Brainstorming: Coh2 improvements.

Please don't mind the grammar; I paid little heed to it. I will update this as I go along:


So, after having played, discussed, and watched the game for about 3 weeks, I feel comfortable making some analytical comments about the Ostheer and Soviet match-up. There are many things that I really like about it, but likewise there are areas where I think that some improvements are necessary. The general notion I get from playing the game is that Relic really focused on making the game fun for everyone. I think the team has succeeded in this regard, however what I see lacking is compelling and intriguing synergy in the design of the Soviet and Ostheer match-up. Coh1 had this in spades, especially in the wehr vs ami match-up. This is why said match-up has remained relevant and popular for all these years. The PE and Brit factions lack this and so is DOW2, which is why once the new and fun features had been exhausted, their appeal started to die off. Brits and PE aren’t played in tournaments, not because they are underpowered, but because the matchup is deficient of that ingenuity. Let me illustrate with some examples:

-The supply yard upgrade: It’s a very clever comeback mechanic, since it increases the rate at which infantry gains vet and reduces your upkeep cost. It allows the American player to both mitigate his/her reinforce costs, which are higher than the wehrs, due to larger squads, and to reduce the gap between you and the Wehrmacht player as, in the latter stages of the game, purchased vet starts rolling in.

-The interplay of bars and german veterancy 2 (elite armor): the American player could try to rush for bars, because if unlocked early, the bar rifles will vastly outclass the German forces. This would force the wehr player to either retreat early, loosing map control, but denying vet, or do the opposite. Loosing map control, would reduce his/her ability to tech, however it would allow him/her to tech to tier 2, get grens and for a rather low fuel cost get vet 2 (elite armor), this would put the pressure back onto the American player since now the vet-less bar rifles would be outclassed by the grens, making earning vet increasingly hard. It’s a great dynamic which made for very intense and intelligent play. (Coh2 doesn’t have anything of this sort.) In essence, it’s a comeback all in itself, however unlike the upkeep comeback mechanic of coh2 it doesn’t feel overly artificial- you still need to fight for it.

-Armor play: In coh, german tanks received a 50% accuracy penalty while on the move, whereas American tanks only suffered a 25% penalty. While this was rather subtle, it promoted a certain armor interplay between the two factions, wherein the germans were very powerful, but slow, and the americans were very agile and accurate while on the move. In other words, the german player was rewarded for clever tank placement, while the American player was rewarded for aggressive and well-timed hit and run tactics. Again, a very well designed feature.

-Veterancy being both aggressive and defensive for the Americans and only defensive for the Germans complemented their fundamental design very, very well in so many ways that I don’t even know where to start. I think the reasons why are kind of obvious to any experienced coh player.


With that in mind, I tried to think of some ways that coh2 could improve in terms of compelling design. Here are some of my suggestions that try to avoid adding new things to the game where possible while briefly my reasoning behind it:


-Russians should have an upgrade that allows them to reduce the effect that the cold has one them by 50% (only for winter maps). This upgrade is necessary, because it’ll make blizzards more intriguing. I think an interest usage of blizzards is to execute massive flanks. However with the current cold effect kicking in so quickly, it’s usually not possible to execute them properly, because infantry start to freeze halfway through, focusing you to interrupt the flank. This is especially true in the mid-game where fire pits start becoming scarcer. It create quite tense moments, where the Ostheer player would be huddling around a camp fire with infantry and mgs, while hearing the cries of soviet conscripts orahhing just outside their heavily impeded vision range. This ability should perhaps be the equivalent of bar tech in the early game of coh1. A teching choice that’ll allow you to be far more aggressive when that first blizzard hits in the early stages of the game. It would also complement the Ostheer player’s ability to place barbwire fields pretty well. Furthermore, I don't think that the Ostheer needs a similar upgrade since they are the more static and strategic faction. Nevertheless, it might become a problem in the latter stages of the game when both sides are scrambling for VPs and fire pits start becoming scarcer. My suggestion is to give German units cold resistance with vet. I.e. Vet 2 -25%, Vet 3 -50% (more on this later when I start discussing vet).

-Panzerfaust and Riflenades: As it stands the former is slightly overpowered and the latter doesn’t really have a purpose. What I’d do is make Panzerfausts only available when tier 2 techs, and make it so that riflenades are pretty good vs stationary light vehicles. To complement this design choice, passengers with heavy weapons in soviet scout cars should only be able to fire their weapons while stationary. This would eliminate their silliness and overpowered-ness and would increase the micro intensiveness of using garrisoned scout cars vs grens in the early game, which is good for competitive play. Normal infantry should still be able to fire out of a moving scout cars, but at severely reduced accuracy. Panzerfausts shouldn’t cause engine crits (maybe only the stunned crew crti), since their range is already so good. Perhaps riflenades could? It would keep them relevant throughout the game.

-Veterancy: I realize it’s still in its infancy, so I’ll propose a rather extensive change: Germans should vet per kill, while soviets vet for doing damage (kill shots providing a bonus). The reason for this is that it would complement the design of the factions pretty well (germans have low squad sizes, soviets have large squad sizes), and it would reward the player that is outplaying his opponent with veterancy, while at the same time allowing its denial. Right now, unit preservation is all that is required for guaranteed vet, which quite frankly isn’t good.

-Some of the vet 1 abilities seem a bit out of place. I haven’t tried all of them yet, but why would t-34s need the same capping ability as a T-70? More importantly, why would would PGs need the marked target ability? It just doesn't complement their design; perhaps a smoke grenade unlock would be more suited towards their role?

-I am very disappointed in the recent balance patch. Why homogenize all the vehicles? I presume Relic is doing this so that they can collect comparative data on each match-up, allowing them to analyze more clearly what each faction is lacking and abundant in, which will, in turn, facilitate more systematic and precise balance adjustments. If not, I think it’s a huge downgrade from the previous balance patch. Right now: ISU152=Elephant, IS2=Tiger, StugIII=SU85, PVI=T-34 85 and etc. Where’s the fun in that? It makes tank battles very stale and it rids them of any tactical play (See my bit on coh1 amor interplay). I’m not a game designer, but to me it seems that balance from a mathematical POV is where DPS is equal across the factions, however this shouldn’t mean that each faction should be identical in how it deals damage. For example, I really like the balance decision to make paks deal half the damage of is6, but therefore fire at twice the firerate. The net effect is the same DPS, however because of the Russians have larger numbers than the germans this really complements that design very well. I believe this should be translated to tanks as well, with Soviet tanks having higher damage per shot, but a slower higher rate and Ostheer tanks being more precise at range (this could reflect the superior training of Ostheer tank crews). Furthermore, I think Soviet tanks shouldn’t suffer as big an accuracy penalty as Ostheer tanks whilst firing on the move and Ostheer tanks should have slower turret traverse speeds. This would also provide the panther with a tangible weakness, seeing as right now it really has none.

-This is a design feature I thought of that would be reflective of the great comeback mechanic of coh1: Germans should have an upgrade with two purchasable levels (perhaps 2, one for infantry and one for vehicles) that vet all levels that aren't already to level 1. The upgrade will also drastically increase the rate at which units gain vet, say +15% and +30%. The reason for this is that it isn't as artificial as coh1 Wehr vet, but it still allows the Ostheer player to increase his/her advantage by making his/her units slightly sturdier (vet2 increasing their armor). Thereby denying vet to his/her opponent. Soviets should have an ability that is pretty much identical to the supply yard upgrade. So slightly reduced upkeep (facilitates armor and infantry swarming; improving their late-game) and allowing them to increase the rate at which they gain vet.

-Upkeep should be reduced and more gradual. Perhaps even make it so that territories grant a marginal upkeep reduction (not mp increase), as it would augment the importance of good map control in the latter stages of the game when MP starts becoming the most important resource.

-To increase the duration/importance of the early game and to create a mid-game (since atm it is largely missing), I’d change at-nades to 125mp 30 fuel, HQ healing to 200mp 40 fuel, and then I’d make tier 3 of the soviets cost 200 MP 50 fuel with an upgrade for, say 100mp and 40 fuel, to unlock t-34s (similarly to how PE unit unlocks worked in coh1). This would allow the t-70 to hit the field earlier (kind of like an m8). I don’t think the Ostheer has as many issues, since it is more of a reactionary faction. I would only suggest a price (and perhaps armor/hp ) reduction for the Ostwind to about 400mp and 50 fuel to transform it into a potential shock unit that can be fast-teched to. It wouldn’t be spammable due to its high mp cost. The low fuel cost would just cause it to hit the field earlier and allow it to become a more game defining strategy.

-Side armor would be very nice, since getting to the rear of a tank can be very frustrating vs a good player (I don't care so much about historical accuracy). If it’s too hard/late to implement side armor, I suggest that the first 1/5 of the side armor counts are front armor and the remain 4/5 counts as rear armor (I think atm the transition happens at the halfway mark). Reason for this change is so that tanks that are in front of the tank will always hit the front armor, whereas tanks to the side will always hit the rear armor.

-Flavor: separate doctrine abilities into 3 types: airborne, infantry, and armor. Each doctrine consists of a combination of two (customizability?). Such as airborne and infantry, where one of the two is for call-ins, while the other is for abilities.

-T-34 ram ability shouldn't be homing. One should have to select a location that then determines the trajectory of the t-34. If the t-34 gets dodged, it remains immobile for about 2-4 seconds due to temporary engine damage (damage disapears afterwards). Also, frontal hits should net shocked crewmen and destroyed gun (and engine damage if the tank is below 50% health), while rear rams should result in shocked crewmen and destroyed engine. I think that'd make the ability more interesting and it makes way for an interesting combo where guards pin a tank and the T-34 rams it.

-Doctrine specfic units should be buildable in the HQ, so that unlocking a tiger tank, for example, doesn't force you to build tier 4 (this isn't OP, since it still requires 5CPs). I really liked the call-in ability of coh1, as it allowed for strategy diversification. For example, one could completely skip tier 2 wehr by getting Stormtroopers from the blitzkrieg doctrine. Coh2 should expand on this by making it so that unlocked vehicles and units appear in the HQ and still have an associated build-time and fuel cost in the case of vehicles. Lastly, I don't see why some units such as Guards, should replace other units. It seems a bit clumsy (can be circumvented), because it requires a player that wants both Guard and Penal squads to build tier 1, construct a few Penal squads, and then choose the Guards doctrine.

-ATG barrages should require lvl 1 vet, since a player should be punished for incorrectly awaiting an early armor rush. Right now, getting an early ATG in anticipation of early tanks is never a bad idea, because the ATG can still immediately function as anti-infantry support.

-I don't understand why Tanks and ATGs lose accuracy but not penetration as range increases. It makes far more sense from a gameplay perceptive to have it the opposite way around, simply because even if a ATG has a 50% chance of hitting a target at range, that average is meaningless in an engagement where 3 shots are all it takes to destroy the target. The result is engagements that are very hard to gauge due to the fact that there's a 50% chance of doing zero damage and a 50% chance of doing 100% damage with every shot. Penetration values decreasing as range increases would make tank battles more consistent. My suggestion is to make accuracy far better, while adjusting DPS via penetration changes over different ranges. I.e. atg 90% accuracy vs tanks and 60% penetration at long range, 80% at medium, and 100% at short. It would net roughly the same average damage vs tanks as when only accuracy modifiers are used, but it'd be more predictable.

-Right now Hit the Dirt is a no-brainer in almost every engagement. Possible fix: Reduce line of sight when hit the dirt is used, blocking their sight with every piece of cover, even the smallest one.

-When a tank with a moveable turret chases another tank, while an enemy infantry unit is nearby, and the enemy tank breaks LoS, the pursuing tank will automatically turn its slow moving turret at the squad. If your tank is moving, there is no way to avoid this and can be very frustrating. Possible fix: give tanks a button that disables/enables turret movement or give tanks the ability to hold fire. (whilst holding fire, the turret doesn't move). This would not only fix said problem, but also prevent wounded tanks from firing at unwanted times.

Nuts and Bolts:

Consistancy: Chance of abandoning a vehicle should scale with the remaining health prior to the finishing shot taking it out. Very low health, plus high damage shot should have very low probability (if the engine allows it). Crits should be consistent both in terms of weapon used and part of the tank hit.
-Artillery pieces need more defined roles. Range, suppression, damage, accuracy. Right now all I'm noticing is that some are strictly better than others.
-TDs and support tanks need have a bit better defined roles, in terms of range, armor, accuracy, and penetration.


Thoughts?

Edit #3: added content and grammar improved

Quite interesting comparison tying in the dynamic US vs Wher matchup of vCoH and how it appears to be lacking with the current build of CoH2. Having played the beta quite a bit myself I would totally agree. I believe I have only ever built the T70 once myself, and that is because of the lack of a transition between mid game and late game. It seems like a straight switch from early game --> late game.

The idea for a russian upgrade that allows better movement and flanking during blizzards sounds quite interesting. I'm not sure how they could then implement this for the summer maps, but for the current blizzard mechanism this seems like a great idea. It would compliment that natural environment of the soviets, albeit to an extent, since everyone eventually freezes.

At the moment, riflenades and panzerfausts do seem a bit off. The fausts should be available a bit later game and should deal only pure damage. Maybe they could sometimes get the crew shock critical, but that is it. They should also be unlocked later as you have pointed out. The riflenades would then have a role early game versus light vehicles giving the chance to crit engines. And since the weapon would target the ground rather than the vehicle it would have a better reward for succeeding in a hit. Obviously with heavy vehicles, I don't think this should apply.

Upkeep has been mentioned several times and it really should change. With the current system allowing up 25 pop and no negative impact on your upkeep. And then furthermore if you put in a mechanic like the supply yard it would have a better meaning.

I am not sure about buying vet, but the current mechanics should change. The idea of changing Ostheer to kills vs soviets to damage could be interesting.

i skipped reading it but maybe you are right maybe not.... who knows?! MVGame

oops...

@Darkbladecr
"The idea for a russian upgrade that allows better movement and flanking during blizzards sounds quite interesting. I'm not sure how they could then implement this for the summer maps, but for the current blizzard mechanism this seems like a great idea. It would compliment that natural environment of the soviets, albeit to an extent, since everyone eventually freezes."

I don't think a summer equivalent is necessary. I suppose it would add a unique feature to playing on blizzard maps. In any case, it would make the early game varied and interesting.

"At the moment, riflenades and panzerfausts do seem a bit off. The fausts should be available a bit later game and should deal only pure damage. Maybe they could sometimes get the crew shock critical, but that is it. They should also be unlocked later as you have pointed out. The riflenades would then have a role early game versus light vehicles giving the chance to crit engines. And since the weapon would target the ground rather than the vehicle it would have a better reward for succeeding in a hit. Obviously with heavy vehicles, I don't think this should apply."

Definitely agree. Relic needs to understand that some of their design designs lack depth.

"Upkeep has been mentioned several times and it really should change. With the current system allowing up 25 pop and no negative impact on your upkeep. And then furthermore if you put in a mechanic like the supply yard it would have a better meaning.

I am not sure about buying vet, but the current mechanics should change. The idea of changing Ostheer to kills vs soviets to damage could be interesting."

I don't know. I quite like the whole supply yard and bought vet dynamic. It added a level of intensity that would build up as the game progressed. Sure, it felt kind of cheap at times, which is why I my suggestion includes an alteration of it, but nevertheless it was well-though-out...

@Barton: Thanks. That means a lot.

Updated OP with added content.

I don't know. I quite like the whole supply yard and bought vet dynamic. It added a level of intensity that would build up as the game progressed. Sure, it felt kind of cheap at times, which is why I my suggestion includes an alteration of it, but nevertheless it was well-though-out...

I agree, I'm just not sure about giving a full level no mater what vet, since there is a big difference between vet 1 and vet 2 and likewise vet 3.
For infantry it is: 480/960/1920

I think it would maybe better to have faster vet growth, similar to the PE ability. That way built units are not instantly more powerful, you still have to take care with your units, and are better rewarded for keeping units alive. This will fit better with soviet troops being harder to kill with them gaining their own vet as well.

Interesting thread, I hope more people throw out some ideas.

Both factions need more fuel cost upgrades to offer more playstyles and to keep the meta a moving target.

I love the cold-tech upgrade for soviets. I suggested the same thing on the official forums for the same reason. I also suggested that ostheer could have expensive counterpart upgrades bought individually with munitions.

I thought that originally the vets of both factions were going to work differently from one another so I like a change that does this. It definitely rewards players for evaluating engagements differently depending on what faction they are using. Ostheer might prefer to retreat and regroup when outnumbered, and a russian player may want to stick it out and continue to eek out vet as long as possible.

I also think your idea about ostheer vetting is interesting, but sounds a little scary being an upgrade that affects every unit. Maybe break it down the same way as wehr's vet upgrades are broken up. I had a similar suggestion to mirror the old game's system, in that there would be upgrades taken among those 4 categories that exist for wehrmacht; infantry, support, light vehicles, tanks, and that buying a specific upgrade would make vetting units in that category much, much, faster. That way you wouldn't be buying cheap vetted squads in the late game, but your late-game squads would be vetting much quicker.

I agree that I would like more diverse abilities rather than giving all the ostheer units marked target upon vetting and all the russian units whatever that ability is called. This isn't a big deal, but it is a little boring currently.

Intersting idea about the riflenade, and shrek. I see the reasoning, but wonder if good players would have no problem avoiding the rifle-grenade for early scout-car flamer impunity...basicallly they could just charge up on the gren squad, because of his minimum range and he wouldn't even be able to fire it.

Giving both opponents an element of micro regarding the t34 ram ability doesn't sound like a bad thing. I'm not sure you need to damage the t34's engine on a miss. He's going to be pretty screwed anyway if he does.

Having an upkeep system that is condusive to upkeep upgrades for one faction or the other also just adds anohter way to play the game...which is a good thing.

I agree, I'm just not sure about giving a full level no mater what vet, since there is a big difference between vet 1 and vet 2 and likewise vet 3.
For infantry it is: 480/960/1920

I think it would maybe better to have faster vet growth, similar to the PE ability. That way built units are not instantly more powerful, you still have to take care with your units, and are better rewarded for keeping units alive. This will fit better with soviet troops being harder to kill with them gaining their own vet as well.

Hmmm, point well made. I'd love a system that builds on top of coh1's. What springs to mind is lvl 1 vet granted to all units that haven't already received it and a buff in the rate at which vet is gained. The problem with that is that it would just assimilate the two factions, eliminating the potential for an intriguing dynamic.
I suppose I need to think it over again...

@Joshua

"I love the cold-tech upgrade for soviets. I suggested the same thing on the official forums for the same reason. I also suggested that ostheer could have expensive counterpart upgrades bought individually with munitions."

Perhaps, but I don't think, with how the Ostheer is designed, that they need it.


"I also think your idea about ostheer vetting is interesting, but sounds a little scary being an upgrade that affects every unit. Maybe break it down the same way as wehr's vet upgrades are broken up. I had a similar suggestion to mirror the old game's system, in that there would be upgrades taken among those 4 categories that exist for wehrmacht; infantry, support, light vehicles, tanks, and that buying a specific upgrade would make vetting units in that category much, much, faster. That way you wouldn't be buying cheap vetted squads in the late game, but your late-game squads would be vetting much quicker."

I kind of like your idea! Perhaps grant vet 1 to all units of that type and then increase the rate of vet gained drastically for a possible of two levels, say +15% to +30%.


"Intersting idea about the riflenade, and shrek. I see the reasoning, but wonder if good players would have no problem avoiding the rifle-grenade for early scout-car flamer impunity...basicallly they could just charge up on the gren squad, because of his minimum range and he wouldn't even be able to fire it."

That's not a problem. The whole point is that flamethrowers and snipers can only fire while the HT is stationary, thereby making it susceptible to riflenades at that very moment. It's a trade-off.

okay, i've read some of your first post and i must say that Relic failed because they should have made tanks with their realistics stats, not identical, and just change costs for them, that would be good

Veterancy - i dont understand why losing your units gives veterancy, if i kill my parents, will i be rewarded with vet1?

infantry battles - all inf is dealing way less damage than in vCoH, for example, rifles when well flanked MG they could kill it even on retreat, in CoH2? molotovs only possible way because rifles are lame, all rifles, and it's very annoying that PPsh's and STG44 are shooting with low series not full auto, also MG pin are insane, in one sec full blob pinned

aircraft - some planes are good, idea is good but ffs, some of them are great for Noobs, for example Ił-2 bombing run is only good against noobs because smoke is dropped, 37mm Stukas dealing shit damage to anything, when is should kill support weapons with EZ, light vehicles and infa, 20mm Ił-2 attacks are usually aiming for bushes, dead bodies and that's annoying. but the most shitty idea was to make dropped smoke in EVERY aircaft call-in, this makes planes a very easy to dodge

Buildings - giving more cover and protection than probably maginot line, very realistic IMO

Basically anything to spend fuel on would be good - right now everyone just fast techs to tanks by default, basically. A lot of your other ideas sound neat too. T-34 ram targeting ground rather than homing would be much better I think but the problem is that people would use it to squish infantry, so it might be a better option to make it target enemy tanks and thus be homing so as to prevent this sort of thing.

you should watch the tournament, T1, T2 heavy builds galore.

Why not make the russian supply yard upgrade the summer map alternative to the theoretical cold-tech upgrade, assuming manpower could remain balanced in both formats. On winter maps soviets can take advantage of small windows of opportunity to turn the tide, and on summer maps they can offset(presumably changed upkeep costs) and add more field presence.

I get what your saying about the rifle-nades now, and the scout car combat adjustment.

People complain a lot about the excess russian artillery in 2v2, though not so much in 1v1. Maybe a small upgrade that could be teched in the support building should be required to unlock the arti abilities of at guns and the mobile at platforms.

After reading your post Crackbarbie, I get the feeling that you try to get back coh1, more than trying to get a more interesting match-up for coh2.
Which isn't necesarilly good or wrong, but I doubt that the devteam saw coh2 as a way to implement only new textures and new names for all existing coh1 elements and units.

@Barton: Most of your suggestions are minor balance tweaks, so I don't think it'd be hard for Relic to implement them.

@Ipkaifung: Well, the reason for that is manpower and upkeep are so dominant in determining a player's ability to tech that going for heavy tier 1-2 builds with their heavy manpower drain makes further teching very difficult. This is bad design, since fuel should be the main resource that determines your ability to tech, not manpower.

@TychoCelchuuu: Well, to an extent, but it's more about adding more depth to the Soviet vs Ostheer matchup. Unfortunately, I don't think Relic put much thought into that aspect of the game.

@MaestroRackam: Could you elaborate on how that is the case? Sure, the supply yard upgrade suggestion is directly taken from coh1, but everything else isn't. The thing is that the american vs wehr matchup is brilliant on so many levels. Analyzing why, just helps understand what coh2 is lacking.

Basically anything to spend fuel on would be good - right now everyone just fast techs to tanks by default, basically. A lot of your other ideas sound neat too. T-34 ram targeting ground rather than homing would be much better I think but the problem is that people would use it to squish infantry, so it might be a better option to make it target enemy tanks and thus be homing so as to prevent this sort of thing.

The ram ability wouldn't crush, because the AI would know where the tank is heading and thus infantry would just out of its way. The only way that crushing works is if you confuse the AI by constantly reassigning way points, which wouldn't apply to the ram ability.


Original post has been updated!

Some great ideas and overall thoughts. Have you submitted this to the Sega forums?

@Joshua: "Why not make the russian supply yard upgrade the summer map alternative to the theoretical cold-tech upgrade, assuming manpower could remain balanced in both formats. On winter maps soviets can take advantage of small windows of opportunity to turn the tide, and on summer maps they can offset(presumably changed upkeep costs) and add more field presence." This would over-complicate the game and make it too difficult to balance. It's frankly not worth it.


"People complain a lot about the excess russian artillery in 2v2, though not so much in 1v1. Maybe a small upgrade that could be teched in the support building should be required to unlock the arti abilities of at guns and the mobile at platforms."
I would just associate a munitions cost to it and/or make it a vet 1 ability. I think this should definitely be the case with ATG barrages, since a player should be punished for incorrectly anticipating an early armor rush. Right now, it's like, "oh, he didn't get a t-34... Whatever, I'll just use the ATG as light artillery support."

@Sojourner: Thank you.
No, I haven't. That place is a garbage heap, to be honest. I hope Relic finds it in them to frequent these forums like they used to.

@Ipkaifung: Well, the reason for that is manpower and upkeep are so dominant in determining a player's ability to tech that going for heavy tier 1-2 builds with their heavy manpower drain makes further teching very difficult. This is bad design, since fuel should be the main resource that determines your ability to tech, not manpower.

My post was mainly a counter point to Tycho's people only fast tech stance on the game.The reason why I think players are going for T1-T2 builds is because all the tools they need to deal with most situations are available in those tiers (indirect fire from mortars, suppression, snipers, AT guns, mainline troops, abilities to disable tanks etc.)

However manpower dictating teching is not exclusive to CoH2, I've seen plenty of CoH1 games were the players have had abundant amounts of fuel but not the manpower to buy higher tech, it's not like manpower is abundant in that game either.

I do agree the upkeep in coh2 is too punishing at the moment but good unit preservation does provide the player in the lead with an advantage in terms of vet.

@Ipkaifung: Yes, but a player that was floating too much fuel was either draining him/herself of mp or relying heavily on OMCGs or off-map units. Generally speaking, because of said reasons, floating fuel is the result of bad strategic decision-making.

Update 4: MOAR BRAEHNSTOHMIN'!