I have moved on from Coh3 and i am down for ....

Your argument could be used to support a theory that Relic was anti Soviet union.

Calling them Nazi lovers is something completely different.

This argument works. If in CoH1 we were shown a story, the officer whose policy was not shown to us. It is simply the story of one battle or event. Then in CoH2 they tried to shove the events from June 22, 1941 to May 9, 1945 into a small campaign. And only one war crime (the death of prisoners of war) which is also shown very vaguely. At the same time, at one of the moments of the campaign, the Main Hero becomes a war reporter, and of course he did not see the burnt cities and villages, people taken away to slave labor in Germany, concentration camps and experiments on people. He's just blind.

If the campaign was focused on only one event: the Battle of Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, Bagration, Berlin, it doesn't matter, any of them were a huge number. Without reference to politics, as in CoH1. I would say yes, there is no love for the Nazis here. But Relic told in the campaign about the whole war.

This argument works. If in CoH1 we were shown a story, the officer whose policy was not shown to us. It is simply the story of one battle or event. Then in CoH2 they tried to shove the events from June 22, 1941 to May 9, 1945 into a small campaign. And only one war crime (the death of prisoners of war) which is also shown very vaguely. At the same time, at one of the moments of the campaign, the Main Hero becomes a war reporter, and of course he did not see the burnt cities and villages, people taken away to slave labor in Germany, concentration camps and experiments on people. He's just blind.

If the campaign was focused on only one event: the Battle of Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, Bagration, Berlin, it doesn't matter, any of them were a huge number. Without reference to politics, as in CoH1. I would say yes, there is no love for the Nazis here. But Relic told in the campaign about the whole war.

Again claiming that Relic has anti Soviet sentiment is one thing.

Claiming that Relic is nazi lovers is another. Relic has not praised nazis or the crimes they have committed in anyway way.

Again claiming that Relic has anti Soviet sentiment is one thing.

Claiming that Relic is nazi lovers is another. Relic has not praised nazis or the crimes they have committed in anyway way.

They just showed:
- Soviets - scum
- The Germans - they're okay, a few prisoners of war deaths, but compared to what the Soviets are doing, they're completely okay. You can even empathize a little.

Of course, this certainly does not look like love for the Nazis.

Why i cannot rebuild my destroyed main base? With how coh3 seems to encourage base inspection, and arty into bases, this is too much Relic! Back to FF16

Why i cannot rebuild my destroyed main base? With how coh3 seems to encourage base inspection, and arty into bases, this is too much Relic! Back to FF16

I think it was aerafield that said this was a good thing because it allows for annihilation victories in VP games lol. Could be mistaken.

I think it was aerafield that said this was a good thing because it allows for annihilation victories in VP games lol. Could be mistaken.

Does not make sense though. to remove this kind of flexibility that coh1 and coh2 had displayed. No wonder coh3 feels off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Hn6P_KMM0o

Free beta at the moment - maybe something to try for people which want to move away from coh but search a game which feels similar.

if you like 1v1 pvp games, play street fighter 6 instead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Hn6P_KMM0o

Free beta at the moment - maybe something to try for people which want to move away from coh but search a game which feels similar.

Looks pretty cool. May have to check it out. Looking at the Steam pics, the GFX looked better than Coh3. After watching the YouTube video they actually look very similar. Just better situational texture choices.

The camping on a point mechanic seems interesting. Not sure if it will make people camp more or if it would help snowballing.

I am going to complete FF16 in a week or so.
Then on to baluder gate 3, that should take me until late Sept.
Then on to starfield, i will be switching between gate and starfield until end of the year.

It is not looking good for relic. They can take slow ass time to fix coh3.
If anything, coh3 helps me move away from obsession with coh. There are bigger forest to trees in games.

I was playing coh2 only for the last 3 years, call it an old man compulsion to stick to routine.

Does not make sense though. to remove this kind of flexibility that coh1 and coh2 had displayed. No wonder coh3 feels off.

How many games did you turn around & win in CoH2 after losing your HQ?

Never happened once in 7000 hours for me or my opponents.

If your enemy is in your base sector with their army or gets away with spamming 10 howitzers, it's probably over

Amazing to see the parallels regarding the development of Street Fighter 6 and CoH3.

Capcom flubbed Street Fighter 5 at launch, spent years updating it and turned into a good game. Used a brand new engine and took on board lessons learned with SF5 to create SF6. They sold 2 millions copies within the month and have healthy player numbers (PC stats only below)




Whereas, Relic flubbed CoH2 at launch, spent years updating it and turned into a good game. Updated the game engine and seemingly took on board minimal lessons from CoH2 development.

Amazing to see the parallels regarding the development of Street Fighter 6 and CoH3.

Just out of interest, how much time was there between the two Street Fighter games and did they use broadly the same team when making the next game?

I suspect that's probably the major difference.

SF5 was out in 2016, however, I do not know the exact date for whenSF6 development began.

The teams are somewhat the same from what I understand.

Japanese game development is fascinating in contrast to North American game development, largely because in the Japanese context games media are still seen as somewhat niche products (despite the staggering reality on the ground) and the companies that make them are more than willing to finance ridiculous auteurs and get out of their way. Profit is a motive but corporate culture over there is significantly different and reputation is more of a factor in influencing a company's decisions.

North American companies, on the other hand, controlled by financiers operating off of a financial playbook that works very well in non-creative industries, chase the dollar down to the bottom of whatever hole it goes in. Epic games is a great example of the trajectory of this - they came up with a successful engine and a few good games based on it (Unreal Tournament, Gears of War), nearly killed themselves chasing the latest trend (MOBAs), and then mounted one of the biggest comebacks imaginable by capitalizing on a nascent trend that had only just breached the horizon (Battle Royale). Other companies, looking at that, skipped the first part and promptly poured money into the abyss trying to rival Fortnite's success instead of making something original or improving on their own formulae.

Why do they do this? Because artistic businesses are inherently risky, and investors are notoriously risk-averse. Giving Hideo Kojima millions of dollars to make a giant-budget game about delivering packages isn't as solid of a bet as making a Fortnite clone to them, because the investors making the decisions don't see it as trying to supplant a market monopoly, because the idea isn't to make something that's fun or interesting, but rather something that encourages compulsive behaviour (and spending).

Company of Heroes 3 itself exists in a limbo between these two competing forces, and I sincerely doubt that it's much to do with SEGA as a publisher. SEGA is, if anything, fairly infamous for being laissez-faire with their studios, sometimes to the detriment of the final product. Hell, Creative Assembly basically only exists today because SEGA was bankrolling niche and less profitable historical strategy games since the mid-2000s, and largely letting them do whatever they wanted with them.

If blame is to rest anywhere, it should rest on the people in charge of Relic - time and time again, the management has fundamentally misunderstood what the game is and why people enjoy playing it. Looking at Company of Heroes 3 in action is like looking at the relics of a Vanuatu cargo cult - people re-enacting barely-understood mechanics as rituals in the hope of recapturing some level of past prosperity. It's depressing but it's the reality we inhabit.

My main issue with CoH3 is that while it is a mechanically good game, its not very different to the other two games so there is nothing "new" in my mind to learn or work on, other than build orders and what units are strong etc.

Additionally, I find that the presentation is very sterile and lacks character and charm.

How many games did you turn around & win in CoH2 after losing your HQ?

Never happened once in 7000 hours for me or my opponents.

If your enemy is in your base sector with their army or gets away with spamming 10 howitzers, it's probably over

Completely separate situation. In those games, you could repair your HQ. If someone got into your base sector and had enough time to destroy all your buildings, then your team is probably getting it up the @$$. In CoH 2 or CoH 1, if you took a couple stray howitzer shells to your base, you could just repair it and voila.

CoH 3? Nahh. Just build a howitzer to bomb fortified positions, and on top of that, make a ticking time bomb for the enemy player. Use it to bunker-bust, and then shoot at the enemy HQ when you have nothing better to do. Game lasts long enough and they can't push you to the howitzer, even though they have a majority of VPs? Too fucking bad, their base is out of HP. GG EZ. I still don't for the life of me understand why you defend this change of all things lmfao. It seems like an oversight by the devs more than a balance decision.

Though the whole game seems like an oversight, to be fair... Joking, not joking.

People have mentioned on these forums how bad vehicle abandons were because of how they encouraged turtling gameplay and then I hear you talking about how it's not a big deal that you can get free manpower and fuel bleed from artying someone's base buildings at the low low cost of building a single howitzer, forcing the enemy player to play aggressively or they lose.

I mean, what am I missing here?

All you need to do is locate their T4, start shelling it, and now they either have to destroy the howitzer or let you set them back allll the fuel it took to tech it. Am I wrong?