Login

russian armor

Rework OKW to be more "Authentic"

2 Jan 2015, 04:48 AM
#21
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Yeah Relic will never change anything they've already released, they'll do anything but that. They'd sooner can development of CoH before they alter a faction design.
2 Jan 2015, 06:09 AM
#24
avatar of BabaRoga

Posts: 829

Sometimes I wonder do people really think that German Army during WW2 produced different equipment for Eastern and Western front. Had different units and so on...

Not only were they same army but also huge number of Soldiers and equipment actually served on both Eastern and Western front.

OKW, OKH, army groups, sectors, divisions, etc.. are just command structures not different armies with different equipment and soldiers. (mostly)
2 Jan 2015, 06:29 AM
#25
avatar of MarcoRossolini

Posts: 1042

Sometimes I wonder do people really think that German Army during WW2 produced different equipment for Eastern and Western front. Had different units and so on...

Not only were they same army but also huge number of Soldiers and equipment actually served on both Eastern and Western front.

OKW, OKH, army groups, sectors, divisions, etc.. are just command structures not different armies with different equipment and soldiers. (mostly)


I see where you're coming from but I feel it's fair enough that OKW has different units because otherwise it wouldn't really be much different to Ostheer.

That said, I'd totally be up for factions with variations to each other, Say you have the Soviets, you might have a shock army with PPSh cons and non-doctrinal shocks and IS-2s. or a Guards Army with T-34-85s and guards non-doctrinal (but with doctrines adding other stuff in, maybe making cons doctrinal cannon fodder say)
2 Jan 2015, 06:49 AM
#26
avatar of BabaRoga

Posts: 829



I see where you're coming from but I feel it's fair enough that OKW has different units because otherwise it wouldn't really be much different to Ostheer.

That said, I'd totally be up for factions with variations to each other, Say you have the Soviets, you might have a shock army with PPSh cons and non-doctrinal shocks and IS-2s. or a Guards Army with T-34-85s and guards non-doctrinal (but with doctrines adding other stuff in, maybe making cons doctrinal cannon fodder say)


That was actually my point.

It's a video game and authenticity and realism are second to gameplay for obvious reason. Some of the units/equipment in COH/2 barely saw any action in WW2.
They deserve to be in the game little bit more than my Grandfathers and even my Honda Accord could satisfy some of the criteria as those units, but it's a game and you have to give some tolerance for variations from facts.

One can expect only so much loose realism in RTS war game...
2 Jan 2015, 09:26 AM
#27
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

Panzer IV ausf J&H and Hetzer should be the backbone of German force. Let em be non-doctrinal!
2 Jan 2015, 09:58 AM
#28
avatar of somenbjorn

Posts: 923

Sometimes I wonder do people really think that German Army during WW2 produced different equipment for Eastern and Western front. Had different units and so on...

Not only were they same army but also huge number of Soldiers and equipment actually served on both Eastern and Western front.

OKW, OKH, army groups, sectors, divisions, etc.. are just command structures not different armies with different equipment and soldiers. (mostly)


Correct, BUT, there was a big difference between the structure and makeup of different divisions and corps, and when you bring in the Kampfgruppe into it all you can make a great bunch of different factions.

Same goes for all major nations involved I guess.


Edit: We all seem to agree autheticity isn't in the game (I agree) and that this is not a problem (agree with that too, balance is more important). Will Quinn ever stop claiming that it is, or do I have to choke him first?
2 Jan 2015, 10:37 AM
#29
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Jan 2015, 09:26 AMUGBEAR
Panzer IV ausf J&H and Hetzer should be the backbone of German force. Let em be non-doctrinal!


Seconding this.
2 Jan 2015, 11:05 AM
#30
avatar of MarcoRossolini

Posts: 1042

Hetzer would be a good alternative to the StuG, but given it's functionally similar to the JP4, what's the point?
2 Jan 2015, 11:10 AM
#31
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470


Edit: We all seem to agree authenticity isn't in the game (I agree) and that this is not a problem (agree with that too, balance is more important). Will Quinn ever stop claiming that it is, or do I have to choke him first?


i find it makes me feel better to tell myself that this is not a WWII game; it's an RTS that happens to use the same unit appearances as WWII.
2 Jan 2015, 11:27 AM
#32
avatar of tiburon680

Posts: 130

Good Job man but I don't think that relic wanna do this xD

But the doctrinal KT is the best idea in the world :thumbsup:
2 Jan 2015, 11:31 AM
#33
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

Hetzer would be a good alternative to the StuG, but given it's functionally similar to the JP4, what's the point?


I'd rather see more often the legendary Hetzer then the JP4 though, probably next army expansion along with a proper designed soviet
2 Jan 2015, 11:32 AM
#34
avatar of MarcoRossolini

Posts: 1042

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Jan 2015, 11:31 AMUGBEAR


I'd rather see more often the legendary Hetzer then the JP4 though, probably next army expansion along with a proper designed soviet


Haha, like that'll ever happen. (The new Soviets I mean)
2 Jan 2015, 18:01 PM
#35
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

the lack of reading comprehension on the first page is alarming. People fail to grasp the theme even when explicitly said that the thread was less on balance and more on gameplay, feel, and authenticity. Still people fail to either understand, or have not read the post in its entirety. As soon as they see "Rework" and "OKW" together, they believe it is an attack on their precious faction.

These ideas will give a faction more diversity, more units to play with, and i suggested that the fuel penalty be removed,
2 Jan 2015, 18:09 PM
#36
avatar of DasDoomTurtle

Posts: 438

Hetzer would be a good alternative to the StuG, but given it's functionally similar to the JP4, what's the point?


Well in game maybe, but for authenticity you would need the StuG and JP4 becuase the Hetzer was not a common or heavily deployed tank on the Western Front. It was heavily deployed upon the Eastern Front where mobile AT was in higher demand. Hetzer would be cool but historically it would have no point as well as functionally for the StuG and JP4 already fill its roll(thought if we had a Hetzer it would have AI capabilities because it had a remotely operated MG lol).
2 Jan 2015, 18:32 PM
#37
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

the lack of reading comprehension on the first page is alarming. People fail to grasp the theme even when explicitly said that the thread was less on balance and more on gameplay, feel, and authenticity. Still people fail to either understand, or have not read the post in its entirety. As soon as they see "Rework" and "OKW" together, they believe it is an attack on their precious faction.

These ideas will give a faction more diversity, more units to play with, and i suggested that the fuel penalty be removed,

Du-ude. You are not doing your argument any favours. First off, balancing qualifiers ("OP")appear already in your initial argument. You propose introducing all sorts of essentially redundant vehicles, that while adding flavour, would basically amount to a rehash of OH T3 - vehicles, that in the current call-in meta would see zero use for the exact same reasons that OH T3 no longer has much of a role (superior Allied call-ins/Jacksons). How exactly could this proposed faction of you be made to work without a total rehash of the rest of the game?
Secondly, if authenticity is what you want, the fuel penalty is about the one thing that in a way corresponds to the realities of the ground. The German plan in the Bulge was absolutely contingent on capturing Allied fuel supplies, as the Germans simply possessed too little stocks and too little in the way of transport capacity of their own. That, among many other factors, was also why the Germans could not have possibly succeeded in reaching Antwerp. Anways, if authenticity was imperative, the Germans should have manpower/reinforcement constraints as well, but whatever.
2 Jan 2015, 18:37 PM
#38
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070


Du-ude. You are not doing your argument any favours. First off, balancing qualifiers ("OP")appear already in your initial argument. You propose introducing all sorts of essentially redundant vehicles, that while adding flavour, would basically amount to a rehash of OH T3 - vehicles, that in the current call-in meta would see zero use for the exact same reasons that OH T3 no longer has much of a role (superior Allied call-ins/Jacksons). How exactly could this proposed faction of you be made to work without a total rehash of the rest of the game?
Secondly, if authenticity is what you want, the fuel penalty is about the one thing that in a way corresponds to the realities of the ground. The German plan in the Bulge was absolutely contingent on capturing Allied fuel supplies, as the Germans simply possessed too little stocks and too little in the way of transport capacity of their own. That, among many other factors, was also why the Germans could not have possibly succeeded in reaching Antwerp. Anways, if authenticity was imperative, the Germans should have manpower/reinforcement constraints as well, but whatever.


i think having more of a mid-tier vehicle system for the entire game would be nice, not just OKW. I would love to see more fights between mediums and heavies rather than the influx of call-in tanks we see now. I realize the call-in system is still a problem and these tanks might be outclassed soon. It's a work in progress i'll admit and some of this is purely wishful thinking.

as for the fuel penalty, i feel it does match the situation well, but at the same tie, i'm not sure if it is "fun". Right now OKW can't build too many vehicles, and if you lose one, it will take a long time for the next. I want to be able to play with all the toys and not just one or two every game.
2 Jan 2015, 19:12 PM
#39
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

Well, I reckon that was a design feature: You have to make hard decisions when it comes to truck/vehicle choice with OKW. And yes unfortunately that leads to rather onedimensional, inf.-heavy play. Then again, if you want fluff (and dont care about your win ratio), you can play OH.
2 Jan 2015, 21:14 PM
#40
avatar of Lucas Troy

Posts: 508

Interesting ideas, Ninja. I gotta second what others have said though - if you're looking for more authentic, 1v1/2v2 is where it's at. The meta is way less heavy tank dominated than the larger modes and there's a lot more room for combined arms and lighter vehicles because everyone isn't teching up so insanely fast and there's not so much wanton firepower blasting anything that isn't a least a P4 to pieces.

The team aspect is my main interest in this game and I really wish Relic had emphasized 4v4 instead of the smaller modes, but the game really just isn't as optimized for that many players.
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

357 users are online: 357 guests
1 post in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49892
Welcome our newest member, privateelene
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM