Does CoH1 have a future?

Please leave the thread until you have something constructive to say. In case you didn't notice there are those of us here that are trying to have a mature discussion. People like you are the reason coh1 won't have a future, if things don't change.

why i should leave the thread?
its a open question to relic and not noobs like u damned

u know nothing about coh1 and when u know something u played in low level class coh1
when anyone has to leave the thread then u are it

u are strategist from coh2 wohooo

make blob bigger then the blob from ur oppoenent and A move him to the win.

i read here so many bullshit from some idiots they wrote so much bullhit abput coh1
And yes the future is coh2 and anyway coh1 suxs

angelfrost did the question to relic in old times noun gaves answer to this questions
and now when i read the hole posts i have never seen so much bullshit here

all crying about purchase vet from wehr in coh1
this is the first point where i see these guys know nothing about coh1
my volks has 10 kills sometimes more after 5-10 minutes
so when i would earn my vet for free... totally bullshit what i read in all last posts here


This thread makes me angry really angry when i read this hole bullshit here WE WANT ONLY A ANSWER FROM QUIN DUFFY or some people they can give an answer
RELIC destroyed coh1 with the steam version and why?? relic knowed that coh2 suxs complete and they wanted that all people from coh1 skipped to coh2.
what happened??? 15k people left coh2 a few played 1 or 2 years longer coh1 but slowly its boring to play coh1


SO NOW STOP POSTING HERE BULLSHIT ABOUT STRATS AND WHICH GAME IS BETTER ANGELFROST AND THE OTHER PEOPLE WANT ONLY AN ANSWER FROM RELIC NOT MORE


ciez 2,3 hours coh1??? i think u have nothing more to say here in this section please go to the coh2 section and be a cool guy there MVGame

+1 another solid post from a vcoh fan. Thank you for your valuable addition and expert insight into the topic at hand.

@generalch I know exactly what inverse is talking about, I just disagree with his assessment that coh2 lacks strategic depth. It doesn't. There are plenty of viable strategies in coh2 and plenty of important timings to know/hit.

But you're right. That's off topic. I still fail to see why coh1 and coh2 can't exist in harmony. Why won't the vcoh fans stop derailing threads on this site to crap on coh2? Just play whichever game you prefer and support the community of the other. Coh2 is the objectively more competitive game but coh1 could still have a bright future if people would stop QQing and trashing the coh2 community and do positive stuff for their game. It just boggles my mind why a handful of people seemingly enjoy sitting of the forums and actively whining about a game they don't even play.

im not a vcoh fan i hate u only for ur none quality post

"ignore inverse" i think he is one of the high quality player here in this thread

History time.

I don't think anyone wanted both games to coexist in the first place. It wasn't advisable because the COH community was already small enough, and somewhat dying already due to mostly everything that Relic did since OF, except maybe patch 2.3xx and 2.6xx. OF brought a lot of tech improvements but the armies were a disaster until 2.301. Then ToV was even worse, and we had an insane amount of time before the next patch (2.6x family especially 2.602) that was great but unfortunately came a bit too late. Worth mentioning the balance wasn't even that bad most of that time, it was just getting stale. Another issue was the hacking, it wasn't as bad as people made it out to be, but still too much for Relic to properly handle (75% of it because of old tech, that COH2 solved).

My hope back then would have been for COH to die really, and COH2 to replace it entirely. This would fix most of the issues, get all the old players in, and bring a ton of new players as well, on an improved game with hype and evolved tech to make more and better competitive events.

If this wasn't for that hope, this entire website wouldn't exist at all. It was fully build on that idea, it started with and for COH players only (COH2 didn't exist yet back then).


When COH players realized COH2 was entirely different, it was already too late, the mindset and hope was already there, and the rest was disappointment after disappointment since it didn't match half of our expectations and COH went through a lot of shit before landing on Steam (and even then).

I believe this is the origin of why COH players don't see COH2 as a good (or neutral) thing, or don't accept it just as a different game. COH2 is the game that could have fixed most COH issues and do a lot more, but it failed to replace it badly, and took all of Relic focus during all of those years, instead of improving what was/is the most competitive game of the two.

If we had known before hand, probably here would be a COH only website. Or a site for both. But we clearly pushed for COH2 only to rally the community instead of splitting it. This was probably the best idea if the game matched the expectations. But it was a pretty bad idea (for both communities) in the other case (which unfortunately happened).

Now we end up with no place to go for COH and an almost dead community but most importantly all the issues with the game are still remaining. The sad part is that they are mostly tech issues and balance issue, the core of the game being still vastly superior. Most of the tech issues are fixed in COH2, and others could be by just getting some care from the dev. But even if they did at this point, there's no hype around the game and the community is too dead/split to go anywhere. A community requires people, automatch requires people, successful events require competitors and (most importantly) viewers.

So now we have COH fanboys on a COH2 site that is otherwise very fine in itself. Most of them have left at this point, but some are still remaining. They came here in the first place because the site was build by them and for them. I explained why they don't like COH2. I'm not sure why they stayed here, probably each his own reasons, which I would be curious to hear.

My personal reason being obviously that the entire website was my original idea (more than 2 years before COH2 was released or even announced, it was truly my COH love that originally pushed anything), site which I imagined, designed, developed and maintained still to this day. Obviously I wasn't alone in that journey but this is a bit off topic, more info about that on the about page for those who haven't read it yet (while I'm at it we should definitely update Janne credits for major contributions there). I can probably make a whole topic of that (or any) kind of history if there's enough interest to motivate me.


tl;dr for me COH is dead and that was the goal ! except coh2 should have been replacing it correctly and that part failed. Maybe there's hope in few years for a COH:HD like AOE2:HD. All COH needs to be back to the best RTS on the market and in our heart is tech update, hype and support. Btw AOE2 HD has usually more players than COH2...

History time.

I don't think anyone wanted both games to coexist in the first place. It wasn't advisable because the COH community was already small enough, and somewhat dying already due to mostly everything that Relic did since OF, except maybe patch 2.3xx and 2.6xx. OF brought a lot of tech improvements but the armies were a disaster until 2.301. Then ToV was even worse, and we had an insane amount of time before the next patch (2.6x family especially 2.602) that was great but unfortunately came a bit too late. Worth mentioning the balance wasn't even that bad most of that time, it was just getting stale. Another issue was the hacking, it wasn't as bad as people made it out to be, but still too much for Relic to properly handle (75% of it because of old tech, that COH2 solved).

My hope back then would have been for COH to die really, and COH2 to replace it entirely. This would fix most of the issues, get all the old players in, and bring a ton of new players as well, on an improved game with hype and evolved tech to make more and better competitive events.

If this wasn't for that hope, this entire website wouldn't exist at all. It was fully build on that idea, it started with and for COH players only (COH2 didn't exist yet back then).


When COH players realized COH2 was entirely different, it was already too late, the mindset and hope was already there, and the rest was disappointment after disappointment since it didn't match half of our expectations and COH went through a lot of shit before landing on Steam (and even then).

I believe this is the origin of why COH players don't see COH2 as a good (or neutral) thing, or don't accept it just as a different game. COH2 is the game that could have fixed most COH issues and do a lot more, but it failed to replace it badly, and took all of Relic focus during all of those years, instead of improving what was/is the most competitive game of the two.

If we had known before hand, probably here would be a COH only website. Or a site for both. But we clearly pushed for COH2 only to rally the community instead of splitting it. This was probably the best idea if the game matched the expectations. But it was a pretty bad idea (for both communities) in the other case (which unfortunately happened).

Now we end up with no place to go for COH and an almost dead community but most importantly all the issues with the game are still remaining. The sad part is that they are mostly tech issues and balance issue, the core of the game being still vastly superior. Most of the tech issues are fixed in COH2, and others could be by just getting some care from the dev. But even if they did at this point, there's no hype around the game and the community is too dead/split to go anywhere. A community requires people, automatch requires people, successful events require competitors and (most importantly) viewers.

So now we have COH fanboys on a COH2 site that is otherwise very fine in itself. Most of them have left at this point, but some are still remaining. They came here in the first place because the site was build by them and for them. I explained why they don't like COH2. I'm not sure why they stayed here, probably each his own reasons, which I would be curious to hear.

My personal reason being obviously that the entire website was my original idea (more than 2 years before COH2 was released or even announced, it was truly my COH love that originally pushed anything), site which I imagined, designed, developed and maintained still to this day. Obviously I wasn't alone in that journey but this is a bit off topic, more info about that on the about page for those who haven't read it yet (while I'm at it we should definitely update Janne credits for major contributions there). I can probably make a whole topic of that (or any) kind of history if there's enough interest to motivate me.


tl;dr for me COH is dead and that was the goal ! except coh2 should have been replacing it correctly and that part failed. Maybe there's hope in few years for a COH:HD like AOE2:HD. All COH needs to be back to the best RTS on the market and in our heart is tech update, hype and support. Btw AOE2 HD has usually more players than COH2...

coh1 fanboys on a coh2 side??

so u want that we all go to gamereplays.org or u want that we make a side with the name coh.org?
we have a little own setion and i cant understand why coh2 only player write so much in the coh1 section we want only that we can stay alone on this small space that we have

coh1 is dead?yes excactly that happened what relic wanted
but the most player didnt switched to coh2

and dont forget without the coh1 player coh2 would never excist the most people buyed coh2 in presale we payed the full money for a game with the class from an early acces
and as thanks they destroyed a good working version from coh1 we have still no brit fixes and still no lobby level no fairplay forum or anticheat and many more

gg wp all specially relic

I think Relic will at least keep the CoH1 servers up and running, how the game evolves is up to the player base as I don't believe Relic will be doing much with the game in the near and not to distant future.

Basically you gotta do what the melee scene had to do.

I think Relic will at least keep the CoH1 servers up and running, how the game evolves is up to the player base as I don't believe Relic will be doing much with the game in the near and not to distant future.

Basically you gotta do what the melee scene had to do.

why relic cant say it?
cynthia told me 1 time that relic not allowed that she talk with us about coh1

I dunno. All I can say is you're gonna be waiting a long time before you hear from them.

so ppl wanted coh: the remastered vcoh. not coh2. shit even cod community splits even though they are same fuckin games.

anyway, great work on the site. i dont usually dont like forums becaues their designs are so clustered and bad. this site is clean, slick and i really like it.

a) We're going to continue to support CoH. We spent a considerable amount of money to move it to the Steamworks and Battle Servers and we wouldn't have done that if we were just going to close it. We continue to sell the game and we continue to support it.

Support won't be as frequent as a new game, but we're keeping it alive and viable as long as people keep playing.

We have no plans for an HD remake. Most of what you're asking for was done as part of the move to the new servers. We think the graphics are strong and while maybe we could improve them a little it would likely not please everyone. You may want to spend another $40 to buy a new version of CoH but most of the current players wouldn't.

THIS WROTE NOUN NEARLY 1 YEAR AGO and after he quittet no one any more wrote some from relic in the coh1 section! Why??

so ppl wanted coh: the remastered vcoh. not coh2.

Nobody wanted CoH2 to be a Eastern Front reskin of the same exact shit, they wanted a game that did everything CoH1 did right, improve on the stuff CoH1 did wrong, and introduce some new meaningful mechanics. True sight is ok, but otherwise game is not really an improvement and took at least one step backward for every step forward. The game is getting better, but still lacking in terms of macro level strategy compared to its predecessor.

Nobody wanted CoH2 to be a Eastern Front reskin of the same exact shit, they wanted a game that did everything CoH1 did right, improve on the stuff CoH1 did wrong, and introduce some new meaningful mechanics. True sight is ok, but otherwise game is not really an improvement and took at least one step backward for every step forward. The game is getting better, but still lacking in terms of macro level strategy compared to its predecessor.

Sooooooooo after two years of discussing coh1 vs coh2 haven't we yet come to the conclusion that both games are good for their own respective reasons. Players are going to like one game (or both) because everyone's taste in games differ?

Like... I don't see what's so complicated...

If you like coh1 - play coh1.
If you like coh2 - play coh2.

The site has plenty of space for both communities to coexist.

Sorry that coh2 didn't pan out like people wanted it to. I feel your pain. I really do. The same exact thing happened to me when SSBB was released. I wanted it to be a better SSBM, but in my opinion it wasn't. Does that mean it's an objectively bad game? Nope. I just didn't enjoy it as much as SSBM.

Is CoH 2 an objectively bad game? Nope. Is either game objectively superior? No. Obviously I prefer coh2 - for reasons previously stated. But I can still respect coh1 and why people like it. Why can't people play whichever game they like?

If anyone is waiting for coh2 to become vCoH 1.5, sorry to tell you, it isn't happening.

The vCoH community has more going for it and more support than plenty of other games that have etched out their own communities in the past. If vCoH is going to succeed it's going to take hard work and effort from the vCoH community. Not forum shitposting about how inferior of a game CoH 2 is.

@Nekron - You do realize I'm trying to help/inspire/do something positive/whatever for the vcoh community? I really don't understand why I'm being directly attacked by you and GeneralCH for saying both games are good and that both could/should be successful titles. My intentions here are noble. Maybe something is getting lost in translation since we don't speak each other's native languages but I really don't think all the hostility is warranted.

@Purlictor - Sure there's no one perfect build in SC2, but the tech timings get tied into a handful of optimal/viable builds. The vast majority of SC2 players - pros included don't come up with huge amounts of new/innovative builds constantly. The SC2 meta is pretty stale/slow to evolve - probably a big part of it is how bad HoTS has been overall. Slow boring game play etc.

My overall point being: Players don't sit there with X amount of resources and say "hm should I build 2 more Roaches or get my +1 attack upgrade." That choice has been made towards the beginning of the game when the player says "Hey on X map I want to do Y strategy which involves a +1/+1 timing attack at [insert game time here]. That's why I don't believe it to be as dramatic/awe inspiring choice as Inverse makes it out to be. I'd still be an advocate for/in favor of more global upgrades for CoH 2 but I still don't think vCoH fans would like CoH 2 just because of the addition of global upgrades.

Also, I'm not really sure you're right about AoE 2/SSBM only succeeding because of a lack of alternatives. Since AoE 2 has been around those players could have left for: SCBW, SC2, WC3, AoE3, AoE4, any of the countless C&C games, MOBAs, etc etc.

SSBM players could have left for... well any of the countless fighting games that have come out in the past decade. Street Fighters, Mortal Kombats, MvC, blah blah. Plenty of alternatives at hand.

Sooooooooo after two years of discussing coh1 vs coh2 haven't we yet come to the conclusion that both games are good for their own respective reasons. Players are going to like one game (or both) because everyone's taste in games differ?

We have, was just straightening up this nonsense that old school coh players wanted coh2 to be the exact same because most didn't. Some people really want a coh1 remastered thing but only because coh2 didn't live up to what they expected it to be.

Players don't sit there with X amount of resources and say "hm should I build 2 more Roaches or get my +1 attack upgrade."

Standard play is exactly this. It's all about figuring out, based on scouting, how greedy you can be. Standard macro play in Starcraft is full of these decisions. Not just with upgrades, with economy management, expansion management, tech management, etc; upgrade management is just one little aspect, but it's what I focus most on because it's the only thing that has a direct analog in CoH. It's what makes the strategic aspect of the game work.

CoH1 was full of these decisions as well. Do I get one more Gren or vet 2? How early can I get away with getting BARs or grenades? Can I invest in this supply yard upgrade right now or do I need a rifle upgrade or another unit more? If you're playing a game with proper strategic options, build orders can only get you so far if you're playing against good players. You have to be able to make these decisions constantly because they all affect the outcome of the game.

The closest thing CoH2 has to these decisions is deciding between a unit and a tech building or deciding between buying a cheaper unit now or waiting for a more expensive unit later. It's an order of magnitude less complex than CoH1, which itself is an order of magnitude less complex than Starcraft.

This has never been about which game is better, and it's never been about "saving" CoH1. It's been about taking the good parts of CoH1 and other games and incorporating them into CoH2, because there's no reason for it to not have core design elements that were in its predecessor for years. Proper strategic variety would make the game more challenging and ultimately more interesting, and there's absolutely no reason for it to not be in the game.

This has never been about which game is better, and it's never been about "saving" CoH1. It's been about taking the good parts of CoH1 and other games and incorporating them into CoH2, because there's no reason for it to not have core design elements that were in its predecessor for years. Proper strategic variety would make the game more challenging and ultimately more interesting, and there's absolutely no reason for it to not be in the game.

Isn't the title of this thread "Does CoH 1 have a future?"

Not "How can we make coh2 better by implementing elements from coh1"?

To me that implies "saving" CoH 1 much more than suggesting potential improvements to CoH 2.

As I've said before - I'm not necessarily against adding global upgrades to CoH 2. I also don't think CoH 2 needs more than a handful (if any at all) because the tactical aspects of CoH 2 are what separate it from other games. But that's just my opinion, and it's off topic anyways.

With respect to tactical decision making I believe that coh2 is a bit better than coh1, which is a big reason I prefer it.

Oh jeez. You clearly have zero understanding of what the word "tactical" means.

CoH 2 has: Linear commanders.
CoH 1 has: Two-pronged trees that require decision making which drastically alters the direction of the game.

CoH 2 has: Cheap upgrades that do not affect the overall game.
CoH 1 has: Upgrades that are expensive and therefore require excellent decision making and timing knowledge to use effectively (ex. grenades vs. early MGs, BARs maybe instead of M8 vs. early sniper depending on fuel and map control, veterancy upgrades, etc.). On top of that, the companies/doctrines are much more complex and there is a great interplay between these two features.

CoH 2 has: Units, and that's about it. Units that just have no depth to them.
CoH 1 has: Units that have an incredible depth and synergy between each other, as well as layers of depth according to what companies/doctrines are picked by either player and what upgrades are chosen. This is what made CoH 1 incredibly tactical. CoH 2 will never be able to compare.

There is a lot more to say about why CoH 2 has features which are game-breakingly bad, and you are in denial. Unfortunately, I don't think you are proving anything to anyone, except the fact that you are fanboy that clearly never played CoH 1 to any real extent. As for me, I moved on to SC 2 and DotA 2. CoH 2 is utter shit, and it's not worth talking about until Relic fixes this mistake of a game and starts to completely change it with patches that will bring it closer to the tactical magnificence that was CoH 1.

I'm not sure why they stayed here, probably each his own reasons, which I would be curious to hear.

Mainly fan/viewer here.

Well, I said my piece on what I saw as Relic's community betrayal (IMHO they used the CoH1 community to hype CoH2 and let the lead user's authority rub off on CoH2 and then left'em to rot) - and then I went into lurking. No sense in ruining people's days.

I lurked for the very possibility we see now; that Relic improves the game from community feedback. Of course I realize that CoH2 will never be what CoH1 became, I think Inverse is spot on (but also that there is more to it than that). VonIvan and HelpingHans are no 12azor nor DrHorse.

But if I can't have my cocaine, I can at least have my methadone. Blob-counters and prolonged vehicle-play can go a long way, especially if the call-in dullness can be curbed. We'll see, at least it is enough for me to give it another go.

But if I can't have my cocaine, I can at least have my methadone.

Off topic but you dont give methadone to a cocaine addict.

i think there should be a thread about proposing global upgrades for coh2. This will make an already good game into a great one.

my suggestions.

global lmg upgrade for grens. 300mp 70 feul
global ppsh upgrade on cons . 250 mp 65 feul \
global bar upgrade for rifles 300mp 80 feul (2 bars per squad)
bazooka unlock 150mp 30feul
M10 with HVAP rounds (200mp 50 feul) (all m10s deploy with HVAP enabled gun (40muni to use))

global RAM upgrade. 500mp 150feul (allows all soviet medium tanks to RAM (does 480 damage))
global side skirts upgrade 350mp 100feul (p4 & panther tanks with sideskirts to improve armor).


you get the point.. making changes like these will force the player to make strategic choices of whether to get another unit or upgrade existing units to be better or even tech and get a higher tier unit.

This i think will make coh1 players happy with coh2 and make coh2 an even better game.

If i wanted to win in coh1, there were those Standard Strats everyone did (4 Rifles m8, T2 Def FTFL Spam vet2Gren Spam etc.)

CoH2 just gives me so much more Room for creative gameplay because of commanders and interesting Units.

Especially in 2v2 i've had so many epic and cool games which always had a good portion of strategy.


But anyway won't be too long till people post i am noob, have no idea of the game and never been top player etc... Well maybe but i made it to #13 PE. Thats mainly because of the sniper gameplay. Actually, the snipers completely killed this game for me, everytime they showed up. The AC could hardcounter snipers and kill the countersnipe shit gameplay.

I also beat Pepsi Trust because i knew his lamer strat. He basically stacked up as much Ammo as he could. He used absolutely nothing for his ammo till he had 1000ammo. then he picked Airborne RHS and spammed Recon Runs and Strafes (which couldnt only suppress but also kill). I hardcountered that by buying 2 Luftwaffe Wirbelwinds which shot down all of his airplanes. Was on Semois, best game ever.

Anyway in Coh2 i can do much more stuff like this. The game gives me much more tools to react on my opponent's plan. Isn't that Strategy too?

Oh jeez. You clearly have zero understanding of what the word "tactical" means.

CoH 2 has: Linear commanders.
CoH 1 has: Two-pronged trees that require decision making which drastically alters the direction of the game.

CoH 2 has: Cheap upgrades that do not affect the overall game.
CoH 1 has: Upgrades that are expensive and therefore require excellent decision making and timing knowledge to use effectively (ex. grenades vs. early MGs, BARs maybe instead of M8 vs. early sniper depending on fuel and map control, veterancy upgrades, etc.). On top of that, the companies/doctrines are much more complex and there is a great interplay between these two features.

CoH 2 has: Units, and that's about it. Units that just have no depth to them.
CoH 1 has: Units that have an incredible depth and synergy between each other, as well as layers of depth according to what companies/doctrines are picked by either player and what upgrades are chosen. This is what made CoH 1 incredibly tactical. CoH 2 will never be able to compare.

There is a lot more to say about why CoH 2 has features which are game-breakingly bad, and you are in denial. Unfortunately, I don't think you are proving anything to anyone, except the fact that you are fanboy that clearly never played CoH 1 to any real extent. As for me, I moved on to SC 2 and DotA 2. CoH 2 is utter shit, and it's not worth talking about until Relic fixes this mistake of a game and starts to completely change it with patches that will bring it closer to the tactical magnificence that was CoH 1.

Oh jeez. You clearly have no understanding of what the word "tactical" means.

Everything you've mentioned are strategic choices, not tactical decisions. We've already established that vcoh had a deeper level of strategic decison making.

Furthermore please tell me how me wanting both games to be successful, saying that both games are good and wishing the two communities could come together/work together so that we can both thrive makes me a fanboy? I've simply stated my personal opinions as to why I, again personally, prefer coh2. All the while I've been clear and transparent about these things being my opinion. If you're really going to get mad at me or call me a fanboy for having an opinion... I think this thread would be better off without you.

On the other hand you come in here spewing ignorant nonsense and then call coh2 shit without ever providing any reasons. If you think it's shit - great. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But then why come rage post here instead of doing something positive for the community? It amazes me that this is the sort of reaction im met with when I try to say that both games are good and it'd be cool if both could be simultaneously successful.