Login

russian armor

Three ways to improve CoH2 from the Open Beta build

11 Jun 2013, 21:16 PM
#1
avatar of Tommy

Posts: 742 | Subs: 2

3 key areas of improvement for CoH2

Can't be arsed to read the whole thing? Scroll to the bottom.

Well, CoH has 'gone gold' and for all intents and purposes the version that we're playing now is the one that will come out on release day. However, I know that there's a day0 patch in the works as well as plans for long term post-game support, and for this reason I've decided to make another 'bucket list' of primary areas of focus (all my opinion of course, but I know these concerns are shared by many others) from here on out. I'm not so egotistical that I think my last '4 ways to instantly improve CoH2' list sparked any kind of impetus for change, but hey, maybe this type of feedback is useful, and ultimately I'm hoping it stimulates discussion. It might come across like an awful lot of bitching, but at the end of the day I wouldn't spend time on this if I didn't care a great deal.

Relic are probably sick to death of hearing about comparisons with vCoH by now- but here's the deal. If you invite me out for a delicious steak, don't be offended by my bitching if you then tell me we're going to McDonalds the next day but it's going to cost the same- oh, and you need to pay for your own little salt sachets too, because fuck you.

Regardless, CoH2 still remains a distant second when compared to the original in terms of the amount of fun I'm having with it, and I think I can narrow that down to about three main areas. Some of you may not agree with me on these issues and that's fine, but here's my 2c.

1. UI

The UI has improved quite drastically from the alpha in terms of readability, but it is still far from user friendly. This boils down to a few things; firstly, the choice to display kill XP over the 'killer' rather than the 'death'. This is an utterly bizarre change that I never understood and was never explained. By placing the XP ticker over the destroyed enemy unit, it means that it is much clearer when units are being shot at, particularly from long range or from cloak (think snipers) and it means that when you kill something in the fog of war, you can get a much clearer picture of what it is you killed. Not only that, but the satisfaction of seeing all those green numbers in vCoH from a well placed artillery strike/grenade/whatever is totally unrivalled- in that department, CoH2 doesn't even compare.

The second major UI issue is the incessant flashing. The biggest culprit is when you get your first CP, and those horrendous yellow boxes flash up across the screen. They are ugly and distracting, and their purpose could be served just as effectively but far more intuitively with a simple glow. Other areas of the UI that seem to flash repeatedly for no reason at all include the retreat indicators over units in the top right hand corner. Having that flash serves, quite literally, no purpose. The stopwatch indicator for idle units is similarly redundant- if I'm a good player, then that squad is idle for a reason and I don't need to be told as much. If I'm a bad player, then I'm not noticing that squad is idle in the first place- and an annoying, pedantic little clock symbol (immediately conjures up images of my eight grade teachers tapping their watches as I walked in late to class) isn't going to change that!

There are two other pretty huge issues with the UI, namely the total waste of space that is the unit description box in the center and the horizontal resources (I don't mind their location quite so much as the fact that horizontal is just objectively harder to read than vertical), but unfortunately it seems that they are not areas that Relic appear willing to change.
The crux of the issue is that I feel genuinely patronized by the UI right now. Stop shoving bright lights and colours in my face Relic- I am perfectly able to see when I've gained my first CP or when my units are retreating or sitting in cover. This is not because I am some elitist 'pro', it is because I am human and I have eyes.

2. Cover and suppression

Cover right now isn't exactly worth much. I believe I read somewhere that a Relic design decision was to lessen the effects of cover because it was seen as too powerful in the original game.

GET THAT IDEA OUT OF THE ROOM AND KILL IT WITH FIRE

Cover was what made CoH so amazing to watch. The very best games of vCoH, the ones that made it into the Hall of Fame, were not there because they had great tank battles (although they may have done) or because there was so much artillery that it created lots of pretty craters everywhere- they are there because of the 'dance'. Those beautiful first 8, 9, 10 minutes of the game where neither side had any vehicles and it was all about unit positioning. If you had a rifle squad charging a volks in cover, those rifles were going to die. If there was a single piece of green cover between your rifle and the enemy volks, it was a tense sprint to the cover as whoever got their first would probably win. The Semois graveyard became a playground for riflemen to advance under cover without being suppressed, only for a bike to come along and nudge them out of cover ever so slightly, and just like that, the engagement is won. That kind of thing was genuinely fascinating to watch, and in a livecast or a tournament final....the tension in such situations was palpable.

But, I digress.

What I'm trying to say is, the 2 mechanics that drove an early game matchup between the US and Whermacht player were the importance of cover and suppression. By making cover nothing more than a sideshow, a minor factor in an otherwise already-decided engagement, CoH2 has immediately become less interesting to watch in the first few minutes, and I'd wager that if cover was made more significant, it would fix a slew of other problems in the game too; the fact that tanks come out so incredibly quick (more decisive infantry battles means more drain on manpower and faster games if one player is seriously outplayed), the fact that the early game right now is nothing more than a few minutes to pass the time until the first trolololwtfpwn vehicle pops out (because better cover means stronger infantry if well placed, so AT infantry are more useful) and so on.

Make cover more significant and these wonderful things will happen:

  • No more 30 minute games and literally having to create a fresco of my opponent's troops eyeballs on the ground to get a win when I 'won' by all conventional definitions within 5 minutes!
  • Interesting, lengthier early games where it's not a no-brainer to build a T34 at the 7 minute mark!
  • Maps that ebb and flow relative to the position of cover, rather than being blob vs blob and ability vs ability!

Also, easy fix: stop making buildings fortresses. Why can I have a conscript squad circle strafe an MG for literally minutes on end being fired at by nothing but the 2 support gunners and still lose? Building cover should be stronger against small arms than conventional cover, but right now it's ridiculous.

3. Commander abilities

Doctrines in vCoH were fantastic; they were all useful in their own individual situations, they were generally characterised by certain players who excelled in them (much as you have faction 'players' in SC, you had 'Terror' or 'Defensive' players renowed for utilizing the skills of a certain doctrine to their best effect- think Aimstrong or Magpies). What's more, they often complimented certain tier structures- for example, an Airborne player would have access to ATGs and so might not need a Motor Pool, so could create a good synergy with the Tank Depot. The doctrines had depth, character, and most of all there was rarely a single useless ability in any doctrine (I'm thinking vCoH here, not OF). Sure, there were certainly under-used abilities and maybe the odd dud, but they were few and far between, and balanced out by a slew of well thought out, interesting and varied abilities.

This so far has not been reflected in CoH2. We are now nearing release (and for all intents and purposes what were are now witnessing in the Open Beta is a 'soft release' in its own right) so I have no idea whether anything I say will be up for change in the future. However, I know that vCoH changed an awful lot in the first few years of development due to patches so maybe there's still hope.

CoH2 has become significantly more reliant on ability based combat (think Dota/Lol/HoN) rather than positioning and timings (a la CoH1). This may or may not rock your world, but it doesn't do it for me. Active abilities, by their very definition, are not going to affect a player's playstyle nearly as much as a passive ability, because active abilities require a) the munitions to use the ability and b) a very precise set of circumstances in which this ability is useful. Passive abilities however, can be useful virtually all the time, for the opposite reasons; they do not require an investment of resources, and therefore it does not matter whether the scenario is a perfect one in which to use the ability- it's already in use, and it's up to the player to make that scenario work to the best of his advantage.

Some classic passive abilities that had a DRASTIC impact on playstyles in vCoH despite giving very little statistical impact

  • Zeal (for each man lost from a squad, the squad gets stronger, therefore catering to an infantry based play)
  • Increased infantry/tank production and reinforcement (allows for more 'riflespam' tactics, best seen in players such as KoreanArmy)
  • Forward bunker reinforcement (Mags a cunt huehuehue)

Sure, there were some very active-ability orientated doctrines- Blitz and Airborne come to mind. But they were always seen as more two-dimensional for that exact reason. You wouldn't make many friends winning tournaments by abusing 4 CP Stuh's every game, but hell, it was a viable tactic. However it is these kinds of doctrines that CoH2's commanders reflect most accurately- I'll pick the Guards doctrine because I want Guards. I'll pick the Shock Troops commander because I want Shock Troops....and that's basically what my choice boils down to. It certainly doesn't influence what tiers I build and has very little impact on what units I build (besides maybe not getting a Panther if I have an Elephant on the way).

I'm sure nobody would complain if a few of the aformentioned vCoH passives were literally just transplanted into CoH2 doctrines, because that would be a hell of a leg up on what we have right now, but equally, new passives would be great too!

The crux of it is that while the current Commander system is perfectly functional, they do not have even close to the level of depth that the original vCoH docs had. This is partially to do with the 2-pronged system we've now lost (and isn't likely to be changed) but I would say that a big part of the reason is the lack of passives. I have no attachment to any commanders because they have such little influence on my play- the Ostheer doctrines are in fact so lifeless that many players I've watched on streams and in replays are simply content to let the CPs stack up to 7 or 8, then pick whatever commander has the biggest tank at the end of it, and that's a pretty poor state of affairs.

So, the promised tl;dr version.
  • Get rid of the glowing/flashing/seizure inducing UI effects. They serve no purpose.
  • Make cover important again, and lots of other nice things will follow afterwards. Positioning will become important again, the skill ceiling will be raised, games will become more interesting...etc.
  • Give the Commanders a bit of character. Being able to unlock an AT mine with my first CP doesn't get my pulse going, surprisingly! Give us interesting, varied abilities that reward good play and unit preservation. Let the abilities guide certain playstyles, and create a synergy with different tiers- if this happens now it will be so, so useful in the long run for the game.
  • One other minor point unrelated; give us fixed positions on maps. It's crucial for tournament play.

Oh yeah, and I'm not ignorant of other glaring issues, like the lack of a proper 1v1 Spring map, the lack of proper stats tracking, the lack of an observer mode and non-existent automatch ladders...but that's for another thread.
11 Jun 2013, 21:30 PM
#2
avatar of Symbiosis

Posts: 862

Signed! Especially the way cover is atm bothers me. Pls also post this at the community.companyofheroes site.
11 Jun 2013, 21:43 PM
#3
avatar of ThumbsUp

Posts: 182

While the game is not bad at the moment, these changes would improve pretty much everything positively IMO. Well thought out post.
11 Jun 2013, 21:45 PM
#4
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

Can anyone provide a numerical comparison of cover bonuses between the two games? It certainly feels less effectual (especially vs flamers, presumably there's no difference at all in flame damage vs various cover types).
11 Jun 2013, 22:03 PM
#5
avatar of ReichGeneral

Posts: 58

An excellent summary (?) there Tommy and well argued. I never thought much about the commander choices before, but you are right. In CoH the commander choice often shaped my strategy and focus, but now I just choose the one that has the biggest gun. I would be quite happy if Relic implemented the changes you mention.

I actually had a mind to set up my own three issues for fixing, (so please pardon the add on) :)
I downloaded the open beta (first time playing coh2) and within the end of the first game had noticed several issues.

1. Flashing UI commanders, The UI seems to be less flashy than it used to be, but it is still a problem.

2. Lack of tracers, It really annoying that I can see a vehicle/unit be hit, but not see what is doing the hitting. The units blend in well better with the background, making this even more of a must.

3. The manpower upkeep system, GAH!!! This is outright infuriating and completely pointless. It's like they realised the game build was skewed towards fast matches, so threw these penalties in to lengthen the match time.

11 Jun 2013, 22:07 PM
#6
avatar of scarenow

Posts: 79

Tommy strikes again, and I have to agree with you. I miss those longer early game infantary engagements, hunting for better cover etc.

I think there is still room for improvement. Last pop cap change made game a lot funier to me. And I saw that guards lost buttoning ability. Maybe Relic will listen to us.
11 Jun 2013, 22:13 PM
#7
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182

Well, said! I agree with pretty much everything.
11 Jun 2013, 22:17 PM
#8
avatar of Tommy

Posts: 742 | Subs: 2

stuff


I actually covered that in my last 'bucket list' :P
http://www.coh2.org/topic/2781/4-things-that-would-make-coh2-instantly-better

To some extent some of those issues have been addressed, but not to the extent I would personally like. However I thought I'd tread some new territory with this thread.

Also, posted to CoH.com: http://community.companyofheroes.com/forums/company-of-heroes-2-discussion/topics/Three-ways-to-improve-CoH2-from-the-Open-Beta-build?page=1#post-232301
11 Jun 2013, 22:19 PM
#9
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182

I'd love for a future expansion to add global upgrades, but that's just wishful thinking.
11 Jun 2013, 22:25 PM
#10
avatar of ReichGeneral

Posts: 58

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jun 2013, 22:17 PMTommy


Some more stuff


Fair point I was beaten, there have been some improvements, not enough though as you say. I'm glad you are articulate enough to set out these well reasoned arguements. I just wish Relic would acknowledge that many people are in one accord about the features that require change and take action.
12 Jun 2013, 01:50 AM
#11
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

Agreed 100% with absolutely every word you wrote. It cannot be said better.
12 Jun 2013, 02:13 AM
#12
avatar of WarMonkey

Posts: 101

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jun 2013, 21:16 PMTommy

  • Increased infantry/tank production and reinforcement (allows for more 'riflespam' tactics, best seen in players such as KoreanArmy)


this one could be a bulletin. though i agree with cover and the other doctrine ideas.

to pick out another particular thing: i dont want vehicles pushing me out of cover. this shouldn't mean much since there's currently not any vehicles that want to get that close till later game when you have bigger problems.

i havent even noticed ANY of the hud issues you guys keep hating on, so i dont care. but if it is bothering ppl, you can turn off events, and xp tickers already, so they should make more of the "flashy" stuff able to be turned on or off as well
12 Jun 2013, 04:27 AM
#13
avatar of wehrman

Posts: 80

I have one basic problem, although what you mention is very important indeed.

I can't see my units. I'm old, like dirt. So maybe it's my eyes. My troops look like little ants. All the colors sort of blend except of course for the Vegas slot machine show of everything flashing and power up sounding.

I can barely tell infantry wise, a Russian unit from a German unit.

And as you mentioned, my other big problem is the rush to vehicles. They should have called it Company of Armor.

Lastly, what's with all the flamer units. Way overkill. Everything has flames.
12 Jun 2013, 04:49 AM
#14
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

Agree with everything Tommy, especially the topic of cover. It is nullifying the art of flanking with small arms fire units. In the current stages of the game, unless you have a munition ability/weapon your flanking unit will do essentially no damage. Flanking is not rewarded and this is purely due to the lack of cover benefits but also the high strength of building cover.

I still cry when I see someone move their flamer pioneer in no cover and from max range small arms fire range, continues to move up despite my 3 conscripts focus firing and it still manages to get off a 1-2 bursts of flames. In this situation I feel I shouldn't even have to move my conscripts back, focus fire should do the job instantly on this careless flamer pioneer push.
12 Jun 2013, 09:12 AM
#15
avatar of m00nch1ld
Donator 11

Posts: 641 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jun 2013, 21:16 PMTommy
Cover right now isn't exactly worth much. I believe I read somewhere that a Relic design decision was to lessen the effects of cover because it was seen as too powerful in the original game.

Seen by who? Relic noob players? Because i have never seen community complaining about cover being too powerful.

Buildings cover are ok as they are IMO. its more realistic. to get the unit out of it you need flamers, mortars, heavy vehicles...I like how we see mortars more often now.
But I agree on most of what you wrote.
12 Jun 2013, 09:36 AM
#16
avatar of Umbert

Posts: 119

+1

1. The UI is much better since alpha, less seizure flashy and we see that they still improve things (small things, bit things nonetheless).

2. Indeed. I share your love for the 'dance'. And I too noticed the flimsiness of cover in CoH2, especially that HMGs can pin units in heavy cover as if they were on open ground.

3. Also have to agree on this one. They could trash the faces of the commander that no one will ever recognize once there will be 20 of them and just replace them with the heavy tank or artillery piece they provide.
12 Jun 2013, 10:07 AM
#17
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1

agreed!
i remember my first game coh2, i had only 10 vps left and every 5 seconds or so i was told "you have 10 Vps left" and everything kept on flashing. it was SO annoying :)
12 Jun 2013, 10:25 AM
#18
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934


Seen by who? Relic noob players? Because i have never seen community complaining about cover being too powerful.

Buildings cover are ok as they are IMO. its more realistic. to get the unit out of it you need flamers, mortars, heavy vehicles...I like how we see mortars more often now.
But I agree on most of what you wrote.


Buildings are not balanced. It takes 2-3 grenades (60+ munition to clear out 1 building) and flamers can take 5-10 seconds of burning to remove a squad. This is excessively to much.

Mortars and vehicles do not do it right either. Your more likely to absolutely destroy the full health buildings before you kill the full health unit inside.
12 Jun 2013, 10:30 AM
#19
avatar of m00nch1ld
Donator 11

Posts: 641 | Subs: 1



Buildings are not balanced. It takes 2-3 grenades (60+ munition to clear out 1 building) and flamers can take 5-10 seconds of burning to remove a squad. This is excessively to much.

Mortars and vehicles do not do it right either. Your more likely to absolutely destroy the full health buildings before you kill the full health unit inside.


Yeah i must say i agree on that! ;)
12 Jun 2013, 10:31 AM
#20
avatar of Purlictor

Posts: 393

I think that Relic tried to balance out the lesser importance of cover by increasing infantry health and lowering rifle damage (not sure about the lower rifle damage, but I know for a fact that basic infantry has more health than in vCoH). The engie & rifle v. pio, volk & MG matchup was (almost) perfect, yet now it's just whoever gets the luckiest crits.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

965 users are online: 965 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM