Dude, stop comparing game mechanics and authenticity. If the game had an A-10 or SU-25 with guided anti-tank missiles, this is one thing. But the game did not deviate from the canons of the Second World War and did not add AK assault rifles.
You still haven't given a good reason why those things aren't related. Like I said the planes in ww2 behave way ahead of their time
Your mention of future planes is perfect, the accuracy of stuka/hawker/p47 AT ability is extremely exaggerated in this game. But you have no problem with it simply because the planes are named correctly? That makes no fucking sense at all |
I am not a big fan of the Soviet Overwatch ability, the PTAB would have been more authentic, but this does not negate the fact that the tanks were fired upon by large-caliber artillery on the orders of the observer team, and a good observer could aim the artillery with jewelry, for example, the Soviet mortars were superbly trained and the old ability "high-precision mortar fire" was 100% authentic but not balanced.
Are you talking about precision shot? Cause I don't disagree there, that was a single shot from a single weapon. Very different from multiple howitzers zeroing in on a tank almost instantly. And it tracking it with perfect accuracy
The effectiveness of most of the offmaps in coh2 is extremely exaggerated. And there are plenty of units in it that also weren't that common (pershing, sturmtiger, ostwind). Maybe none as "non-existent" as the black prince, but this lack of realism is nothing new to coh |
Jesus Christ, you again compare the square with the soft. Did air support, IL-2 attack aircraft on the ground exist in World War II? Hell yes. If it didn't exist but was in the game then it wouldn't be authentic. Stop comparing things that are not directly related.
Why is your only threshold for realism whether or not the unit existed? That's such an dumb cutoff for deciding what's accurate or not
Did stukas and hawkers exist? Sure. How often did they kill or even damage tanks? Almost never. It was so rare that it's not even worth mentioning as a reliable option. And yet they do so reliably in coh2
How about soviet AT overwatch? Are you going to tell me that because it's possible for artillery to kill tanks that means that an ability which rains down shells on tanks with perfect accuracy is realistic?
You not given a single reason why these things aren't related. You just say they aren't and expect people to agree |
Yes, I understand, you continue to compare the square with the soft: game mechanics and authenticity.
What? Those two things are directly linked
Look at air support in coh2. Having air to ground attacks track targets with the accuracy that they do is absurd. Irl in ww2 it was extremely difficult to accurately hit anything on the ground from a plane |
I suggest you read a book. Start with the normie classics like 1984.
When skepticism is received as something ethically questionable (""""negativity"""" in your words) you know you have to do with sheep.
What the fuck are you talking about? You need more reading yourself, I'm not questioning skepticism. I'm questioning the frequency of your incessant whining. If you made one thread and detailed your complaints, whatever. But that's not what you've done, you have repeatedly acted like the world is burning in multiple threads over and over again
And I am not being disrespectful to anybody. The guy you are referring to defended lelic without a single shred of evidence.
And you said his brain works like a childs despite the fact that he's made multiple maps for a game you allegedly love. That's disrespectful, but more importantly it shows a hilarious lack of self-awareness on your part
I shit on relic quite a bit myself. Their handling of the dlc in this game was atrocious. Didn't stop me from enjoying the game for years on end though did it
I gave him the shitty explosive mechanics 2 months away from launch and he shrugged it off "That's no evidence"
I gave him the shitty animations, tank riding which features models floating mid air and he shrugged it off "Game is still in alpha"
on and on and on
If a guy wants to be blind, the man that attempts to help him becomes the victim.
Then don't buy the game and wait to see what people who do say about it. Saying the game hasn't been released yet is a valid point, and it counters most of the crap you're whining about |
When I purchase something, the first thing I do is read the negative comments. That is where you learn the most information. You will get nothing from the 5 star-this is great comments. Read the 1 star comments to find out this doesnt work for Win 11, it breaks after 3 months, it has a faulty design so they are getting rid of them cheap, etc etc etc.
Negative comments are extremely useful. But repeatedly over and over again about a game that hasn't been released yet? It would be just as dumb to praise it to high heaven, there's not enough evidence of either yet
Aerafield and whiteball is a great example. He's arguably the best team game players in the history of coh2, which means he has a shitload of experience on team game maps
Meanwhile we all have barely any experience on coh3. Acting like the worlds on fire based on the tiny samples and the short trailer is a bit much |
Seriously though, Coh3 does not look terrible. Just unfinished. And everyone agrees with that fact. No one is disputing it.
There's literally a thread titled "further evidence coh3 is trash". I think there's a massive difference between asking for more positive attitude and expecting everyone to agree with you. Those aren't the same thing
In fact, based is the one who seems to lose his mind the most everytime someone even dares to suggest he might be wrong/overreacting.
Look at how he responds to sneakeyes disagreement in this thread. That's someone who, like you, has actually contributed to this game, and based can't even be respectful while disagreeing with him
He's not required to be nice, it's the internet. But to be surprised that people react negatively to him when negativity is the only thing he contributes is just dumb |
The problem with that line of thinking is the use of obers as the benchmark. Guards are an all around unit while obers are a pure AI infatry and guard should have no chance against them.
But that's the entire point, they usually lose. Outside of that situation, obers will reliably beat guards, as they should
There is a bug that makes Guards perform better than AI infantries under certain circumstances and that is regardless of any video.
Not sure what you mean by regardless of any video. The video is literally showing one of the only scenarios the bug applies too
And I'm honestly not convinced it's because of the bug. That performance could just be because of the firing positions
I always pick Guard's PTRS regardless if I play axis or allies. I am not sure which or how many people do not or even if they are aware that Guards PTRS is different weapon than Penal PTRS.
Well aware. If you know that then you clearly know that guards have their own mosin, which has better dps than their ptrs
Unless you want the AT, there is no reason to pick up/replace a dropped ptrs on guards. That's a mistake on most squads to be honest. Gren/Vgren kar98ks, penal svts, even conscript mosins all have better dps then guard ptrs. And they can fire on the move
Many patches ago, sure their ptrs profile was stupid OP. Not anymore. You really shouldn't be picking it up on anything besides maybe engineers |
Button is situational, and almost purely defensive.
No shit it's defensive. Just a heads up, ALL snares are defensive... Except maybe on conscripts because of hoorah
You don't need the full duration of the ability to make it worth it, a few seconds can be enough to get in the extra damage/follow-up snare
Not to mention Mark target is on two guards commanders, combining that with button can be extremely deadly
it also breaks if you order the guards to do anything and their ptrs doesnt seemingly focus the target, which is fun
You can easily fix this by telling the guards to attack the target first before you button it. Not at all an issue
Not to mention you don't use it just to setup more ptrs fire. You're supposed to use it to setup damage from something else |
This is a clear case of bug that gives a clear advantage to Guards under certain conditions (enemy in green cover or garrison). This should be fixed.
The rest is just mental gymnastics ranging from silly claims that green cover does not matter, to sillier claims that "guards are shit".
While I don't agree that green cover doesn't matter/guards are shit, it's just not that clear of an advantage
The video shows it, if they need to be prone in heavy cover just to have a chance against obers then it's also not the massive deal some are making it out to be
Should it be fixed? Of course. It's going to change a lot? No. There's a reason many people don't bother picking up/replacing dropped ptrs with guards
I have no clue why people even mention it
Because it's good. If you think it's not worth mentioning you are very mistaken. So good at setting up kills for teammates
It can give you more time to get off another snare. Button tanks for brit teammates all the time so they can tulip them. I've done it for myself to setup an AT satchel
|
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
Heartless Jäger 
