the difference is that one is unit based on real ww2 soldiers just having some in game mechanic ability and the other is an alien thingy that doesnt even exist.
why dont you ask relic so that when you are playing soviet, change the map names so maps like 'paris' is 'pariski' or 'ardenne' is 'ardenngrad' .just for you, even though you look over the fact that tanks don't massacre inf, il2 gun hits units and they only bleed?, lay mines in matter of seconds, units have infinite ammo, units dont get into melee combat when face to face, and so much more.
you look over all these but suddenly your brain can't wrap around another little historical inaccuracy.
You do know that 'authentic' has a different meaning from 'realistic', don't you?
Here, let me show you some examples between the two. You know, so you can wrap your brain around it..
Compare these 3 games:
- Blitzkrieg
- CoH2
- Call of duty: world at war
Both Blitzkrieg and CoH2 are authentic WW2 RTS games. Both have units that were actually used in the war and have maps resembling the actual fronts. Neither of them have fantasy elements such as Soviets and Americans fighting together in Paris. This makes both games authentic.
However, of the two, only Blitzkrieg is realistic. Tanks generally get blown up by one penetrating hit, tanks destroy infantry etc. Units act like you would expect them to after watching a few hours of the history channel. CoH2 on the other hand is not realistic, and this is fine. After all, Relic has never even tried to create an illusion of realism.
Call of duty: world at war is neither authentic nor realistic. It is a fantasy game based on WW2. In this game, you could play as a german soldier, arm yourself with a japanese made Type99 machine gun with a bayonet on it, and fight russians equiped with american drum-magazined tommie guns and japanese pistols.
I would rather not have CoH2 become a fantasy WW2 game where germans are fighting off soviets in Holland or France. It is not what I was sold as a paying customer.