Fears for COH2 being too Tank focused

If we have MG 42 type suppression from a anti tank tank, it could break gameplay.

Do you not remember the free MG on Gwagons and how effective a couple of them together were at suppressing?

Who says anything about suppression at that level ? Mostly it's just damage and some. And the Geschutzwagen didn't have that good suppression. And quite frankly. Without it, the Geschutzwagen largely became irrelevant. I mean i've had opponents spam them. Never a huge problem. It's large, clumsy and poorly armoured. And now, pretty defenseless as well.

pretty sure it has same suppression as stug and a few stugs firing together suppress very quickly.

No-one ever complained about tank hull MG's not being effective enough.

Dont change what isnt broken especially when you are talking such a major gameplay.

Just pay kolaris some money Relic and we should be sweet

Dont change what isnt broken especially when you are talking such a major gameplay.

... that's an interesting idea for when you're trying to make a new game.

I have concerns tank skins won't be pretty enough but I have no evidence to suggest this but I am kinda worried.

Well that is where DLC might come in *shrug*

@Heathen: Well that is called Stagnation, IE, the Blizzard Approach. You never try anything new or improve. In which case. You're not really going to find being a Relic fan a fun bit. They always try something different. Why i like them Sure i don't always agree with every decision they make. And some things frustrate me.

But the fact that they don't just go "well that is perfect, let us never try to improve" is rather what makes them a game developer i like Otherwise we wouldn't have CoH in the first place.

Blizzard Approach = Stagnation? Well dude, all I can say is that you don't play SC2.

No. Why would i play a stagnating game ?

I'm not that worried. CoH tank/infantry balance was quite allright, some things were arcardy, but heck, I love the fact that heavy tanks were almost immune to most weaponry.

1. A hull mg should do some damage to infantry. It's an mg after all
2. Any tank gun should have some ooopmh when it comes to anti-infantry.
3. A tank should be somewhat lumbering. It cannot see that good and thus cannot react to quick changing battle field conditions that well

I think these points are more or less a given and I feel relic has them bolted down with their true light of sight approach and the reduction of hand held AT (Russians have molotows, though...).

Greets
Schepp himself
I think almost

Relic's approach is very clearly different from Blizzard, and I do think they deserve some credit for that. Every new generation of RTS games (so that excludes expansions and add-ons) has had some kind of big new feature. DoW 1 has the resource system forcing you to get out on the field, CoH has cover and an intricate morale system (suppression), DoW 2 the large role for the commanders (I think, haven't really played it) and I think the biggest thing that CoH 2 brings is the influence of weather.

Well DoW 2 brought in a few things, commanders certanly. A special resource for those abilities and some other bits.

COH2.. I wouldn't just say weather, it's the line of sight. The tank capture, the vaulting. And who knows what they are doing with the doctrines in CoH2. A lot of the things might seem small, but in the larger picture. They can actually change quite a few things.

Not saying i am disagreeing with you semint. Just felt i'd elaborate a bit

Are those things also conceptually new? I (personally) can't think of any RTS games that have weather as a "tangible" actor. Tank capturing and the line of sight have been in other games before, and don't feel as "new" to me.

Well context matters in that sense And true, they are not new as such. But they are new in CoH. and the overall game.

Weather certainly in that sense is newer.

Though how veterancy works could also be something new, ie it could apparently change how the infantry behaves.

I would love for them to include fire more, imagine, forests dynamically growing or dying based on weather.

I also wish they would include dead bodies and live tanks as cover.

Relic broken the game with OF, somewhat fixed it and then horrifically broke it with TOV.

The core parts such as MG's, Snipers, Base Building were broken by OF.

I'd like to see them refine the sniper mechanic so its not so much about luck. I'd also like them to fix some stupidly gimmicky stuff like m18 engaging cloak mode.

I would like to see WM, US, Russia, WM 2 factions having different but similar units and all balanced.

They should be aiming for US vs WM play with sensible improvements like vaulting, fire, weather, improved cover system, improved squad member behavior.

The biggest failure in my opinion is the Relic's inability to tap into the community for the game.

Running a business, I can imagine that each of the maps made for COH would have cost 20k plus each. It would be smarter of Relic to offer 50k in prize money to map developers and pay a single employee to tidy up.

I may get laughed at but imagine how much fun many would have if Relic made a system where people could submit maps for co-op holdout mode in TOV and anyone could easily jump in without having to download the maps.

Giving people the ability to control AI for those maps could be a real challenge for noobies to the most advanced.

I think the company that can get the community to make the maps for the actual game drastically reducing the cost of making maps would be primed for a much more cost efficient way of developing resources for the game.

Think about how much it costs to balance the game, throw 5k at Kolaris and some guys and I think you would find they would work 80 hours a week because they love it and do a 10 times better job at doing it.

Anyway, I'm just shit scared that Relic is going to fuck this franchise because going on history, OF was a shocker, they almost killed it with TOV so hopefully they can evaluate what the strengths of the game were and focus on them.

Running a business, I can imagine that each of the maps made for COH would have cost 20k plus each. It would be smarter of Relic to offer 50k in prize money to map developers and pay a single employee to tidy up.

A single employee for Quality Assurance?

They shouldn't make any maps and once the game comes out make people make there own

Kolaris balance crew could pretty much handle all of it. Imagine if they released the worldbuilder now and offered this money up so the maps could be ready for the launch of the game.

They would save a shitload of money and solve their biggest weakness, balancing.

Yes but you wouldn't be able to test your maps.

errr there are heaps of people in the beta who could test the maps before retail launch.

Jump back to quoted post24 Nov 2012, 22:23 PMRogers

Tanks at least from the alpha we played were more powerful but still soft-counterable by infantry and light vehicles if used properly. However you will not see blobs of infantry chasing off 3 tanks anymore.

why not?

Mainly because they will get ripped to pieces. Tanks destroy infantry. Not just with the main guns (which have considerably improved accuracy over CoH1 tanks), but the coaxial machine guns are also extremely deadly against infantry units. A couple of burps of the ol' MG-34 and two squad members would be no more. Wait another 15-30 seconds and the squad has disappeared.

During the alpha skirmish demo, if you wanted to take out a tank, it was a combined arms battle. You'd've better brought a tank of your own. If you didn't have one, you'd better hope the infantry squad(s) you had could dodge and move around quickly enough to keep sight-lines on the tank for your AT gun.

Tanks don't need to run away from "shreck blobs." Shrecks seemed to need to be fairly close to the tank to guarantee a hit, which would essentially guarantee a couple members of the squad biting dust (unless the tank was otherwise distracted). And by "fairly close" I'm talking 10-20 meters or so, well within sight and firing range of the tank. Schrecks are definitely more supplemental in CoH2, as opposed to an armor deterrent or a full-on anti-ever-armor brigade. They need support, cover, and if possible, the element of surprise.

AT guns are extremely effective because of their range and their ability to use the environment to their advantage, such as using a wall, building or tree(s) as a "blind-spot." However, they can't just end a tank on their own in a 1-on-1 match-up. Nothing will do that besides another tank. They are machines to be feared and revered. Expensive as hell, difficult to maneuver and vulnerable to a variety of combined counters.

Did you notice anything different about their line of sight btw ?

Different to what? CoH1 or other units in the game?

Relative to CoH1, every unit's sight-lines are different. It's no longer an all-encompassing radius, unhindered by the environment. Wind direction, snowfall, trees, walls, bushes, all of it would reduce the LoS for units.

Relative to other units, tanks had a fairly smaller radius* than infantry or lighter vehicles. Regardless, tanks are just as susceptible to ColdTech as any infantry unit. Driving into a snow bank blows as suddenly you lose speed and effectively become a sitting duck for an AT gun lying in wait, knowing you were going to try and flank and fail because you didn't realize the snow was there. You decide to press on because you don't meet any initial resistance, and you drive further into the snow bank hoping to catch your enemy unawares... too far. Halfway in, an AT gun opens up on your left-side armor, and before you can reverse the hell out of there, you're scrapped.

*I could be very, very wrong, but I thought I remembered someone from the Relic or THQ team saying that we could pop the commander out of the cupola and increase the sight-range of the tank at the risk of the commander's life. I never saw or tried this and therefore could be remembering something completely different. Can anyone confirm or negate this? I'm so unsure that I could've just dreamed it up in my sleep.

I think these points are more or less a given and I feel relic has them bolted down with their true light of sight approach and the reduction of hand held AT (Russians have molotows, though...)

Yes, tanks are very scary. I lost 3 squads of varying quality quite quickly to a Panzer IV as my T-70 and T-34/76 took their sweet, fuckin' time crossing the frozen fuckin' river.

The Russians do have the PTRS-41 (or PTRD-41, can't remember which one is in-game) anti-tank rifle as an infantry upgrade as well.