|
CoH1's US army is fine. You're playing them wrong. |
|
My issue isn't with the con spam per say, it's with the indirect fire the soviets get - and the fact that early cons spam forces you to make weapons crews or at least play defensively, in which you have no offensive strike that can really knock out the mortars/rockets/onmaps because your luch's has been crippled and you're sort of forced to invest in some sort of defensive fortification.
I just played a game where my opponent lost 3 squads to not retreating, lost 3 tanks by driving them into my pak emplacement, lost a mortar to not retreating, and still almost won because he was able to sit with artillery and just blow stuff up from afar. It's the muta-ling of CoH2. |
|
If you could break it down to just a few points:
What CoH1 did well:
Vanilla balance was...well it was ok, if it wasn't for the broken stuff.
Commanders were far, far better. Less is more in this situation.
What CoH1 did poorly:
Every major patch up to 2.301 had a completely game-breaking bug or ability. Literally every patch had a gamebreaking bug, from paks that could oneshot any unit in the game to artillery with no cooldown.
What CoH2 did well:
Truesight
What CoH2 did wrong:
Balance overall isn't terrible, but it consists of a lot of ridiculous unbalanced things all equaling out.
What they both did right:
Infantry combat/cover is still great
What they both did wrong:
RNG is still such a crazy determining factor
The Brits.
|
|
Can I complain about stuff that wasn't changed? |
|
The game is pretty balanced. There are a few things here and there, but for asymmetrical balance in a game that relies on RNG, the game is pretty damn good. |
|
yeah, it's alright.
still learning the balance between units and the commanders, but for the most part its the same thing.
good game by the way. I really hate the american commaders. I wish I'd get lucky and get the heavy cav |
|
Am I missing something? As axis I'd much rather play against the "calliope" commander than heavy cav. Once a Calliope is out you have to change your play style a bit, but you have a definitive advantage of having heavy tanks while your opponent lacks those (assuming you pick a doctrine correctly).
Everyone seems to be complaining about the rest of the doctrine but I really don't see an issue with the 1919s. The halftrack really isn't that useful because it comes well after you can field light vehicles anyways. The strafe is alright, but delayed to the point where you only have to worry about weapons crews. |
Hell, I think I'm a pretty good CoH1 player, and I had access to the private forum on GR that was used to develop the 2.602 patch with Relic, but even then I didn't feel qualified enough to comment on all but a handful of issues because even the difference in game understanding between top ladder players and top tournament players is ridiculous.
If it makes you feel any better, they didn't listen, anyhow. |
|
The game changes, but the rants always stay the same.
Funny how people are clamoring for a balance that revolves around the top 20 players in a game that will never see a highly competitive professional environment.
The game is going to be balanced for the entire playerbase, or at least that's the goal. If you think otherwise you're playing the wrong game. An RTS that revolves around random chances is never going to compete with games like Starcraft on a competitive level.
Yeah, top level players are, on a whole, going to have better views at balance but excluding anyone but the top fraction of a percent from the conversation is ridiculous. |
 What rank did you get to?
rank 20 shammer.
We've got a battalion run this morning? shucks, I have to be at dental... |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
