What the PRO's think of COH2

CoH 2 is not yet as good as vCoH was or is, and I think there is a certain retrospective bias mixed in many people's opinion. I think the game has a huge potential and it lies in the dev's hands to make the most of it.

I really hope they'll bring the game back on track because I'm just hooked on the Ostfront scenario...

Until then 3v3 with friends and Red Orchestra 2 it is!

People compare early vCoH to early CoH2 all the time, but the comparison doesn't really make sense when you think about it.

When vCoH was being patched in its early years, the core game never changed. Sure, there were some pretty drastic changes to how units functioned and how mechanics worked, but the actual units themselves and the dynamic of the gameplay was exactly the same. Things like Strafing Run and Calliopes and infantry upgrades were heavily modified, but nothing was really added or removed. Tweaks were made purely to improve balance and encourage quality gameplay, not to add content or artificially create diversity.

Compare that to CoH2. No matter how brilliant Peter and the balance devs are, I don't see how it's possible to successfully balance a game when completely gamechanging content is being added on a monthly basis. The early stages of vCoH never had to worry about half a dozen new commanders every month, and balancing the need to make those commanders strong enough to encourage purchases with not screwing over the players that refuse to play.

And it's not even the balance that's my greatest concern. The core gameplay of CoH2 is incredibly simplistic when compared to vCoH, in my opinion at least. That's doubly upsetting when you realize that, strategically speaking, vCoH is technically a very simple game. Yet when you look back at early vCoH replays and walk through the history of the game, you quickly notice striking changes in gameplay and strategy. These changes didn't rely on the addition of new content, but rather the inherent depth of the original game.

Take, for example, the Americans vs. Wehrmacht matchup. Gameplay in the early years of vCoH revolved around heavy low-tier play with rushes to high-tier tanks. Veterancy was rarely touched, certain tiers were rarely used, and gameplay was fairly simplistic. Fast forward a few years and you have the emergence of T2 Terror with heavy veterancy and doctrine dependance for late-game strength. This change in strategy and gameplay was purely the result of players understanding the game better; no new content was needed.

I can't see a similar situation occurring in CoH2, and I don't think Relic can either, which is why they're attempting to artificially create this innovation by adding commanders that drastically change how the game is played.

Wehrmacht veterancy, for example, was bitched about by many players in the vCoH days. However, at the highest level of play, you rarely heard players complaining about it. Purchasable veterancy was one of the most interesting and strategically challenging aspects of vCoH play, and one of the main reasons why Wehrmacht was such a diverse faction strategically. It gave you something other than units to spend your money on, forced you to prioritize and manage your economy more intelligently, and opened up strategic opportunities for your opponents.

The problem I have with CoH2 is the fact that the base game is so painfully dull and simplistic, and the attempts by Relic to diversify that base game by releasing paywall-blocked commanders is needlessly segregating the community and making any well-intentioned attempts at balance completely futile.

You say that, but it took years for this depth to be aknowledged. This rosepainting of coh1 compared to coh2.. how much of it is a wish for coh 2 to be better rather than giving some credit.. some of us actually disagree with coh 2 being so bland and poor.

Is it also possible that people grew up in the meantime and now expect much more of a game?

Sure, I love colonization 1 that I played on my 486. I found the new civilization:colonization really bad in comparison. Do I have much in terms of arguments? No the latter was harder, more complicated and yet more gimmicky.

What it didn't have was the sakura blossom of childhood memories connected to it. And Coh1 was the "first" of it's type

You say that, but it took years for this depth to be aknowledged. This rosepainting of coh1 compared to coh2.. how much of it is a wish for coh 2 to be better rather than giving some credit.. some of us actually disagree with coh 2 being so bland and poor.

Is it also possible that people grew up in the meantime and now expect much more of a game?

Sure, I love colonization 1 that I played on my 486. I found the new civilization:colonization really bad in comparison. Do I have much in terms of arguments? No the latter was harder, more complicated and yet more gimmicky.

What it didn't have was the sakura blossom of childhood memories connected to it. And Coh1 was the "first" of it's type

But that's exactly what I said. Over the years vCoH's strategic depth increased even though no new content was being added, simply because the game's mechanics and design encouraged that depth. You had purchasable veterancy and lots of fuel-based upgrades to go along with the standard progression of tiers and unit production.

Compare that to CoH2 right now. There are almost zero fuel-based upgrades, and there's really nothing to spend your money on other than tier buildings and more units. That's my biggest problem with the game so far; it's incredibly bland from a strategic point of view, and it lacks mechanics that have the potential to add strategic depth in the future. There's nothing to spend your money on aside from buildings and units, so there's far less decisions to be made strategically. The only thing adding depth is all these DLC commanders, and if the only way to allow yourself access to the complete spectrum of strategic options is through DLC purchases, there is something incredibly wrong.

Essentially, it feels like Relic has made a game that requires drastic changes and additions before it feels like a truly compelling and challenging strategic experience. However instead of giving everybody access to these changes/additions, they're forcing players to pay extra for them by linking the changes to DLC commanders.

This game will never be as good as vCOH unless most of the commander specific units become generally build-able units. How can you balance 10+ commanders for each faction?

This game will never be as good as vCOH unless most of the commander specific units become generally build-able units. How can you balance 10+ commanders for each faction?

I wholeheartedly agree with you. One way of how I can see of making commanders in a more buildable screnario is first of all to lay off the DLC for a couple of months, balance the current ones and do extensive testing on their future DLC.

This is wishful thinking but I would like to see them reintroduce the teching mechanism of COH1. How:

Bundle the commanders of each faction up, and then split them into 3 defined trees. Specific trees have specific commanders, allowing you to chose different abilities from all the commanders in that tree only (to a max number of allowed abilities) - with the CP abilities accumulating to purchase the next 0CP unit to 1 CP for example just like COH1. This is one way to avoid people who bought the commanders not being upset as they can still use all of a specific commanders abilities, but will allow for a hell of a more diverse game as you can pick and choose abilities from the different commanders in the tech tree you chose to follow.

Well in my mind it sounds easy but writing it doesnt come out as I would like to explain as english is not my first language. I hate when people make these kind of suggestions but I thought it worthwhile putting it out there as I don't really care anymore at this point.

This game will never be as good as vCOH unless most of the commander specific units become generally build-able units. How can you balance 10+ commanders for each faction?

I think the Inverse argument about the depth of the game is true but could have been fix in the future if the main issue could be resolved but it can't.

The main issue that will never be resolved are the commanders. It's too late now, they can't remove something that they've already sold and even if they stop selling new commanders, like link0 said, how can you balance all of these ? unfortunately their business model won't change for this game and more commanders will be added and more problems will be created.

I really can't understand how they thought this model could work. Seriously how many people actually bought DLC multiplayer commanders ? there's less then 2000 people playing at a given time so even if 2000 people purchased 2 commanders each, I really can't imagine that they've sold more then this, that's only 16,000$. Even if you double this, do they really make money with this ?! and seriously at what cost ??? pissing off the whole community and potentially destroying a franchise ? I really can't wrap my head around it.I do appreciate the free content but what good is free content for an almost broken game.

Except inverse applies this bland thing in comparison to depth that he found over several years. The game has hardly been out 1/2 year ?

I think the Inverse argument about the depth of the game is true but could have been fix in the future if the main issue could be resolved but it can't.

The main issue that will never be resolved are the commanders. It's too late now, they can't remove something that they've already sold and even if they stop selling new commanders, like link0 said, how can you balance all of these ? unfortunately their business model won't change for this game and more commanders will be added and more problems will be created.

I really can't understand how they thought this model could work. Seriously how many people actually bought DLC multiplayer commanders ? there's less then 2000 people playing at a given time so even if 2000 people purchased 2 commanders each, I really can't imagine that they've sold more then this, that's only 16,000$. Even if you double this, do they really make money with this ?! and seriously at what cost ??? pissing off the whole community and potentially destroying a franchise ? I really can't wrap my head around it.I do appreciate the free content but what good is free content for an almost broken game.

+1 thats the main issue/problem.... my last 20-30 games, was against player with 1-2 new commander. As long as there are enough ppl purchased the commander, they are satisfied...and new commander are on the way.
So we are restarting this discussion in 3 weeks again.

Except inverse applies this bland thing in comparison to depth that he found over several years. The game has hardly been out 1/2 year ?

I'm not sure what you mean.

My argument was that while it look a while for vCoH to develop strategically, all of the necessary elements of a successful strategy game were in place from the start. You had a lot of options, even if players took a long time to figure out exactly how and when to use them all. Relic didn't have to add new content to create those strategic options, they just had to encourage players to explore them through balance updates.

In CoH2, those options simply do not exist. You don't have anything to spend your money on outside of units, buildings, and a few extremely cheap upgrades. There's not really any arguing with that IMO. So Relic can't just sit back and let the game mature, because there's objectively less strategic options in CoH2 than there was in vCoH. There's less things to spend your money on, so there's less decisions to be made. You can't expect strategic depths to emerge from a game with such limited options.

Relic's solution to this lack of depth is releasing new units, abilities, and mechanics via DLC commanders. That's the problem. If they were making these changes free for everybody, I would still have a problem with the direction they were taking the game, but I would be far more optimistic about its future because at least it's giving players more options. Forcing people to pay for those options is the wrong way to go about making the game more strategically diverse.

Ah, you disagree with the model and that's fine. I hate having to pay for new stuff luckily I have a benefactor in Los Angeles that keeps me well endowed in matters of steam gifts. But the depth is still being added, and there will be MORE depth in total for those willing to pay.

And who's to say it won't be a point where booster packs are added? With bundle DLC content to a affordable price? Yes, it will take time, but then again if you don't have time to wait for the game to change maybe COH is not for you. How long did it take for fast armored car to be reliably countered? Sometime's the players mind is the slowest thing to change, not the game itself.

Just because fast t70 is all the jazz now doesn't mean people won't figure out how to play against it. Time is on the thinking player's side.

And I really don't think being negative about COH2 will help. This is the market you are fighting, and the market doesn't react to minority punishment it reacts to big population sales.

I think the Inverse argument about the depth of the game is true but could have been fix in the future if the main issue could be resolved but it can't.

The main issue that will never be resolved are the commanders. It's too late now, they can't remove something that they've already sold and even if they stop selling new commanders, like link0 said, how can you balance all of these ? unfortunately their business model won't change for this game and more commanders will be added and more problems will be created.

Totally agree with this.
It's too late, Relic won't change the business model. And even if they want to, Sega will probably refuse to change anything.
One solution : modding.

I really can't understand how they thought this model could work. Seriously how many people actually bought DLC multiplayer commanders ? there's less then 2000 people playing at a given time so even if 2000 people purchased 2 commanders each, I really can't imagine that they've sold more then this, that's only 16,000$. Even if you double this, do they really make money with this ?! and seriously at what cost ??? pissing off the whole community and potentially destroying a franchise ? I really can't wrap my head around it.I do appreciate the free content but what good is free content for an almost broken game.

I have no idea how many DLCs they sold, but I honestly think it's way more than what you think. ^^

To be perfectly honest, one of CoH2's core problem reminds me somehow of DoW2.

In DoW2 the balance was meh, sometimes terrible, sometimes even enjoyable. If you have adapted your playstyle to the current balance in some way, you wouldn't have had too many problems actually. But there was a huge problem concerning DoW2: bugs. The whole game was filled with a tremendous amount of bugs, which finally made the game unplayable for most of the players (beside other factors turning the game into a torture). Relic has never ever fixed most of the bugs.

I can recognise the same concern in CoH2. Instead of fixing these crucial core concerns such as command-and-response-lagg, too boring and simple way of playing the game and several bugs Relic releases more DLC commanders which cause more and more issues. Moreover all the bugs I encounter in CoH2 (found game, but could not join??? triggered unit ability, nothing happens???) hugely decrease my fun when being in-game.

Therefore I don't want Relic to balance everything immediately (which is without any doubt a almost impossible task due to DLC commanders) but to correct the issues stated above and many more. Improve the quintessence of CoH2, the fundamental structures of CoH2.

I have no idea how many DLCs they sold, but I honestly think it's way more than what you think. ^^

not sure if this is what you understood but...

I'm talking about mutiplayer commanders DLC only, not skins, faceplate etc...

Maybe they've sold more but remember when we could see the amount of players searching for a game ? there was rarely more then 20, so I really don't see how these DLC mp commanders can really bring in a significant amount of money but maybe I'm totally off.

Except inverse applies this bland thing in comparison to depth that he found over several years. The game has hardly been out 1/2 year ?

True it has been out only 1/2 a year. But then it has vCOH to look to for inspiration, which CoH1 didn't.

Had they released a, let's call it less ambitious, upgrade, or at least a less drastic one, we would all be much happier.

Truesight is enough of a difference in both feel and strategy that if you added just that, and kept all else the same, it would have felt like more than an expansion. I don't even think you would need blizzards, just the snow tech, and that would already be a second major change. Then keep Wehr as is and introduce a Russian faction with lots of balancing.

They didn't need to mess with buildings, snipers, pathing, terrain, AI, new fausts, new nades, new mines, new pio/engineers, etc except to tweak the balance.

We would all have still bought it. It would have had fewer bugs and less development, and it would still have been better than most of what's out there (including probably COH2).

They could even have introduced DLCs in the form of a unit replacement here or there, skins, map packs, ToW, campaigns. Even license and resell popular mods for a buck or two (a la phone apps).

Ah, you disagree with the model and that's fine. I hate having to pay for new stuff luckily I have a benefactor in Los Angeles that keeps me well endowed in matters of steam gifts. But the depth is still being added, and there will be MORE depth in total for those willing to pay.

Units =/= depth. They can add all the new units and commanders and funny abilites they like, but it doesn't create depth.

For depth, you need multiple strategic options. Because all the strategic options in CoH2 are locked behind commanders, there's a huge wealth of options that are denied to the player at any one time.

Options that were available to the player at any given moment in any given game in vCoH are now only accessible if you have the commander which grants it to you, and that isn't likely to change.

Broadly speaking my issues with CoH2 are thus (pasted from another thread):

I'm trying hard to think of a way Relic/SEGA could feasibly extracate themselves from this mess but I'm struggling. That is of course assuming that they see this as a mess and not just a little blip.

What really grinds my gears is that every time we complain at the DLC (and say what you like about DLC, but full price game AND constant gameplay-affecting microtransactions?!) we're guilt tripped with the notion that if WE want nice, free things that benefit US (worldbuilder, observer mode etc) then we should just shut up and shovel down another shit sandwich.

This is problematic for two reasons; one, it implies that such features are being designed purely for the 'elite', for the 'esports fans'. This is just false- everyone from the comp stompers to the tournament competitors can benefit hugely from these features, not to mention the fact that it allows streamers and casters to better advertise the product.

Secondly, the message that all this DLC is just so that we can have 'free' features is patently wrong. If we only get 'free' stuff by buying DLC, it's clearly not free. Even though I as an individual am not forced to buy anything, clearly this business model only functions if enough people DO buy the extra content in order to fund the 'free' content. We're being diddled either way- either people buy the DLC content to fund the 'free' features the game is lacking (and by all accounts should've been there in the first place) or not enough people buy the content and therefore nothing is updated.

We are all well aware that Relic suffered financial and timing setbacks and that SEGA is probably pushing hard to squeeze every last drop out of their $20 million investment. That's why these forums are littered with ideas for how Relic could make money without a) compromising playability and b) pissing off their (shrinking) fanbase.

This is another place where the business model confuses me- if, as we are told, 'we', the competetive, automatch, ladder etc community are the 1%, and the campaign players, comp stompers and skirmishers are the 99%, why is the stream of DLC aimed at the minority?! Surely it would make more sense to design DLC content specifically for that AI focused market; premium 3v3 and 4v4 maps designed like Scheldt or Hochwald Gap (shit, you could repackage every 3v3 and 4v4 map from vCoH into CoH2, that's about 20 or so maps and sell them for a buck each, I guarantee you make more money than pitching super-Tigers at people who throw up at such a notion), extra artillery units for CPU games, an 'ultra-gore' mode a la Total War, extra campaign missions, etc etc.

Stop making premium commanders, please. Please, please, please. A new batch every month will be the leading cause of death for CoH2 if not.

Lucky Strike and HolyHammer pretty much nailed it, and there are lots of posts in this thread I can relate to. I wonder why there have been no official replies from Relic to all of this? Where is Noun, the "community" manager?

Community managers are firemen/litterguys. They are there to close threads that repeatedly complain about an issue, talk vaguely about stuff and reprimand people for making demands based on what has been said in the past.

As for the depth discussion I don't dismiss your points. It's certainly one way to look at it depth being "barred" from most players. But you go into the game with 3 doctrines and bulletins and if each player has 3 different one's in a 2v2.. thats more "depth" if you have payed for it. I'm just not swallowing that one based on the merit of:

- Number of doctrines
- Short time given to appreciate coh 2

Yes it had vcoh to look for inspiration. And surely noone can deny that a lot of features of vcoh got carried over.

Small arms can actually be fixed you know. It's just a matter of tweaking values, and once the novelty of a new commander is passed, the commander can be made in line with the older ones. It's good policy because in the end that means you got a lot of options and depth

Hi,

obviously im no pro player, but the thread got hijacked anyways. So i agree with tommy. I dont understand why things like bulletins, Commanders with supertanks and so on arent just where it hurts nobody: With the comp stompers. Its fun there to build an special army to crush the computer, and you can imba everything nobody cares. It probably is more fun. Hell, i think it would be fun to get an new super super super howie and kill 3 tanks of a computer. It could be fun with a m8 like hell. But I think it is a shame that the comp stompers cant even build tank traps without a doctrine.

But i like to watch experts play. I dont want lags, i want months for new strats to evolve. I want ppsh as a teching option and 12 Commandes which are balanced.

RELIC Divide Torunament and Automatch from the rest. It is the only way. Look how many casters are still there?
Krebs? Gone
Tyhcoo? gone
Experts like Symbi? Gone
RNP? gone
Frontline Network? Dangerously annoyed

The only one is still kicking is Mr Dane.
The only new is ATR. The game ist new there should be a dozens of em.

I really like relic an im a fanboy as well, but when even Ami seems annoyed and he is a true believer, you NEED to KNOW there is sth. wrong.

You cant give your probl. to the patch teams. We need a real turning point and this VERY VERY fast.

Best Regards

Tommy and Sepha are absolutely right. DLC on its current monthly trend will destroy this game. I have been casting COH since 2007. I had a lot of hope for COH2. My interest is none existent at the moment. I have not bought any DLC and don't plan on it. I am just going to throw my gaming time at BF4 instead.