VCOH Vs COH2 Meta

man is the coh2 meta boring...

Russians
Cons into atg into t34 and wait for is2 rinse and repeat
Maxims (accused of being a noob) into atg is t34 into is2 rinse and repeat

US
3 rifles, liet , shermans and Jackson use para's as needed rinse and repeat

OST
3 grens, hmg, pak, wait for tiger
4 grens pak wait for tiger

OKW
kubel, 3 volks,mg34, puma or aa,panther,kt
3 volks,2- 6 man rifles ( forgot name) puma, panther, kt

theirs COH2 2v2 game build order for every single game you play, and if not usually punished by the game

Now for the COH1 which I just played felt good again to be able to do anything I pleased

US
spam engi's into armor
spam rifles into armor
rifles into rangers into armor
rifles into para's into armor
rifles, light armor
support weapons

SNIPERS actually feels like a sniper should be
note how one faction already has more SUCCESSFUL build orders then the entire coh2 game...

all coh1 factions are like this so much more diversity

the fact that coh1 is leagues ahead is well known

some would argue that it took 8 or 9 years to get the vcoh factions to the way they are...


but i don't think coh2 is going to ever get the support it needs

relic seems to be in it for the DLC money, and nothing else

I feel that half of these are too much of the same thing with the only difference being one unit. Main difference was tech system which allowed upgrades to replace units for a lot of faction. Focus on tech or units, though Allies sort of have this as they have to unlock stuff.

for Ost I could easily say this
Grens --> PGs --> Tiger
or
Grens --> Half-Track --> Tiger.
or
Grens --> Pak --> Panzer IV
or
Ostruppen Spam --> T2


Also CoH 1 snipers were awful. There was no reason for cloaks in the open. Shoot, back-pedal with cloak and the sniper hunter were less to hunt and more to get LOS on them for another sniper. It's far worse than Soviet Sniper sprint. And the only thing really good about US WSC was the sniper. The other support weapon were so lack luster. (30cal may have had more damage, but Axis troops had higher HP values and could grenade it like grens rifle nade Maxims)

Sure there are problems with the meta such as call-ins, but only a few players are willing to experiment away from it and to try and make it work.

vcoh master race!

looks like you are most of all, a 2v2 player.

i dunno. i am having fun mixing cons with tier 1 or 2, or both, using terror tactics, ml20, partisans, etc etc.

mixing re with rifle, sure still kinda boring, mixing re/rifle with ass engi, lieu+/capt+/major, priest, ir pathfinder,

ost is less varied and more structured, which is the design, which i like in one of the factions, ostruppen is fun, camouflage is fun, combined armed front line centred around one halftrack, etc etc.

okw... well... okw be okw.

i might not win all the times when i pick partisans, but i firmly believe that options are out there.

The problem with CoH2 is the game only has units. Sure, there's a fuckload of units, but at the end of the day it's still just units, and there's always going to be an ideal unit for every role when you don't have something like upgrades there to add variety.

As long as the game lacks strategic options beyond just building units, it's going to have a stale metagame. Saying CoH1 had all this time to mature makes sense in theory, but when you actually look at the games it's obvious that the potential for CoH1 was there from day 1, whereas CoH2 has lacked that potential for its entire life so far. CoH1 had rifle upgrades and supply yard upgrades and global veterancy built right into the core game, and it just took a while for players to understand how to combine these complex elements together effectively. CoH2 has a ton of units, but it doesn't have the extra dimension that comes with giving players upgrades and different means of improving their forces beyond simply improving their numbers. The only real strategic choices you make in CoH2 are "Do I build unit A or unit B?", "Do I build a unit or build a tech building?", and "Do I build a weaker unit now or save up and build a stronger unit later?". The entire game is composed of strictly these three options; it's no wonder the metagame is stale.

CoH2 isn't really about strategy right now, it's about tactics and unit control. And at that it does a great job; it gives players a lot of ways to outplay their opponents with unit control, arguably moreso than CoH1 did. But adding more commanders with more units isn't going solve these metagame problems if the core design issues of the factions aren't addressed.

i am actually starting to see that. i hope there would be free expansions that add some more depth like you mention.

i can only dream.

CoH1 had faction design issues too. Brits anyone? Plus loads of other stuff.

But yeah, you had more strategic flexibility in CoH1.

vcoh was very well paced imo

besides brits

The problem with CoH2 is the game only has units. Sure, there's a fuckload of units, but at the end of the day it's still just units, and there's always going to be an ideal unit for every role when you don't have something like upgrades there to add variety.

As long as the game lacks strategic options beyond just building units, it's going to have a stale metagame. Saying CoH1 had all this time to mature makes sense in theory, but when you actually look at the games it's obvious that the potential for CoH1 was there from day 1, whereas CoH2 has lacked that potential for its entire life so far. CoH1 had rifle upgrades and supply yard upgrades and global veterancy built right into the core game, and it just took a while for players to understand how to combine these complex elements together effectively. CoH2 has a ton of units, but it doesn't have the extra dimension that comes with giving players upgrades and different means of improving their forces beyond simply improving their numbers. The only real strategic choices you make in CoH2 are "Do I build unit A or unit B?", "Do I build a unit or build a tech building?", and "Do I build a weaker unit now or save up and build a stronger unit later?". The entire game is composed of strictly these three options; it's no wonder the metagame is stale.

CoH2 isn't really about strategy right now, it's about tactics and unit control. And at that it does a great job; it gives players a lot of ways to outplay their opponents with unit control, arguably moreso than CoH1 did. But adding more commanders with more units isn't going solve these metagame problems if the core design issues of the factions aren't addressed.

Well put, I strongly agree

the fact that coh1 is leagues ahead is well known

some would argue that it took 8 or 9 years to get the vcoh factions to the way they are...


but i don't think coh2 is going to ever get the support it needs

relic seems to be in it for the DLC money, and nothing else

No. The vcoh factions were always the way they are. The current balance took 4-5 years.

CoH1 had faction design issues too. Brits anyone? Plus loads of other stuff.

But yeah, you had more strategic flexibility in CoH1.

CoH1s problem (OF) was introduced by some of the same people playing major roles in the development of CoH2, go figure.

Coh1 2on2 meta was absolutely horrible.

Wehr: Grenspam vs brits, sniper spam vs US
Brits: Artyparty campfest or stagspam
US: Sniper spam
PE: Was gay whatever they did

I did enjoy 1on1 more in coh1 than I do in 2

I watched plenty of vCoH 2.601 games a few months ago. I picked them from the most wubbed replays on GR and they included players like Razor, Seb, Freestyler, GosuStarcraft (aka HuK), Kot, Aimstrong etc. And to be fully honest the meta back then was just as bad as what we have in CoH2 atm if not worse. Almost every single game goes like this (maybe 9 out of 10):

-high skilled early game by both players with nice rifle flanking great mg play->highly entertaining and nice to watch and waaaay better than what we have atm
-ami goes infantry in every single game
-wehr goes either t1 t2 t3 or t1 t3 and ends up spamming pumas but even the very best players with top notch micro have awful vehicle control and suicide them like crazy against Rangers, Sticky Riflemen, M10s or AT guns.
-american build is heavily infantry based (eg Rifles+multiple Rangers+Supply Yard Upgrades+Inf Upgrades+Howitzer)
-players stick to their build no matter what happens->howitzer gets destroyed after one barrage by firestorm ? Build another one ! First Puma dies after one minute ? (this happens in a surprisingly large percentage of the games) Build another one !
-some units are built in most games but barely have an influence (Nebelwerfer get like 3-4 kills per game on average, other than that all they do is denying ground and forcing american at guns who seem to miss pumas 90 % of the time to move)

Lol COH 1 meta was just as shitty and stale as coh 2 meta was.

COH 1 had an incredibly shitty metagame through out most if its lifetime.

Infact IMO coh 2 is better in this atspect.


coh 1 meta is still pretty boring. Go play coh 1 again and you will see what im talking about.

...
theirs COH2 2v2 game build order for every single game you play, and if not usually punished by the game

Hmmm...

RU:
1-Con spam
---3/5
---With/out molo/At nades
-----T2 units/shocks
2-Clowncar 1/2/CptMolo
---With sniper mix
-----T2/T3/T4
3-Sniper openings
...
4-Maxims
...

Guard/Shocks in the mix. T70/T34 as rush techs, ending with IS2, ISU152 or T3485s. On certain maps and match ups KV1 + B4.
On specific maps and spawnpoints FHQ.

USF:
1-3/4Rifles (Elite)
2-2RE + 2Rifles (when going Airborne)

A)-Nades/Ambulance/Bars
B)-LT> M20/AAHT
C)-Cpt (vs Mech)

Sherman, Scotts or Jacksons, depending on the occasion. Mix either Infantry/Airborne or if feeling like something different any of the other 4 doctrines.

OH
1-Mix up of grens, Mg, mortar.
2-Osstruppen
3-1Assgren

A-Add PG/HT

Paks into the mix. PIVs (with edge and no allied tech PV) into or just stall Tiger doctrine (5), Elephant or CAS.

OKW
I guess after i wrote RU i got pretty lazy.
I'm just gonna say: what about this units you don't mention.
Obers-P2-Stuka-Pak43
Not gonna say you want them all the time but they might be more effective or your only option on certain scenarios: JLI-Falls-JPIV

That awesome coh1 meta, ultra brit blob, BAR blob, zeal empowered PE blob and zombie vet2 grenblob struggling against each other in the artillery rain.

Such fun.

vcoh master race

That awesome coh1 meta, ultra brit blob, BAR blob, zeal empowered PE blob and zombie vet2 grenblob struggling against each other in the artillery rain.

Such fun.

I think you forgot about the legendary snipers.

That awesome coh1 meta, ultra brit blob, BAR blob, zeal empowered PE blob and zombie vet2 grenblob struggling against each other in the artillery rain.

Such fun.

Get out from the Scheldt before commenting COH1.

Lol COH 1 meta was just as shitty and stale as coh 2 meta was.

COH 1 had an incredibly shitty metagame through out most if its lifetime.

Infact IMO coh 2 is better in this atspect.


coh 1 meta is still pretty boring. Go play coh 1 again and you will see what im talking about.

lol, I just played another high level 1v1 Wehrmarct play yesterday morning, Volks, bike, Volks, MG, Sniper, MG, Pak38, HT, the back and forth action which is 10x more fun, fluid and exciting than Ostheer Gren Gren Gren MG HT Pak40 Stugie Tiger loop.

The problem with CoH2 is the game only has units. Sure, there's a fuckload of units, but at the end of the day it's still just units, and there's always going to be an ideal unit for every role when you don't have something like upgrades there to add variety.

As long as the game lacks strategic options beyond just building units, it's going to have a stale metagame. Saying CoH1 had all this time to mature makes sense in theory, but when you actually look at the games it's obvious that the potential for CoH1 was there from day 1, whereas CoH2 has lacked that potential for its entire life so far. CoH1 had rifle upgrades and supply yard upgrades and global veterancy built right into the core game, and it just took a while for players to understand how to combine these complex elements together effectively. CoH2 has a ton of units, but it doesn't have the extra dimension that comes with giving players upgrades and different means of improving their forces beyond simply improving their numbers. The only real strategic choices you make in CoH2 are "Do I build unit A or unit B?", "Do I build a unit or build a tech building?", and "Do I build a weaker unit now or save up and build a stronger unit later?". The entire game is composed of strictly these three options; it's no wonder the metagame is stale.

CoH2 isn't really about strategy right now, it's about tactics and unit control. And at that it does a great job; it gives players a lot of ways to outplay their opponents with unit control, arguably moreso than CoH1 did. But adding more commanders with more units isn't going solve these metagame problems if the core design issues of the factions aren't addressed.

You missed a few other strategic dimensions...

- Tech TREES: You had to make a choice. Going one direction meant not going or delaying the other.

- Timing: Games move and progress much faster in COH2 vs. the VP counter. The VP counter means semi-contested games will last 30-40 minutes but late game and heavy tanks can be reached by 12-15, so most of the game is played in "late game" heavy call-in mode.

- Popcap: I am not sure which is the superior system, but it but the vCoH system added another facet. One strategy to stifle Wehrmacht vet3 was to just not let them get as many units. If you held enough points then sure their vet3 tiger lasted forever, but even if they were building up a huge bank of manpower they can't use it if their pop cap limit is reached.