next DLC patch November

I think I would have liked to do something new appeared on the eastern front not only among Americans and okw but also in the soviets of ostheer were new units from 1944

Not sure if i understand you the way you meant, but i don't think Wehrmacht (Ostheer) will ever get new units: OKW is the representation of Wehrmacht (same army) of the late war (44-45), so in essence, it wouldn't make sense if Wehr get new units.

On the other hand, USSR getting late war units would be logical. So i don't know what Relic will do.

on my part OKW troops fought on the Western Front and Werhmacht ( Ostheer ) is the army fighting on the Eastern Front was that the gameplay more interesting as a relic of the new units will 1944 years

I think that the OKW and werhmacht completely different armies mainly vehicles and weapons I have great hopes that they will hand vehicles and weapons of the war in 1944

I see your point, but i don't think the armies' structures differed that much in reality. I don't think they were two different armies (two different high command, sure, but same army structure). So i took it this way: same army, two different timelines. But anything is possible, we will see what Relic has in stores for us (not in AA though, it is Single Player only, for what i've understood).

I understand what's going on but I hope that the relic think of something on the Eastern Front with new units and vehicles and infantry weapons of the war theater 1944 years

although I do not know whether the relic will be on the Eastern Front will be new units ostheer or Soviet

I don't think we need any more units or factions from the Eastern Front. Let's be honest here, what more can Relic add? They can't add any new armies unless you're content with another German faction, and they got most of the weapons, equipment and vehicles that the Germans had in WW2 in the game, so if they add any more "new" ones, they risk recycling units from the OKW and Wehrmacht to make up the rest of the unit roster.

No, I think the Eastern Front is done now since there's nothing left.

Let's be honest here, what more can Relic add?

They need to tear down the sad failure that are the Allied factions and redo them from scratch. That would be a worthwhile addition.

But who are we kidding here, this basically amounts to CoH3 and will therefore not happen.

I'm confident the Allies can be reformed but before that happens, the final Allied country needs to be added to the game which would be the British Army. It isn't a WW2 game without the British since they were essential to defeating Germany, so i'm hoping Relic can add them the way they did with the US; so they're very different from their CoH1 counterparts in terms of functionality.

*you're

(couldn't resist)

Actually in that case it is "Your".

I really hope we don't see any new factions in coh2. Maybe for a single player campaign, but at some point it just becomes too much to balance, and I can't imagine the balance process going well with 6 factions.

Actually in that case it is "Your".

I really hope we don't see any new factions in coh2. Maybe for a single player campaign, but at some point it just becomes too much to balance, and I can't imagine the balance process going well with 6 factions.

festive strikes once again

So you're saying it's right to leave out the British who were a major factor in WW2? At least Murica' got in, am I right? The British don't deserve to be a faction is essentially what you're saying.

The best course of action Relic can do is release the Armies, units and etc that they have in mind within 1-2 years; after that all they have to focus on is balance(Since no more factions will be added after the British and another Axis faction are included in CoH2) and skins/commanders to a certain extent.

If what Relic says is true and CoH1 is an example of their support for their games, then we can expect CoH2 to be worked on for a very long time...enough time to add the British and balance the game.

So you're saying it's right to leave out the British who were a major factor in WW2? At least Murica' got in, am I right? The British don't deserve to be a faction is essentially what you're saying.

The best course of action Relic can do is release the Armies, units and etc that they have in mind within 1-2 years; after that all they have to focus on is balance(Since no more factions will be added after the British and another Axis faction are included in CoH2) and skins/commanders to a certain extent.

If what Relic says is true and CoH1 is an example of their support for their games, then we can expect CoH2 to be worked on for a very long time...enough time to add the British and balance the game.

Your putting words in my mouth, I said nothing about whether or not the British played a big enough role in the war to be included.

It took a full year to balance 2 factions. WFA has been out for nearly 5 months and there are still major balance and design issues and bugs that have existed since the beta. I'm sorry, but I don't think the multiplayer would EVER be enjoyably competitive with 6 factions. Not to mention all the new bugs, and Relics design philosophy of innovation for the sake of innovation that produces gimmick factions that seem cool on paper but end up being cheesy and frustrating to play with and against (trucks, pre release OKW, vcoh British, blizzards, deep snow, mud).


My point has nothing to do with the merits of the British. I don't think Relic should be basing their game design decisions around whether or not a country "deserves" to be included based on their real contributions in WW2. It's not as if their exclusion from the game somehow detracts from the sacrifices they made. If Relic wants to highlight a particularly interesting theater of war there are other ways to do that without completely destroying competitive multiplier balance, such as a single player campaign or more theater of war missions.

next year 1944

Your putting words in my mouth, I said nothing about whether or not the British played a big enough role in the war to be included.

It took a full year to balance 2 factions. WFA has been out for nearly 5 months and there are still major balance and design issues and bugs that have existed since the beta. I'm sorry, but I don't think the multiplayer would EVER be enjoyably competitive with 6 factions. Not to mention all the new bugs, and Relics design philosophy of innovation for the sake of innovation that produces gimmick factions that seem cool on paper but end up being cheesy and frustrating to play with and against (trucks, pre release OKW, vcoh British, blizzards, deep snow, mud).


My point has nothing to do with the merits of the British. I don't think Relic should be basing their game design decisions around whether or not a country "deserves" to be included based on their real contributions in WW2. It's not as if their exclusion from the game somehow detracts from the sacrifices they made. If Relic wants to highlight a particularly interesting theater of war there are other ways to do that without completely destroying competitive multiplier balance, such as a single player campaign or more theater of war missions.

A bit of overreaction on my part I admit but when someone says that the British shouldn't be included as a faction, I have to stand my ground and prove them wrong; the British Army is as close as i'm getting for Canadian infantry, artillery or whatever to be playable in CoH2.

As for balance, I'd like to point out that Relic have extensively supported CoH1 for 8 years and will probably still continue to support it for years to come, so what makes you doubt that by adding the British Army, that a balanced game won't be achieved? Like you pointed out, it took 2 years for the Wehrmacht and Russians to be well balanced, and I don't think i'm alone in stating that balance right now is acceptable and fairly good for the most part- so what makes you think that by adding the British Army, Relic won't be able to balance it? They have 5 years to do so so unless you're expecting Starcraft level of balance, there's no reason to appose the British Army being added.

Also, for continuities sake the British were added for CoH1 so a lot of people expect them to make a return for CoH2. Much like the US(Which Relic added so they can get Americans on board with their game), the British Army would also attract a lot of customers(Mainly from Commonwealth countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and etc) which would help the game. If the Americans can make a return to CoH2 then the British can as well.

A bit of overreaction on my part I admit but when someone says that the British shouldn't be included as a faction, I have to stand my ground and prove them wrong; the British Army is as close as i'm getting for Canadian infantry, artillery or whatever to be playable in CoH2.

As for balance, I'd like to point out that Relic have extensively supported CoH1 for 8 years and will probably still continue to support it for years to come, so what makes you doubt that by adding the British Army, that a balanced game won't be achieved? Like you pointed out, it took 2 years for the Wehrmacht and Russians to be well balanced, and I don't think i'm alone in stating that balance right now is acceptable and fairly good for the most part- so what makes you think that by adding the British Army, Relic won't be able to balance it? They have 5 years to do so so unless you're expecting Starcraft level of balance, there's no reason to appose the British Army being added.

Also, for continuities sake the British were added for CoH1 so a lot of people expect them to make a return for CoH2. Much like the US(Which Relic added so they can get Americans on board with their game), the British Army would also attract a lot of customers(Mainly from Commonwealth countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and etc) which would help the game. If the Americans can make a return to CoH2 then the British can as well.

Again, your putting words into my mouth. I literally never said anything about the British until you brought them up.

I really don't care about what specific factions have been introduced. I would have been fine if Relic introduced the Brits rather than the US if they were a fun and interesting faction. I just don't have faith in Relic to actually invest the time necessary to balance 6 factions. There will always be another ardennes assault that will take priority over multiplayer because that is what Relic has decided pays the bills.

I personally don't want to invest a ton of time into a game that is introducing new content at a rate faster than it can get balanced. We have had the stale as hell call in meta for over a year now, despite the fact that 2 new factions and several new commanders have been released during that time.

Every new patch has a new set of bugs that take a significant amount of time to fix, and while the game might be relatively balanced, it is still fundamentally a commander v commander cheesefest, with a very narrow set of legitimately viable options. Currently, too much of a factions strength (especially the soviets) is locked into commander choice and rewards stalling for call ins rather than actually making a conscious decision on how to spend your resources.

It is changes like these that should be highest on the priority list, as you can't have a healthy long term multiplayer base without an interesting and strategically diverse meta. Eventually people get turned off and leave the game by being punished for playing outside the very, very narrow meta.

Until the fundamental flaws of the multiplayer get fixed, there is no room for more factions in coh2.

Again, your putting words into my mouth. I literally never said anything about the British until you brought them up.

I really don't care about what specific factions have been introduced. I would have been fine if Relic introduced the Brits rather than the US if they were a fun and interesting faction. I just don't have faith in Relic to actually invest the time necessary to balance 6 factions. There will always be another ardennes assault that will take priority over multiplayer because that is what Relic has decided pays the bills.

I personally don't want to invest a ton of time into a game that is introducing new content at a rate faster than it can get balanced. We have had the stale as hell call in meta for over a year now, despite the fact that 2 new factions and several new commanders have been released during that time.

Every new patch has a new set of bugs that take a significant amount of time to fix, and while the game might be relatively balanced, it is still fundamentally a commander v commander cheesefest, with a very narrow set of legitimately viable options. Currently, too much of a factions strength (especially the soviets) is locked into commander choice and rewards stalling for call ins rather than actually making a conscious decision on how to spend your resources.

It is changes like these that should be highest on the priority list, as you can't have a healthy long term multiplayer base without an interesting and strategically diverse meta. Eventually people get turned off and leave the game by being punished for playing outside the very, very narrow meta.

Until the fundamental flaws of the multiplayer get fixed, there is no room for more factions in coh2.

You did mention the British though; you said you didn't want them in CoH2.

Relic balanced CoH1 for the majority of its life span so what possible reason do you have to doubt Relic's ability now? They have 5+ years to get balance done, so as far as i'm concerned that's plenty of time to add the British Army, change the call-in meta and balance the game. Sure, we'll have a few patches where the game won't be fun at all but it happened in CoH1 so it's expected to happen for CoH2.

It essentially comes down to what both you and I prioritise. I believe that Relic should add all the units, factions that they have in mind to the game, and then they can change the meta and adjust the balance as they see fit. The problem with these commander, expansion releases is that they're followed by a balance patch which throws everything off; if Relic just worked to have everything they wanted into the game(British Army, another Axis faction, new USF units and etc), then all they have to do is balance the game with the occasional skin release so they can generate revenue(Think of Dota 2 for an example).

This I feel would be much easier than balancing the game, releasing new units, content and etc, balancing again and rinse and repeat.

I'm just stepping in, but i wouldn't count new factions out of the equation either, there remains two huge theaters of operations that saw plenty of ground armies actual fighting, which aren't yet into the game: the Africa front (British Commonwealth vs Afrika Korps) and the Pacific Islands (US Marines vs Japan Imperial Army). It would be a bloody mess to balance all those things around, but i wouldn't be surprised if any, if not both, of those theaters were coming to the game in the years to come.

I'm just stepping in, but i wouldn't count new factions out of the equation either, there remains two huge theaters of operations that saw plenty of ground armies actual fighting, which aren't yet into the game: the Africa front (British Commonwealth vs Afrika Korps) and the Pacific Islands (US Marines vs Japan Imperial Army). It would be a bloody mess to balance all those things around, but i wouldn't be surprised if any, if not both, of those theaters were coming to the game in the years to come.

Maybe that's why they have not yet implemented 88's: they will be the Afrika Korps' heavy AT to make them competitive for MP!