I don't believe that because you don't have mirror matches means you cannot have balanced teams (It's weird because you can have mirror matches in COH2 custom games, not that I recommend it). Some bulletins will be definitely more popular than others, but that doesn't mean it would be unbalanced. By choosing a specific set of bulletins, you adhere to a specific strategy in which you use the units the bulletins benefit. For example, if you choose 3 bulletins that favor the maxim machine gun, your maxims will be very strong, but at the same time you lose out on other bulletins that could have benefited other units.
The situation you mentioned about is more of a logistical problem than anything else. While it is not the players fault that for whatever what reason he cannot access his account, it would be up the tournament organizers to decide what to do. I would imagine it would mean he/she would play under sub-optimal conditions, but that would hopefully be a rare case and the only other options would be to delay the entire tourney to solve the issue or disqualify the player.
Personally I like the idea of giving your armies perks based upon what you like using. It's not like its an invisible thing. During the loading screens you can see what the opponent bulletins are. I truly hope that COH2 will have a large competitive scene than vCOH, and if that was the case most RTS tournaments feature a best 2 out of 3, where you can change your strategy/loadout to better suit fighting your opponent.
@Hirmetrium
I was not aware of that point that Duffy said, thanks! I love the historical stuff about the soviets and germans (I find WW2 in general to be fascinating) I agree with you that vCOH (and to an extent, COH2) was not built to a competitive Esports game at the core, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be. That said, I believe the main cause of preventing it from being a competitive game is not the balancing issues (although it will be if relic does not address them) but random factors or chance factors in the game. 50% chance for entities to die in a vehicle. #% to critically hit a unit. These factors make some game units unreliable and inconsistent. I find that most competitive games attempt to reduce random factors.
P.S. Also in a tourney (would need relic's help on that) have accounts that unlocks all items for the tourney player. So all bulletins and commanders would be available during the tournament. However this is all speculation and is not at all what relic may or may not do. It would be cool though.
That's fine, we see it from slightly different perspectives. We do share the same dream, however, that CoH2 be highly competitive, and that is probably what matters most.
I am bitter because i just don't see how anything Relic has done, scrapping the original CoH, shipping without ladders, Bullitins, CoHonline, yadda yadda to show the proper understanding necessary to actual build and maintain a competitive RTS.
Like I mentioned in a reply before this one, RTS is the only competitive genre where there is one game to rule them all, and I saw something in CoH that could have challenged that. Due to Relics leadership, it never did, and I don't think it will.
These are my pipe dreams ;p |
I cannot believe this to be a serious post given the date of posting.
That's fine, you bumped it. |
During the previews, Duffy sold it as a historical thing - when different armies encountered monsters like the Tiger for the first time, they didn't have a clue how to fight them - however, they quickly learned the weak points and how to exploit them. This information was then circulated to the troops through Intel Bulletins - it was thought of as another way somebody could make their army more personal. Relic is all about a personal army - that's why there was an army painter in Dawn of War 2.
And its a pretty fun system as well - its a bit poorly balanced at the moment, with certain skills being quite clearly superior to others (also tied in with difficulty) but it has potential to be a great way to make your army play to your style - if you like Panzer 4's over panthers or vice versa, you're obviously going to use a bulletin that accommodates that play-style.
I think its important to remember that COH was never intended to be a super-competitive tournament multiplayer game ala SC2 - its a poor comparison, and the systems in COH2 make it fundamentally different and very difficult to balance compared to SC2 (tanks for example - theres nothing quite like that in SC2, where all units are suddenly rendered ineffective without a counter).
I'm not saying COH2 isn't a competitive game - it is, and can be. I'm saying it appears to me to be designed at a fundamental level to be fun and have lots of cool systems and historical accuracy that just don't permit that sort of competitive play.
I agree with everything you said.
The comparison between the games isn't really fair, but I guess I always wanted to believe that it was their drastic differences that made them the two best RTS (competitive RTSs) available.
When you take a look at the genres of FPS, MOBA, and RTS; RTS is the only one with a single most popular title, that title being SC.
I really saw something in the original CoH that could've shared that space. I speak from the bereaved perspective because every step I've seen Relic take since the original release of CoH has been one that moved away from that space rather than towards.
Well said though. |
If so then I did a bad job explaining what I mean. no apologies needed.
No, I did not say Balance is the spice of life, diversity is. I use starcraft as an example because despite having 3 radically different and unique playable factions/races, they do an amazing job of balancing. My point was to say that it is possible to have asymmetric playable factions with balancing, just that it is harder to do so. I am advocating for the stay of asymmetric factions. Balance != diversity. I feel intel bulletins also push diversity because it increases the asymmetry while also granting the player options. It just makes it that much harder to balance.
Bottom line is that I feel intel bulletins can increase diversity/asymmetry but does not make it impossible to balance, just harder. I feel I should mention the core of this is that I disagree with you when you mentioned imbalance was built into the core of the game. I think asymmetry is built into the core, not imbalance.
Unfortunately my saying "balance" was a mistype where I thought i had placed "diversity" however, I got a lot from your response.
I can see what you are saying as far as asymmetry is concerned, but something I had not taken into consideration before is the fact that there are no /mirror\ matches.
In SC2 the races must be balanced against each other as well as themselves because the mirror is as prevalent as any other MU whereas in CoH2 there is no such thing. If a bulletin gives a bonus to the Russian player, it is a matter of balancing that bonus against the German faction. Yes, it does present an advantage that did not previously exist, but you would never be playing against a player that could also have that exact advantage under the exact same circumstance, but doesn't. That would be a problem.
It does add something to the game as far as asymmetry is concerned, but there are just certain situations you never want to present in a truly competitive environment. Imagine if during a major tournament someone's account is not working correctly and they have to play under another that may not have the bulletin for increased experience gain, and they barely lose the match. They can potentially blame the lack of the bulletin for the lose whether it's legitimate or not. It doesn't matter that it is legitimate. It's like a player blaming a bad mouse that no-one else had the opportunity to try, but just so happened to be forced on him by the tournament organizer.
You just are not supposed to create those situations, and a faction that becomes more powerful the more you play it, not because you're becoming better with it, but because IT is literally becoming better, shows that Relic doesn't truly understand how competition works, nor do they value it enough.
|
Some of the early RTS games had near identical units in every aspect. This lead to some very boring (my opinion) games as there was no diversity. Diversity is the spice of life. Sure it makes balancing a nightmare if not impossible, but it makes the game more interesting. It's what makes Starcraft a good game.
Sorry if this sounds snotty, but i fail to understand the connection that you are making. Balance is the spice of life, a game in this case, and makes said game more interesting but consequentially impossible to balance.
Starcraft, however, the game you decide to use as an example of this is quite possibly the most balanced RTS of all time featuring three very distinct factions and a win spread of nearly 33%. (Source: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all)
Intel Bulletins are not an example of racial diversity fyi. |
Here here.
Or Hear Hear.
Whichever.
Also, to the developer , it would be nice if you could explain the mindset behind including the intel bulletins. The skins idea is nice, but adding (even if minuscule) bonuses to experience and or ability power is totally unheard of in a competitive environment.
Nullist is right to an extent that as a community the game can be balanced and that we have a good format for doing so. You say "hear, hear!" to the balance talk, but answer me this; how do you balance a product that has imbalance built into its core framework and supported by is developer!
It's not a question of whether the differences are big enough to make a difference, it's the conundrum of why they even exist in the first place. |
They are still in the game.
Tbh, man, most of what youve requested is available on the main official site and in patch updates. Would be cool if you do some clickwork and check what you can on your own before asking others to do it for you. Know what I mean?
I've seen a lot of constructive posts made under this topic, not to mention Relic dev hits.
My only intention, and one I don't think was in vain, was to ask the community for their thoughts on certain mechanics coming from a specific comparative (CoHvCoH2) and competitive perspective.
So, to be honest man, a persons opinion is not a matter of "clickwork". This is a forum and in forums there happen to be discussions.
So don't be a snide brat, k? |
|
So wait, did relic scrap intel bulletins or are they still in the game? |
Well, to be honest. What makes Starcraft is just the 8 years it existed before CoH.
Don't get me wrong, SC is a good game and i played it like a lot and still play SC2 from time to time.
At the time SC came out, there was not a huge amount of competitors and SCs fast gameplay and decent balanced made it popular and those competitive.
What people need to get is, that not the game itself is the reason it is competitive but the fame it has. There are a lot of players playing the game. Those you have a huge "casual" crowd that watches tournaments and stream, which leads to sponsors getting interested into top-players and tournaments to advertise their products.
That is all a cause of the "easy to learn, hard to master" gameplay of SC. Everyone can understand how things work quite easy and what unit does how much damage and has what life and what armor and so on.
CoH is not as friendly to beginners as SC and those it will not attract the amount of players that SC does. Also the competitive SC scene was established for about 6 years when CoH hit the field. Players are attracted by games that have a big competitive scene already.
For CoH2 to compete with SC2 in terms of competitive scene, there has to be a lot of things going wrong in SC2, no matter how good CoH2 is. That's just how it is.
You make a lot of good points. SC has a gigantic casual community to support a large viewership.
I would say though that there is something to be taken from the simplicity of the game and something more to be taken from how little they changed the base when introducing a "new" title.
I don't think CoH would ever be as popular as SC, but I also don't believe that mutes the point that a competitive scene, albiet a small one, is what keeps a game alive and Relic's choices have been anything but in line with the idea of fostering a healthy competitive community.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
