2020 CoH 3 is becoming more real by every day

WW1 setting wouldn't really work for the franchise, look at the mod "The great war 1918" and see how it would fit coh. It's very stale or in other words, isn't competitive enough. The vietnam setting would work but, imo, it would be really hard to make factions dlc's (for the same reason it's hard to make an italian or japanese new faction for coh2, those countries had shit tanks and so on) and sega loves to milk as much money as possible so there will be tons of dlc's I bet. Not to speak that after dow3 relic will have to play it safe and thus most likely wont leave the ww2 setting.

In regards to brit factions I dont get why do brits have to have a direct correlation with stactic army/defences. I hope all armies will be able to make defensive play but without the "emplacement" kind of unit.

Operation Unthinkable (1945-1946):
- Main factions - USA / Britain against the USSR
- DLC faction - Wehrmacht remains and the Eastern Bloc. A lot of German equipment from both sides (the Eastern bloc was received from Germany/ captured/ gift of the USSR)

Caribbean crisis:
- Main factions - the USSR against the United States.
- DLC faction - China and the European Union (NATO)

These two themes have very few games

If you're going for just after WW2, may as well go with the Korean war.

You see, brits in coh1 were exactly the same as brits in coh2. And so are going to be brits in coh3. Even if some alien company buys relic.

you see brits were not as cancerous in vcoh as it is in coh2.
Definately not "exactly the same".

Did you even play vcoh ?

you see brits were not as cancerous in vcoh as it is in coh2.
Definately not "exactly the same".

Did you even play vcoh ?

Sure I did. But you took what I said too literally. It's not that the current brits is a copy paste of the old ones. Rather that their introduction had similar negative effect on the gameplay and that they are build around emplacements and cheese.

Also, what does playing vcoh have to do with brits? There is no brits in vcoh.

you see brits were not as cancerous in vcoh as it is in coh2.
Definately not "exactly the same".

Did you even play vcoh ?

VCoH didn't have brits lol

I personally think a situation around 1940/1941 would be cool. French and the Germans, Russians.

A simulated Russia VS USA. With China/British forces being DLC. Remember people we don't always have to go historic but we can go realistic.

Quality vs Quantity
Communism vs Democracy

That would be better than another ww2 RTS

Relic, if you're reading this I have one request for CoH3. Please do not do time slice balance (games that are balanced by giving one side or the other dominance in particular phases of the game.) Thats why 3s and 4s were miserable when 1s and 2s were happy and vice versa.

That's a big ask, I know. But if you must do time slice balance, please don't miss the forest for the trees. Take a look at your faction comparison post from August 17 of 2015. Specifically, the time comparison between the Ostheer and the Soviets/USF. You built a historical ww2 game in which, by your own lights, the German player was incentivized to stall for his superior lategame. That's aggressively backwards, and it really undermines all the care that went into making sure the other historical details were correct.

coh2 kind of gameplay is the way to go just with more options and flavor for factions.

coh3 with 1943 theme and launching with UK vs Germany with US and USSR expansions would be fun. customizable commanders would be fun. buildable air units would be fun, and being able to directly control certain units outside of competitive matches would draw people in. (make it its own gamemode.)

coh2 kind of gameplay is the way to go just with more options and flavor for factions.

coh3 with 1943 theme and launching with UK vs Germany with US and USSR expansions would be fun. customizable commanders would be fun. buildable air units would be fun, and being able to directly control certain units outside of competitive matches would draw people in. (make it its own gamemode.)

Sounds a lot like coh1 with all the game modes and direct control.

coh2 kind of gameplay is the way to go just with more options and flavor for factions.

coh3 with 1943 theme and launching with UK vs Germany with US and USSR expansions would be fun. customizable commanders would be fun. buildable air units would be fun, and being able to directly control certain units outside of competitive matches would draw people in. (make it its own gamemode.)

One part of coh2 they should scrap IMO is the stupid "allies better early game, axis better late game" because it messes up the balance across teamgames vs. 1v1 and makes some games very boring (i.e. Usf roflstomping in like 4 minutes in a 1v1 if done right or being totally lackluster in teamgames longer than 20 minutes)

Sounds a lot like coh1 with all the game modes and direct control.

The gameplay should still be similar to coh2 though. If factions are designed to be fun and flavorful (like USF for instance) coh2 gameplay reigns supreme over coh1 imo because the strategy is still there, just less with teching and resource control and more with upgrades, muni expenditure, and army comp.

Also by direct control I meant in 1st person with unit production/etc being handled via hot key.

Given that DoW3 probably didn't sell well due to many factors including changing too much to win over new audiences (and failing), plus CoD WW2 going back to its 'roots', I think Relic will go back to the Normandy or Western Front setting but with more polish and better graphics.

I really don't know where else they could go with CoH3 if they want to be safe. I keep hearing people scream "Africa" but I don't think people take into consideration about how the map design in a desert setting and people want their late war tech. I know the Tiger and Churchill arrived in Africa but I assume people want more than that. The pacific would be an incredible departure from the European setting. I mean I could see some cool mechanics but it would be quite risky. If you change the gameplay too much, fans will get angry. If you change too little then fans will say it's too similar despite the change of scenery.

I guess Italy? It would be pretty safe because you get most of the late war tech, it's a European setting, you can have four factions (US, Commonwealth, Wehrmacht, and Italian or another Totally-Not-SS-Waffen German faction), and Italy could look refreshing from the same old French country side or the hazy Russian plains. The only issue I see with the Italian front is that it's not iconic enough. Sure there's Husky, Anzio, Cassini, and probably a few others but other than that, especially in 44 onwards, it was largely overshadowed. So Relic will have to do something to make the Italian front look compelling in the trailers and gameplay. I guess trailers can focus on those iconic moments while taking artistic liberties and gameplay wise Relic can make the 44-45 campaign look more 'exciting' and high stakes than it historically may have been.

But yeah, safe options are Normandy again or Italy. Anything else would be too different from what people like about CoH.

An alternate history setting could be interesting. The question is what kind? People have mentioned Operation Unthinkable or a Wolfenstein esque setting. I personally would be okay with these or even a futuristic setting

If I was the Lead designer for the studio bringing the new occurence of Coh.

First, all the units, factions, mechanisms, maps are already there so the development for the game itself would cost a lot less money. In my opinion, there is no need to develop a new game mechanism, a good synthesis between Coh1 and Coh2 is to be done to keep all the good aspects and get ride of what didn't work or is not enjoyable to play with. A the end the major cost of Coh3 would come from the transition from the old engine to a new one.

So I would focus on developping what really matter today, in my opinion, the structure around hosting the game divided in three major areas.

First area:

A multiplayer competitive game struture centralized designed for hosting tournaments. I would provide the tools for players to build their own, local or worldwide, tournaments.
As a dev, I would rather focus on bringing the better balance possible between available factions to make those tournament viable. Having a special competitive design for each factions and commanders associated
The platform hosting those social events would be rentabilized by those activities. I would take my share on any tournament/social event hosted. It could be a % of money involved or a flat fee per game hosted... Players would directly pay their subscription to any social event on the platform itself in order to get in.
Of course the platform would have all the tools required to keep players in it and not going to YT or Twitch. meaning a replay center and a live game viewer area (with broadcasting delay) with all the casting tools needed. I would also think about sponsorship and advertizement to be included in a futur patch.

Second area.

A multiplayer competitive area centralized around a Lobby using an ElO system. Basically what we have now on Coh2.
This area would use the same competitive design for each factions and commanders.

Thrid area
Completelty dedicated to casual play. (different from being dedicated to casual players). Here we would find multiplayer and single player scenarios, multiplayer arranged team game and mods etc...
The good thing with scenarios is that you can redo/modify any armies structure according to the scenario in place, to bring new units or remove some, modifying balance around so everyone is happy. One scenario can be in the desert in 1940, another one following marketgarden, another one in Italy etc...

Financial aspect.

The game could be free or with a low entry price, around 20 euros including some early made goodies (skins, voice acting, wallpapers, dedicated UI and a first scenario).
-Participating to a tournament would cost some money (decided by the tournament director including Relic share)
-The lobby free, used as the main area, you can only play vs players using ELO.
-Solo/multiplayers scenario could come as DLC over time. A way to promote them is to associate exclusif goodies with each of them.
-Arranged teamgame free.
Skin/Voice acting/wallpaper/UI payable using the workshop as today with the devs supervising what to accept and what to refuse and Relic taking their share on what goes in.

Social aspect
Friend management panel
Statistic panel with a study of the player stats.
Statistic panel per faction (winrate/% of use etc...)
Replay center
live game center
etc...

coh2 kind of gameplay is the way to go just with more options and flavor for factions.

Unless I misunderstand you, more flavour and options means less balance. The more stuff akin to "Commanders" and Bullentins, the more likely it will be that some kind of unbalanced s*** will show up and ruin the game for months and seasons (call-in meta anyone).

You can include compstompers in your customerbase with competitive balance - you just can't include the competitive players with an unbalance but "fun", compstomper-oriented game.

One of the strengths of CoH is that it makes sense to an audience and is enjoyable to watch - but that customer-base won't be there if the game isn't competitive and decently balanced.

Rather, let the options (which could be called meta-game choices) come from different teching options such as veterancy, supply yeard upgrades and riflemen upgrades as in vCoH. Inverse was a great proponent of this, IIRC.

I feel people underestimate the competitive scene. It isn't just the top-20 players, it encompasses the numbers-strong audience as well. I'm not just floored by the micro-tactics, I'm also floored by the macro-strategy. The better the balance, the more dedicated the players, resulting in better casters and bigger audiences. E-sports are only growing in numbers, might as well try to tap into it with such a crowdpleasing game

If I was the Lead designer for the studio bringing the new occurence of Coh.

First, all the units, factions, mechanisms, maps are already there so the development for the game itself would cost a lot less money. In my opinion, there is no need to develop a new game mechanism, a good synthesis between Coh1 and Coh2 is to be done to keep all the good aspects and get ride of what didn't work or is not enjoyable to play with. A the end the major cost of Coh3 would come from the transition from the old engine to a new one.

So I would focus on developping what really matter today, in my opinion, the structure around hosting the game divided in three major areas.

First area:

A multiplayer competitive game struture centralized designed for hosting tournaments. I would provide the tools for players to build their own, local or worldwide, tournaments.
As a dev, I would rather focus on bringing the better balance possible between available factions to make those tournament viable. Having a special competitive design for each factions and commanders associated
The platform hosting those social events would be rentabilized by those activities. I would take my share on any tournament/social event hosted. It could be a % of money involved or a flat fee per game hosted... Players would directly pay their subscription to any social event on the platform itself in order to get in.
Of course the platform would have all the tools required to keep players in it and not going to YT or Twitch. meaning a replay center and a live game viewer area (with broadcasting delay) with all the casting tools needed. I would also think about sponsorship and advertizement to be included in a futur patch.

Second area.

A multiplayer competitive area centralized around a Lobby using an ElO system. Basically what we have now on Coh2.
This area would use the same competitive design for each factions and commanders.

Thrid area
Completelty dedicated to casual play. (different from being dedicated to casual players). Here we would find multiplayer and single player scenarios, multiplayer arranged team game and mods etc...
The good thing with scenarios is that you can redo/modify any armies structure according to the scenario in place, to bring new units or remove some, modifying balance around so everyone is happy. One scenario can be in the desert in 1940, another one following marketgarden, another one in Italy etc...

Financial aspect.

The game could be free or with a low entry price, around 20 euros including some early made goodies (skins, voice acting, wallpapers, dedicated UI and a first scenario).
-Participating to a tournament would cost some money (decided by the tournament director including Relic share)
-The lobby free, used as the main area, you can only play vs players using ELO.
-Solo/multiplayers scenario could come as DLC over time. A way to promote them is to associate exclusif goodies with each of them.
-Arranged teamgame free.
Skin/Voice acting/wallpaper/UI payable using the workshop as today with the devs supervising what to accept and what to refuse and Relic taking their share on what goes in.

Social aspect
Friend management panel
Statistic panel with a study of the player stats.
Statistic panel per faction (winrate/% of use etc...)
Replay center
live game center
etc...

You're saying like developing a new engine from scratch is cheap, yeah more like doubling the development cost of a new game. Much better to just adopt well-functioning ones like Frostbite/Unreal and work from there.

EDIT: And please no more emplacements, just no more a la Mortar Pit or Bofors. I had enough of Sim City BS.

Just keep it in WW2 and add new units, new features, updated graphics, and more content.


It's really not that hard.


Oh yeah, and no more bugsplats.

Relic, if you're reading this I have one request for CoH3

no they're not.

Relic, if you're reading this I have one request for CoH3. Please do not do time slice balance (games that are balanced by giving one side or the other dominance in particular phases of the game.) Thats why 3s and 4s were miserable when 1s and 2s were happy and vice versa.

That's a big ask, I know. But if you must do time slice balance, please don't miss the forest for the trees. Take a look at your faction comparison post from August 17 of 2015. Specifically, the time comparison between the Ostheer and the Soviets/USF. You built a historical ww2 game in which, by your own lights, the German player was incentivized to stall for his superior lategame. That's aggressively backwards, and it really undermines all the care that went into making sure the other historical details were correct.

Assymetrical design by faction (example: this side gets moratar and no mg, that side gets mg but no mortar, etc.) - I think it is problematical and hard to balance, particularly between multiple factions.

Assymetrical balance over the timing - hella stupid design that BY DESIGN will not satisfy one faction.

I have written many times on this forum before, but a design like that is just horrible. If a faction is stronger in early game it will win more often and in minutes. This will also feel less satisfying than surviving early with other faction and then steam rolling the opponent after 20 minutes.

But it will also lead to cries for the nerf bat. So the early game of faction A gets nerfed. If Faction B late game doesn't also get nerfed faction B becomes OP. If it does.... well that just proves it should have been balanced over time in the first place!

Regarding factional differences.... stop making big differences for differences sake. Small differences will be apparent without it. you could even take the same mortars, same MGs, etc., put them in different tech buildings or different tech structures, and the factions will feel and play differently. There is TOO MUCH difference for difference's sake.