The game IS a click fest now

In regards to the "positioning" of infantry units vs. grenades. The amount of "clickiness" or "micro" that the use of grenades adds is negligible unless you are in the mindset of "I'm going to send my infantry to this cover here and they should have the advantage". Instead think ahead. OK so if I move my infantry to this light cover first, wait for them to throw a nade, then move to the adjacent green cover, I'll be have the upper hand as I'll have lured them into wasting munitions and I'll also be in superior cover. As opposed to moving them into the green cover immediately and trying to fight it out from there.

The purpose of a grenade is to flush troops out from cover (hopefully killing a few in the process). Cover in this game is directional also, which means if a rifle nade lands on the side of the cover your guys are on, that stone wall isn't going to stop those metal fragments.

The only thing grenades add is tactical depth to the game. God forbid you have to click 2, 3, or 4 more times to dodge them.

I have written more about this previously. The point is, cower dosent matter much anymore, so there is little to be gained by flushing enemies out, because the few seconds they spend out of cower really dosent matter that much. This goes both ways. In vCOH, an enemy in green cower would be a serious threat, and charging him through red cower would be costly. In COH2 you just run up to him and throw your grenades, and then you both dance arround for a while.

Understanding and utilising tactics, and the chess aspect of COH becomes, less important, and moving about "casting spells" is more important. Personally, I really liked the tactical depth and realistic twist on combat, and im sad to se the importance of understanding basic tactics toned down. I always enjoied COH because it challenged my mind and strategic abilities, not so much my reflexes and mousemovement, but I guess its a matter of taste.

So you think that assaulting from the front and throwing a grenade is at the very least equally as effective as a flanking maneuver?

EDIT: I would simply have to disagree with you about the effectiveness of cover. If you look at the bonuses units get they are fairly significant.

I think the solution to what you are describing would be to increase the penalties for units that are exposed and out of cover? This is something that I think I would agree with to a degree.

So you think that assaulting from the front and throwing a grenade is at the very least equally as effective as a flanking maneuver?

Not equally, but not much difference either.

Timing or movement in itself isnt a problem, those were important aspects of vCOH as well. The problem is that the reduced lethality of infantry has made good use of cower less important, thus encouraging more running arround, charging head on, while givig tactical movement and positioning less impotance.

Its a very different style of gameplay, mowing away from the more realistic aproach of vCOH and more in the direction of "spellcasting" of games we dont wat to compare it with. It shifts the focus from the more chess style stratgic/tactical focus, to the more reflex and speed oriented pinnball kind of play, while none of the games being at any of the extremes of course.

I started playing vCOH while in the army, against others in my squad when we had spare time, and what struck us was how intuitive it all was for us, who had a good understanding of companysized combatoperations, having participated in a lot ourselves. This isnt as true for COH2, and that makes an understanding of basic tactics and those aspects less important, while favouring the "clickers" more.

Im not saying that one path is better than the other, but what I, and obviously a lot of others, seems to preffer.

I agree with everything this guy says.

Also, someone else earlier wrote this too but squads need to stop jumping back into Molotov flame because of auto-cover seek. It's just stupid in so many ways.

I agree with everything this guy says.

Also, someone else earlier wrote this too but squads need to stop jumping back into Molotov flame because of auto-cover seek. It's just stupid in so many ways.

Glad to hear.

Does anyone know why the infantrycombat was altered the way it was? Was this a request by the community or is it simply a result of the new developmentteam having a different philosophy than the team behind vCOH?

Based on the descriptions of people in this thread at least, it sounds like infantry combat in vCOH was less dynamic and kind of boring.

Based on the descriptions of people in this thread at least, it sounds like infantry combat in vCOH was less dynamic and kind of boring.

you are mistaken.

Based on the descriptions of people in this thread at least, it sounds like infantry combat in vCOH was less dynamic and kind of boring.

I guess its another layer of dynamics. It obviously didnt focus on movement for the sake of movement, but made other tactical considerations all the more important. Throwing that grenade wasnt as much of a nobrainer as it is now, as you would need to consider that closing that gap might cost you dearly.

It played and looked a lot more like a firefight rather than a streed dance face-off

used to merc fools in coh1 by spamming pineapples, too many people with rose tinted glasses.

It played and looked a lot more like a firefight rather than a streed dance face-off

I'm calling rose-tinted glasses.

edit: hahaha I replied to this after leaving the window open for hours, did not see your post before I wrote mine IpKai

OK I tried this long form, but here's the TLDR, in the hopes that I get a more direct response

1. I cannot believe that some people think the micro requirement in this game is too high. Sorry. Compared to SC2 or any MOBA, the mechanical burden of this game is fairly low.

Its not about is it to much or not. Its about what has been lost from COH1 mechanics. We all love COH for a reason, and that was not because it was like other games (SC and others)

2. I don't see how it's a bad thing that infantry are required to move to stay clear of grenades, aside from COH1 players being upset that it's different from what they've come to expect. Can someone explain this to me?

In COH if you were sitting in green cover and some, lets say noob, walks over the road to throw granade at your unit in cover, he will most likely lose more man than you even if he throws the nade. Also, you could target and kill model that is throwing nade. Therefore you always had to think what you are doing, where you are positioning and calculate will you be able to win every engagement, is it worth it, etc. Right now all that is gone and replaced with: 'I throw nade at you, you throw nade at me' lets see who can get out of the way and have more luck with RNG.
Your units even seek autocover on their own

3. with Mortars, snipers, MGs, AT Guns, and vehicles all placing a much higher premium on positioning than micro (even, I'd contest, Scout Cars and the T70) I feel that it's quite obvious that positioning is important.

In COH, letting your sniper have a shoot at any unit required great deal of thinking and calculating. Snipers used camo/uncamo system. Shooting your sniper of often resulted in your sniper being counter-shoot in his face.
Vehicle micro in COH meant you had to be careful where you go and what you do because there were many things that could kill your vehicle. Now if you have Panther your micro consists of avoiding SU85's, or if you have t70 kill as many units before Piv shows up.

So basically, COH2 has become stupidified for user and is starting to look a lot like SC2. All we need is Chuck Norris and Rambo superheros that kill everything DLC, to complete the feel.
Most people would love that and I am sure it would sell even better, but old COH players loved COH because it wasn't like that

Hope that helps you

P.S. You seem to think this is only about nades and positioning. There were nades, riflenades, mortars, vehicle buttoning, at nades, etc in COH. And you needed to dodge those just as much as in COH2. (these things were not introduced in COH2 and old COH players find it to hard to cope with as you seem to think)
Its about entire game losing tactical importance to clicking mindlessly (not to be confused with faster) and running around wrecking havoc with OP unit at that moment.
Where in COH you had to think how to maintain your fuel and pop cap to pull out that tiger, you only had to wait until you have enough fuel now. etc etc

Much as the VCoH argument is the more interesting one, Sluz's OP was about COH 2 as opposed to COH 2 a couple of months back being a 'clickfest'. I completely do not buy VCoH requiring less clicks/micro/control/whatever you want to term it than CoH 2 (for instance, ketten/jeep/bike pushing was more clickfesty than anything in the early game now) - in many ways it felt a bit more demanding on account of the lethality.

Baba, CoH 2 snipers require *far* better positioning than VCoH snipers ever did, because their magic cloaking is now conditional. Also they're a much more vulnerable unit in general. I don't really get your idea that vehicle micro and positioning is less important or involves less caution and risk-taking than VCoH. Other than blitzing with a damaged engine and random heavy crits there's nothing to make it too different. I think on those fronts you're maybe mistaking the fact that people aren't playing at the level they played VCoH yet for a fundamental lack of depth in the game.

(and with a T-70, you have to consider, non-exhaustively - avoid suspected teller mines, don't get ambushed and fausted from behind a hedge due to truesight, are there shreks or a pak around, can you get around the PAK, are the shreks in a position where you can approach them at max range and kite a little, is vehicle repair worth it to get you back in the fight more quickly, do you prioritise trying to get the kill on light vehicles which you don't have another counter to or going after infantry, how far do you pursue, if the opponent is entrenched, do you try to scope it out with the recon ability, can you lure the first P-IV onto mines or into an AT gun/nade to give your T-70 some more infantry killing time until it's repaired... all of that is positioning and tactical judgment)

The infantry game... it's more the low lethality of the base units than the cover system that is the change. How you can scale them up without making LMGs, shocks or pgrens just stupidly deadly I do not know. Also the fact that both sides have grenades available very early, and the importance of buildings as a positional tool. Not that there aren't things I prefer about VCoH (more global upgrades, BARs, far better designed doctrines) but I think a lot of it played more artificially and less tactically than people remember.

Where in COH you had to think how to maintain your fuel and pop cap to pull out that tiger,

In CoH you had to not spend any manpower for a couple of minutes, not get all your sectors cut off and then throw away infantry until you could pull a king tiger out of nowhere. It required no fuel control, and you only needed the population for the split second to deploy it.

Personally, I'd like flamers to not explode randomly until the squad is below half its models so as an early game upgrade they don't get neutralised by the first loss the squad sustains. I think that'd add some variety to the early game.

I am explaining the difference between COH2 and COH to someone who didn't play it and asked for explanation........

Still I don't agree with you on many things.

Sniper is more vulnerable unit now as opposed to being shoot in the face by other sniper out of nowhere if it fires. Positioning in COH2 means you come in the vicinity of enemy and fire away. You know there is nothing to shoot you back in the face, as opposed to having to scout area to make sure there is no other sniper.
(you are confusing tactical sniper play with currently broken snipers where they get one shot by all manner of things)

You had to do all those things you wrote, in COH with vehicles on top of which there were generally more things that could kill your M8 on the field than there is when you pull out T70. Due to faster teching. So yes, you had to be a lot more careful and think what you are doing as opposed to your main concern being how many units can I kill in the short window of opportunity.

In CoH you had to not spend any manpower for a couple of minutes, not get all your sectors cut off and then throw away infantry until you could pull a king tiger out of nowhere. It required no fuel control, and you only needed the population for the split second to deploy it.

Really? is that your answer. You just need to do these couple of simple things and you are good to go.
If you don't control the map you cannot get K Tiger at all, If you don't control the fuel, you cannot build any vehicles period

All that doesn't mean that there is no tactics or thinking involved in COH2, a lot less then COH that is for sure

I am explaining the difference between COH2 and COH to someone who didn't play it and asked for explanation........

If you want to explain diffrences you could try do it without such a obvious bias. You are more explaining what you sentimentally miss.

Its not about is it to much or not. Its about what has been lost from COH1 mechanics. We all love COH for a reason, and that was not because it was like other games (SC and others)

It still isnt SC or other games. However, new game, new crew that developed. There are bound to be diffrences between the games.

So basically, COH2 has become stupidified for user and is starting to look a lot like SC2. All we need is Chuck Norris and Rambo superheros that kill everything DLC, to complete the feel.

I would argue that some things are easier to pull off in CoH2, opening up for a wider playerbase to enjoy the game while risking to scare away veterans and 'pro' gamers. However there were alot of things that were just plain stupid and abusive in CoH1. Like bike/jeep pushing. Magicly cloaked sniperspam (lets not forget to add stormtroopers to the magical cloak). Buying vet for wermacht. The list could goes on. As far as fighting goes, I felt a diffrence between CoH1 and 2, however, I think it plays out ok. Some less nades and molotovs would be nice to see, something like 20% less (so I suggest a slight cost increase). I think overall small arms damage could need a look at. A slight increase of dps for basic T0 and T1 infantry (aside from Penals) would speed up fights and make cover feel more important. I dont think it is an impossible problem to solve.

Also, clicking mindlessly? If you are clicking mindlessly I can see you have a problem with this game. There are still decisions to be made, even in the smallest fight. That said, I really would like to see units shooting backwards when moving again, allowing softretreats actually to dish out a little damage.

If you want to explain diffrences you could try do it without such a obvious bias. You are more explaining what you sentimentally miss.



It still isnt SC or other games. However, new game, new crew that developed. There are bound to be diffrences between the games.



I would argue that some things are easier to pull off in CoH2, opening up for a wider playerbase to enjoy the game while risking to scare away veterans and 'pro' gamers. However there were alot of things that were just plain stupid and abusive in CoH1. Like bike/jeep pushing. Magicly cloaked sniperspam (lets not forget to add stormtroopers to the magical cloak). Buying vet for wermacht. The list could goes on. As far as fighting goes, I felt a diffrence between CoH1 and 2, however, I think it plays out ok. Some less nades and molotovs would be nice to see, something like 20% less (so I suggest a slight cost increase). I think overall small arms damage could need a look at. A slight increase of dps for basic T0 and T1 infantry (aside from Penals) would speed up fights and make cover feel more important. I dont think it is an impossible problem to solve.

Also, clicking mindlessly? If you are clicking mindlessly I can see you have a problem with this game. There are still decisions to be made, even in the smallest fight. That said, I really would like to see units shooting backwards when moving again, allowing softretreats actually to dish out a little damage.

Is that so? How about you trying to explain it without Bias then???

You obviously prefer COH2 and you are happy with it.

FYI, I actually liked sniper mechanics of COH. I liked bike pushing, and storms 2.

If you like something it doesn't make it right, it only makes it your biased opinion, same way mine is biased towards things I liked more in COH....

There are a lot of things that are plain stupid and abusive in COH2, like paper/rock/scissors units hitting the field. And lets not go into strafing runs that close of half a map for 5 minutes or kill every living thing in half a map radius,etc etc......

So please, if you didn't like sniper mechanics and purchased vet dont assume no one else did.

Also look up what bias means. We are all bias when it comes to what we liked more

Is that so? How about you trying to explain it without Bias then???

Might have been me overreacting, and it was most likely this...

I am explaining the difference between COH2 and COH to someone who didn't play it and asked for explanation........

So basically, COH2 has become stupidified for user and is starting to look a lot like SC2. All we need is Chuck Norris and Rambo superheros that kill everything DLC, to complete the feel.

...I reacted to. Sorry about lashing out.

About me liking CoH2 more. It is very true, and I think it plays better with 2v2 than CoH1, without really knowing why sadly. Aslo not a high level player, something that might play a part in all of this.

About abusive things in CoH2, I do agree that there are alot of things that need to be looked at, and I'm not fond of all hardcounters that make builds stale. However, this is a new game and things are subject to change, unlike CoH1 which is unlikely to recieve any major further patches to iron out what I dislike in that game.

Also, I never claimed that everyone disliked cloak or vet works in CoH1. Just saying that not everyone thinks that all mechanincs in CoH1 were perfect either. In this sense we agree to disagree.

To try to stick to topic and answer if this game is more a clickfest than earlier (and CoH1) I think Blovski put it very good here.

I'm sorry I cannot take anyone seriously who compares COH2 to SC2. In terms of micro, ability use, anything.

Calling the game "stupidified" and attempting (incorrectly) attempting to compare COH to SC2 makes the argument or "explanation" to ring false.

If you're going to make an unfavorable comparison, at least ensure it's accurate. The comparison and lack of understanding of SC2 is frankly laughable.

There is one thing i am never fast enough: It's when i'm in a building and nades are incoming... I can't never exit before the building is obliterated. Those random building crits must go, they are no fun at all. Too much random events or critical hits are to be minimized in any serious strategy game.

There is one thing i am never fast enough: It's when i'm in a building and nades are incoming... I can't never exit before the building is obliterated. Those random building crits must go, they are no fun at all. Too much random events or critical hits are to be minimized in any serious strategy game.

Random crits on anything must go, to be honest. Immobilizing a Tiger at full health with a ram from the front, flame crits on full-HP models, flamethrower exploding on the first shot, rifle nade building crits - all of the extreme cases must be taken out of the game because although they do not happen often, they take all the fun out of the game when they do happen.

I don't mind light RNG in the form of mortar shells, firefights, and even basic engine damage crits on fausts or nades, but these extreme cases that happen randomly add no value to the game.

Just yesterday I had a flamer engineer crit 3 grenadier models on the first burst (grenadiers at full HP). Saw it happening and couldn't even retreat fast enough because the last guy decided to stand there in front of the flamethrower jacking off. This outcome is not warranted because the enemy player did nothing more than attack-move his engineer - the game decided the rest. Winning the game needs to be based off of making good plays and proper positioning, not attack-moving and and hoping for the best.

I am explaining the difference between COH2 and COH to someone who didn't play it and asked for explanation........

Still I don't agree with you on many things.

Sniper is more vulnerable unit now as opposed to being shoot in the face by other sniper out of nowhere if it fires. Positioning in COH2 means you come in the vicinity of enemy and fire away. You know there is nothing to shoot you back in the face, as opposed to having to scout area to make sure there is no other sniper.
(you are confusing tactical sniper play with currently broken snipers where they get one shot by all manner of things)

You had to do all those things you wrote, in COH with vehicles on top of which there were generally more things that could kill your M8 on the field than there is when you pull out T70. Due to faster teching. So yes, you had to be a lot more careful and think what you are doing as opposed to your main concern being how many units can I kill in the short window of opportunity.

Really? is that your answer. You just need to do these couple of simple things and you are good to go.
If you don't control the map you cannot get K Tiger at all, If you don't control the fuel, you cannot build any vehicles period

All that doesn't mean that there is no tactics or thinking involved in COH2, a lot less then COH that is for sure

Ahk. Snipers - my argument is that the cloaking being dependent on cover makes using them against *any* unit more of a matter of positioning, while in VCoH you basically only had to worry about other snipers most of the time, and since you could see over any obstructions they were harder to flank by tactical play. There is still some countersniping play... I don't think people in general have got their sniper use to the level where they're executing it well right now. In general I'm kind of glad the mid game has gone beyond both sides trying to kill a sniper but that's just my preference.

Vehicles - yeah, you were more likely to have the PAK/shrek combo when an M8 hit the field. Also, both sides used mines properly so it was always riskier. I think CoH 2's reliable engine-crit fausts, true sight and AT nades do compensate for that though. Map control to get a King Tiger... have to admit it was a rare game where I found that to be a problem. Because it didn't cost fuel it was rarely a serious problem getting one if you lasted that long in the game.