Black Prince Poll
Posts: 978
The next logical step for those who want it in the game is to deny the results.
Posts: 545
The poll shows that of the people that participated the larger part is against the Black Prince.
The next logical step for those who want it in the game is to deny the results.
Considering it’s far from unanimous and less than 100 people so far, calling this a conclusive decision is silly lol.
Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15
Lol
Posts: 978
We might aswell deactivate the ability to make polls then since every poll is going to have that problem in the first place.
Considering it’s far from unanimous and less than 100 people so far, calling this a conclusive decision is silly lol.
92 people is far from an irrelevant sample size considering those are likely to be part of the active community.
Posts: 978
Wehraboos going nuts because an allied heavy tank.Hey namecalling. That convinced me.
Lol
If they inculded the Maus I would have opened the same thread. It is about a post war prototype being used in a game that is specifically designed and announced to be special because it is MID WAR.
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
Hey namecalling. That convinced me.
If they inculded the Maus I would have opened the same thread. It is about a post war prototype being used in a game that is specifically designed and announced to be special because it is MID WAR.
I mean. It's Italy. Italy runs until '45.
Posts: 545
We might aswell deactivate the ability to make polls then since every poll is going to have that problem in the first place.
92 people is far from an irrelevant sample size considering those are likely to be part of the active community.
That’s what I’m trying to tell you, this little thread represents so little of the average launch number of players that it doesn’t really constitute an opinion worthy of changing the game. If relic themselves poll the alpha then great but the 60-40 and at times close to 50-50 split this poll has seen shouldn’t influence their current creative plans.
Posts: 348
Posts: 1594
That’s what I’m trying to tell you, this little thread represents so little of the average launch number of players that it doesn’t really constitute an opinion worthy of changing the game. If relic themselves poll the alpha then great but the 60-40 and at times close to 50-50 split this poll has seen shouldn’t influence their current creative plans.
What makes you think that the Alpha's playerbase is necessarily representative of the number of launch players, either?
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
While the boundary of believability isn't absolute, and certainly many disagree about where it lies in an arcadey-ww2 game like COH, there's definitely some special oddness to inclusion of the BP that I believe has provoked warranted discomfort.
I'd prefer not to see it in coh3, and would instead rather have the comet, firefly, or challenger - or if the particular role of slow tank destroyer is very important to fill, APDS rounds for the Churchill 6pdr.
Posts: 545
What makes you think that the Alpha's playerbase is necessarily representative of the number of launch players, either?
Alpha testers are mainly to test stability, spot bugs and build hype. Our numbers may not match the people interested in purchasing the game you are spot on which is why again I tell you that ~60 people who currently show they don’t want it shouldn’t change creative direction.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Relic should take them out of the campaign (or have them appear late in the campaign) and leave them in the game as multiplayer goodies.
And there won't be a single person having any problem with that.
Keep campaign "historical", multiplayer was always pure fantasy and since some snowflakes tend to think otherwise, name me a single soviet vs okw battle in France.
Posts: 518
And there won't be a single person having any problem with that.
Keep campaign "historical", multiplayer was always pure fantasy and since some snowflakes tend to think otherwise, name me a single soviet vs okw battle in France.
Pure fantasy you say? Can't remember seeing Maus/ T28 / IS3 tanks in CoH2.
And fighting on a map that is supposed to be in France is also not quite the same as having a Tank available that was never used (especially when it is one of those maps that could be pretty much anywhere). This argument also doesn't really apply to CoH3 (at least so far) since so far it will only be Italy (no DAK confirmed afaik) which means that there will be no Russians fighting on maps in Italy / Brits fighting on maps in Russia / DAK fighting in Italy (which wouldn't be that much of a Problem since a lot of stuff that the DAK used was used in Italy too ... and who says that DAK will be able to fight vs Italy UKF anyways? Maybe it is separated this time? After all a BP would trash literally anything that DAK could offer ; ) )
Also gotta love how pretty much all people that are in favor of keeping the BP in this thread (or on the Dev. forum) resort to shallow arguments like accusing the people that don't want the BP of being "Snowflakes" or "Wehraboos" (or claiming that the "BP is here to stay" or that "Historical accuracy in CoH is not important" (or that no one cares about it) despite Relic stating otherwise)
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
Also gotta love how pretty much all people that are in favor of keeping the BP in this thread (or on the Dev. forum) resort to shallow arguments like accusing the people that don't want the BP of being "Snowflakes" or "Wehraboos" (or claiming that the "BP is here to stay" or that "Historical accuracy in CoH is not important" (or that no one cares about it) despite Relic stating otherwise)
Not really, you just like those ones because they're easy to dismiss
Italy runs until 45, the hardware existed and could have been shipped and driven up to the front lines. In exactly the same way that people could have launched a naval invasion by driving material that wasn't there hisotrically to a place of their choosing.
Making use of hisotrical assets in an ahistorical way is, in fact, the foundation of there being a campaign at all.
Unlike, say, the Panther 2, which was never more than a hull. That's fantasy. Using the BPs that exist and worked is just alternate history.
If you don't want to use anything that didn't see front line use, that's fine, but letting people have the freedom to run the campaign to their liking then telling them that they're not allowed to use historical assets of that nation in ways that the nation didn't is pretty absurd, when you stop to think about it.
Wrong location? No problem! But only so long as it's the right type of thing in the wrong location, the BP is the wrong type of thing in the wrong location, makes prefect sense.
Posts: 518
Not really, you just like those ones because they're easy to dismiss
I like them because they are ironic. They call us "Wehraboos" and "Snowflakes" but get mad at people for not wanting UBER Tanks that never saw service in a WW2 game
And yes: They are easy to dismiss. If your argument is "You are a Wehraboo" or "Relic does not care about historical accuracy" despite them stating otherwise, then it is easy to dismiss
Italy runs until 45, the hardware existed and could have been shipped and driven up to the front lines.
But it wasn't
Also Italy runs until May 2nd. The first prototypes appeared in May.
Making use of hisotrical assets in an ahistorical way is, in fact, the foundation of there being a campaign at all.
Is isn't. We could have gotten historical, linear campaign similar to CoH2 (but ofc with better research)
Unlike, say, the Panther 2, which was never more than a hull. That's fantasy. Using the BPs that exist and worked is just alternate history.
How is alternate history not fantasy to you?
Also: Why you mention Panther II but not Maus? This tank was completed.
is pretty absurd, when you stop to think about it.
How is not wanting prototype tanks that never saw action in a WW2 game absurd?
Wrong location? No problem! But only so long as it's the right type of thing in the wrong location, the BP is the wrong type of thing in the wrong location, makes prefect sense.
The difference is that one thing was at least used while the other thing (the BP) was never used. So it is less of a stretch. Also I still would like it if there were no Tiger IIs / Panzer Is in Italy so no, it is not "no problem" for me
Posts: 76
https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Black_Prince_(tank)
"By the time the Black Prince prototypes had appeared in May 1945, the Sherman Firefly had acquired a proven combat record, the Comet tank was in service and the introduction of Centurion was imminent. All these tanks carried the QF 17-pounder or a derivative; all had better mobility than the Black Prince and the Centurion had frontal armour of comparable effectiveness.[Note 1] The Black Prince had become redundant and the project was abandoned.[2]"
in game we could just give the firefly/comet extra frontal armor.
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
But it wasn't
Also Italy runs until May 2nd. The first prototypes appeared in May.
The first prototype was done in January, the last was done in May.
Is isn't. We could have gotten historical, linear campaign similar to CoH2 (but ofc with better research)
How is alternate history not fantasy to you?
Also: Why you mention Panther II but not Maus? This tank was completed.
But we don't. They have already taken a big bold step away from a linear, historically faithful campaign. They want to give players the option to wage the war to their liking, and even in the most liberal levels of feedback review they won't gut the freestanding campaign in lieu of a linear one now. The work has been done.
We have a campaign where we get to make our own decisions on the method and direction of the war.
In this context, the Black Prince makes perfect sense, and doesn't break any rule that the campaign does not already discard by default - i.e. only making the same decisions about where to use X unit as was done historically.
The campaign is alternate history. That's what we got.
How is not wanting prototype tanks that never saw action in a WW2 game absurd?
Because it's a WW2 alternate history campaign to begin with.
The difference is that one thing was at least used while the other thing (the BP) was never used. So it is less of a stretch. Also I still would like it if there were no Tiger IIs / Panzer Is in Italy so no, it is not "no problem" for me
You're welcome to this opinion, but the format of the campaign makes such restrictions entirely arbitraty.
Don't use 'em if you don't want to. But Relic are letting people run the campaign in the manner they choose. So... others will disagree. And they will use them.
-----
I see no reason why we shouldn't replace the BP with a Firefly or Comet. from the wiki:
in game we could just give the firefly/comet extra frontal armor.
My humble assumption is that other British Campaign Units will have the comet and firefly as the end of their tech trees.
The heavy, lumbering armour company gets the BP.
Posts: 518
I see no reason why we shouldn't replace the BP with a Firefly or Comet. from the wiki:
https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Black_Prince_(tank)
"By the time the Black Prince prototypes had appeared in May 1945, the Sherman Firefly had acquired a proven combat record, the Comet tank was in service and the introduction of Centurion was imminent. All these tanks carried the QF 17-pounder or a derivative; all had better mobility than the Black Prince and the Centurion had frontal armour of comparable effectiveness.[Note 1] The Black Prince had become redundant and the project was abandoned.[2]"
in game we could just give the firefly/comet extra frontal armor.
Or even better: Replace it with the M10 17pounder (also named Achilles (?)). This thing was present in Italy from 1944 onwards and I would really like to see it in a CoH game.
It could also get slightly better frontal armor than it deserved since there were M10 with 76mm guns that had add-on armor so it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to give M10 with 17 pounder some extra armor too. Also it was way faster than BP which could make up for its lower armor.
Posts: 76
The heavy, lumbering armour company gets the BP.
Or give them a churchill tank that was actually active in the italian peninsula. Would you hold the same opinion if Relic added the Maus to the wher faction in the next COH3 patch? Just curious
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
Or give them a churchill tank that was actually active in the italian peninsula. Would you hold the same opinion if Relic added the Maus to the wher faction in the next COH3 patch? Just curious
Maus was never more than 1 assembled vehicle.
Black Prince was both a series, and it actually worked. Slowly, but it worked.
More practically speaking, there's no real need to reach for a super heavy in that way when, all things considered, wehr already has end game heavy tanks that fit that bill. UKF doesn't have anything that's a functional equivalent to the BP in service.
I'd say it's a step from plausible into absurdity, but if they wanted to introduce some absurdist wunder waffen, all the more power to them. My royal artillery regiment will appreciate the target practice.
Livestreams
77 | |||||
13 | |||||
0 | |||||
128 | |||||
105 | |||||
19 | |||||
15 | |||||
15 | |||||
6 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.840223.790+3
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.599234.719+7
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.927408.694+1
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.306114.729+2
- 9.1123623.643+4
- 10.266140.655+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger