Profile of donofsandiego

normal life

lol and perhaps even lmao. College life for sure.

There are certainly a lot of... interesting.. threads here.

Reposting from my steam discussions post:

The more I've been playing the game, the more I've come to really appreciate how well put together the battalions system is. At least, in theory.

For example, the devs wanted the infantry companies to stand out, but also, at the same time, they wanted every regiment to have squads to capture territory with.

So what did they do? They make it so that all tank and artillery regiments (except two specific regiments which are supposed to be hybrids) have a massive penalty to basic infantry, BUT they still have access to the new "seperate infantry squads" which are way more Battle Rating AND Command Point effective at the cost of not being able to divide up like basic infantry.

In this way, the devs made it so that non-infantry company players have to make a decision: do I take away Battle Rating from my specialized units so that I can put basic infantry in my deck, or do I fully specialize and just take seperate squads to handle capping.

Then we have the specialized regiments like heavy tank regiments, howitzer regiments, etc. There's a really interesting dynamic there, where you get access to higher tier units from the regiment's specialty, but you give up on the generalist discounts of the basic regiment.

I can honestly say that it's incredibly fun to break down a regiment and build it up from scratch. I have a blast figuring out ways to accentuate my strengths while covering for weaknesses.

And honestly, the regiments really do each have their own "feel". I really do love how loadouts can look so different from regiment to regiment, but still fit the "theme" of the regiment.

Honestly, I've given the devs a lot of sh*t about the game, but the battalion system absolutely sells the game to me, hands down. They really did a good job with it.

The serial necromancer is back at it again. Which thread's corpse will they reanimate next? The 120mm mortars instakilling squads thread? Pio spam OP thread? Popcorn MG42 thread? Tune in during June to find out!

Care or nerves to elaborate?
I've played some of the MoW2 single player content right before the last playtest stopped.

Having played previous iterations it, generally speaking, seemed like a somewhat modern take on MoWAS2. Nothing too groundbreaking.

They did not improve the game at all from the playtest. In fact, they broke the encyclopedia system, so you can't see information about your troops while you're equipping them to your army.(This was fixed by clearing my game cache.)

The voicelines were all default Gem engine stuff in the playtest, but they added a slew of voicelines that are absolutely atrocious and immersion-breaking to the point where I just can't play Americans, it's so bad. I'm told it's the same for German and Russian voicelines too (according to Katitof).

I still love the Battalions system, and it's still the only game in the Men of War series that I actually enjoy playing PvP in. However, I said that I couldn't recommend the game as it was then in the playtest (after the CoH 3 launch disaster), and seeing as the game has actually become worse than it was in the playtest, I most certainly can't recommend it now.

So is the conclusion of all this MoW 2 furor that basically COH3 has become the premier WWII RTS game? I'm not saying that's a high bar with the games industry in general these days.

CoH 3 is the best arcade-style WW2 RTS put on the market this decade, absolutely.