The game IS a click fest now

I'm not sure what happened, I was a pretty competitive 1v1 player until August when I took a month off.

After the patch to infantry combat, and the removal of the health bulletins, something has changed for me. I can't compete. At all. Maybe it was also that the game's meta was still evolving and therefore strategy was more important.

But now having dropped 200 places I've realized I can no longer compete. Not fast enough. The game has devolved into nothing but constant nade/dodge, and the faster clicker is going to win.

I did have the tactics and micro (my vehicle micro is plenty good, and I still manage to win some games with that) to beat some of the faster clickers before, but they're useless now as I'm taking too much manpower damage. Can't execute a strat if you can't beat off con or gren spam and avoid as many nades as he does.

So I'm done. No more 1v1 for me, might still play some 2v2s and up where the game is more about teamplay, strategy and army composition, but I give up on 1v1. I know I'm not fast enough, but I really don't like what the game has become. I actually really liked the slightly slower pace before the last batch of patches - it made executing really good flanks and strats more important than pure nade-dodging ability and building hopping.

Just had to get that off my chest. And no, I won't let the door hit me on the way out.

Which side you play mostly?

Kind of confused by this, Sluz - I don't at all understand how the patches would have an impact on what you're suggesting. Possibly the lots-of-scripts vs lots-of-grens into mutual tier 3 meta mean there are more grenading units early game but that's been the case ever since the MG change otherwise I can't see the health bulletins or infantry changes doing much to speed up the game.

And, for instance, Von Ivan, whose clicking isn't that fast, is still a top player.

Edit: dl'd a few replays of top players and run them through the analyser. It seems like their CPM is only a bit faster than mine in a typical game (in a few cases actually slower), but any of them would flatten me.

I actually understand and agree with your sentiment, OP. Molotovs and rifle grenades are (often) micro checks that out weigh the importance of positioning.

A Guard's nade can instantly wipe out 3 gren models. A single rifle nade can instantly wipe out 4 Guards in heavy cover.

I personally have very decent micro and I'm pretty good at dodging nades, but it's not a gameplay mechanic that I really enjoy.

I would argue that the overall playerbase has gotten better rather than game is broken. More and more players have realized where to place the nade to get max efficiency. More players have learned how to dodge nades (look at CoH1) still there are just a few players who actually place nades at the door instead of into the building. I know I get better (slowly but ok for my age I guess). So it would make sense if other players get better to. I think this game is still evolving. I do have to fight harder myself as well. But I think this is what it boils down to, players get better, and perhaps even more players that keep playing.

I am not a great player, but I'm paying more attention to where enemy units are clumped and not just aiming directly under the squad icon any more. Also, I'm getting better at predicting movement patterns This has increased my efficiency with 'nades.

But, more than that, I'm improving in other ways. I'm not just rushing vehicles into bad positions, I'm flanking more/better/getting better reads of situations going in. I'm learning the meta and what my opponent is likely to do on any given map (and at reacting to it). I'm spending resources more efficiently, and mining more consistently and in better locations.

Coming from SC2, my APM was already around 70-90 (not great for that game but it seems sufficient atm in COH2). But for me at least, I'm learning to play smarter and not harder, if you get my drift.

EDIT: lately, though, I've been focused less on grenades in the early game so I can hit t3/t4 faster (I play Soviet)

Agreed with OP. 2v2 can be enjoyable because of the teammate synergy aspect, but the doctrine design and linear teching has removed a ton of the actual strategy. Right now the toughest decisions you have to make are "T34 or T70" or "what DLC commander should I buy first" xD.

And, for instance, Von Ivan, whose clicking isn't that fast, is still a top player.

Edit: dl'd a few replays of top players and run them through the analyser. It seems like their CPM is only a bit faster than mine in a typical game (in a few cases actually slower), but any of them would flatten me.

Clicking speed isn't everything. Maybe he's just slightly better at multitasking. 40 apm divided pretty evenly between 5-6 different units is much more effective than 60 apm divided between 3-4 units. Also there is too much of a lack of competition and strategy right now to go branding people top players. CondemnationWings and DanielD/Twister are the only CoH2 players that are impressive right now tbh. Several of todays supposedly high level CoH2 players were at best above average CoH1 players even with much more time invested in the game.

I agree with the OP, but I think its a "COH2-thing" rather than i big change in the games gameplay. Infantrycombat often turns into units running arround throwing bottles at each others, making micro much more important, while overall tactics and positioning isnt as important anymore. I think this was better in vCOH but I guess the competitive segment might not agree with me?

Cheer up OP. At least we're not chasing multiple invisible snipers around the map while trying to fight a battle.

Right now coh2 is a team game.

I'm also fed up with 1vs1's and pretty much abandoning that aspect of the game. You can toss munitions left and right and left and right with really no thought whatsoever on what you're doing (I feel this is even possible playing as the germans). This is making positioning and flanking really pointless. Why take the green cover when you know you'll get 2 rifle nades thrown at you every time you try to close in? Why stall with a conscript in MG fire to flank when you know that it will probably get frontally naded with a long range deadly rifle nade and you could very well lose that squad easily?

Why put your grens behind some green cover where the approach is a negative cover road? The rifle damage is still so low that all their units can simply charge you, taking minimum damage and throw off molotovs? This game is the pits, and so far is catering to casual gameplay, which is why team games are becoming way more popular.

However, I just wanted to say all RTS are clickfests, it's just the genre. I mean higher level vcoh play didn't require super high APM but a good number of the top players had pretty solid micro.

I disagree with your analysis of the game, but if you don't want to play any more that's up to you. I won't try and stop you

A possible cause:

"Players seem to spend a lot more time on unit micro now because there is an overall lack of thinking involved" - Southers

Coh2 for me is lacking in Tech options on the battlefield. How do I mean? Well I feel like they have moved most of this into the lobby, so you pick commanders and bulletins etc, then you play the actual game with your mind set on a strat or general direction of gameflow.

I really miss global upgrades and trade offs, they need to implement more of these into the current game (instead of just adding a wider array of choice in the lobby -dlc comanders/ bulletins etc) - I don't know what exactly although from these coh1 examples it shouldn't be too hard to think some up (many have been mentioned).

So in Coh1 we had loads of options, not to mention the doctrine tree adding the whole which way shall i go aspect....

Americans - Bars/Nades/Stickies? Supply Yard upgrades? WSC? MP? Tank factory? smokes/upgun... lots of global upgrades to consider!
Germans - Which VET upgrades do I purchase? people forget this as part of tech!

SOooo, do you people see why in my opinion coh2 lacks something? CHOICE! and I believe that this could be what leads you to deducing the game as a click fest!

Maybe this is a completely dumb cause for clickfest but it might have something to do with? I think the core gameplay has moved away from thinking to clicking! the same could be said for flanking and tactics... remember all that rifleman flanking early game you get on coh1. its gone...

Agreed with OP. 2v2 can be enjoyable because of the teammate synergy aspect, but the doctrine design and linear teching has removed a ton of the actual strategy. Right now the toughest decisions you have to make are "T34 or T70" or "what DLC commander should I buy first" xD.


Clicking speed isn't everything. Maybe he's just slightly better at multitasking. 40 apm divided pretty evenly between 5-6 different units is much more effective than 60 apm divided between 3-4 units. Also there is too much of a lack of competition and strategy right now to go branding people top players. CondemnationWings and DanielD/Twister are the only CoH2 players that are impressive right now tbh. Several of todays supposedly high level CoH2 players were at best above average CoH1 players even with much more time invested in the game.

Yeah, clicking speed not being everything was basically my point. I'm talking about top players relatively speaking in this game at the moment in exactly the same way that Sluz is talking about click speeds being essential for competitive play in this game at the moment.

Obviously the level of competition isn't equal to that which VCoH had after a long lifespan and for various reasons (people not playing, not adapting etc.) the best players in this game right now aren't the people who were the best at VCoH (and vice versa). That's not terribly relevant to the question of whether the game is more of a clickfest than it was two months ago.

its the natural adjustment to the now true and low conscripts health.

Yeah, clicking speed not being everything was basically my point. I'm talking about top players relatively speaking in this game at the moment in exactly the same way that Sluz is talking about click speeds being essential for competitive play in this game at the moment.

I don't think spamming a ton of unnecessary clicks = better micro, but at the same time Sluz is right about 1v1 being a click fest. Not because you need 100+apm to win, but because good positioning and long term decision making are hardly requirements to be a top 1% player. The skill ceiling is painfully low.

Players like SiberianPlatoon and Aimstrong were great because they could consistently make good flanks, position well, pick the appropriate doctrine, spend their resources on the right things, predict what the opponent is doing, etc. In CoH2 the hardest thing you need to do is dodge nades.

Click fest has very little to do with skill pretty mu ch everyone at the top has basically the same about the same cpm with very little difference, even if you did have a higher amount the game systems discount it largely.

Right now people are still learning the game, Spamming the same units and for the most part it works but only because the more complex strats haven't been perfected yet. Some of that is unit balance of certain units is a bit off but I think that by the time snf5 finals happen you will see much more complex strats coming in as people learn to deal with spam with the proper unit counters instead of more spam of their own.

To be honest I would say that the biggest problem we have now is too many people focus on micro and don't put much thought into what units they are building and when.

Way to many people are currently doing either a spam x unit to spam y unit strat or combined arms I'll get one of everything so I have counter to everything. Instead of getting just the units they need to deal with what is on the field or likely to be in a few minutes.

Thanks for the compliment basilone, but I'm going to have to disagree with you I do think that squad losses are not punished enough, however to say that it's all about dodging nades...

What you do with your shock units is still incredibly important. Losing lynchpin units like the german HT or soviet AT gun in the mid game can cost you the game. What happens to that first t34/PIV, the choice between a pak and a PGren, etc etc all make huge differences in who wins.

To me the huge problem is the cheap nades totally negate the cover system. If you were going to throw a nade in COH, it was kind of a big decision, and as US you did it get an MG, or if you saw some clumped units that wouldn't be able to move in time. Now some players did toss them like candy, but it was a strategic decision. Throw a lot of nades now, less muni later. The M8 might only get armored skirts, etc. Grens rarely tossed nades because it was pricey for the weak effect, but the range was sometimes handy.

Right now there's not much benefit to NOT tossing the nades, as it will be a LONG time till you get your strafe, and no Soviet vehicles need upgrades and the MG on Ostheer tanks is so cheap I have never seen anyone NOT get one. If you're not tossing nades to force your opponent out of cover he will take advantage.

So cover and positioning is basically negated. Every time you're in cover, along comes a squad that forces you out with a nade toss, and if you're microing in two places chances are you'll catch one of the nades in the face.

I do think the remvoval of the damage bulletins really changed the game for me. The first 3-4 games I played after that patch, I was losing units left and right because I didn't have the feel for the damage being taken by units I wasn't watching closely. I'm still trying to watch the health bar more because I still don't quite have the feel.

And the game is really slippery slopey. You can play on but that AT gun or PZiV loss means it's over. And how many COH 1v1s were there where there were decrewed AT guns scattered across the field, and sometimes the US player would still win?

I also hate how AT Guns act. In COH if you clicked attack, it would follow for a bit if the tank was backing up into the FOW. In COH2, as soon as the tank gets out of the angle of fire the damn autoattack just gives up. So tank micro is a ton easier thanks to the reverse, but AT gun micro is twice as hard.

AT gun pathing is pretty horrible at the moment. I've just watched in agony as AT gun crews just stare at the ground deciding if they're going to play the AT gun and fire or not...

The way i see it is that resources are far to plenty, it lead to too much grenades tossing. Grenade's damage being a tad random, often we see no damage or a squad wipe. It sad to see a match won by a simple grenade toss. Strategic points should give less munition so it's usage would be something important, a meaningful decision.

The game would be more fun. People rely too much on grenades now.(repetitive play)