|
Why not simply return to CoH1's doctrine system? It was flatly superior to CoH2s--far less memorization involved, meaning better potential for interesting mind games. Interesting trade offs for the player (spend now for small bonus or save for bigger later) and best of all the limited number of doctrines made them a hell of a lot easier to balance. |
|
All this talk of of customized load outs/armies/commanders scares the shit out of me. If this stuff makes it on the ladder we will all be eating a ton of salty cheese. |
I don't want to be mean but you're wrong. Look at the top games, LoL, CSGO, Overwatch, ect, they all have thriving esports scenes. In regards to RTS, SC2 is the king with a healthy esports scene. Simply put there is a direct correlation between size of esports scene and size of profits. Last time i checked these games are real and not some "fantasy"
If people only watch games they play, I didn't know there are sooo many soccer, football, and basketball players out there. While there is a burden of knowledge to understanding a game, visually a random viewer can understand the basics. In regards to coh2, you have army men and tanks shooting at each other. Not too complex.
Lastly if we use SC1 & SC2 as a case study, you can appeal to the masses while also having a highly compepetive esports scene. The main reason why SC2 had problems with their casual scene is because they gutted custom games & mods. Even still SC2 is kicking COH2's ass. It ain't even a comparison. Back to CoH2, it is very easy to get a 4v4 casual game going so there is 0 reason why creating a balance esport game would kill or hurt the 4v4s. The balance from 1v1s would trickle down, creating an overall balanced game.
Balance doesn't trickle down that way, or at least not necessarily. Throughout CoH2s lifecycle, 1v1s have usually been balanced-ish. But because that balance was built around clock-dominance, it really screwed up 3s and 4s. A strong allied early game became a brutal game-ending nightmare at the upper levels of AT. Strong German late game became nearly insurmountable auto-wins after 30-35 minutes, especially below that tippy-top.
|
how do you even see your units?
Colored outlines could work okay. |
One other problem with Pacific campaign is that jungle is involved, and whilst its easy to think of lots of battlefields that weren't, you couldn't really miss them out without compromising the theme.
Jungle maps would mostly suck - like Bryant Forest with mosquitos.
I actually think that jungles could conceivably add pretty interesting terrain into the game. Places where big tanks and heavy equipment doesn't fit create interesting decisions. Do I focus on sub-optimal units that can go anywhere, or do I buy that tank knowing I've got to somehow catch him on open ground? |
Possibly.
I would add a lot more axis buffs to the list, which was both to make them competitive and to please the fanbois. Axis cats can appear on any battlefield and in equal or greater numbers than mediums. Also 50% of them don't break down or run out of fuel in any given battle. Their old men and boys can become as good fighters (or better) if given enough time and casualties in battle. And their super experienced and battle hardened veterans have lots of room to get even better given a bit more combat and casualties.
Add the allies nerfs (because I am having fun with this): They don't control the skies and slow stukas can attrit them. And they don't make the whole front blow up with their large volumes of tubes and ammunition (and speedy response in the case of US and Brits).
Yeah. At the end of the day the history should be a roadmap, not handcuffs. If it gets in the way of fun (like accurately representing US artillery would) it should go on the garbage heap. With this in mind I think Japan can absolutely be made viable--Marines vs IJA would have a roughly similar balance to Wher vs Soviets.
|
The problem with Pacific theater is the reality. Japan went to war with a WWII navy and air force, but a WWI army. This was enough vs the Chinese and when they got the drop on the US and Brits early in the war, but later it was really all about rooting out dug in troops that wouldn't surrender. They didn't even have an AT weapon that could take out US medium tanks. (IIRC in some places the only plan was a 500 lb aviation bomb in a covered over pit.... with a soldier with a hammer to set it off!)
That is why air simulators and naval combat games in this region have worked where ground combat really hasn't (without buffing the japanese kit and units).
To actually make it somewhat historical it would the Japanese forces would be all emplacements with "brace". How much fun that would be!! (~s)
I guess I don't really see the problem with buffing them a bit. We've accepted buffs for almost every other army in various places--(the Germans have way too many tanks and far too much mechanized equipment, the Sherman performs too well, etc, etc.) the Japanese had access to equipment which could be made to work--the Type-4 70mm rocket launcher and the Ho-Ni for example.
The other option is to balance around the disparate objectives of the two sides. Japanese equipment can be inferior, because they win if they either inflict a certain number of casualties or they hold out for a long enough time. |
|
Pacific war. It's the big theater that hasn't been explored by the franchise, and if it's fair to give the Germans the Ostwind(40 built) it's fair to give the Japanese the Chi-Nu(140-160 built.)
The Cold War would also be fun, but it's hard to see how they'd do stuff like air support without it feeling either super cheesy or irrelevant. |
|
Mortars or ISGs can handle emplacements just fine. As a bonus, they're both great against Tommies (who need to be still to be effective.) Just keep them moving so the counterfire doesn't get you, and be prepared for him when he comes for them. |
+7,032
It is such a stupid concept in a competitive product I can't figure out how anyone ever tried to defend it as a feature for so many years.
I think that it can work, (Starcraft is pretty competitive) but it just means that you'll be deciding in advance that either 1s or 4s will not be balanced. Besides which, the way they have been doing it (strong allies early game, strong German late game) is really dumb. If Von Runstad had decided to turtle till KT lol, he'd be shooting Germany in the foot incredibly hard when all those units needed to fight the next soviet push were busy turtling next to the U.K./US. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
