Company of heroes 1>COH2?

So, I've been playing COH and COH2 for a while now and I can't say it's better than 1. The main problems I encounter are:

the new terrority capping system. It's kind of unbalanced since it advantages the player that is capping because he can remain in cover and be stationary while the other player has to move to them while in the open. This kind of disadvantages any tactics with a weak early game as it would be difficult for them to defend points without investing a lot of manpower into it. Strong early game countries such as Russia exploit this very well.

The lack of uniqueness. The countries to me seem to be the same but are just different units and buildings. With the Western Front dlc, it still seems kind of dull to me. Since, they seem like the British, but spilt. In COH 1, each country has a very unique play style. This does not seem to apply to COH2.

Milking and overpriced factor. I bought a majority of the COH2 content and I can't say it was worth it for its price. Even at the discounted price I received it for during sales. The additional content seems to lack uniqueness too. It just seemed like they rearranged the abilities around for some.

There are more reasons, but these are the main. What do you think?

k thx bai.

You know, I found COH1 is more boring lategame than COH2, but I talk about multiplayer

Not this thing again...please.

I speak as an old fart CoH1 veteran. I played CoH1 and CoH2 multiplayer side by side for a while and three things immediately popped out for me in CoH1:

Infantry / support crew combat was much better in 1, more fluent and important, all the way through to the late game.
There was a lot less soft counters. When armoured cars rolled onto the field you either had dedicated antitank or were dead. In 2 you can make do with antitank grenades, fausts, and even small arms the scout cars to death.
Tanks felt incredibly sluggish and the whole tank combat aspect was a bit anemic. Tanks were more like slow lumps of hit points. AT gun shells plopped some health and there was no "oomph" overall.
And then the opposing players started rolling out snipers and I remembered how annoying and broken their Romulan Cloke Field mechanic was and I uninstalled the game. I will much rather face Russian 2 man squads any day of the week, thank you.

There are a few things that I liked alot more in COH 1, but a couple things that are so frustrating that they fixed in COH 2 (snipers, some horrible maps designed for crap tactics, kangaroos). I like the doctrine system alot more than the commander system because each of them felt unique and different. There were alot of very similar commanders that are mixed and matched in vCOH 2, but the new WFA commanders are a step in the right direction. I also liked how the veterancy system was unique for each faction, instead of all of the veterancy systems being the same.

As a CoH1 vet, if you still believe its better then CoH2, you should be locked up in asylum.

I was a huge fan of CoH1 but still CoH2 has the edge.

I think the nostalgic people (eg me) like CoH2 a lot but are annoyed that the game didn't improve on everything from CoH1 and had some features that were worse. (BLIZZARDS WTF MY EYYYESSS!)


But what is definitely superior:
True Sight
More soft counters - eg no More PE Ac rush / M8 rush.

Rushes in general are less effective in CoH2 and I love that. So it's not dependant on UEBER FAST CLICKETY CLICK. Even if you rush a fast light vehicle, it won't be able to rinse everything for 5 minutes (although units like M3, flamer HT did used to do this)



Pathing sucks balls though, MGs don't supress blobs as well, maps are a bit cramped.


The majority of things are superior in CoH2 but they can still improve it using idea from CoH1.

CoH2 is a better game but CoH1 had better maps and was better paced. I think in those regards CoH2 took far too many lessons from DoW2.

i have more fun playing coh 2 for sure. And probably the game will only get better. e

There are a lot of things that are better in CoH 1.

MGs did a better job, not like the shitty MG43 and MG34 currently and the instant stun Maxim.

The German Sniper is imho too weak because of a very bad armor class. One focus fire and he is down, sad even if you have an Vet 3 Sniper.

More unique vehicles like Hetzer, Jagdpanther, Flak 88, Flak 38 Quad 20mm, Wirbelwind, Hummel, better Fallschirmjäger. Stuff like that

Now we have a Oberkommando West that should be the German Army @ '44 '45 where i think -> well that is a good idea, also with less ressource income to see the crumbling industry of Germany. But what did i get?
Volksgrenadiere -> well, at least better than the Volkssturm they were in CoH 1, still they should be upgradeable (Volksgrenadiere hat a lot of G43 and automatic weapons) now they are some kind of second line Infantry.

Jagdpanzer IV feels a bit slow and fat, even if it should kinda be mobile. But anyway, where are dedicated Tankhunter-Commanders with Hetzer, Marder 3 (as mobile AT Gun not this Raketenwerfer 43) or a Jagdpanther with good mobility unlike the Jagdtiger?

I have an SdKfz 251/17 Flak Half-track. Well, late 1944 or early 1945, and i have an Flak Halftrack? Seriously? Where is my advanced weaponry of the 3rd Reich? Wirbelwind, Quad 20mm etc?

I liked the Puma in CoH1 more, as it was an early scout vehicle with some punch, now it is T3 vehicle...

T4 - well, Obersoldaten, the biggest bullshit name after Knight-Cross-Holders. Why can't it be kinda realistic? Grenadiere (basic), Volksgrenadiere (Veteran NCOs with wounded and fresh man, but good equipment like G43, StG44, MP40 etc.), Panzergrenadiere (good units) and Sturmgrenadiere (as it was a honor name and battle hardened veterans) and not that a bullshit name. I know in the game are Sturmgrenadiere, but they are not kinda Elite as they should be. Also the Reich is in the last time and Obersoldaten are running with an MG34 that was replaced by MG42 because it was too expensive etc and old bolt action K98k while they should be more on the new stuff of the Reich like at least G43 but normally StG44, Mp40 etc. That is kinda bullshit. Yeah there is the Elite coming with bolt action rifles...true story

As T4 i also got a Pz II? Seriously again? That would make a good early anti Inf vehicle, but lategame? There would be a Wirbelwind good, but a Pz II? pff...

Panzerelite got more things right with the doctrines and the unit selection, but the idea behind the Oberkommando is really good. Just the praxis is kinda bullshit made imho.

Just a small summarize, where is Hummel, Hetzer, Jagdpanther, Marder, Vampir or other vehicle like "Greif" like Rommel was using as command vehicle. Always command tank...

Also i miss a medium tank. Pz III at least, Pz IV Ausf. H would be awesome as it was the main battle tank at that time still.

Lovely butterfly bombs for Luftwaffe support anyone?

I just do not feel that "elite"

As a CoH1 vet, if you still believe its better then CoH2, you should be locked up in asylum.

+1 Coh2 is much improved over Coh1 in many aspects the most major one I notice though which is the biggest and most important difference imo.

Team games are actually fun in Coh 2 even up to 4v4 you can have enjoyable games in COH anything above 1v1 was not enjoyable at all.

And as far as other gameplay elements everytime I got back to CoH1 im just reminded of all the stuff I am so glad is not in Coh 2 ... sniper perma cload.... jeep/ketten pushing theres a long list, I find COH 2 to be a worthy successor and also an improvement.

I'll even argue that Coh 2 has more depth then Coh 1 because frankly we havent even scratched the surface of whats possible in just the vanilla armies notwithstanding the WFA. I'm referring to all the vet abilitis and stuff that still goes for the most part completely un-used and no its not becuase its worthless its because people havent even got that far into truly learning the game yet. Coh 2 has crazy undiscovered depth yet I guarentee it.

i think that panzer 2 in tier 4 is good, if the player decide go tier 1 then tier 4 they should get one anti infantry vehicle

I like the diversity of maps in CoH1 more, and the infantry combat, but the armoured combat is better in CoH2, along with True Sight. I love me some True Sight.

Oh, and while it took some getting used to, I like that it's more difficult in general in CoH2 to play a strictly defensive game.

Sorry for my language, im russian player.


It never ending holy war about old and new, i think.

Recently i try to play COH1 again so... objectively game is slow, i need click on territory flags, big blobbing and boring late game. Game need some progress and bit more content. But doctrine system looks good, it really one thing what i want in COH2 (or same system).
P.S. Oh wait, german bike - i miss you :-)

coh1 and coh2 are seperate games with seperate mechanics. Both are enjoyable in their seperate regimes.

i think coh 2 is better.


Why?

No massive brit or pg blobs or blobbing in general is not that common in coh 2

No zero micro needed snipers

No nonsense like KCH being sniper proof

Tanks feel like tanks, not stupid boxes of shit.

No zombie medic bunkers

I could go on and on, but i think coh 2 is better.

750 hours logged in CoH1, about 200 so far in CoH2.

There are a couple of things they improved in the sequel, but up until just recently they didn't even bother to include a game lobby. And at launch there were DLC shaped holes everywhere.

The commander system in general is a step back. Having 3 fixed doctrines with 2 branches was better than bringing along a "deck" of three commanders, some of which you can only get through microtransactions, and having a huge number of commanders with overlapping abilities. I feel like there are far more useless options now than ever before. Even if one or two of the three usually worked out to be "generally better". It's also much harder for me to work out which doctrine somebody has gone when there are duplicate abilities and 5,000,000 commanders to memorize.

Positive changes:

- Jumping over obstcles with infantry
- Line of sight system
- Units all come from off-map
- Theatre of War system is good
- Relic servers eventually got added to kill drophacks.

Negative changes:
- DLC everywhere
- Commander system
- Blizards *suck*
- Launched in a shameful state regarding basic features being missing that were there in #1
- (technical) Performance of the game is terrible considering the graphics that it is putting out.
- Units feel much more disposable than they did in the first game
- Early game infantry combat seems to give way to tanks far quicker
- Asymmetrical snipers are much less fun than sniper duels in CoH1


I think that we are about 3-4 balance patches away from the game being as good as it's going to get without ripping out core systems and starting over. Even then, I doubt I'm going to have as much fun as I was having circa 2012 or so playing the game with my partner.

CoH1 will always be a class of its own, it was the RTS that got me hooked for years. CoH2 is a different game imo, because both games have a different feel to them. But right now, i'll stick to coh2.

all games have dlc now. why relic shouldn'd explore that, if add more content and is not paytowin it is ok.

how the new commanders setup is a step back? it give option to explore more strats.

what you call step back i call normal evolution!