Login

russian armor

4 things that would make CoH2 instantly better

PAGES (19)down
27 Apr 2013, 11:15 AM
#121
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Apr 2013, 00:02 AMKolaris


I don't see the point in Supply Yard type upgrades when both factions have the exact same upkeep. It worked for US because US and WM were beautifully distinct from each other and had different takes on upkeep. There's no diversity in that area between Soviets and Ostheer, outside of the oversight of Conscripts taking 6 Pop vs Grenadiers 4 Pop.


I feel compelled to step in to avoid false information being spread. Both Grenadiers and Conscripts have 6 as their population count. The only unit that has a lower population count than its direct counterpart are the pioneers with a population count of 5 versus the 6 of the combat engineers, which is understandable since they do not perform as well.
27 Apr 2013, 14:20 PM
#122
avatar of SShaker

Posts: 10



I feel compelled to step in to avoid false information being spread. Both Grenadiers and Conscripts have 6 as their population count. The only unit that has a lower population count than it's direct counterpart are the pioneers with a population count of 5 versus the 6 of the combat engineers, which is understandable since they do not perform as well.


Thank you sherlock I was just about to rectify this. I like you.

Edit: might as well add something more relevant to the topic. At first I thought upkeep was really bad. After reading a bit, I decided to withdraw my previous opinion and attempt to adapt my play style. After playing more games as Ostheer, I don't find it as bad anymore. Sure I can't invest in T1 as much as I'd like and I feel you're forced to tech ASAP which reduces your strategic options. I don't think it's viable to stay in T2 and rely in paks for AT for example (good or bad thing, idk). Maybe as the game changes some more, a different pace will be established and more strategies will become viable.

I am enjoying the game though.
27 Apr 2013, 19:35 PM
#123
avatar of Stalker

Posts: 37

Seriously guys, the upkeep system should be the least of our concerns relating to the game. It's rectifiable and easily fixable by Relic with the help of the community.
The improvement of the clunky unresponsive UI and core game mechanics, like blizzard, is what we should be pushing for at this moment in time.
Also, it's AMAZING how difficult it is to distinguish different units from each other in COH2. What the hell is up with that?
27 Apr 2013, 19:54 PM
#124
avatar of SunAngel

Posts: 104

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Apr 2013, 19:35 PMStalker
Seriously guys, the upkeep system should be the least of our concerns relating to the game. It's rectifiable and easily fixable by Relic with the help of the community.
The improvement of the clunky unresponsive UI and core game mechanics, like blizzard, is what we should be pushing for at this moment in time.
Also, it's AMAZING how difficult it is to distinguish different units from each other in COH2. What the hell is up with that?


Seems pretty easy to distinguish them myself. Their icons are above the squads, just have to know what the icons mean.
27 Apr 2013, 20:09 PM
#125
avatar of Qvazar

Posts: 881

But it's still more difficult in CoH1, as the icons can get lost in all the nice graphics.

The thing I think is most important right now, is the UI of course, the feedback you get from the game ("visibility"), and the teching choices (or lack thereof).

If I have fuel as any faction, I can tech to vehicles or... nothing else?
27 Apr 2013, 20:38 PM
#126
avatar of SShaker

Posts: 10

I agree with the lack of options, what I should have said in my earlier post is "I feel you're forced to tech to tanks ASAP", because there isn't much else to tech to lol.
27 Apr 2013, 20:50 PM
#127
avatar of Tommy

Posts: 742 | Subs: 2

The loss of SY upgrades and global veterancy is indeed sad- all you can do is grow your army, vetting them up happens anyway and is generally of little significance, due a) because it takes no skill to get high levels of vet anymore and b) the vet itself isn't very interesting.
27 Apr 2013, 21:18 PM
#128
avatar of Stalker

Posts: 37



Seems pretty easy to distinguish them myself. Their icons are above the squads, just have to know what the icons mean.


The icons get lost in the mess often. In vanilla COH units are extremely easy to distinguish due to actually LOOKING different. Plus, in COH2 units actually blend in with the freakin background. I get the notion of camouflage, but this is an RTS and unit management, tactical decisions and micro are all dependent on one's ability to assess the enemy's unit composition. But if you can't even tell YOUR OWN units apart, something's really wrong with the RTS.
27 Apr 2013, 21:45 PM
#129
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Apr 2013, 20:50 PMTommy
The loss of SY upgrades and global veterancy is indeed sad- all you can do is grow your army, vetting them up happens anyway and is generally of little significance, due a) because it takes no skill to get high levels of vet anymore and b) the vet itself isn't very interesting.

The way that veterancy was earned and the effect it had on the game was indeed interesting, however the effects of veterancy weren't really...
27 Apr 2013, 23:32 PM
#130
avatar of Haupt

Posts: 25

4 things that would make CoH2 instantly better:

1) Allocate an appropriate budget that assures the development of a well-made game, including good game support, such as solving server issues, and frequent bug and balance fixes

2) Hire game developers who understand the game mechanics of Coh1 as well as why the original game was so much fun.

3) Make Coh2 competitive, for example getting it into Epsorts, as well as avoiding play-to-win aspects and balance-breaking DLC

4) Make Coh2 a sequel in the spirit of Coh1 by staying true to the game, while improving all aspects of the game, for example design, graphics, etc. without dumbing the game down
27 Apr 2013, 23:52 PM
#131
avatar of GreenDevil

Posts: 394

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Apr 2013, 20:09 PMQvazar
But it's still more difficult in CoH1, as the icons can get lost in all the nice graphics.

The thing I think is most important right now, is the UI of course, the feedback you get from the game ("visibility"), and the teching choices (or lack thereof).

If I have fuel as any faction, I can tech to vehicles or... nothing else?


That's the same as CoH1, you always end up teching to vehicles. That's really not a problem in CoH2. The balance of the vehicles are maybe, but the general aim of the game is to tech up to tanks and roll over your opponent with a coordinated attack.

I mean what else are you going to tech up to? There is no bought veterancy anymore, which was a crock of shit anyway, so thats a good thing, the game is WW2, the strongest vehicles on the Battlefield were tanks, it's only fitting that the end game should be tank focused.
28 Apr 2013, 00:23 AM
#132
avatar of Solver

Posts: 34

Upkeep seems to be part of an overarching problem, that is, the game rewarding the loser almost as much as the winner. It's the same with veterancy, where taking damage gives you a lot. My vet3 squads are usually lowly conscripts that took a heavy battering. If you fight a battle where you overwhelm the enemy by outgunning him, he'll gain more veterancy as long as he manages to retreat.

It is encouraging to me that many problems could clearly be fixed just by tweaking numbers, but a bit worrying to see how many problems there currently are.
28 Apr 2013, 00:28 AM
#133
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Apr 2013, 20:50 PMTommy
The loss of SY upgrades and global veterancy is indeed sad- all you can do is grow your army, vetting them up happens anyway and is generally of little significance, due a) because it takes no skill to get high levels of vet anymore and b) the vet itself isn't very interesting.


While it is indeed easy to get vet (just retreat in time) and the vet is boring stats wise, saying that it is of "little significance" is pretty out there considering that most wher units get 1.78x damage increase at vet 3.
28 Apr 2013, 00:37 AM
#134
avatar of Qvazar

Posts: 881



That's the same as CoH1, you always end up teching to vehicles. That's really not a problem in CoH2. The balance of the vehicles are maybe, but the general aim of the game is to tech up to tanks and roll over your opponent with a coordinated attack.

I mean what else are you going to tech up to? There is no bought veterancy anymore, which was a crock of shit anyway, so thats a good thing, the game is WW2, the strongest vehicles on the Battlefield were tanks, it's only fitting that the end game should be tank focused.

In CoH1 you can use fuel to get BARs to improve your existing army, or a fast M8, or even WSC or Tank Depot. Yes, you usually end up with both BARs and M8, but what you got first can decide the game.
The counter on the Wehrmacht side is bought vet vs T3/T4. It's the same story, improve your existing stuff or get new things out.

Yeah you always end up with vehicles, but it's how you got there that matters.

Right now there is only one path to late-game.
28 Apr 2013, 00:46 AM
#135
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2013, 00:28 AMDanielD


While it is indeed easy to get vet (just retreat in time) and the vet is boring stats wise, saying that it is of "little significance" is pretty out there considering that most wher units get 1.78x damage increase at vet 3.


Not to mention increased armour, I think it's 2.25 which gives them a 56% chance not to get hit by small arms.

28 Apr 2013, 02:00 AM
#136
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Apr 2013, 23:32 PMHaupt
3) Make Coh2 competitive, for example getting it into Epsorts, as well as avoiding play-to-win aspects and balance-breaking DLC

Games don't become competitive because someone waves a magic wand and makes them "esports", they become esports if they are very competitive.
28 Apr 2013, 03:28 AM
#137
avatar of SunAngel

Posts: 104


Games don't become competitive because someone waves a magic wand and makes them "esports", they become esports if they are very competitive.


^Basilone is completely right, and Relic is trying to make the game into an eSport already. It's unlikely that they'll force players to pay-to-win, although it only makes sense that there are some play-to-win mechanics. League of Legends forces you to play the game quite a bit in order to unlock a larger champion pool, runes, and masteries, all of which are necessary for high-level play.

28 Apr 2013, 03:42 AM
#138
avatar of canard

Posts: 48

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2013, 17:12 PMKolaris
2. Vet is a huge issue too, thanks to most of it being earned from taking damage rather than inflicting it.


Oh yes, it bugs me to see poor managed squads getting medals. What the ? It remind of this in another game: https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5522034432/h2BD3FF04/

Only valid reason I can imagine for such nonsense is to go with pair with the beginner friendly upkeep. I may add vet is too easily aquired. You realize you got veterans when stars appears, without being capable to remember what the hell you did with them to earn it.

High ressources/new upkeep (mix with a lot less hard counters) is also the cause of another issue in my opinion: you dont get this tier's race feeling anymore between two equally skilled player.

I miss the 1 minute dominance of the greyhound (or not greyhound ? -> early sherman §!) before the first pak, that kind of thing.

Played almost exclusivly as russian and while I enjoyed it a lot, I got the feeling to blast my way to victory without much thinking, running like mad, spamming grenade to te moon. Still confident, units and gameplay mechanisms are great and valid, It's just a matter of tweaks. Lot of tweaks.
28 Apr 2013, 03:43 AM
#139
avatar of Hypnotoad

Posts: 107

I understand why many of you are upset with the new MP system, (it doesn't reward good play, too simplistic etc..)
At the same time however, this new MP system, combined with the new 'passive-capturing' of sectors makes the game much more fluid - i.e, faster paced and closer in terms of the point difference in the outcome.
I think this is a good thing, perhaps it doesn't reward a well played early game as much as it should (perhaps the numbers could be tweaked as mentioned in other posts) but it also means the outcome of the game isn't decided in the early phases and makes the winning player work hard for their victory. (which would in turn improve the quality of their play) The spectacle of a close game is also enthralling for the stream audiences.
I remember (I believe it was the second TFN beta cast) the 2v2 between Ami on one side and some other randoms coming down to literally a single VP, the winning side having sat on that single VP while draining 60 or so points from the opposition..

Now that shit was a watch and a half.

I agree that the UI is pretty shit, (it looks ornate and stupid and the resource layout is way too small) but the other gripes such as the lack of visibility of the units, during blizzards and combat I don't agree with. I never had a problem seeing who was shooting at who and I could always clearly differentiate the units from each other. Hell, I even remember the OP saying during one of his streams the conditions (lack of visibility etc..) of the Blizzard added an additional tactical layer to the game by making ninja caps easier for instance.

In closing I think especially with the gripes over the look of the game it's important for us all to remember that this is a different game to coh1 and that we shouldn't want to revert this game to be more like the former (what would be the point of a sequel then?)just because we dont like some things as they are atm. The new MP system has as well introduced a faster paced and closer style of play than coh1 which isn't bad (I think it's great ^^) so don't just piss all over it just yet
- give Relic some time to sort some of this shit out.

/enddevilsadvocaterant
28 Apr 2013, 04:03 AM
#140
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

At the same time however, this new MP system, combined with the new 'passive-capturing' of sectors makes the game much more fluid - i.e, faster paced and closer in terms of the point difference in the outcome.

It makes the game LESS fluid. Instead of giving effective players a quick win, it lets even bad players come back from behind and drag the game out because their MP income barely takes a hit from being cut off and in fact their MP income beats their opponent because they have less upkeep. The game doesn't flow: it just bumbles on for half an hour until the better player wins anyways but only after dealing with the multiple inevitable comebacks from the worse player. And when players are evenly matched it just evens out the highs and lows and makes big victories and defeats matter less because the other player can always come back. It's not faster paced, it's slower paced - you can't win quickly.


I think this is a good thing, perhaps it doesn't reward a well played early game as much as it should (perhaps the numbers could be tweaked as mentioned in other posts) but it also means the outcome of the game isn't decided in the early phases and makes the winning player work hard for their victory. (which would in turn improve the quality of their play)

What it mostly does is give the losing player a lot of opportunities to get lucky by decrewing a tank or getting a nice off-map artillery hit. If you think CoH 1 didn't already have enough opportunities for amazing comebacks you must have played a different game than me. The only thing the new resource system does for CoH 2 is drag the game down and make comebacks more of an automatic thing for every game rather than an amazing feat for the players that can pull them off and come out on top. The heroic climbs out of the depths of a bad early game are much less heroic and the excitement in watching to see whether a player can recover is much less exciting. Of course they can recover. Their manpower income didn't even dip, and they put a fuel OP on the strat point right outside their base so they're not even too far behind in teching (because it's not like anyone is doing anything other than teching up with their fuel).

The spectacle of a close game is also enthralling for the stream audiences.
I remember (I believe it was the second TFN beta cast) the 2v2 between Ami on one side and some other randoms coming down to literally a single VP, the winning side having sat on that single VP while draining 60 or so points from the opposition..

Now that shit was a watch and a half.

This happened in CoH too though, and it was much more exciting because both players had to work at it, instead of CoH 2 where even if you suck you can still force your opponent to slog through another few sets of your units and force your opponent to take more time rebuilding their force after your assault because their MP income was low for a while because they had to pay upkeep as the price for keeping their units alive.


I agree that the UI is pretty shit, (it looks ornate and stupid and the resource layout is way too small) but the other gripes such as the lack of visibility of the units, during blizzards and combat I don't agree with. I never had a problem seeing who was shooting at who and I could always clearly differentiate the units from each other. Hell, I even remember the OP saying during one of his streams the conditions (lack of visibility etc..) of the Blizzard added an additional tactical layer to the game by making ninja caps easier for instance.

I'm glad you've got great eyes but poor old people like Inverse and me and tons of others have a lot of trouble seeing what's going on. I also watched a TFN cast recently and both casters misidentified the source of suppression in one of the fights. Is it because they're blind? No, it's because it's super hard in CoH 2 to see where a machinegun is firing (for example).


In closing I think especially with the gripes over the look of the game it's important for us all to remember that this is a different game to coh1 and that we shouldn't want to revert this game to be more like the former (what would be the point of a sequel then?)just because we dont like some things as they are atm. The new MP system has as well introduced a faster paced and closer style of play than coh1 which isn't bad (I think it's great ^^) so don't just piss all over it just yet
- give Relic some time to sort some of this shit out.

It's different, I definitely agree. Is it better? Well...
PAGES (19)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

772 users are online: 1 member and 771 guests
aerafield
1 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
20 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49667
Welcome our newest member, Chmura
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM