Login

russian armor

I miss the old guard,: where are they??

PAGES (9)down
18 Apr 2015, 11:34 AM
#61
avatar of niksa

Posts: 64



no problem:
-new resource system allows more comebacks

-the lategame isnt just about snipers and arty anymore
and i actually find a lategame which is dominated by tanks and heavy tanks much more logical and enjoyable than a lategame which is dominated by snipers

-the commander system actually provides a rather good diversity of how a game envolves. AND I KNOW: PEOPLE WILL NOW REPLY: HEY EVERYONE TAKES THE ALL SAME COMMANDERS AGAIN AND AGAIN! yes its true some are better than others. however the rate at which someone uses a less taken commander is actually rather high. and the many different commanders provide plenty of tactical options for creative and fun gameplay

-stuff like crushing knights cross and grens with m10 was imo nothing more than lame and abusive. this happens at a much lower rate in coh2.

-90% of CoH1 2v2 games consisted of learning maps and build orders by heart:
wehr player 1: defensive, vetgrenspam, medbunker, Flak, t4+stuka
wehr player 2: Terror, 3 snipers, support vet, pumas und nebelwerfer spam
US player 1: 4 rifles BARS m10spam Calliope
US player 2: 2 mgs, 2 snipers, m8, at gun spam, 2 howitzers

You will state: Hey there were variations of thi and it wasnt always the same. well for me it it felt like it. and in the end of coh1's lifecycle, when everyone played like this, i was just sick of trying to countersnipe, dodging nebelwerfer barrages, encountering a wall of 5 rep/medic bunkers and so on. the lategame was literally hammering arty or being hammered and then creeping with snipers. and i just couldnt stand that anymore

- CoH2 has a great variety of possible counters: to anything:
vs tanks for example: Stugs, jagdpanzer4, paks, shreks, jagdtiger, mines, anti tanks strafe etc.
and all of this stuff is actually being built.

DOnnieChan I agree whit you in most of the things,but resource system from COh1 was better for me,for competitive games Coh1 was far better and more skill based then COh2
18 Apr 2015, 12:50 PM
#62
avatar of Purlictor

Posts: 393



no problem:
-new resource system allows more comebacks


Why is this a good thing? Just means the worse player gets an advantage for playing bad.



-the lategame isnt just about snipers and arty anymore
and i actually find a lategame which is dominated by tanks and heavy tanks much more logical and enjoyable than a lategame which is dominated by snipers



It's about spamming heavy tanks/call-ins and trying to wipe squads with RNG bullshit. Getting vet is meaningless in CoH2 when you get it so quickly from everything.



-the commander system actually provides a rather good diversity of how a game envolves. AND I KNOW: PEOPLE WILL NOW REPLY: HEY EVERYONE TAKES THE ALL SAME COMMANDERS AGAIN AND AGAIN! yes its true some are better than others. however the rate at which someone uses a less taken commander is actually rather high. and the many different commanders provide plenty of tactical options for creative and fun gameplay



Certainly true, the CoH2 commander system had some potential. If only Relic actually balanced them. Right now 75%+ of all commanders are useless and everyone goes the same docs in 1v1 anyway. Docs like guard motor are the best choice in pretty much every situation.


-stuff like crushing knights cross and grens with m10 was imo nothing more than lame and abusive. this happens at a much lower rate in coh2.



Because everything has AT. There is no more strategic depth to teching. You can't get outteched because AT guns are so easily available and every basic infantry unit has really good supporting AT. Besides, getting your infantry crushed can easily be avoided. They get crushed because you play bad, same in CoH2.



-90% of CoH1 2v2 games consisted of learning maps and build orders by heart:
wehr player 1: defensive, vetgrenspam, medbunker, Flak, t4+stuka
wehr player 2: Terror, 3 snipers, support vet, pumas und nebelwerfer spam
US player 1: 4 rifles BARS m10spam Calliope
US player 2: 2 mgs, 2 snipers, m8, at gun spam, 2 howitzers

You will state: Hey there were variations of thi and it wasnt always the same. well for me it it felt like it. and in the end of coh1's lifecycle, when everyone played like this, i was just sick of trying to countersnipe, dodging nebelwerfer barrages, encountering a wall of 5 rep/medic bunkers and so on. the lategame was literally hammering arty or being hammered and then creeping with snipers. and i just couldnt stand that anymore


CoH 2v2 meta was indeed boring, but same goes for most of the 2v2 matches in CoH2:

ostheer: spam grens + paks/mortar/HT -> call-in or close air.
OKW: spam volks -> elite inf and eventually KT
USF: spam rifles -> stuart or m20 -> spam jacksons + M4 + paras/1919rifles.
soviets: double sniper/T2 -> guards -> call-ins



- CoH2 has a great variety of possible counters: to anything:
vs tanks for example: Stugs, jagdpanzer4, paks, shreks, jagdtiger, mines, anti tanks strafe etc.
and all of this stuff is actually being built.


Same thing in CoH1: Stugs, panther/p4, paks, schrecks, kintiger, mines, goliath

CoH1 has a boring meta, especially in 2v2 (which elitemod certainly changed quite a bit), but is still by far the superior game. The level of competition of CoH2 is virtually non-existent but when my mate asks me to play, it's gonna by CoH2 every time because at least there's still players playing 2v2s there.
18 Apr 2015, 13:25 PM
#63
avatar of Fanatic
Patrion 14

Posts: 480 | Subs: 1

Purlictor +1


-stuff like crushing knights cross and grens with m10 was imo nothing more than lame and abusive. this happens at a much lower rate in coh2.

Because everything has AT. There is no more strategic depth to teching. You can't get outteched because AT guns are so easily available and every basic infantry unit has really good supporting AT. Besides, getting your infantry crushed can easily be avoided. They get crushed because you play bad, same in CoH2.



This plus there is another aspect. T34, and some other tanks, are capaple fo crushing stuff as well, even while they are not as mobile and faste as the M10 in CoH1 was.

There are two reason why this doesn´t happen way more often:
-teching < going for call ins
-some people prefer the IS2, and the Tank Hunter Commander after the patch, over Guard Motors



-90% of CoH1 2v2 games consisted of learning maps and build orders by heart:
wehr player 1: defensive, vetgrenspam, medbunker, Flak, t4+stuka
wehr player 2: Terror, 3 snipers, support vet, pumas und nebelwerfer spam
US player 1: 4 rifles BARS m10spam Calliope
US player 2: 2 mgs, 2 snipers, m8, at gun spam, 2 howitzers

You will state: Hey there were variations of thi and it wasnt always the same. well for me it it felt like it. and in the end of coh1's lifecycle, when everyone played like this, i was just sick of trying to countersnipe, dodging nebelwerfer barrages, encountering a wall of 5 rep/medic bunkers and so on. the lategame was literally hammering arty or being hammered and then creeping with snipers. and i just couldnt stand that anymore


CoH1´s meta became more static and less inovativ after more and more good players stop playing the game. There was no more new input.


- CoH2 has a great variety of possible counters: to anything:
vs tanks for example: Stugs, jagdpanzer4, paks, shreks, jagdtiger, mines, anti tanks strafe etc.
and all of this stuff is actually being built.


From my experience CoH2´s meta is way more boring the CoH1´s meta was. There are by far less valuable tactics and more useless units.
18 Apr 2015, 15:31 PM
#64
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 10:17 AMwuff


Even if Relic had made a COH1 HD remake instead of COH2 it wouldn't make any impact on the competitive scene at all vs the likes of dota2, cs:go etc

Relic just doesn't target that audience.

It wouldn't have made a difference relative to those titles, but the game still would've had a better competitive scene than CoH2 does now, because CoH1's design is more conducive to competitive play than CoH2's is. CoH2's competitive scene is nearly non-existent.
18 Apr 2015, 15:39 PM
#65
avatar of wuff

Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 15:31 PMInverse

It wouldn't have made a difference relative to those titles, but the game still would've had a better competitive scene than CoH2 does now, because CoH1's design is more conducive to competitive play than CoH2's is. CoH2's competitive scene is nearly non-existent.


It is certainly possible.



18 Apr 2015, 15:57 PM
#66
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 15:31 PMInverse

CoH2's competitive scene is nearly non-existent.


what makes you say that?
18 Apr 2015, 16:14 PM
#67
avatar of GiaA

Posts: 713 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 15:31 PMInverse

It wouldn't have made a difference relative to those titles, but the game still would've had a better competitive scene than CoH2 does now, because CoH1's design is more conducive to competitive play than CoH2's is. CoH2's competitive scene is nearly non-existent.


I do usually agree with your positions but this is a pretty arrogant statement tbh especially considering that you haven't played CoH2 in ages.
18 Apr 2015, 17:14 PM
#68
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

It's just my perspective based on community activity. Where are the tournaments? The hype? The analysis of top players? The excitement of experts posting replays? There hasn't been a new popular CoH2 replay on GR since November 2013, and games posted here rarely get more than 100 downloads unless they're highlighted. The only person who cares enough to run tournaments is Romeo. This site was created to be the hub of competitive CoH, yet prominent community members slander 1v1 and tournament players here and are applauded for it.

My opinion is just that, an opinion. But from my perspective, there just isn't the same level of excitement surrounding competitive play in CoH2 than there was in CoH1. I get the strong sense that very few people care.
18 Apr 2015, 18:49 PM
#69
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

You missed my point Donnie, I wanted u not to compare the games, but I wanted u to point out what makes COH2 a great game on it's own. But w/e

Damn Inverse you're hitting nails on their heads like a professional carpenter.

18 Apr 2015, 18:56 PM
#70
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4



Why is this a good thing? Just means the worse player gets an advantage for playing bad.



It's about spamming heavy tanks/call-ins and trying to wipe squads with RNG bullshit. Getting vet is meaningless in CoH2 when you get it so quickly from everything.



Certainly true, the CoH2 commander system had some potential. If only Relic actually balanced them. Right now 75%+ of all commanders are useless and everyone goes the same docs in 1v1 anyway. Docs like guard motor are the best choice in pretty much every situation.



Because everything has AT. There is no more strategic depth to teching. You can't get outteched because AT guns are so easily available and every basic infantry unit has really good supporting AT. Besides, getting your infantry crushed can easily be avoided. They get crushed because you play bad, same in CoH2.



CoH 2v2 meta was indeed boring, but same goes for most of the 2v2 matches in CoH2:

ostheer: spam grens + paks/mortar/HT -> call-in or close air.
OKW: spam volks -> elite inf and eventually KT
USF: spam rifles -> stuart or m20 -> spam jacksons + M4 + paras/1919rifles.
soviets: double sniper/T2 -> guards -> call-ins



Same thing in CoH1: Stugs, panther/p4, paks, schrecks, kintiger, mines, goliath

CoH1 has a boring meta, especially in 2v2 (which elitemod certainly changed quite a bit), but is still by far the superior game. The level of competition of CoH2 is virtually non-existent but when my mate asks me to play, it's gonna by CoH2 every time because at least there's still players playing 2v2s there.



Comebacks are still extremely difficult in CoH 2. Sure you are getting more manpower/minute but you have to push into squads that get to camp cover, you've almost surely bled more MP since you're losing, you don't have munitions for things like mines, off-maps, weapon upgrades, etc and you will be at a major fuel disadvantage. Come-backs are exciting to watch and keep people motivated to always try hard to win, even when they feel like they're in an unwinnable situation. Losing quickly because you can't even field an army is not fun for the players and it is not fun for spectators. The only way any game can be majorly competitive is if enough people like to spectate, because that is where the money lies.

Call-ins/heavies have definitely plagued the meta for a while, can't disagree with that, but hopefully Relic will address the issue in the future. We as the community have made our voices heard numerous times so the ball is in their court now. But to suggest that veterency is meaningless in CoH 2 is nothing short of completely ignorant. Vet is *extremely* important, and is probably the biggest deciding factor in games. I'm not sure I've ever seen a game where some one wins with a less vetted army...

It is hard sometimes to keep your squads alive but this patch is better than any other that I can remember in terms of squad wipes, thankfully this is something Relic can easily continue to improve upon. If you're playing for the "save me RNG gods" squad wipes, sure you might win every once in a while, but it is easy enough to out-play people that this isn't really the meta at all.

CoH 2 commander system is way better than vCoH's doctrines. Sov and Ost have numerous viable commanders, USF/OKW are more limited, but they also have way fewer. (Off the top of my head for Sov: Guard Motor, Shock Rifle, Soviet Shock Army, Guards ISU, Shocks ISU, Tank Hunter, M4 Shermans, Advanced Warfare... plus a few more I'm probably forgetting) the top two are probably Guard Motor/Shock Rifle but the other commanders definitely have their place, and are in some situations better than the two most used.

Rifles don't really have good supporting AT, you can easily get out teched - it happens all the time. That statement is just false =/

Your analysis of the current CoH 2 2v2 meta seems very wrong. Can't remember the last time I got a KT as OKW in a 2v2. Ost T3 is very viable, as are call-ins (of course). Soviet can do anything except T3 in my opinion - Shocks are Guards are both viable now.

As for the level of competition in COH 2, if it is as nonexistent as you claim why aren't you and your mate even top 25 of the 1v1 or 2v2 ladders? Well, maybe you are under a different name? But I don't think insulting the top CoH 2 players with a blanket statement like that is wise. There are a lot of extremely skilled CoH 2 players.
18 Apr 2015, 19:27 PM
#71
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

If the CoH2 competitive scene is nearly non-existent then what's the state of the CoH1 competitive scene?
18 Apr 2015, 19:57 PM
#72
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

If the CoH2 competitive scene is nearly non-existent then what's the state of the CoH1 competitive scene?


Damn IpKaiFung you're hitting nails on their heads like a professional carpenter.
18 Apr 2015, 20:11 PM
#73
avatar of Von Kluge
Patrion 14

Posts: 3548 | Subs: 2

Here we go again

18 Apr 2015, 20:27 PM
#74
18 Apr 2015, 21:31 PM
#75
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

The CoH1 competitive scene is nonexistant as well, for the reasons I mentioned in my first post. But for years before CoH2's release, CoH1's competitive scene was far and away more vibrant and interesting than CoH2's is right now.

The CoH1 portal on GR was the site's most popular, and 95% of the people who posted there were hardcore into the competitive scene. It also constantly had nearly 1000 people online at any given time, which is far more than this site ever has. People got hyped up about expert nominations and expert replays, people dissected the strategies of top players in portal posts, threads, and videos, when SNF wasn't running the next season was being planned. Viewer numbers for the first (only?) CoH2 season of SNF (season 5) were lower than those for the last CoH1 season. As of this post, there are 16,058 threads in the CoH1 strategy forums on GR, compared to 1,101 threads in the strategy forums here.

By every single possible metric I can think of, CoH1's community just cared more about the competitive aspects of play than CoH2's does. And when CoH2 came out? The CoH1 competitive scene died, for obvious reasons. Everyone tried CoH2, nobody like it, and they moved on instead of clinging to an old game with a fractured community and no chance of future support. But hell, even now the CoH1 replay section has more activity than the CoH2 replay section does, and comparable activity to the replay section here. The only thing the CoH2 competitive scene has going for it right now is the ESL tournament; aside from that, I can't think of a single thing that gives me hope in the game's competitive future.
18 Apr 2015, 21:41 PM
#76
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 17:14 PMInverse
This site was created to be the hub of competitive CoH, yet prominent community members slander 1v1 and tournament players here and are applauded for it.


You're welcome
18 Apr 2015, 21:50 PM
#77
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 21:31 PMInverse
The CoH1 competitive scene is nonexistant as well, for the reasons I mentioned in my first post. But for years before CoH2's release, CoH1's competitive scene was far and away more vibrant and interesting than CoH2's is right now.

The CoH1 portal on GR was the site's most popular, and 95% of the people who posted there were hardcore into the competitive scene. It also constantly had nearly 1000 people online at any given time, which is far more than this site ever has. People got hyped up about expert nominations and expert replays, people dissected the strategies of top players in portal posts, threads, and videos, when SNF wasn't running the next season was being planned. Viewer numbers for the first (only?) CoH2 season of SNF (season 5) were lower than those for the last CoH1 season. As of this post, there are 16,058 threads in the CoH1 strategy forums on GR, compared to 1,101 threads in the strategy forums here.

By every single possible metric I can think of, CoH1's community just cared more about the competitive aspects of play than CoH2's does. And when CoH2 came out? The CoH1 competitive scene died, for obvious reasons. Everyone tried CoH2, nobody like it, and they moved on instead of clinging to an old game with a fractured community and no chance of future support. But hell, even now the CoH1 replay section has more activity than the CoH2 replay section does, and comparable activity to the replay section here. The only thing the CoH2 competitive scene has going for it right now is the ESL tournament; aside from that, I can't think of a single thing that gives me hope in the game's competitive future.



i think it's because coh 1 had a significantly bigger playerbase? Now, i do not know how coh 1 competitive scene was 2 years after it's release, where coh 2 is now.


Also, coh 2 might have less strategic debates, but i definately think it has alot more balance debates :snfPeter:
18 Apr 2015, 21:57 PM
#78
avatar of Inverse
Coder Red Badge

Posts: 1679 | Subs: 5

Comparing CoH1 2 years in to CoH2 2 years in doesn't make sense because CoH1 wasn't a sequel. Having an active, involved competitive community and then losing that community in your sequel is a major failing for any company, and it should be considered as such. If CoH2 were as good as or better than CoH1 from a competitive perspective, then the competitive community would have only grown. But the competitive community shrunk. I think that tells you something.

As for raw player numbers, the two are comparable. I'd say CoH2's player numbers right now are right around what CoH1's player numbers were before CoH2 came out, if not higher.
18 Apr 2015, 21:59 PM
#79
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 21:57 PMInverse
Comparing CoH1 2 years in to CoH2 2 years in doesn't make sense because CoH1 wasn't a sequel. Having an active, involved competitive community and then losing that community in your sequel is a major failing for any company, and it should be considered as such. If CoH2 were as good as or better than CoH1 from a competitive perspective, then the competitive community would have only grown. But the competitive community shrunk. I think that tells you something.

As for raw player numbers, the two are comparable. I'd say CoH2's player numbers right now are right around what CoH1's player numbers were before CoH2 came out.



Hmm, i guess you are right.
18 Apr 2015, 22:02 PM
#80
avatar of NoLuckyStrike

Posts: 123



background music when u readin this thread
PAGES (9)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

844 users are online: 844 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49121
Welcome our newest member, Hanra274
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM