Relic wants your vote about blizzards

Realism doesn't equal fun.

I love blizzards It force us to get more micro with our units and give us some abilities for ambush or rapidly attack. It is also icon of coh2 so I voted for first option

Interesting mixed response. Not what I was expecting at all.

totally yes for blizzard, i'd like to beat zergs with Sturmtiger

Good commander adapts to conditions, doesn't ask for everything to be in a sunny meadow in May.

Sure you can hunker down in a blizzard, you can also use it as cover to attack - especially against people who only shelter.

I do like the ideas about it acting like WP, and nerfing deep snow affecting retreats.

And it is very weird that only one unit in one faction can buy immunity, having one unit in each faction have it, especially an underused or poorly scaling one would be interesting:

Soviets: conscripts (of course)

Usf: rear echelon (they got to pick from the cold weather gear rather than send it forward)

Ost: pios, grens or pgrens

I like the idea of blozzards, but I think they need to work differently mechanically.

One of the annoying parts of blizzards is the fact that infantry freeze to death. I think that the freezing should be replaced by a health loss Ala white phosphorus when the squad starts to "freeze."

Another annoying part of blizzards is their frequency. On the few maps where there are blizzards, there will be several times in the match where you know everything will freeze over. My suggestion would be to make blizzards be rarer and more interesting:

- 25% chance of a blizzard occurring in the game.

-The blizzard will only happen once in the match, and will happen at some point between 5m - 1hr10m

-The new blizzard will last 5+ minutes

This way, the blizzard has more of an interesting impact and will give players more time to take advantage of it. IE. flanking an enemy position.

With all these changes, I think blizzards could be interesting again. At least for me personally.

Honestly I would love to see a coh2 tourney that almost exclusively utilize maps with cold tech, but it's true that some of the older coh2 maps with deep snow has to be tone down a bit.

Good commander adapts to conditions, doesn't ask for everything to be in a sunny meadow in May.

Sure you can hunker down in a blizzard, you can also use it as cover to attack - especially against people who only shelter.

I do like the ideas about it acting like WP, and nerfing deep snow affecting retreats.

And it is very weird that only one unit in one faction can buy immunity, having one unit in each faction have it, especially an underused or poorly scaling one would be interesting:

Soviets: conscripts (of course)

Usf: rear echelon (they got to pick from the cold weather gear rather than send it forward)

Ost: pios, grens or pgrens

OKW cannot buy immunity anymore, that was removed long ago.

Maybe it (cold) could work like White Phosphorous? Take the health away from troops but doesn't kill the members.

Also vision block is cool, deep snow is a bit annoying, make squads move just a bit faster in that (but not the normal speed) ?

+1

Maybe it (cold) could work like White Phosphorous? Take the health away from troops but doesn't kill the members.

Also vision block is cool, deep snow is a bit annoying, make squads move just a bit faster in that (but not the normal speed) ?

Any damage received by the environment is bad design for a competitive game.

OKW cannot buy immunity anymore, that was removed long ago.

I'm quite sure it wasn't and shrecks still provide it.

I like blizzards. They are spooky.

I don't think blizzard provide much fun to the game, but what i hate most about the whole cold tech is first of all DEEP SNOW... this just limits micro and has never ever provided anything else than frustration and not fun. I also hate that your units can freeze to death while retreating to HQ. Why did Relic add deep snow around buildings on semois winter for example? Micro units in and out of buildings to dodge nades is a fundemental skill of coh but with deep snow around the building they just derp around and gets killed.

I'm quite sure it wasn't and shrecks still provide it.

It was in the private alpha, guess it never made it to live, shame.

Blizzards are manageable, why so much hate?

Deep snow however sucks.

Blizzards are manageable, why so much hate?

Deep snow however sucks.

Because they have no place in a competitive game? A player shouldn't have to manage an external force.

Christ, this is basic competitive design philosophy.

I think the blizzards were one of the best things that CoH2 brought in, and I'm deeply disappointed that they are not a part of the tournament scene.

People say that they slow down gameplay, but this is only really true for certain meanings of gameplay. Because what players should be doing is using the blizzard for one of two things: staging surprise assaults on the enemy, and reorganising their forces.

Blizzards don;t last very long, but it's enough time for players to take some stock of the situation, to let their manpower reserves to recover, to bring on units to fill a gap in their force composition. Both sides get to take a bit of a breather and prepare themselves to resume the battle. And yet in all of this lies the danger that while you are reorganising, your opponent is deviously pulling together an armoured column with motorised infantry to launch a surprise assault.

On top of this, of course blizards affect the utility of different commanders differently. Look at all the issues around CAS, and yet players could have actually what the Germans actually did in the Ardennes, and make a point of playing on maps with blizzards precisely to frustrate the power of CAS.

It is quite true to say that realism itself is not the goal; but blizzards offered an opportunity to make CoH2 something really different, to bring in an element that required deeper thinking.

I support blizzards wholeheartedly. There is not one part of them, or indeed ambient deep snow, with which I have any issues. Go blizzards!

Blizzards shouldn't damage troops but should always be on, on a couple maps.

Because they have no place in a competitive game? A player shouldn't have to manage an external force.

This force is same for everyone.

This force is same for everyone.

But it isn't?

What if negates your commander choice, what if your army if infantry based? What if you're OKW with cold winter clothing? What if you lost a squad to mortar because their health got drained as they weren't near a campfire?

A competitive game should be player vs player and nothing else.

I think the blizzards were one of the best things that CoH2 brought in, and I'm deeply disappointed that they are not a part of the tournament scene.

People say that they slow down gameplay, but this is only really true for certain meanings of gameplay. Because what players should be doing is using the blizzard for one of two things: staging surprise assaults on the enemy, and reorganising their forces.

Blizzards don;t last very long, but it's enough time for players to take some stock of the situation, to let their manpower reserves to recover, to bring on units to fill a gap in their force composition. Both sides get to take a bit of a breather and prepare themselves to resume the battle. And yet in all of this lies the danger that while you are reorganising, your opponent is deviously pulling together an armoured column with motorised infantry to launch a surprise assault.

On top of this, of course blizards affect the utility of different commanders differently. Look at all the issues around CAS, and yet players could have actually what the Germans actually did in the Ardennes, and make a point of playing on maps with blizzards precisely to frustrate the power of CAS.

It is quite true to say that realism itself is not the goal; but blizzards offered an opportunity to make CoH2 something really different, to bring in an element that required deeper thinking.

I support blizzards wholeheartedly. There is not one part of them, or indeed ambient deep snow, with which I have any issues. Go blizzards!

COH2 has plenty of other defining features without the need of this one.