Steel Division sales...

Sleksa
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2245
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 12:26
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Sleksa » Tue 20 Jun 2017 12:21

Hidden Gunman wrote:However, if you also believe that the game should be balanced for the benefit of a select few, that's your view. I'll still hold the view that it should be tweaked for the benefit of the average player, because at the moment the player numbers aren't too good, and the actual player interest on the whole is waning, largely for the reasons that Gros and I and others have given.


I'd like you to quote to the part where I say that the game "should be balanced for the benefit of a select few". Because what I said was that when the game is balanced from top down, it also becomes more balanced for everyone, no matter what their level of skill is.


Sleksa wrote:]The game should still be balanced top-down in my opinion, as it's worked in every other rts title no matter what skill level the players are.
Image

User avatar
Lawliet
Corporal
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue 22 Sep 2015 14:48
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Lawliet » Tue 20 Jun 2017 12:22

Hmmm, I cant see the reason why they keep nerfing Jumbo in the last patch. Perhaps it is just due to the fact that too many "average players" cried about how Jumbo is op and this game is unbalance blablabla

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Hidden Gunman » Tue 20 Jun 2017 12:45

Sleksa wrote:
Hidden Gunman wrote:However, if you also believe that the game should be balanced for the benefit of a select few, that's your view. I'll still hold the view that it should be tweaked for the benefit of the average player, because at the moment the player numbers aren't too good, and the actual player interest on the whole is waning, largely for the reasons that Gros and I and others have given.


I'd like you to quote to the part where I say that the game "should be balanced for the benefit of a select few". Because what I said was that when the game is balanced from top down, it also becomes more balanced for everyone, no matter what their level of skill is.


Sleksa wrote:]The game should still be balanced top-down in my opinion, as it's worked in every other rts title no matter what skill level the players are.


Factually what Razzman said is correct though.


That is from your post to me...you and Razz have to accept the implications of his statement, which is balancing for the benefit of a select few.

As I said, I don't have an issue with the statement re high level ranked players/average joe...it is correct, and so is the implication I highlighted.

The question is, just how many ranked players are there playing at peak, and at trough? Excluding QP, and excluding what they class as 'noobs'. I'll bet there isn't a great number.
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

Sleksa
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2245
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 12:26
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Sleksa » Tue 20 Jun 2017 13:30

Hidden Gunman wrote:
Sleksa wrote:
Hidden Gunman wrote:However, if you also believe that the game should be balanced for the benefit of a select few, that's your view. I'll still hold the view that it should be tweaked for the benefit of the average player, because at the moment the player numbers aren't too good, and the actual player interest on the whole is waning, largely for the reasons that Gros and I and others have given.


I'd like you to quote to the part where I say that the game "should be balanced for the benefit of a select few". Because what I said was that when the game is balanced from top down, it also becomes more balanced for everyone, no matter what their level of skill is.


Sleksa wrote:]The game should still be balanced top-down in my opinion, as it's worked in every other rts title no matter what skill level the players are.


Factually what Razzman said is correct though.


That is from your post to me...you and Razz have to accept the implications of his statement, which is balancing for the benefit of a select few.

As I said, I don't have an issue with the statement re high level ranked players/average joe...it is correct, and so is the implication I highlighted.

The question is, just how many ranked players are there playing at peak, and at trough? Excluding QP, and excluding what they class as 'noobs'. I'll bet there isn't a great number.


Whatever implications you take from what I said are yours alone, unless you're seriously telling me that either me or Razzman are actively trying to create imbalances in the game to benefit ourselves? How does that even work without letting everyone else exploit the same things? I don't really even play steel division, and by the looks of things neither does razzman, so I'd love to hear what your perception for my/his motives are from that angle as well.

As far as the ranked/competitive scene goes, wargame series has basically never had a real competitive scene.

I know for a fact that there's a more pro and competitive scene existing in open red alert's c&c community, which has maybe 1/20'th the players that steel division has currently. This was the case 2 years ago, continues to be the case currently, and will continue to be so to the indefinite future in my eyes. If I had to polarize, these games mostly draw in people who are looking for whatever realism they percieve to be the most accurate depiction of cold war / ww2, rather than looking for a game they want to compete in, and due to a small pool and some level of inherent hostility towards people who are looking at the game from a competitive angle, there's no real chance to form up a even minimal competitive scene. I do want to note here that people who are drawn in by the realism angle more than the gameplay angle are completely fine with me, and the cold war / scandinavia theme was largely the reason why I got into the game series in the first place.

However, it also means that as a sideproduct there's never been a real positive attitude towards the people who look at the game from a competitive angle. As a prime example of the "players playing at the peak", Daywalker was a rts player with a long pause from the genre before I goaded him to try wargame. He had probably a total of 15-20 hours of total wargame playtime before he joined up to airlandbattle's esl tournament, and he ended up winning the most money out of the tournament, pioneering many different strategies and ideas that were later on taken to more wide use. In the ranked ladder, he had somewhere around a 95% winrate in ranked plays as well, which basically just screams about an absence of any kind of competitive community since if there were even a remotely competitive scene in that time, there would've been 0 chance for him to win as many tournament matches as he did for the sheer fact that he had very little idea of how the game works compared to the people who'd been playing since the release of euro escalator. I also had some background in rts, and I know for a fact that I'm barely mediocre (and that might still be generous) in many other games (aoe 2, starcraft). However I was also able to pull off a 90+ winrate in early wargame, before quitting after sitting for 48h straight in the ranked que without a single match. Instead of having that competitive scene, wargame's instead had a massive crowd of people screaming abuse and cheeser at people who've tried to play the game competitively. You can see this more or less everywhere if you start digging through some older things, and I'm fairly sure that this is what Razzman was more or less referring to.

https://www.reddit.com/r/wargame/commen ... ry_of_top/
Image

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Hidden Gunman » Tue 20 Jun 2017 15:23

The implication applies to the statement, not the interpretation of the statement...it's a consequence of it.

I'm not suggesting that either of you are trying to create imbalances to benefit yourselves...and I have not in any way implied that. I have clearly stated that the ranked community has a particular bias towards their game, and I'm also stating that the balancing opinions of that community may not be in the best interests of the general SD playing community...this thread is, after all, about lack (or perceived lack) of sales, which carries over into player numbers, which are low.

My view is that the manner that the game plays out contributes to that (as do others), and I have offered solutions/fixes both here and at Paradox, as have Gros and others on this thread, and other threads...at no point have I discounted anyone else's opinion regarding balance on anything other than elitist diatribes and self serving 'deck' waving...if posters wish to progress a 'your opinion is less than mine' or an elitist ranked arrogance, or agenda, as we see on this forum and Paradox's, I reserve the right to slap them down and call them for it.

The insult thrown at me on this thread shows exactly the attitude that does create ill feeling and does the ranked lobby no favours, but they can't help it, they and their supporters simply don't like being stood up to.

I'd also like to point out that I suggested this topic actually be dropped, but no, that wasn't good enough, and yet again a thread is derailed by a defence of the ranked lobby arrogance and attitude...one day it might sink in that creating ill will in the community is actually counter productive to the competitive side of things.
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

Grosnours
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2091
Joined: Mon 17 Sep 2012 23:00
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Grosnours » Tue 20 Jun 2017 16:49

Lawliet wrote:Hmmm, I cant see the reason why they keep nerfing Jumbo in the last patch. Perhaps it is just due to the fact that too many "average players" cried about how Jumbo is op and this game is unbalance blablabla

My feeling is they did some more research and calculations and adjusted the Jumbo out of the blue according to it, in order to be more authentic.
Which by the way drives me nuts.
Image

User avatar
I WUB PUGS
Lieutenant
Posts: 1221
Joined: Tue 30 Apr 2013 18:40
Location: Monterey California
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby I WUB PUGS » Tue 20 Jun 2017 19:12

Grosnours wrote:
Lawliet wrote:Hmmm, I cant see the reason why they keep nerfing Jumbo in the last patch. Perhaps it is just due to the fact that too many "average players" cried about how Jumbo is op and this game is unbalance blablabla

My feeling is they did some more research and calculations and adjusted the Jumbo out of the blue according to it, in order to be more authentic.
Which by the way drives me nuts.


Any idiot can dig up data and make changes based on them because there's no backlash. You can simply say 'oh well, this data says this'.

It is much harder to dive deep into the game do things like balancing availability and pricing for whole sections of battlegroups, which is something Eugen seems to be avoiding.

Lawliet wrote:Am I the only one here who think that this game is actually boring to play?


It is getting repetitive for me, so yeah, boring.










Edit: I'm bored so I was looking at the links on the first page to Steam DB. Now you can play around with statistics a bit to fit pretty much any narrative you want sometimes, so I decided to look at the player count in the 3-week window from the first Sunday after release to the 3rd Sunday after (SD has only had 3 Sundays of play). Sundays tend to be the peak days so this makes sense to me. Red Dragon had a 44% drop from the first Sunday to the third. Steel Division has a 63% drop as of this last Sunday. AoA had a 67% drop. :|
Image

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Hidden Gunman » Tue 20 Jun 2017 22:44

I WUB PUGS wrote:
Grosnours wrote:
Lawliet wrote:Hmmm, I cant see the reason why they keep nerfing Jumbo in the last patch. Perhaps it is just due to the fact that too many "average players" cried about how Jumbo is op and this game is unbalance blablabla

My feeling is they did some more research and calculations and adjusted the Jumbo out of the blue according to it, in order to be more authentic.
Which by the way drives me nuts.


Any idiot can dig up data and make changes based on them because there's no backlash. You can simply say 'oh well, this data says this'.

It is much harder to dive deep into the game do things like balancing availability and pricing for whole sections of battlegroups, which is something Eugen seems to be avoiding.

Lawliet wrote:Am I the only one here who think that this game is actually boring to play?


It is getting repetitive for me, so yeah, boring.










Edit: I'm bored so I was looking at the links on the first page to Steam DB. Now you can play around with statistics a bit to fit pretty much any narrative you want sometimes, so I decided to look at the player count in the 3-week window from the first Sunday after release to the 3rd Sunday after (SD has only had 3 Sundays of play). Sundays tend to be the peak days so this makes sense to me. Red Dragon had a 44% drop from the first Sunday to the third. Steel Division has a 63% drop as of this last Sunday. AoA had a 67% drop. :|


Good points again re balancing. I'm of the view that an holistic approach is needed, and that many folk will accept that there will be 'peak' units, etc. So long as average player has a fair chance to win, and there is a good 'feel' to the game, then the balance is fine...this isn't the game to go through a series of meta swings as we saw on the Wargame series.

On the player numbers, in the Australasia/Asia time slots we are seeing the trough points...last week it was horrid, little over 300 playing at worst which doesn't do a lot for the MM system.
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12153
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby Mike » Wed 21 Jun 2017 02:32

I WUB PUGS wrote:Edit: I'm bored so I was looking at the links on the first page to Steam DB. Now you can play around with statistics a bit to fit pretty much any narrative you want sometimes, so I decided to look at the player count in the 3-week window from the first Sunday after release to the 3rd Sunday after (SD has only had 3 Sundays of play). Sundays tend to be the peak days so this makes sense to me. Red Dragon had a 44% drop from the first Sunday to the third. Steel Division has a 63% drop as of this last Sunday. AoA had a 67% drop. :|


To be fair to Wargame, a lot more people that bought Wargame RD probably knew what they were getting compared to a new series like SD.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

throwaway
Lieutenant
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri 27 Feb 2015 21:23
Contact:

Re: Steel Division sales...

Postby throwaway » Wed 21 Jun 2017 03:27

Subtle balance issues are more fun to talk about, but I'm pretty sure SD's main problems are more mundane. I only have 4-5 games from the VIP beta, but my take is:

-poor optimization
-slow units (I think its important for any game to play smoothly and be very responsive to player commands, it may be realistic for everything to move at 18kmh but gameplay-wise its just results in a bad feel to the game that even short distance orders take forever to complete; in RD even infantry was quite fast)

The above two are the most important IMO.

-poor UI - I'm not sure this is right, the UI is pretty detailed and clearly meant to match the time period. But it still somehow looks clunky and ugly to me.
-poor graphics - Very detailed models and maps, but just like UI at least for me the zoomed out product doesn't look right. Could be the optimization, but screenshots from other people don't look much better either. Random screenshots from different games: gravimeme sd rd sc
-matchmaking I guess, though what I've heard about it sounds good and it seems to be a problem of it being added too late

I also had issues with much shallower gameplay, but I think that that one, just like balance tweaks, is a fun topic to talk about that's not of foremost importance for player retention. I'm probably also wrong about some of the points above, discuss.

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest