So now anyone voicing their concern about unit roster overlapping too much is foolish and silly? You are not aware that people can disagree with you, are you?
I can write more about why I think that way, but that would be a waste of time to engage in this conversation. Do what you want.
If you're trying to say that I want to silence/censor people or the discussion you're very much mistaken.
I'm just putting forth my opinion in your discussion about the overlap, nothing more.
Of course we're all different individuals with our own experiences and views on things so there's nothing bad about discussing things.
However I have been playing Company of Heroes since 2006 when it first originally released and with the Panzer Elite in Opposing Front launching about an year later it was fairly obvious to everyone that there was going to be overlap between the 2 Armies since again, they're both German.
So you had the basic infantry, that is the Panzergrenadiers for PE and Grenadiers for WH being fairly similar, both using the Panther tank, both having halftracks and armored cars that somewhat filled the same roles and so on and so forth.
But the overlap of units or at least similar units fulfilling the same role is unavoidable due to obvious reasons and I don't think a lot of people batted an eye about it back then, including me, and so I just think that it's being over-exaggerated by people on here and I don't mean you specifically either.
it can be overlooked to a certain degree, but yeah. It remind me once i created a highland infantry section with sniper voice line, sound pretty nice i will say. Sure the ausies wont sound that good. I will just stick with Recon section then, they can fit to more than one commander.
The Commando voicelines also fit from what I remember since they never actually say "Commandos", again from what I remember at least.
Why though? All other factions have commanders that have multiple “selling point” abilities.
For example, Soviets have Mechanized support tactics with Guards and ISU 152, or Shock army tactics with Shocks and T34/85s, or USF who have Heavy Cavalry company with Rangers and Pershing, or Tactical support company with M1919 LMGs and Caliope, or UKF, who have Vanguard regiment with Crocodile and Strafing support and Commandos, or Royal artillery regiment with Valentine and Sexton.
I think this is one of the reasons why Ostheer commanders feel so similar, because most of the abilities are weak and not worth choosing a specific commander over, with Anne impactful ability or unit sprinkled in each commander
Agreed.
It just feels like the Army is playing second fiddle to the OKW because of the amount and low quality of toys it has compared to it.
Stuff like a Forward Retreat Point, even doctrinally, repair station upgrade for the bunker, Puma, Jagdpanzer IV, King Tiger and whatever else they can transfer over would really help the faction out in my opinion.
Like I've said before, it's a solidly built faction but the amount of tools it has and thus options it provides is a bit lackluster when compared to other designs if you ask me.
Does Ostheer really need more doctrines with heavy tanks? I feel there are far more interesting units or abilities Ostheer could get than another heavy tank doctrine.
This new King Tiger would be like I already said for something like Mobile Defense since it fits it's theme.
Something to bring the commander up back to scale again and make it usable, or as Sander said, Festung doctrine again for the same reasons.
There are a fair few doctrines struggling right now from what I'm seeing, and I think many of us can agree on that point, and so I think this is also a fair suggestion on how to alleviate that for at least maybe a couple if not more.
I didn't suggest to remove anything, so there's no need to be cynical about it. Exactly because there's a large amount of overlap already, having more overlap will erode the faction identity. I thought it is a perfectly fair point to make.
It would have been a fair point to make oh I don't know, maybe a few years ago before the community development team took over.
Now we have so much of your supposed "overlap" that it doesn't really matter at this point.
Both factions are German and they will share a lot of units, that's a given.
But even if their rosters were exactly 1:1 they would still not be the same Army/faction and would still unique and diverse enough to be played very much differently.
Comparing a mostly Eastern Front focused defensive sort of faction to a late 1944 mostly offensive Western one again, even if their rosters did overlap so much is just foolish and silly.
They will never feel or play the same, or similar for a matter of fact, as much as people would like to overexaggerate it.
True, but removing units from doctrines can be necessary for Balance purposes, unfortunately. (This is partially caused by doctrines sharing units, actually. It's easier to remove and replace an unit than rebalance the unit directly, as you are simultaneously rebalancing multiple doctrines.)
A lot of this might also be solved if, as we discussed in another thread, Lelic just allowed us to import models/textures again. There's little stopping the balance team adding any of the units you mentioned, other than the inability to add the assets.
And the effort required to design them, obviously.
Agreed, but there's also been plenty of instances where things were changed up and not necessarily needed to be removed in order to balance things as well.
Things like for example Relief Infantry for Ostheer and Conscription for the Soviets are 2 abilities which I would call exceptions because they're going against the game's design of encouraging the player to preserve his units rather than blindly charge them at the enemy and so should be either replaced or removed in my opinion.
Which actually reminded me of Allied War Machine for the US back in the old CoH, didn't make much sense back then either for the "zombie tank" ability.
There was no way to counter it either besides trying not to destroy the enemy units which was very hard and the US player could freely make a large offensive because even if he lost his tanks he'd get new ones and just keep on pushing since it also had a large timer.
And then it was nerfed to only you getting 2 Shermans back for whatever tanks that were destroyed for 200 munitions.
Part of the issue is the sheer number of doctrines (Especially for SOV and OST) relative to the number of doctrinal units to sprinkle between them. It's too late now, but honestly the number of Commanders ought to have been pared down, or the number of unique units ought to have been increased so that no two doctrines share anything.
Yeah and I agree.
If it were up to me I would have included a Porsche Tiger for example, which would basically be the Elefant/Ferdinand with a Tiger turret as a unique unit for an Ostheer doctrine.
Maybe a Wespe or Grille as Self-propelled artillery.
The Sherman Jumbo for the USF as I've already mentioned on several places here already.
For the Soviets like somebody else said the SU-100 and BS-3 perhaps as well.
Stuff like the Hummel, Jagdpanther and so forth for the OKW.
This would of course all require new models and thus up to Relic but as you said, it's too late now sadly for that.
But there's definitely a lot more that can be done that adds options and actual diversity and uniqueness rather than removing units and abilities from already present and established commanders.
I mean, to be fair, you could switch literally any vehicle between OKW and OST and it wouldn't seem out of place, they are literally the same faction after all.
You could probably even do the same for any of the Infantry, too.
Yeah but I mean the voices also seem to be as well.
It doesn't sound out of place if you ask me like maybe something like the Jagpanzer IV would for example, even tho that would probably also be a good fit for the Ostheer.
It will make it more unique and desirable, because it won't be all over the place, being a common unit.
Sure.
Why not go ahead and remove the Churchill Croc from all 3 of it's current doctrines for the British as well.
Or the T-34/85 for the Soviets as well.
Just because the Pershing, E8 and other tanks are in singular doctrines doesn't make them good, "unique" or more desirable.
It makes them less of a good choice because they're stuck in shitty doctrines.
Not to mention that as far as I'm aware these updates should add more content and options to the game for people to enjoy, not remove already present and well known ones.
Because not everybody wants to feel like a special snowflake with his commander that he picked just because of 1 tank.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
