General Information
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJT-oswDRyOrhrVghT-6ZRw
Steam: 76561198157193379
Nationality: United States
Game Name: Snaek
I decided to come back to CoH 3 with a new goal in mind: attempt to play proficiently at the factions I like to play (DAK and US), without "crutching" on doctrinal infantry. I had a somewhat easy time as DAK, once some people gave me a few pointers, but US was a bit of a different story. Infantry Support Center was something that I could never get to work in 4v4 during the multiplayer beta, and so I wanted to see what I could do to make it work.
Let's be upfront about this:
It's difficult to play. It's not very aggressive until mid-late game, and it doesn't abuse the chaffee like everyone else is doing currently (it's included in the build, but the army composition doesn't revolve around them. Therefore, I think it's safe to classify this build as OFF META. ooo spooky
Additionally, I'm still working on it. Trying to see if I should fit in a riflemen here or there, but I did a pretty good job sticking to tight timing on my tech.
Feel free to leave a reply with your opinion on the build. I am always looking to improve my gameplay, and, as they say: two heads are better than one.
A 4v4 game where I demonstrate the panzergren build with DAK. Pgren>250>Pgren>Pgren>Tech x 2(Varies from here)>254>Marder>Grenade
From what I've heard, the build isn't very applicable to smaller gamemodes, so 1v1 and 2v2 players need not apply, but if you're playing DAK and you feel like you're getting stomped on, this build might be just the thing to make you feel worth a damn again.
Basically, what ends up happening is that I lose a bunch of early game engagements because I'm not able to properly flank the Brit MG (user error ofc), and I end up losing the VP for maybe 4-5 minutes. It was such a rough engagement that they even attempt to cap the ammunition point by my HQ, they get so cocky. I regroup, however, and with the 8 Rad, I push back out and take my VP. I then got a Marder, and a 254 after.
I'm successfully able to defend the VP against 2 ghurka squads, get multiple teamweapon steals, and I even force my opponent back to base. In addition, I'm able to defend the VP against two opponents attacking one after the other.
Sadly my teammates were struggling pretty hard south of me, so we lost the game. I tried to flank down into middle a couple times, to varying effect.
I know I'm not as high skill as some of y'all on here, but I feel like it would still be a fun watch. I'd be happy to hear what you have to say about it.
P.S. - oh yeah, I didn't even select a battlegroup. I've been trying to get proficient at playing DAK with the base roster, so that's the reason for that.
I'm surprised because several people have said to me in game that they have the same problem, but maybe it's not as common as I thought.
Still, I have the feeling that the netcode just doesn't do any double-checking at all, so just doesn't work on high-latency / lossy connections (insert TCP vs UDP meme.jpg)
After having played a bit more, I can say that my units receive their move orders pretty consistently, but I find myself giving AT grenade orders multiple times, since units seem to just not receive them sometimes.
It's more than once that I've seen this on forums somewhere, but I cannot for the life of me understand why Europeans continue to call AI "IA".
Why are Europeans like this? Why? *I* am an intelligent adversary, *you* are an intelligent adversary, a goddamn cat can be an intelligent adversary if you're playing with it with a string. It's a f!@#$ing Artificial Intelligence. A robot. Not real. Artificial.
Maybe this made sense back when brits invented automated tiddlywinks machines that they could play against or some shit, but once multiplayer games were invented, "IA" stopped making sense.
I come across Intelligent Adversaries every 4v4 PvP game (some less than others). It's a terrible descriptor.
Is this just the Europeans' version of the Imperial measurement system?
How long until they realize "AI" (the metric system) is just better in every way?
I messaged 45 users in my friends list if they would be willing to give CoH 3 another shot with this tuning pack and maybe some custom maps. Every single one is not interested. That's the level of apathy this game has accumulated for itself.
Of all the things I could say about CoH 3, at the very least I could say it was usually pretty responsive outside of giving attack orders to casemates (though that's since been improved), so my final answer is latency.
On top of people like AE being involved who is a glorified anchorman that couldnt win a game against someone who RE spams him in COH2 ( he lacks understanding of gameplay).
To be completely fair to A_E, he is a popular content creator, so if nothing else he would be a good ask on what a lot of people like to see most in a game/what brings in the most attention. I would imagine that they were asking him about what players liked watching the most about previous games. Or maybe how he would improve the replay/caster system.
Divided on the topic though. I think having 4 factions currently keeps the game alive, because even with only 2-3 maps, you can have at least some variety in gameplay....the balancing isn't an awful lot off..."overfitting"..CoH3 balances each faction against two others from the start...
All very good points
This surely came at the cost of other parts not being finished. I don't think that CoH3 would have been a solid game if it released with two factions and shifted resources elsewhere. There was too much wrong with the game at release, having four factions can't be the cause of these issues.
The post-release drought is a symptom of incompetent Relic leadership...
+1
I think the situation overall has improved.
Certainly, a lot of stuff sucking the fun out of the game in 4v4 got patched early on, like OST emplacement spam and brit boys rifle deathballs.
...Relic bit off more than they could chew, at least with poor leadership and planning. Four factions at release is part of that, but not the main reason why the launch failed so horribly and why the post-launch phase was very underwhelming.
Thank you for the post. Good points all around. Maybe it was doomed from the start just from the Relic staff and leadership, maybe it was biting off more than they could chew, or maybe it was both ofc. Who knows. To be completely fair, it's probably not worth much to speculate about, seeing as there's nothing we can do to change the release (unless someone on here's invented a time machine I don't know about ), it was more of a hopeless rant on my part haha.
United States
), it was more of a hopeless rant on my part haha. 
Relic Entertainment
