DBP Balance Feedback

1282930313234»

Comments

  • #992
    8 months ago

    @Toomes said:
    Hey anyone and everyone. I had to register and all that just to ask this question. Am i the only one whos entire COH 2 is unplayable now since December patch? Every game i load up, vs AI, Automatch, Custom games etc. All of them BUGSPLAT now, it's very frustrating having your favorite game turn to an unplayable piece of trash and no one mentioning themselves having the same problem. Any feedback would be great, iI waited for a new quick fix patch for maybe others suffering the same problem. But no nothing.

    Try here.

    https://community.companyofheroes.com/categories/coh2-bug-reporting

  • #993
    8 months ago
    BaálthazorBaálthazor The shoreline by the river Styx.Posts: 1,092
    @Lazarus

    Forget it man.
    He's the type that doesn't WANT to improve. He just wants continue roflstomping and God forbid his Pershing can't be the new TA!
  • #994
    8 months ago
  • #995
    8 months ago
    HardyStyledHardyStyl… MoscowPosts: 24

    @Lazarus написал:

    @HardyStyled said:
    I know that you all are pros and top 10 players knowing what to right in every situation. This is how forum works, just dislike the post and tell something smart, like, use COMBINED ARMS on allies and don't spam call-ins.

    Oh, okay well we-

    @HardyStyled said:
    I just gave real feedback and not some baby rages here, I don't need your advises on how I need to play this game, thx.

    Oh. Oh no.

    @HardyStyled said:
    Nice one, when Axis meta right now is just spam G43 and from my investigation british combined arms can't do shit if you just not spam infantry like an idiot. I played a lot of games on that faction since patch came out in almost every game mode, testing this units changes comparing to other gamestyles and using different build orders to understand. And I'm telling you that Crocodile is UNDERPERFORMING comparing to same or a bit higher price units especially in mass modes. I just gave real feedback and not some baby rages here, I don't need your advises on how I need to play this game, thx. This is up to balance makers to look at this situation and make final decision.

    Right - and I've done nothing but play UKF and OKW in this patch because playing anything else is intentionally handicapping yourself, and I'M telling YOU that Crocodile is NOT UNDERPERFORMING comparing to same or a bit higher price units. So. One of us must be giving the wrong feedback. I wouldn't hinge your hopes on the balance team, given they're the ones who decided the Crocodile needed a nerf to begin with, and yes - you clearly need advise on how to play the game, and with all good nature I do encourage you to post some replays in the strategy section so someone can teach you which skills you need to improve to perform better as a player.

    Whatever u say. WE have different thoughts about how this unit should perform and how it's performing atm. I rather invest fuel in other tanks instead of another churchill for 160 fuel but with worser gun and no smokes but with some flames that are ok but it's not enough. But it became a lot way more situational. And I'm talking not about 1v1.

  • #996
    8 months ago

    @HardyStyled написал:

    WE have different thoughts about how this unit should perform and how it's performing atm.

    Yes. And your opinion is wrong.

    I rather invest fuel in other tanks instead of another churchill for 160 fuel but with worser gun and no smokes but with some flames that are ok but it's not enough. But it became a lot way more situational.

    Because this tank must be situational. Before the patch croc was game-closer for a lot of games in 1v1.

  • #997
    8 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,437

    @LetzteJunker said:

    @HardyStyled написал:

    WE have different thoughts about how this unit should perform and how it's performing atm.

    Yes. And your opinion is wrong.

    I rather invest fuel in other tanks instead of another churchill for 160 fuel but with worser gun and no smokes but with some flames that are ok but it's not enough. But it became a lot way more situational.

    Because this tank must be situational. Before the patch croc was game-closer for a lot of games in 1v1.

    Please start being concerned when at least a SINGLE player will use churchill mk7 in actual, non comp stomp, competitive game.

    Until then, its like complaining about "possibly overpowered and everpresent M-42 AT gun or 250 transport".

  • #998
    8 months ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 466
    edited December 2017

    @Katitof No faction is supposed to excel in late game.

    Cartman if that were the case, this entire game's structure would be void. It would be one big mirror match with identical (perfect clone units)/factions facing each other, having no distinctions.

    @Slonek it is AGAINST its claimed characteristic

    While i agree with, a lot of your points, that is indeed the Okw enigma...it's never had one (characteristic that is). Remember when the faction was first released? It was a supplemental faction, that compliments the ostheer, but has now undergone countless surgeries that has left it mutated; yet they are still trying to play it off as if it can retain it's heritage. Trying to make it more mainstream while leaving some of it's roots has made it a mess. I mentioned this because i do not seem him talking about skill as another said, i see him talking about design.

  • #999
    8 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,437

    @eonfigure said:

    @Katitof No faction is supposed to excel in late game.

    Cartman if that were the case, this entire game's structure would be void. It would be one big mirror match with identical (perfect clone units)/factions facing each other, having no distinctions.

    Were you in stasis for the last 3 patches or are you completely blissfully ignorant of what is happening with balance?

    Plus, you seem to be confusing lack of "strength phases" with mirroring factions.

  • #1000
    8 months ago

    Axis has no strength phases anymore.

    Bad patch. Can't believe we're still getting Allied propaganda over 70 years after the big win. I mean, c'mon, it's a game and both sides should have a fighting chance if player skill is equal, which this patch took away from both Axis factions.

  • #1001
    8 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,437

    @redCOMET said:
    Axis has no strength phases anymore.

    That's because no one is supposed to.
    That's specifically why allies got early game nerfs and axis got late game nerfs for last 3 patches.

    Bad patch. Can't believe we're still getting Allied propaganda over 70 years after the big win. I mean, c'mon, it's a game and both sides should have a fighting chance if player skill is equal, which this patch took away from both Axis factions.

    Suuuuuuure, just loosen up that tinfoil hat of yours there, mate - its a little bit too tight at the moment and it shows.

  • #1002
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,390
    edited December 2017
    > @redCOMET said:
    > Axis has no strength phases anymore.
    >
    > Bad patch. Can't believe we're still getting Allied propaganda over 70 years after the big win. I mean, c'mon, it's a game and both sides should have a fighting chance if player skill is equal, which this patch took away from both Axis factions.

    Aside from you playing them what disadvantages do you feel the axis factions have? Like in design specifically.
  • #1003
    8 months ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 466
    edited December 2017

    @Katitof said:

    @eonfigure said:

    @Katitof No faction is supposed to excel in late game.

    Cartman if that were the case, this entire game's structure would be void. It would be one big mirror match with identical (perfect clone units)/factions facing each other, having no distinctions.

    Were you in stasis for the last 3 patches or are you completely blissfully ignorant of what is happening with balance?

    Plus, you seem to be confusing lack of "strength phases" with mirroring factions.

    You're just rewording the phrase; go ahead and count how many times people have mentioned the terms, "early/mid/late-game" in relation to this game, and all the factors associated with it. You're not discrediting me when saying that, you're being naive to try to pass it off as something else. Everything has up and downs in this game, moments where they have greater potential than others. It's not that i'm trying to argue with you, it's just that i can't believe you said that.

    @thedarkarmadillo Aside from you playing them what disadvantages do you feel the axis factions have? Like in design specifically.

    I' am in no way being sarcastic or disrespectful when i say i could write an entire book off of this topic. Most of it stemming from the first game, which has carried off into this game. It's fundamental points being a design aspect/flaw, rather than a balance (technical stats, though that is one too) flaw.

    But how can you argue balance when designers implement new characteristics into a game that was pretty much set in stone? Release of new factions while the game has been active has caused all these problems. We wouldn't even know each other or be discussing all of these mentionings, if so many details of this game were left unfinished and-or unrefined. There's just so many things to mention. And I'm glad its "getting there", if even at a slow pace.

  • #1004
    8 months ago
    mrdjjag81mrdjjag81 Posts: 194
    edited December 2017

    since the Q17 nest lost it garrison damagebonus it should be adjusted to 300 damage i think, it did 320 before if it was close to an assimble or had a dude in it. Its ok if the pak has 320 damage and still able to 2-shot medium tanks because of it lesser benefits comparing to the Q17. Alternity get 300 after vet 1 or back to 320 after reachin vet 3. It just got an UI added(which dosent work currently) to make up for the loss of the assimble aura and garrisn bonus which is a bit meh imo.

  • #1005
    8 months ago

    @Katitof написал:

    Please start being concerned when at least a SINGLE player will use churchill mk7 in actual, non comp stomp, competitive game.

    I don't get at all what are u want to manage and why u think that churchill's using is rare and this unit must be used more regularly.

  • #1006
    8 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,882

    @Katitof said:

    Please start being concerned when at least a SINGLE player will use churchill mk7 in actual, non comp stomp, competitive game.

    < this guy right here, so start being concerned.

  • #1007
    8 months ago
    SlonekSlonek Posts: 5
    edited December 2017

    @eonfigure said:
    While i agree with, a lot of your points, that is indeed the Okw enigma...it's never had one (characteristic that is). Remember when the faction was first released? It was a supplemental faction, that compliments the ostheer, but has now undergone countless surgeries that has left it mutated; yet they are still trying to play it off as if it can retain it's heritage. Trying to make it more mainstream while leaving some of it's roots has made it a mess. I mentioned this because i do not seem him talking about skill as another said, i see him talking about design.

    In my view OKW resembles much of Panzer Elite from CoH, with some changes. Still, characteristic included: local advantage thru strong specialized units fewer in number, overall battlefield presence thru high speed and frequency rather than waves of cannon fodder or rock-solid defense, aggressiveness with high risk and high value attached, if lucky (i.e. skillful enough). Suppression thru Kubel, powerful pios, lack of 'siege' and 'wall defense' weapons (flamethrowers, smoke, mgs), limited resource flow but extended vet system...all was perfectly fine for me, although I did see balance issues among all fractions thru all those years. Now, regardless of all discussions about balance, OKW had been castrated from that aggressiveness and uniqueness...and I do agree...now it is poorly organized mess...
    On the wider perspective, I think Relic wants to create impression that CoH2 is still something important to the company, while apparently it's not. Drastic changes dictated by outsourced guys claiming to represent 'community' (really???), dramatic tech quality of whole process and perceived lack of ANY long-term vision 'where are we going'... really it looks like they're trying to keep players attracted at lowest cost possible...until they will have time for CoH3. Embarrassing...

  • #1008
    8 months ago

    @Katitof said:
    Firstly, its not relic who did the changes, its the modders on behalf of relic.
    The modders did things I don't agree with as well, but on the long run its mostly improvements.
    The period of tons of errors, bugs and mistakes was couple of months we had DPB in testing, if you contributed, that's great, if you didn't, that's on you.

    Are you kidding me, pal? If other arguments don't work - I'VE PAID for that game. All to all - quit a lot of money. And spent A LOT of time with it. So I don't want it to be changed so drastically, ruined from my perspective, by group of unidentified guys, claiming to be 'gurus from community'. This is not an open source work...this is a commercial product. Relic took money, Relic owns it, Relic takes responsibility. That how it works among men, not boys. Period. And I don't buy arguments like 'you had time to speak up' - because whole process is so blurred and non-transparent, and I don't see ANY mechanism to actually had any impact.
    You seem to like fall back to numbers and statistics....so...I've spent last 19 years (sic!) of my professional life in IT product development. And I can smell badly-organized, under-resourced, no-vision-plagued process. And now is claimed 'community'...bad joke...

  • #1009
    8 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,437

    @Slonek said:

    @Katitof said:
    Firstly, its not relic who did the changes, its the modders on behalf of relic.
    The modders did things I don't agree with as well, but on the long run its mostly improvements.
    The period of tons of errors, bugs and mistakes was couple of months we had DPB in testing, if you contributed, that's great, if you didn't, that's on you.

    Are you kidding me, pal? If other arguments don't work - I'VE PAID for that game. All to all - quit a lot of money. And spent A LOT of time with it.

    Both of these are utterly stupid arguments you know.

    So I don't want it to be changed so drastically, ruined from my perspective, by group of unidentified guys, claiming to be 'gurus from community'. This is not an open source work...this is a commercial product. Relic took money, Relic owns it, Relic takes responsibility. That how it works among men, not boys. Period. And I don't buy arguments like 'you had time to speak up' - because whole process is so blurred and non-transparent, and I don't see ANY mechanism to actually had any impact.

    This is also a product which wants to provide compelling, competitive experience, which you can't achieve without changing balance and revamping stuff that was proven to not be working.

    You can either adapt to changes, stick to unchanged single player content or make a rage post and leave the game for good, because it WILL keep changing balance.

    And what TF was "blurred and non transparent" for you?
    We had a number of patch iterations, a thread to provide feedback and replays and a long time period for testing.
    If you didn't participated, its on you and play the patch which is a result of feedback from remainder of community.

    You seem to like fall back to numbers and statistics....so...I've spent last 19 years (sic!) of my professional life in IT product development. And I can smell badly-organized, under-resourced, no-vision-plagued process. And now is claimed 'community'...bad joke...

    Let me welcome you to modern day gaming development then, which is badly organized(too much stuff changes along the line of development), under-resourced(developers can't afford required menpower to work on the project and publishers give a crap only about rising revenue curve at lowest possible cost) and lacking vision(which makes the games go completely opposite direction after few years when people on the project are exchanged, especially lead game designers).

  • #1010
    8 months ago

    @Katitof said:
    Both of these are utterly stupid arguments you know.

    Well...I am not 5 yo., so won't go into your clumsy sophistry....sorry...

    This is also a product which wants to provide compelling, competitive experience, which you can't achieve without changing balance and revamping stuff that was proven to not be working.

    It took years to recognize that so drastic changes are needed? And that OKW is so op, in fact BOTH early and late game? Really?

    You can either adapt to changes, stick to unchanged single player content or make a rage post and leave the game for good, because it WILL keep changing balance.

    With all the respect pal, you ARE NOT the one that will dictate my options...And you DO NOT own the game...
    Instead of just talking...show the numbers. Show raw, unbiased data, not your conclusions or gut feelings. What was the base for assumptions that this or that characteristic needs to be changed, and that it will be change for better? Each game has detailed timeline collected I guess. It shouldn't be hard to run some BI on games data, no matter how big dataset is... Or are you using just your thumb?

  • #1011
    8 months ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,248 mod

    **(Moderator Input) ** The DBP phase is over, and the patch is now live. I believe this thread has had a positive input towards the whole iterative process, but it has had its run - therefore, I am closing it.

This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.