edit: Inverse covered most points before me.
Sc2 and sc:bw only shared a handful of top level players
I disagree, the very best Korean players were on Kespa teams which officially switched BW to SC2 early in WoL. Over half of the current top players (rough estimate) in SC2 have a history in BW. They can only really do this due to the 'e-sports infrastructure' unique to Korea though.
and their respective communities were much like coh1 and coh2's for a long long time, probably still are but I don't keep up with it.
For Brood War, maybe. It was never that big outside of Korea, but the level of competition was considerably higher with LANs/sponsorships. The size of the CoH2 community is and never has been anywhere near that of SC2, despite Starcraft losing a lot of players to MOBAs and other f2ps.
Of course dota and dota2 kept the same players, dota2 is 99% a copy/paste of dota1. Coh2 shares very little other than genre with CoH1 theyre totally different games.
I'd say that both coh games are really similar compared to other sequels like DoW(1-2) and SC(BW-2) or even non-RTSes like CS(S-GO). The core game mechanics are the same, even if gameplay feels a lot different between versions which is kind of what Dota has too.
Plus the majority of top vCoH players are much older now with a lot more going on in life, it's just natural that they wouldn't play as much or as competitively. I see the discussion a lot about "coh2 just doesn't make me want to spam games as much as I used to" and I'd say that applies to basically any game. I used to be able to play stuff for like 10 or 12 hours a day back in high school and college. I can't do that today even when I'm in love with a game, after a few hours I'm ready for a break no matter how much fun I'm having... It's just life.
Good point, many coh1 players were college students, so once you finish your education you're unlikely to have as much time to spend or maybe you just lose interest. |
It depends on what you mean by "future". People will play it as long as the servers stay up, but it won't grow, and there won't be a proper competitive scene.
Pretty much, there's no incentive for players to come back to CoH1 when Relic obviously just wants to push the sequel for more dlc/expansions and such. New players will be more attracted to the newer and prettier campaign of coh2 rather than try out coh1 multiplayer. |
|
With last tourney I meant star crossed cup. It got 600 viewers in the finals which is really good.
One thing I have noticed in coh2 is that streaming is a lot bigger now than it was in coh1. Nowadays some streams will often get close to 200 viewers whereas before you could get 100 at most. |
Comebacks are still extremely difficult in CoH 2. Sure you are getting more manpower/minute but you have to push into squads that get to camp cover, you've almost surely bled more MP since you're losing, you don't have munitions for things like mines, off-maps, weapon upgrades, etc and you will be at a major fuel disadvantage. Come-backs are exciting to watch and keep people motivated to always try hard to win, even when they feel like they're in an unwinnable situation. Losing quickly because you can't even field an army is not fun for the players and it is not fun for spectators. The only way any game can be majorly competitive is if enough people like to spectate, because that is where the money lies.
Most comebacks happen when the opponent overextends and is too aggressive, same way as in CoH1. The alternative is often that they lose squads by over-the top RNG which has no place in a competitive game, no matter how much spectators like it. I can't say I've never had planes crash and wipe entire squads or having a pak snipe both the members of your sniper team.
Call-ins/heavies have definitely plagued the meta for a while, can't disagree with that, but hopefully Relic will address the issue in the future. We as the community have made our voices heard numerous times so the ball is in their court now. But to suggest that veterency is meaningless in CoH 2 is nothing short of completely ignorant. Vet is *extremely* important, and is probably the biggest deciding factor in games. I'm not sure I've ever seen a game where some one wins with a less vetted army...
You misunderstand because I wrote it badly, I meant to say that acquiring vet is meaningless in the way that you gain it without any effort and sometimes at an insane rate on some units (i.e. most infantry units, more-so if they have AT weapons). All you have to do is use the unit and you'll more often than not end up with vet2/3. The veterancy itself is indeed very important, which is why games in the late game can be decided by who gets a lucky squad wipe on a high veterancy unit.
It is hard sometimes to keep your squads alive but this patch is better than any other that I can remember in terms of squad wipes, thankfully this is something Relic can easily continue to improve upon.
Relic needs to add a button that toggles squad 'cover seeking' behaviour on/off. I don't see why Relic had to change the lethality of tanks vs infantry away from the CoH1 method which seemed to have a good balance.
If you're playing for the "save me RNG gods" squad wipes, sure you might win every once in a while, but it is easy enough to out-play people that this isn't really the meta at all.
If it's easy enough to outplay people then there is not enough competition, but in close games these things can and will decide the outcome.
CoH 2 commander system is way better than vCoH's doctrines. Sov and Ost have numerous viable commanders, USF/OKW are more limited, but they also have way fewer. (Off the top of my head for Sov: Guard Motor, Shock Rifle, Soviet Shock Army, Guards ISU, Shocks ISU, Tank Hunter, M4 Shermans, Advanced Warfare... plus a few more I'm probably forgetting) the top two are probably Guard Motor/Shock Rifle but the other commanders definitely have their place, and are in some situations better than the two most used.
Most of those are behind a pay-wall though. You are certainly correct in that Soviets have the most viable commanders (which follow the same structure of PTRS/PPSh and/or call-in, preferably both), but for ost and OKW I'm always suprised if I see less than 2 blues.
Rifles don't really have good supporting AT, you can easily get out teched - it happens all the time. That statement is just false =/
I highly doubt that, USF teching is very fast and almost always you'll be holding most of the map too. Rifle AT nades are pretty stupid sometimes, but at least obtaining ability is free. Soviets have an ATG in one of the very first buildings they can build. OKW can make do with T0 units until something heavier than a sherman comes out.
Your analysis of the current CoH 2 2v2 meta seems very wrong. Can't remember the last time I got a KT as OKW in a 2v2. Ost T3 is very viable, as are call-ins (of course). Soviet can do anything except T3 in my opinion - Shocks are Guards are both viable now.
The KT does indeed get wrecked since last patch with the armor nerf and jackson buff. Ost T3 is really map dependant, in my experience P4s just don't scale well enough against jacksons/su85s to be worth investing a lot into past the mid game, a but like soviet T3.
As for the level of competition in COH 2, if it is as nonexistent as you claim why aren't you and your mate even top 25 of the 1v1 or 2v2 ladders? Well, maybe you are under a different name? But I don't think insulting the top CoH 2 players with a blanket statement like that is wise. There are a lot of extremely skilled CoH 2 players.
Last tourney got less than 100 sign-ups afaik, I believe the massive 1k tourney got less viewers than last coh1 snf event (correct me if I'm wrong).
Besides, I personally have no interest in doing so because there are better games to get good at.
|
no problem:
-new resource system allows more comebacks
Why is this a good thing? Just means the worse player gets an advantage for playing bad.
-the lategame isnt just about snipers and arty anymore
and i actually find a lategame which is dominated by tanks and heavy tanks much more logical and enjoyable than a lategame which is dominated by snipers
It's about spamming heavy tanks/call-ins and trying to wipe squads with RNG bullshit. Getting vet is meaningless in CoH2 when you get it so quickly from everything.
-the commander system actually provides a rather good diversity of how a game envolves. AND I KNOW: PEOPLE WILL NOW REPLY: HEY EVERYONE TAKES THE ALL SAME COMMANDERS AGAIN AND AGAIN! yes its true some are better than others. however the rate at which someone uses a less taken commander is actually rather high. and the many different commanders provide plenty of tactical options for creative and fun gameplay
Certainly true, the CoH2 commander system had some potential. If only Relic actually balanced them. Right now 75%+ of all commanders are useless and everyone goes the same docs in 1v1 anyway. Docs like guard motor are the best choice in pretty much every situation.
-stuff like crushing knights cross and grens with m10 was imo nothing more than lame and abusive. this happens at a much lower rate in coh2.
Because everything has AT. There is no more strategic depth to teching. You can't get outteched because AT guns are so easily available and every basic infantry unit has really good supporting AT. Besides, getting your infantry crushed can easily be avoided. They get crushed because you play bad, same in CoH2.
-90% of CoH1 2v2 games consisted of learning maps and build orders by heart:
wehr player 1: defensive, vetgrenspam, medbunker, Flak, t4+stuka
wehr player 2: Terror, 3 snipers, support vet, pumas und nebelwerfer spam
US player 1: 4 rifles BARS m10spam Calliope
US player 2: 2 mgs, 2 snipers, m8, at gun spam, 2 howitzers
You will state: Hey there were variations of thi and it wasnt always the same. well for me it it felt like it. and in the end of coh1's lifecycle, when everyone played like this, i was just sick of trying to countersnipe, dodging nebelwerfer barrages, encountering a wall of 5 rep/medic bunkers and so on. the lategame was literally hammering arty or being hammered and then creeping with snipers. and i just couldnt stand that anymore
CoH 2v2 meta was indeed boring, but same goes for most of the 2v2 matches in CoH2:
ostheer: spam grens + paks/mortar/HT -> call-in or close air.
OKW: spam volks -> elite inf and eventually KT
USF: spam rifles -> stuart or m20 -> spam jacksons + M4 + paras/1919rifles.
soviets: double sniper/T2 -> guards -> call-ins
- CoH2 has a great variety of possible counters: to anything:
vs tanks for example: Stugs, jagdpanzer4, paks, shreks, jagdtiger, mines, anti tanks strafe etc.
and all of this stuff is actually being built.
Same thing in CoH1: Stugs, panther/p4, paks, schrecks, kintiger, mines, goliath
CoH1 has a boring meta, especially in 2v2 (which elitemod certainly changed quite a bit), but is still by far the superior game. The level of competition of CoH2 is virtually non-existent but when my mate asks me to play, it's gonna by CoH2 every time because at least there's still players playing 2v2s there. |
|
Yeah this was written for last patch, right now guard motor tactics is probably your best bet in most cases. Haven't tried AT-tactics but it seems kind of overrated tbh.
Snipers lost their 'get out of jail free' ability so using them got a bit trickier. I do believe obers are more expensive to reinforce (not sure though) so you'll probably be seeing more Pzfus instead of obers. |
|
Who is Sandland? |
In the past it was, but not in the current state.
It is, you have a large advantage in 1v1 with mech. assault and/or elite troops, same goes with rifle company. Other more arguable choices are scavenge, lightning war, counterattack, etc. (Not sure if fortification is paid but every okw 1v1 v. Soviet uses that doc).
It doesn't matter how cheap the commanders are when on sale or how you have a (tiny) chance of getting better commanders through war spoils. If you want a competitive game you can't have this shit give a player an advantage from the very start of the game because they happened to have spent more money on it or played longer. |
Provide a replay of this not working for you. Please.
Hes also posted replays before of him using MG42 properly,and look at his ranks.
why would he lie to you?
Quite a shocking response coming from a 'senior strategist'. Instead of proving something works you ask others to try it out for you?
There are obvious flaws to double MG, for example the fact that only idiots will drive their m20 into an MG, wait for it to load AP and then get their vehicle destroyed. There is a reason most 'good' players do grenspam. It's easier and doesn't rely on your opponent fucking up.
Stats are meaningless in such a sample size unless he actually beat good players, which would then mean there might be replays to show me wrong. You could do 20-0 in coh1/coh2/sc2/whatever with any stupid strat but that doesn't mean it's a good one. Just means you haven't faced a good opponent.
My advice: well micro'd armored cars and halftracks + lmg42s are ostheer's biggest strength in the mid game, be sure to use green cover and houses as much as possible and keep your T1 units together. Sniper is decent if you can keep map control.
|
|
^ Then I'm sure you can provide us with replays of this working vs. good US players? |
Relic Entertainment
