The new factions should be:

The Soviets dominated the Japanese in china so hard making a faction out of it would be like making a RTS out of the 2003 invasion of Iraq

this game is not historical reconstruction.
Theoretically, this game - strategy. That is, it requires to show their skills.

God .. I like talking to a wall.
Why if Japan - everyone thinks about the jungle and the island.
Soviet war with Japan in China, which means:
- Mountains and cold
- steppes
- Cities
- And of course the jungle and island
and a bunch of interesting places

Because: Thailand, Malaya, the Philippines, BURMA, are all more significant and talismanic campaigns within that theater of operations compared to what as far as I know are simple border incursions and a one month campaign in Mongolia.

this game is not historical reconstruction.
Theoretically, this game - strategy. That is, it requires to show their skills.

It sorta is. They start with a campaign/theater in mind to keep a thematic framework and work from there.

The soviet invasion of china lasted less than 11 days

The Soviets dominated the Japanese in china so hard making a faction out of it would be like making a RTS out of the 2003 invasion of Iraq

Soviet slaughtering Japanese in 1945 is like Soviet slaughtering German in Battle of Berlin, stop making stupid assumption.

The main opponent of the IJA in China is the elite Chinese companies, trained by Germans in decade, and 100% using German made weapons and equipment, before they got totally annihilated. Even the Japanese publicly protest this to Hitler, some germans still smuggling weapons and resources to China. Arguable China survived WWII because of Germans. Story was told that Chinese soldiers refuse to use Soviet lend lease field gun because those are too shitty comparing to the Germans.

The soviets literally dominated the Japanese in 45 so hard the manchurian campaign is widely cited as one of the major contributing factors to japan's surrender.

like you just need to google the stats to see how one sided it was.

The soviets literally dominated the Japanese in 45 so hard the manchurian campaign is widely cited as one of the major contributing factors to japan's surrender.

like you just need to google the stats to see how one sided it was.

Japanese surrendered because Yankee fleet is at her doorstep, the navy was annihilated and the whole island was bombed into ashes. Seriously they wouldn't give a shit unless the Soviet assaulted on Hokkaido. They lost four islands at the north of Hokkaido though.

And again, stop making stupid assumption because Axis manpower, supply and production in 1945 was done for.

Okay great you spent all your munitions on call ins, a IS2 is moving to your location to crush your 37mm AT guns under it's treads.

Oh and your strafe did nothing, because the Katyusha just moved, because it has wheels. And the mortars you tried to kill? They have legs.

Imagine the IL2 strafe ATTACKS(The ones that TRACK,IN OTHER WORDS MOVE ALL YOU WANT,youre still losing that kat) The Japanese could very well have a doctrine that has a recon run and a tracking strafe run and divebomb run,especially since the ostheer SORTA does with CAS

And since the soviets completely lack AA,especially in T4,Japanese planes could literally have a field day on your infantry and light vehicles unless you compensated for this,teched a different path and got an M5 Quad(Which could be buffed and given a powerful AA mode against fragile jap planes),which means no kat. Or you can wait for a Pintle mounted IS2 ISU MG,If you fancy getting raped by well trained,quick,and hell possibly well equipped and motivated japanese infantry including eLeet spawn from building bushido commandos while you stall for a call in

Which means you and your forced into t34s that are infact EXTREMELY vulnerable to my CAMO SUICIDE PUNJI STICK JAPANEESSSSEEEE SUICIDE SQUAD,unless you properly support and screen your tanks.(Tanks arent SHIT without amazing infantry support,see vietnam war with USA tanks,aircraft,and indirect fire vs a now you see me now you dont enemy.
You have to get down and dirty with an enemy like this. simple as that.

If were talking team games...then id imagine a 3 man sprinting inf squad that immobilizes tanks in conjunction with a Jp4+/Pak wall would stop any armor just thrown in. Heavy or not heavy. You're gonna need your infantry if you're fighting the japs and germans. they would be designed that you couldnt just roll them with tanks,or just roll them from your base with kats from safety,especially if I sneak a light tank around into your lines to kill a Kat. If they are designed at all.

Also,if we design a 2003 Iraq campaign,then give the Iraqis plenty infantry that can plant IEDs consisting of 105,152, and 203MM explosives that can take care of most american vehicles, RPGs in every squad,and plenty of AA options as well for USF air superiority.

Ill say it again...we can be imaginative and design a faction to scale with the others, and actually have an interesting,fun game, or we can just JAPANESE R SHIT NO BIG TONKS NO BIG ARTEEE ADD EQUALLY SHITTY ITALIANS AND ANOTHER GERMAN FACTION insteed!

i would add -2 new armies to this poll and pay 20EUR to remove WFA

edit: never mind

double post

I'd prefer Italy instead of Afrika Korps because if you must represent the armies that fought primarily in the mediterranean theater of war you can't chose between Germany and USA
For the allies you should represent the Commonwealth because they started that war from 1940 until 1945, of course in "commonwealth" i mean brits, aussies, canadians, indians and the other countries.
For the axis troops the only option is Italy, why the DAK? Of course that Rommel is german but he was not the leader of the axis troops in Africa but Mussolini, the Italian High Command in Rome and the Governor of Italian Libya.

PS: the vast majority of axis troops in Africa were the italians. And the italian have the weapons, vehicles, tanks, etc. to take part in CoH2, remember that i don't mean the italian army of 1940 but the italian army of 1943. (the same date for ostheer and soviets).

this is an arguement i've heard in reguard to italian (and french) soldiers. and it's a pretty good arguement

their tanks were crap, and there was never enough of them. but they were not bad soldiers.

their had outdated equipment, and there were shortages. but they were not bad soldiers.

their leadership was horrible, their officers were badly inexperienced. but they wern't bad soldiers

their training was horrible, and wasn't long enough. but they weren't bad soldiers

when they were supplied, when they were trained, and when they were fighting alongside german troops. the italians performed admirally

"Good soldiers, bad officers; however don't forget that without them we would not have any Civilization.", and about the Italian elite light infantry: "The German soldier has impressed the world, however the Italian Bersagliere soldier has impressed the German soldier."

A thing to remember when considering the viability of armies like the Italians is that we're not tied to restraints that the armies were in WWII; we can overcome a lot of the problems the Italians had when it comes to the war by ignoring the issues of logistical supply chains, unit availability and quantities of production.

For a multiplayer army, the Itallians can have cheap and ready light tanks and their heavier AT can come in the form of their pre-armistice tank destroyers. Much like the Americans, a good TD can easily compensate for the lack of a heavy tank. Their infantry can be 5/6 man rifle armed, they have MG's and weapon teams, yada yada.

They have the Cannone da 90/53. It's a damn good gun. They have submachine guns, rifles, carbines, and field guns. Yada yada.

It's perfectly possible to build an army around their equipment, theme it as best as you can to their historical structure (within reason for balance) and cost it appropriately for what you get.

An Axis fraction that doesn't automatically have better everything is a terrifying thought, I know, but the allies have been making do just fine for a long time now. You can do it, wehraboos.

We shouldn't skirt history to such a massive degree just to try to shoehorn in unviable factions. Want Japs? well then I want a MAUS or a T-28

We shouldn't skirt history to such a massive degree just to try to shoehorn in unviable factions. Want Japs? well then I want a MAUS or a T-28

The t-28 is a very real tank, it's just arse. The MAUS was a prototype that was never finished, ever.

We're not skirting history to make an Italian army. We're using gear they had, troops they had, and equipment they had.

We're just representing a very well supplied battle group. And those existed too. Be they a minority and poorly commanded or no, they existed.

New factions are inevitable as long as this game is supported and highly desired outside this forum, but don't expect anything til July. That's when they released the game and WFA so they seem to be on a yearly time schedule for the big releases.

They will keep bringing new armies to the game, CoH2 was the 5th most sold game of 2014. http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/03/steam-gauge-measuring-the-most-popular-steam-games-of-2014/2/ And if anything Afrika Korp elements should be integrated into an Italian army.

We shouldn't skirt history to such a massive degree just to try to shoehorn in unviable factions. Want Japs? well then I want a MAUS or a T-28

Excellent, give me a T-44, IS-3 and paratroopers

Definitely UK and Japan. I'd be so excited for Japan. I don't want to see another German faction, and I especially don't want to see an Italian faction. Bleh.

This.

Also I would like to see IS-3 to stand off against the King Tiger and maybe be a one-off, and a T-44 that can be like Panther and Tiger combined but better in every way... Except it would still get Secure Mode I guess.

Hahaha how about a faction called balance? The new faction will basically be 'The purge of more community money'