CoH3 faster VP tick rate

I'm not sure I'd read that much into one game (commenting about the winning strat). There were a lot of trash players this weekend. Sometimes I'd try things that made me one of them. The fact that your opponents didn't have a counter doesn't mean that it will be unstoppable in multiplayer.

I do agree that there isn't a comeback from a mistake. It's going to lead to a lot of early drops and will be terrible for 2v2+ multiplayer.

..did it in more than one game and saw others do it on stream as well. I don't mean it's totally unstoppable but just very tough to play against and quite boring in general so it should not be doable that easy.

It's going to cause a lot of people to quit as soon as they lose a battle, which won't be good for multiplayer gameplay.

I know I would drop immediately after anyone on my team had a bad engagement. "This is over.. /L".

And in lower rank games this happens every game multiple times.

I already drop 30% of games just seeing the load out of my team mates. Sturmpoio spam on an open map "This is over.. /L".

You cant base the game timings on a 20 minute match and have it end in 12-15 minutes. That is just hard dumb.

I'm really not a fan, in coh2 you can choose between prioritizing resources of VPS (especially important in tournaments) here its. "Rush VP now!!" otherwise you end up 3 min into the game and have lost already like 50-100 vps, which is even more bizaree given how ridicolous the resource placement are on these maps (4 corner munis on tunisia, am i just not meant to take those resources at all lol?)

I also think that the faster vp tick rate has lead to games not blooming into the intense fights that make the mid to late and late game so great in coh2, and are forced to play vp's

What I struggled with in the play test was to hit pop cap without inflating my army with 4+ inf squads.
If off-maps remain as batshit crazy strong and all explosions including zooks/schrecks deadly to clumped up inf it might not be as bad as in coh2 but blobbing feels kind of encouraged due to the point drain especially if you are on the side under pressure from VP bleed.

With the brits it was hard to get real playtime with T3 due to the fast tickrate/games.

What I found out was spamming bishops while skipping t3 until churchills unlock with the armored battlegroup.

I think the problem here is not the triple cap, but rather double cap. I myself, only got 20+mins games only few times. One which was basically a comeback from less then 100 points, second one where VPs were constantly switching hands or remained uncapped.

Assuming you hold 2vps and opponent holds 1 with no one contesting anything, that's 25 minutes until win.
Not that far off from ~30 mins in CoH2.

It really only matters in most passive games and 3-0 stomps.

Assuming you hold 2vps and opponent holds 1 with no one contesting anything, that's 25 minutes until win.
Not that far off from ~30 mins in CoH2.

It really only matters in most passive games and 3-0 stomps.

Assuming a 1 VP advantage, all games are a good 8 min shorter or, unsurprisingly, 25%.

There's no reason why the tick rate should matter only in stomps. It matters in all games, and all games will (from what we could see in the test) be shorter by roughly a quarter compared to CoH2

Assuming a 1 VP advantage, all games are a good 8 min shorter or, unsurprisingly, 25%.

There's no reason why the tick rate should matter only in stomps. It matters in all games, and all games will (from what we could see in the test) be shorter by roughly a quarter compared to CoH2

But again, is it a bad thing?
I don't know about you, but I tend to lose concentration if game takes too long.
I won't exactly miss seeing 3 tigers/churchills/whateversuperunitlategame in a span of a single game from a single player.

Hell, shorter games do fix a problem of skipping mid game, rushing for late game armor and spamming it.
CoH3 is definitely mid-game oriented compared to 2.

But again, is it a bad thing?
I don't know about you, but I tend to lose concentration if game takes too long.
I won't exactly miss seeing 3 tigers/churchills/whateversuperunitlategame in a span of a single game from a single player.

Hell, shorter games do fix a problem of skipping mid game, rushing for late game armor and spamming it.
CoH3 is definitely mid-game oriented compared to 2.

Shitty tech and cost design is what made CoH2 late game devolve into artillery and heavy units, not tick rate. You can generate the same gameplay in CoH3 by just cutting tech costs and making lighter vehicles unviable in later stages, just like they are in CoH2. This has nothing to do with tick rate.

CoH3 seems to put more focus on lighter vehicles generally, which is a good thing. That's the reason why CoH3 looks more mid game oriented.
I've layed out a few points where and why shorter games could be problematic for CoH gameplay.

If you're happy to not see the late game content of the game, then maybe that content is just shittily designed.

And yes, I usually enjoy the longer games. The ones I fucked up majorly early on but did not give up because I knew I had the chance to recover, the ones I was on my last 50 VPs and drained the enemy by more than 400 etc etc. Those have all the backs and forths that I want from CoH. Shorter games won't have as much of this back and forth. I don't remember any particular game that was below 30 min or so, they are either standard games or stomps, so not interesting at all.

Fast tick rates might also be bad for larger modes. Players already leave early in CoH2 because one team mate screwed up. Now imagine if that screw up costs you even more VP and you have less chances to recover. Even more players will drop out even earlier, ruining the complete match.

But again, is it a bad thing?

Yes. It's boring to have games end so quickly.

But again, is it a bad thing?
I don't know about you, but I tend to lose concentration if game takes too long.
I won't exactly miss seeing 3 tigers/churchills/whateversuperunitlategame in a span of a single game from a single player.

Hell, shorter games do fix a problem of skipping mid game, rushing for late game armor and spamming it.
CoH3 is definitely mid-game oriented compared to 2.

Funny enough, as it stands, you still gonna see 3 tigers or what ever most likely then not, because whole CoH3 teching right now is seems to be based around mentioned short games. So instead of Tiger arriving at 20 min mark, it now arrives at 12.

Look at it from the another angle, not from a perceptive of faster stomp or just fast games. Right now, as it felt, CoH3 had very to no room for a mistake or misplaced unit.

As an example, if you are playing against DAK, you better to get AT weaponry as your first grade, otherwise you will be base locked by LVs. If you as any faction, loose squad, you get almost no room to rebuild it, because the flow of the game, forces you to rush tech and countermeasures to the enemy as fast as possible.

Its more complicated problem. 8 mins shorter games are fine, when you are just staling for mentioned 8 mins. But in reality this time spent:
Moving around the map (which is unlike CoH2 is viable in 3)
Recovering from engagements good and bad ones (therefor forward reinforcement in 3 was mandatory)
Actually deciding what you want to tech
Laying mines

And each action is not that long on itself, maybe like 30-40 seconds max and we are pretty much throwing it all out of the window. Not to mention that, I believe, armor arrives in 3 way too early as well as teching feels like a speedrun.

On top of that, it reminded me a game I had as allies in 4v4. Axis basically took the middle city, built crap ton of defences, Flak88, bunkers and stuff, all it took to pretty much obliterate everything is 1 british naval bombing, and we won the game.
Was this ability overpowered? By CoH standards, definitely, but by CoH3 standards its for sure not. Simply because with this VP drain, you are suppose to have abilities which are bat shit crazy, since you have no spare time methodically destroy all of this.

i also do not like the new vp drain.

i want it constant like coh2, it makes more gamesense. should not have different drain rates...you dont see sports matches tick down faster if you scored more goals....

everyone going to flood the vp section of the nap.

the basis given for the new vp drain, is not convincing.

i also do not like the new vp drain.

i want it constant like coh2, it makes more gamesense. should not have different drain rates...you dont see sports matches tick down faster if you scored more goals....

everyone going to flood the vp section of the nap.

the basis given for the new vp drain, is not convincing.

It is constant. It's consistently faster than CoH 2 because the score updates every 3 seconds instead of every 4 seconds whether you have 1, 2, or 3 VPs.

"...for Company of Heroes 3 we are committing to Victory Points count being updated every three seconds. This happens all the times, regardless of how many Victory Points players hold." - Marco, Relic Game Design

Marco also said that it can easily be changed back to 4 secinds with the way they coded it.

It is constant. It's consistently faster than CoH 2 because the score updates every 3 seconds instead of every 4 seconds whether you have 1, 2, or 3 VPs.

"...for Company of Heroes 3 we are committing to Victory Points count being updated every three seconds. This happens all the times, regardless of how many Victory Points players hold." - Marco, Relic Game Design

Marco also said that it can easily be changed back to 4 secinds with the way they coded it.

oh dear, i thought relic said the ticker drops to 3s with all VP captured.

i must read an older plan.

well if constant 3s, that is not too good.

Marco also said that it can easily be changed back to 4 secinds with the way they coded it.

I'd honestly not understand how a professional game developer could code it in a way that they could not easily change it. Tick rates have been untied from the game speed for years now, no competent developer does that anymore

Show Spoiler

Show Spoiler

all of this, just works

Huge fan of the Faster Tic rate

I'd honestly not understand how a professional game developer could code it in a way that they could not easily change it. Tick rates have been untied from the game speed for years now, no competent developer does that anymore

Show Spoiler

Its called "hardcoding" and you pretty much have to hack your own game if you want to do something different, sometimes it works, sometimes it does not.

Show Spoiler

Is 3.5 seconds an option? I generally really liked the new tick rate but on the other hand I found it hard to get to the really late-game content in 1v1s... in countless games I think I got Tiger, Black Prince, Easy 8, maybe once each if I actually filled out the rest of Battlegroup Tree first. That doesn't bother me *too* much knowing that if tried going straight for those units I could probably get them faster if I wanted.

I'm mostly just sick of playing COH2 games against "I have enough braincells to hold 1 VP (or the map gives me a really safe VP) to stall for a end-game unit/off-map that makes the game 20-30 minutes longer than it has to be but I generally suck" opponents.

For example:

Show Spoiler Part of that is obviously shit design with abuse of Spearhead vision and I'm sure the other team had fun feeling like they could pull out the game but I find games like that INCREDIBLY not fun. If you can't contest a second VP into the midgame then I don't think you should feel entitled to late-game come back mechanisms.

the thing is, nobody or no majority asked for a faster tick rates.

4s is perfectly tried and tested and everyone enjoys the late game carnage. the back and forth, the downtime and breathing space.

so why cut to 3s now? who asked for it?

considering coh3 seems more heavy into vehicles, i can get 3 p4 easily. cutting down the play time seems wrong.

tanks move faster, we can transport troops now, and forward auto reinforcing.... i hope coh3 do not become like dow3 where everything just happens and concludes...

the thing is, nobody or no majority asked for a faster tick rates.

If anything I think people have indirectly asked for slower tick rates.

One complaint for Coh2 is that the window for light vehicle play is too small. So in some game modes, they are never even considered. Stretching out the game a little would give them more room to be viable.

Maybe Relics thought was making the VPs faster would force you to decide on early power spike with lights over mediums later? If you are far ahead, close out the game with lights early? This would be fine for 1v1s, but bad for 4v4s. Especially since 1v1 players dont actually like to "play" the game. They want a fast chess match and once they think they have won, they get upset it is not over already. 4v4 players want a long slog with much death and carnage.

Maybe that is the answer, different VP times for each game mode: 1v1 (fast) to 4v4 (slow).

It is really hard to say what will happen in 4v4 since we have a new resource system. Maybe 4v4 will not a be myopic fuel charge every game, so, with faster ticks the VPs may become as important as fuel is in Coh2?

Not having to push fuel early would be great. It caused faction imbalances in start times.

EXAMPLE:
OKW would swarm a fuel almost a minute before some soviet builds get there. By then it is too late because the OST MG is setting up.

Having more lower value points could spread the fighting.