since we are adding prototype tanks in game

I didnt answer it because been asked a dozen times already. If maus were balanced i wouldnt care. This isnt about axis v allies and im really bored of ppl trying to turn the conversation into that

But stop it with that m1 abrams crap. Dont act like me saying im accepting a prototype from 1945 is the same as being okay with a tank that saw its first action in 1980. THats just a ridiculous exaggeration

At least maus and BP were actually designed by ww2 engineers. ANd were being built during the war


THen its a good thing i didnt say anything goes. I just dont think the gap between BP inclusion and Relics already taken liberties is as large as u do

Its not just about timeline, unit frequency matters just as much imo. COh2s meta has had things like Sturmtiger and Jagdtiger be units that were seen in almost every match. That is not at all reasonable by history standards either, but its a video game so i dont mind that violation. ITs effect on gameplay variety bothers me more than the insult to historians

If BP shows its face every game then i will have problems with that. But thats more for gameplay reasons, i think uber units in general make the gameplay more stale

If any liberty taken is acceptable because liberties were taken previously, it follows that anything goes. If we want to have ‘were designed by ww2 engineers’ as a condition, we can but that would lead to the inclusion of vehicles like tortoise or the centurion. It’s your and esxile’s argumentation that went down this line. I had to explain why the BP crossed a line, which is impossible.

I guess we can leave all of that aside and focus on the Black Prince in comparison to COH2 vehicles. The Jagdtiger and the Sturmtiger aren’t seen every match. They are extremely rare in 1v1 and 2v2 and less common than the KT. Moreover, these vehicles were used in the Ardennes, so their inclusion of a faction based around that makes sense. It’s an overrepresentation (a rare on at that) but not borderline fiction.

Relics design for the British in COH3 is clearly focused on the mid war. They could have done Cromwells, Fireflies and Churchill’s again but it seems they wanted vehicles like the M3 Lee, Matilda II and Crusader. For whatever reason, someone at relic decided that this faction wasn’t complete without a prototype vehicle from may 1945.

Overrepresenting vehicles that were there is not the same as including a vehicle that was finished two years after fighting ended in a particular theater. It’s like saying that giving the DAK a Stumtiger is the same as giving OKW a Sturmtiger. Off course, the timeline isn’t the only thing that matters but the game needs to cohere somewhat to it. The inclusion of specific theaters and parts of WW2 is pointless otherwise.

Why are you fine with the inclusion of the BP if you didn’t like the Sturmtiger and Jagdtiger. You’re taking a gamble as far as frequency of the BP goes and it makes the inclusion of vehicles like the King Tiger fair game. I don’t understand at all how you can say with a straight face that the Maus would be fine.

If any liberty taken is acceptable because liberties were taken previously, it follows that anything goes. If we want to have ‘were designed by ww2 engineers’ as a condition, we can but that would lead to the inclusion of vehicles like tortoise or the centurion. It’s your and esxile’s argumentation that went down this line. I had to explain why the BP crossed a line, which is impossible

But i didnt say that any liberty is acceptable. For fucks sake

Saying that my argument justifies including m1 abrams was totally fucking absurd

I guess we can leave all of that aside and focus on the Black Prince in comparison to COH2 vehicles. The Jagdtiger and the Sturmtiger aren’t seen every match. They are extremely rare in 1v1 and 2v2 and less common than the KT. Moreover, these vehicles were used in the Ardennes, so their inclusion of a faction based around that makes sense. It’s an overrepresentation (a rare on at that) but not borderline fiction.

Im not talking about exsluvisely now. The ST dominated team game meta multiple times after certain patches

And the JT isnt rare at all otuside of 1v1. EXTREMELY common in all modes with 2 players or more

Overrepresenting vehicles that were there is not the same as including a vehicle that was finished two years after fighting ended in a particular theater. It’s like saying that giving the DAK a Stumtiger is the same as giving OKW a Sturmtiger. Off course, the timeline isn’t the only thing that matters but the game needs to cohere somewhat to it. The inclusion of specific theaters and parts of WW2 is pointless otherwise.

I didnt say its the same. Im not sure y i have to keep telling u what im not saying

My entire point is that relic has a pattern of ignoring history. U can say BP is further our of timeline than other violations. Fine. But its well within their overall pattern of ignoring history/realism

The speed of tanks offroad in coh2, the accuracy of air to ground attacks, the frequency of heavy tanks, flares providing recon (lol), US and Brits fighting regularly on the eastern front, the list goes on. Sure those arent the same as including BP, but they break immersion enough for me that i dont expect relic to try to keep up the ruse of this being an authentic ww2 game

Why are you fine with the inclusion of the BP if you didn’t like the Sturmtiger and Jagdtiger. You’re taking a gamble as far as frequency of the BP goes and it makes the inclusion of vehicles like the King Tiger fair game. I don’t understand at all how you can say with a straight face that the Maus would be fine.

I literally said "i dont mind the violation"..... THe only part about ST and JT that bothered me was how much they dominated team meta at certain points. BP will bother me the same if it does, but the game isnt even out yet so i have no idea how common it will be......

I can say what i did about the maus because its a video game, not a fucking history class. LIke i already said i would prefer neither BP or Maus cuz i think it makes the gameplay boring

To me the fact relic is acknowledging that they feel they took a historical-fiction route overrepresenting the presence of the JT & KT alone shows that they understand that is just as much of a fiction as the BP and they did it for gameplay. I consider it a fiction that the ST is such an effective weapon at all in the game but its a gameplay choice they made for their product and both I and many others use it often so id call it a success.

There isn't two divisions of historical fiction either. It is just as fictional to see the stock KT stock IR halftracks, an effective sturmtiger, invincible stukas and entire squads with IR guns. Their chat on stream shows that they understand that for their own IP they've taken big liberties. I'm leaning towards their thinking that hey its time for another gameplay choice for the COH product that has not so often stuck to the lines off a history book. The statement of needing to be careful by them is also important as 3 games in a row of creating fictional histories for some axis units to make a faction, you may want to throw in an interesting gameplay unit for the allies to spice up the IP.

COH already being a historical fiction doesn't change now that they want to put in the BP, it was one before its presence and will remain one afterward.

But i didnt say that any liberty is acceptable. For fucks sake

Saying that my argument justifies including m1 abrams was totally fucking absurd

Im not talking about exsluvisely now. The ST dominated team game meta multiple times after certain patches

And the JT isnt rare at all otuside of 1v1. EXTREMELY common in all modes with 2 players or more


I didnt say its the same. Im not sure y i have to keep telling u what im not saying

My entire point is that relic has a pattern of ignoring history. U can say BP is further our of timeline than other violations. Fine. But its well within their overall pattern of ignoring history/realism

The speed of tanks offroad in coh2, the accuracy of air to ground attacks, the frequency of heavy tanks, flares providing recon (lol), US and Brits fighting regularly on the eastern front, the list goes on. Sure those arent the same as including BP, but they break immersion enough for me that i dont expect relic to try to keep up the ruse of this being an authentic ww2 game


I literally said "i dont mind the violation"..... THe only part about ST and JT that bothered me was how much they dominated team meta at certain points. BP will bother me the same if it does, but the game isnt even out yet so i have no idea how common it will be......

I can say what i did about the maus because its a video game, not a fucking history class. LIke i already said i would prefer neither BP or Maus cuz i think it makes the gameplay boring

You’re stating that this isn’t an authentic WW2 game, so the inclusion of the BP is fine. Then it follows that any inclusion (as long as it was designed during WW2 like you stated) is fine. Then little boy and fat man could be off-maps and every German unit can get IR StG44s. You should probably commit to that position instead of walking away from it every time I try to counter it.

If you agree that the BP is more of a stretch than the JT and ST and some things are too unhistorical for COH, then we can formulate at what point something is too fictional for COH. Even if COH is fictional, it is not fictional on the level of games like World of Tanks or BF5. It is pretty obvious that the factions Relic designs are supposed to have some resemblance of reality. Even if they take liberties with their designs.

When you’re saying that you don’t expect Relic to keep the ruse up, that’s pretty synonymous with anything goes. If the fundamental disagreement here is that you don’t think COH should strive for some authenticity and I think it should, then there isn’t any point in discussing this further.

You’re stating that this isn’t an authentic WW2 game, so the inclusion of the BP is fine. Then it follows that any inclusion (as long as it was designed during WW2 like you stated) is fine. Then little boy and fat man could be off-maps and every German unit can get IR StG44s. You should probably commit to that position instead of walking away from it every time I try to counter it.

Im not walking away from it. Im saying that the m1 Abrams is an absurd exaggeration of my argument

Little boy and fatman would be bad for gameplay reasons. Nobody wants to play an rts game where they can lose everything all at once to an uncounterable unit

It all depends on frequency. Irstgs on every single squad would be too much. Just like if BP is closing out every single game for brits it would be too much. Have to wait and see how its implemented

Irstgs in coh2 are good exanple of the right balance. Only available on elite squads thru specific doctrines. That itself is still an exaggeration but at least it was well limited

If you agree that the BP is more of a stretch than the JT and ST and some things are too unhistorical for COH, then we can formulate at what point something is too fictional for COH.

I didnt say i agree its more of a stretch, i said they are different. They are different stretches but the result is the same: breaking immersion from a realistic ww2 experience

Its only "more of a stretch" if the timeline is the only thing u care about. Why does BP bother ppl while tanks having nascar engines does not? I do not understand that

When you’re saying that you don’t expect Relic to keep the ruse up, that’s pretty synonymous with anything goes. If the fundamental disagreement here is that you don’t think COH should strive for some authenticity and I think it should, then there isn’t any point in discussing this further.

BUt the 1st two games didnt strive for authenticity, so why shuld the 3rd?

I would rly just like them to be honest. They were dishonest in coh2 when they said they would never add pershing because it didnt fit USF design. Then they added it

With BP they are at least acknowledging up front that they have gone in a more fictional direction. Is BP alone enough to stop you from buying the game? Cuz thats the main thing i don't understand

Im not walking away from it. Im saying that the m1 Abrams is an absurd exaggeration of my argument

Little boy and fatman would be bad for gameplay reasons. Nobody wants to play an rts game where they can lose everything all at once to an uncounterable unit

It all depends on frequency. Irstgs on every single squad would be too much. Just like if BP is closing out every single game for brits it would be too much. Have to wait and see how its implemented

Irstgs in coh2 are good exanple of the right balance. Only available on elite squads thru specific doctrines. That itself is still an exaggeration but at least it was well limited

I didnt say i agree its more of a stretch, i said they are different. They are different stretches but the result is the same: breaking immersion from a realistic ww2 experience

Its only "more of a stretch" if the timeline is the only thing u care about. Why does BP bother ppl while tanks having nascar engines does not? I do not understand that


BUt the 1st two games didnt strive for authenticity, so why shuld the 3rd?

I would rly just like them to be honest. They were dishonest in coh2 when they said they would never add pershing because it didnt fit USF design. Then they added it

With BP they are at least acknowledging up front that they have gone in a more fictional direction. Is BP alone enough to stop you from buying the game? Cuz thats the main thing i don't understand

The BP is not going to stop me from buying the game at all. It just going to make me sigh a bit every time I see it.

If this game shouldn’t strive for authenticity, then anything goes right? As long as IR StGs are balanced, they can be on any squad and little boy and fatman are only wrong for balance reasons. It follows from your argumentation that we can just go overboard with the amount of prototype units that never saw action. You obviously believe that there is no historical standard for this game, so why shy away from that. It’s not absurd at all to ask if the Abrams would be ok since you think the game shouldn’t strive to be authentic in any way.

It’s pretty reasonable to say that a BP call-in would function similarly to JT and ST call-ins. It is also likely that the BP, just like most vehicles in COH, will be pretty OP at some point in the game’s lifespan. Controlling the frequency of a unit is almost impossible if it’s already a doctrinal call-in. If it is rarely used, Relic will buff it until it is a good pick in team games. The BP has also way more potential in 1v1 and 2v2 than the JT and ST currently have due to it being way less specialized. What makes you assume that the BP won’t see frequent usage? Accessibility is exactly the same for both of those vehicles.

Having tanks drive faster than they actually did, was probably a necessary sacrifice. I don’t think a super heavy is necessary for a faction at all. If they felt that just 1943 units was too limiting, they could have taken liberties with a bunch of 1944 units. Instead, they went for a prototype from 1945.

Just because COH had and will have immersion breaking elements, doesn’t mean we should open the floodgates. I don’t think USF needed a Pershing either but that doesn’t mean any immersion to be had in COH2 as a WW2 game is now completely gone.

Controlling the frequency of a unit is almost impossible if it’s already a doctrinal call-in. If it is rarely used, Relic will buff it until it is a good pick in team games. The BP has also way more potential in 1v1 and 2v2 than the JT and ST currently have due to it being way less specialized. What makes you assume that the BP won’t see frequent usage? Accessibility is exactly the same for both of those vehicles.

I hope they limit "uber" units to 1 per game. Something i think they shouldve done in coh2 rather than dance back and forth between buffing and nerfing over and over again

Like i already said, id like the game to focus around mediums and lights. But if were already gonna have "uber" units, just make them fair

Another way u limit it is by making other options viable, and avoid doing things like overbuffing ST (which caused the temporary period where u saw one every game)

Just because COH had and will have immersion breaking elements, doesn’t mean we should open the floodgates. I don’t think USF needed a Pershing either but that doesn’t mean any immersion to be had in COH2 as a WW2 game is now completely gone.

I didnt say we should open the floodgates. I dont know how many times i have to tell u that i wouldnt be okay with the abrams while u insist thats what im saying

Im saying that i dont think the BP is any crazier than the liberties taken in coh1 and 2. Its a different way of pushing the limit, but its not any more immersion breaking than things like brits on the Eastern front. Or tanks being too fast for infantry to dodge being crushed...

The m1 Abrams would be MUCH crazier than anything theyve done.... U can drop that idea already

And if its not gonna stop u from buying the game, i dont rly know y ur even arguing with me. That is the entire original point i was objecting too....

Very disingenuous allied fanboys in this thread . . . ..

The KT, JT, Sturmtiger, IR halftracks and even the IR STG-44 all saw combat on the frontlines of WW2. Not only did the BP not see combat, but the first prototype was completed in May of 1945 and it never saw service. as u can see there is a very clear distinction to be made here between the BP and "Wunderwaffe".

Including the BP would be like including the E-100, a vehicle also prototyped but did not see combat. For those who do not care about basic historical representation in a WW2 game, your opinion on the BP inclusion doesn't matter because you will not notice anything wrong whether or not it is in the game, for aforementioned reason of not caring, so i dont know why you are voicing for it to be present. . . .

anyway, CoH has always been a pop-culture history representation of WW2, which is why we see all the shiny toys in it.... but all those toys actually saw deployment in WW2. The BP is a clear depearture from the rules of previous games and sticks out like a sore thumb to anyone with a mild interest in WW2 history.

and this scumbag argument of saying insert X wunderwaffe was low in number or X was combat ineffective therefore we should add the BP.... huh ? Stop embarrassing youself mate. USA faction in team games is composed of Airborne infantry equipped with M1D garands (less produced than FG42) that are supported by M8 Scotts that could do literally NOTHING in real life because it is made of paper with a tiny 75mm howitzer. Dont forget the pershing with less than 200 ever engaged in combat against the axis, and the fact that Axis superheavies can be penetrated by even the weakest Allied tank guns of the war frontally...


the list goes on, but everything listed above is a product of the aims of the game whether that be balance or theme. But they always stayed consistent in one way: EVERYTHING you see was FIELDED and saw ACTION in ww2.... thats all i ask for tbh.

regardless it is pretty clear the inclusion of the BP is desperation on relics part to give Britain a heavy tank on par with the Tiger. except they didnt have one IRL. I'd much rather they scrap this laughable idea and work on some other more unique advantages for the british faction.

I hope they limit "uber" units to 1 per game. Something i think they shouldve done in coh2 rather than dance back and forth between buffing and nerfing over and over again

Like i already said, id like the game to focus around mediums and lights. But if were already gonna have "uber" units, just make them fair

Another way u limit it is by making other options viable, and avoid doing things like overbuffing ST (which caused the temporary period where u saw one every game)

I didnt say we should open the floodgates. I dont know how many times i have to tell u that i wouldnt be okay with the abrams while u insist thats what im saying

Im saying that i dont think the BP is any crazier than the liberties taken in coh1 and 2. Its a different way of pushing the limit, but its not any more immersion breaking than things like brits on the Eastern front. Or tanks being too fast for infantry to dodge being crushed...

The m1 Abrams would be MUCH crazier than anything theyve done.... U can drop that idea already

And if its not gonna stop u from buying the game, i dont rly know y ur even arguing with me. That is the entire original point i was objecting too....

I guess you agree then that the availability of the Sturmtiger and the BP will be roughly equal. So, it follows that the only other thing we can look at is the timeline. In which case the BP is more immersion breaking than the ST. The BP probably isn’t limited to one, so I don’t know why you’re comparing your ideal scenario for the BP with the few months that the ST was broken. I’m not interested in what you think should happen but what is happening in reality. Right now, the ST and BP are going to have more or less the same availability. Even if the ST was a bit more common to see, it did fight in the period and place on which OKW is based. It has every right to be more common than the BP. The Pershing is also a rarely seen vehicle in COH2 but you still think it is on the level of the BP.

I guess nobody ever though of not overbuffing units. What a brilliant idea. Implying other options aren’t viable right now because of the ST and JT, is such a laughable statement. You can limit certain vehicles to one but that doesn’t mean you won’t see them every game.

I’m trying to figure out at roughly what point you considered something to be too inauthentic for COH. You already named ‘being designed during WW2’ as a necessary condition, so I will adhere to that. You can duck out of the example of little boy and fat man but the point obviously wasn’t about balance. You’re not giving any reason for why the IR StG44 would be bad if it was on all German units. If you think that any WW2 prototype is fine as long as it doesn’t get picked every game, then I look forward to seeing all the weird 1945 experimental vehicles in COH3. If you think COH3 should not go further than the previous games, then you can’t go around saying ‘BUt the 1st two games didnt strive for authenticity, so why shuld the 3rd'.

I hope the mods will forgive me this transgression...

HAHAH

What? Questionable tanks? Does anyone have doubts that the King Tiger participated in the war? Or JagdTiger or SturmTiger? It's that mythical tanks, which everyone is talking about and not finding evidence of participation in the archives? these statements are so absurd. Any tank presented in the game was, was at war. Which is questionable. Or maybe I don’t know something and it’s time to doubt that the T-34 or Sherman was also in the war?

Maybe it's time to actually shed some doubt on the combat ability of Shermans????

I can't wait to hear what alliedcucks think about htis

You can be obstinate to the point a few people are trying to express you if you wish, but relic have essentially admitted they know that their IP contains a lot of fiction. Such as the rarity of the KT and Jagdtiger however to improve gameplay and make a fun product they are a franchise staple of common appearance. They go on to state that this chapter isn't any different.

I mean id love to see the drone b17 bombers that were meant to blow up targets remotely, they did poorly but since they were used once it meets the threshold for inclusion that some are making. Since its ok to fictionalize the units performance it would be above the mark, even though they never once hit a target.

Just as there is very poor performance on the tactical history of the strumtiger but it was used in that role poorly or not and its been given a fantastic gameplay place, regardless of being highly fictional.

That is the point I find funny, if we can fictionalize units operational lives to the point of reinforcing myth and this is the camels back broken in two, its funny.

fiction =/= creative freedom

Overrepresenting King Tiger is creative freedom to make the gameplay more fun since KT existed and in not low numbers (500 of them were made, definitely 25 times more than ST) is not the same as taking a paper tank and putting it alongside real ones.

Else we would be talking about Maus Ratte etc

Exactly. These guys look at: 1, 2, 3 it and think: -What the hell is this? This a fiction, there were no such tanks in the war! Let's add our fictional Black Prince then!

Bottom line I think is that WW2 is fake...

wake up ppl...

Seeing Soviets and Americans fighting side by side is honestly more immersion breaking than the BP.
I can’t draw a line on where my immersion is totally broken but unnecessary inclusions of experimental vehicles doesn’t help that. I usually cringe a bit when I see the Soviets and the Americans/British side by side and I’ll probably slighty cringe when I see the BP in North Africa. Even seeing Panthers in North Africa is a bit immersion breaking, but that is a sacrifice I can live with. I can easily turn your question around though. Does the US and USSR fighting together make the inclusion of the MAUS ok? Just because they are already immersion breaking elements doesn’t mean anything goes.

Besides that, we should probably want the internal design and look of each faction to be consistent with what they’re based on. Even in COH2, which might have some holistic immersion breaking moments, the individual factions don’t have units that are out of place on the level of the BP.

lmao americans literally financed half of the rearmament of soviets, having them side by side IS the immersion you want.

WHy do you forget Stalin purged almost all officer corps before war? Why do you forget that up until Stalingrad Wehrmacht was unstoppable?

if Stalin lost and all his "accomplishments" (breaking down of pre War production, purging of good officers, military stupidity) were shed to light we would have him in worse place than hitler... but that's what victory does to you and fairly so

after all soviets fought with human wave tactics mostly.

Americans financed through Lendlease almost all the tank production of soviets (since soviets had next to zero steel production at the start) and some production of light weapons.

And then after all that they said that they fought the wrong enemy.

I didnt answer it because been asked a dozen times already. If maus were balanced i wouldnt care. This isnt about axis v allies and im really bored of ppl trying to turn the conversation into that

But stop it with that m1 abrams crap. Dont act like me saying im accepting a prototype from 1945 is the same as being okay with a tank that saw its first action in 1980. THats just a ridiculous exaggeration

why not?

I mean if we are to go full retard we could say that Germans pioneered the use of heavy all purpose combat vehicles with the Tiger chassis, USA followed suit and ended up with Abrams.

Since Abrams takes inspiration from WW2 it should be added in COH3.

why not?

To me the fact relic is acknowledging that they feel they took a historical-fiction route overrepresenting the presence of the JT & KT alone shows that they understand that is just as much of a fiction as the BP and they did it for gameplay. I consider it a fiction that the ST is such an effective weapon at all in the game but its a gameplay choice they made for their product and both I and many others use it often so id call it a success.

There isn't two divisions of historical fiction either. It is just as fictional to see the stock KT stock IR halftracks, an effective sturmtiger, invincible stukas and entire squads with IR guns. Their chat on stream shows that they understand that for their own IP they've taken big liberties. I'm leaning towards their thinking that hey its time for another gameplay choice for the COH product that has not so often stuck to the lines off a history book. The statement of needing to be careful by them is also important as 3 games in a row of creating fictional histories for some axis units to make a faction, you may want to throw in an interesting gameplay unit for the allies to spice up the IP.

COH already being a historical fiction doesn't change now that they want to put in the BP, it was one before its presence and will remain one afterward.

apologies but your posts are getting more and more retarded

JT and KT are not fictional vehicles, end of discussion.

BP is.

But i didnt say that any liberty is acceptable. For fucks sake

Saying that my argument justifies including m1 abrams was totally fucking absurd

Im not talking about exsluvisely now. The ST dominated team game meta multiple times after certain patches

And the JT isnt rare at all otuside of 1v1. EXTREMELY common in all modes with 2 players or more


I didnt say its the same. Im not sure y i have to keep telling u what im not saying

My entire point is that relic has a pattern of ignoring history. U can say BP is further our of timeline than other violations. Fine. But its well within their overall pattern of ignoring history/realism

The speed of tanks offroad in coh2, the accuracy of air to ground attacks, the frequency of heavy tanks, flares providing recon (lol), US and Brits fighting regularly on the eastern front, the list goes on. Sure those arent the same as including BP, but they break immersion enough for me that i dont expect relic to try to keep up the ruse of this being an authentic ww2 game


I literally said "i dont mind the violation"..... THe only part about ST and JT that bothered me was how much they dominated team meta at certain points. BP will bother me the same if it does, but the game isnt even out yet so i have no idea how common it will be......

I can say what i did about the maus because its a video game, not a fucking history class. LIke i already said i would prefer neither BP or Maus cuz i think it makes the gameplay boring

that's about gameplay balancing choice... completely offtopic

You’re stating that this isn’t an authentic WW2 game, so the inclusion of the BP is fine. Then it follows that any inclusion (as long as it was designed during WW2 like you stated) is fine. Then little boy and fat man could be off-maps and every German unit can get IR StG44s. You should probably commit to that position instead of walking away from it every time I try to counter it.

If you agree that the BP is more of a stretch than the JT and ST and some things are too unhistorical for COH, then we can formulate at what point something is too fictional for COH. Even if COH is fictional, it is not fictional on the level of games like World of Tanks or BF5. It is pretty obvious that the factions Relic designs are supposed to have some resemblance of reality. Even if they take liberties with their designs.

When you’re saying that you don’t expect Relic to keep the ruse up, that’s pretty synonymous with anything goes. If the fundamental disagreement here is that you don’t think COH should strive for some authenticity and I think it should, then there isn’t any point in discussing this further.

You should unironically become a mathematician your use of propositional logic is astounding. I hope you do well if you are a student.

regardless it is pretty clear the inclusion of the BP is desperation on relics part to give Britain a heavy tank on par with the Tiger. except they didnt have one IRL. I'd much rather they scrap this laughable idea and work on some other more unique advantages for the british faction.

excellent reply on most points

I think your last sentence should be talked upon because it shows the natural projection of real life history bias in a game and the reverse.

UKF and Wehrmacht were two very different armies, not only in uniforms etc. but down right to their organizational principles.

UKF did not build "heavy" attacking tanks like Tigers simply because they never needed them. Most if not all of their engagements were in forest heavy areas where deployment of those vehicles was never seriously considered to begin with.

Similarly, Luftwaffe never built the same planes as the british did, simply because the British could afford to mass produce cheap planes and order their pilots to parachute down from their plane if they lost an engagement and give them a new one. Luftwaffe did not have such an excuse for making a down par vehicle.

Same with Soviets, they could get away with shitty T34s' chassises since they could refuel nearby and if they ever broke down or lost (which absolutely did) they could count on their crews being near the base of the camp and give them new ones.

Expecting the UKF to have the same fighting means as Wehr is completely ridiculous and insane. And it leads to dumb shit like this when we talk about Black Panther or Pink Panther or whatever and talk abou Maus and Ratte etc... stupid discussion by people mostly ignorant on practical mil history.

If all lelic cared about was a "Tiger killer" to appease marketing fanboys they could pick from thousands of tanks produced and suit them appropriately in the game (by changing stats etc) to make a fair fight. That would be ok.

I doubt there is even one sane person here who is 100% FOR the Black Prince. Everybody knows it's completely out of historical context and out of the very COH's franchise aesthetic toolkit. The only thing they can talk about is shit like "Yes but JT/KT/ST are not exactly ...." which completely misses the point.

You cannot be asked a question and reply with another question, at least if you have something to say and not try to evade.

Nobody believes BP deserves to be in the game, for any reason other than "giving it" to purported Wehraboos which in and of itself is very sad.

does not take genius to see how stupid the BP will be, except for the typical allied cucks.

But i got a feeling relic know exactly what they are doing. the BP will open up the can of worms to all sort of prototype tanks through DLC's in order to milk as much money as they can.