Profile of van Voort

Jump back to quoted post19 Jan 2015, 07:38 AMsir muffin

wow fuckin edgiest thing i've read all day

thanks for giving me fuckin papercuts dude

i need to go to the bathroom cabinent and get some bandaids now, man

Jump back to quoted post19 Jan 2015, 05:55 AMMr. Someguy

I typed my post from memory (after the stream), so if you could point out what exactly I got wrong that'd be excellent. I'd rather be wrong and salvage as much of my optimism as I can, but the impression I got from Peter wasn't a good one.

Jump back to quoted post18 Jan 2015, 01:18 AMpqumsieh

In hindsight, playing and trying to do a QA likely was not the best idea. It was very difficult to answer questions meaningfully and play the game itself. I figure its worth clarifying a few points incase they weren't clearly communicated in the stream itself.

Regardings Volksgrenadiers and the Shrek, we recognized this as an issue. However, we noted that the removal of this weapon would likely have adverse effects on the factions performance. As such, we are working towards a solution which minimizes this adverse effect while resolving the tactical breakdown this strategy has created.

Regarding the Pack Howitzer, I did not understand the question when it was first stated. The point relating to its target size is fair, its definitely something we can look into.

Regarding RNG, there are definitely cases where RNG has resulted in a negative experience for players. In cases where counterplay is maintained, we feel RNG works well to create a positive environment. In instances where counterplay is non-existant, we feel RNG's impact on the game can come across as arbitrary and is worth addressing at some point in the future. One example related to stray shells wiping a squad, this is definitely an area we want to improve on.

Regarding Panzergrenadiers, it was noted that they are over performing relative to their cost. But, given their timing their overall performance is limited. Basically, if the unit was fielded at the 0 minute mark it would likely be viewed as an over performer, its not and therefore its performance is considered to be on par or slightly below par. That is all that comment was meant to point out.

Regarding the call-in meta, it was noted that we recognize the cost efficiency of call-ins and their impact to the meta. However, we feel that a solution to call-ins cannot occur until we remove the reliance Soviet players have on these units. This likely means some changes to make Soviet core units more appealing/viable.

Hope this clarifies some of the point we sought to make in the cast. We will definitely consider going with a separate QA section next time.

PS. The point about the Sherman Bulldozer was meant to be some light humour.

Jump back to quoted post19 Jan 2015, 00:49 AMsir muffin

there's something called free speech, and anyone who hinders it is techically censoring

Jump back to quoted post18 Jan 2015, 01:18 AMpqumsieh

Regarding Panzergrenadiers, it was noted that they are over performing relative to their cost. But, given their timing their overall performance is limited. Basically, if the unit was fielded at the 0 minute mark it would likely be viewed as an over performer, its not and therefore its performance is considered to be on par or slightly below par. That is all that comment was meant to point out.

Jump back to quoted post16 Jan 2015, 18:31 PMSUCKmyCLOCK

Lolz relic is based in Canada hence the hour of the stream duh!??