I don't want anything in my Company of Heroes games that was not in the official table of equipment and organization of a combat unit at the year and region of battle depicted.
Game would be so much better, and more authentic. And it would be easy to balance if the people in charge had something concrete to stick to instead of just making shit up as they go.
Gott strafe braindead heavy tank users, also. Single-handedly ruin WW2 RTS games everywhere with their dumbassery.
Why on earth would this make the game easier to balance? |
Id at least like to get a chance to actually play the factions more before i decide the walls are crumbling down because of 1 tank. Im more concerned about the lack of MP info in general than i am about the mere inclusion of the BP
Correct. So many assumptions being made about units and lots of doom and gloom from the usual people about what the meta will be. |
|
Just play 1v1's for a while mate. So much better for your sanity. |
|
No-one really cares. Look at this forum as an example, it's basically only Crecer and BasedSecretary who are legitimately bothered by a bit of artistic license being employed by the developers, let's call it what it is.
Several people have pointed out how completely inconsistent their complaints are with regard to realism. It'just something to argue over before we can answer the important questions like, is the game fun? Are you the units balanced and tactically interesting in a way that improves the previous entries? etc. |
It's funny how willing people are to push things when they do not want to concur that their arguments are borderline retarded.
*Starts laughing uncontrollably* |
|
Strangely enough I did have an opponent in automatch recently who tried really hard to do this with an M10, as their kind of 'opening play' rushing it before any other vehicle. Needless to say, it didn't work very well.
If Rumartinez says it got heavily nerfed in the past perhaps it makes a bit more sense. Possibly someone who hadn't played the game in a long time? It was weird. |
It's a matter of principle. Relic needs to learn to keep his word, they already fucked up all the promises about the historicity of the CoH2 campaign and all their blah blah what they said. Here they again stated that historicity and authenticity are important to them, but they add the Black Prince without an objective reason. Either Relic keeps his word, or my wallet is closed to them.
Oh no! Crecer's wallet is closed. |
Yea I remember losing 2 Vet3 double bar Rifleman to a tiger in a shot or 2. Shit was insane.
I don't think it would be as bad as it used to be due to the tech requirements.
They do seem to be kind of weak for how much they cost(tanks, not TD), the only one that truly seems worth it is the KT due to available HEAT/TankComm/Spearhead. All the others ones seem to be easily counterable with available TD.
Indeed, even without HEAT/TankComm, the KT seems to be the only one left that can easily wipe infantry squads in a couple of shots from long range. The amount of threat it brings sets it apart from the rest. |
Because, my good friend, I have an expert's knowledge on the way Nazi Germany conducted its military research (did a stats project on WW2 Operational Research as part of my master's degree).
Hitler personally signed off on anything that claimed to be "the best best best ever" not caring about costs. Everybody knew shit like Maus and Ratte was completely combat stupid but they got the proof to carry on since the boss signed off on it.
Compare that to the way USA, UK and (to a lesser extend) USSR conducted their military research: tons of committees, scientists etc. striving to find the golden ratio... sure that's how it should be done but nothing trully shockingly huge comes out of it...
Compared with Maus let's say.
You decide to put 250mm of fucking grade A steel armor topped with a fucking 12.8cm PAK gun you sure as fuck are going to be making something really OP for COH standards. Just imagine a vehicle with an elefant gun, a TigerII armor and Jagdtiger range... I can already hear the alliedcucks coping
Over engineered and 'bigger is better' yes, i'm aware. But what does that have to do with game balance? One has no influence on the other, it's a videogame.
Obviously the game will have balance issues that will need to be addressed, like all games in the genre, but Nazi Germany's design philosophy isn't going to be up copied by Relic when balancing a videogame. They could just as easily accidently make an allied unit too powerful... This is such a strange thing to fixate on. |
Realism =/= Authenticity.
The battles COMPANY of Heroes tries to portray (those on a company level) actually took days to show a decisive outcome. Obviously that's unfeasible that's why relic simplified a lot of stuff to be able to make the game fun.
It's an entirely different story using PROTOTYPE units, eg. using PAPER units. That's historical fiction plain and simple which COH NEVER WAS.
And guess what, Nazi paper tanks were way better than Allied paper tanks (Hitler was a known megalomaniac that insta approved every project that claimed to be 10 times better than the enemy's and that was not exclusive to tank designs: buildings, whole urban planning projects etc).
So if push comes to shove, and we see a MAUS that can self spot and rape every armor in existence don' tell me I did not warn you.
But why would you assume that prototype units will automatically be overpowered, compared with i dunno, anything else that's in the game? I'm just curious, as unit balance will almost certainly be a complete mess on release.
Just trying to understand your perspective. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
