Profile of LuckyHammer777

thats a bummer but i tell u that game was the most balanced game wise i've ever seen neither side had an advantage and all the units had level playing field stats instead of the horrid asymmetrical balance we see in CoH2 today. maybe relic ought to do symmetrical balance instead where all the factions have the same advantages like the way WiC did it.

I liked this game too, I've played several multiplayer games on it. Also the game was particulary beautiful when it was released.

Maybe no faction had an advantage over the other one, but there were cleary no differences between Soviets and US/Nato units ... All the units were the same, which is cleary not a good point for me. That's not what I call balance. Thus it became clear that the game had a quite poor gameplay depth in the end, in spite of some innovative ideas like the fact that each player had to pick a role to get a significant price decrease on some units, or some funny ones like the nukes (which were useless most of the time but gave eyeful).

Games with different factions having different units and playstyles are much more interesting to play, like COH or Starcraft.

And, honestly, there a no major balances issues on COH 2. Actually, what is really broken ? The calliope ? It might be a bit strong, but nothing that can't be handle. When it will be fixed, there will be something else to complain about. When COH 2 was released, it was Wehrmacht's flame half-track, then grenade launcher, then LGM42s+G43s, then Flak-half track when OKW was released ... It never ends.

It is exactly like Starcraft II : everyone whines about things being broken (mines, oracles, hellbat, storms ...) despite the game is well balanced in overall and these things are quickly nerfed.

So I think that WiC deserved its poor popularity. Copying and pasting units for every factions is not enough to make a good multiplayer RTS, especially when there are only two factions ...

I must say that I would love to have each faction's OV. On COH, I dowloaded the audio files of German and English versions of the game to have the German and English voices in my game. It was way more immersive. Unfortunatly, I can't do the same for COH 2.

I don't get what is difficult about putting an option to have russian, german and english voices in the game. Since everything is already recorded, there should be no major problem.

I never liked the "Ich bin ready" "Ich vierderhole, fall back position is canceled" things ... And I think I'm not the only one who does.

Even on free to play like World of Tanks there is an option to have the native langage of each nation : Russian, German, English, Japanese, Chinese and French !

Most of the time i manage to prevent the British player from building positions. I was talking about the situation where british positions are set up.

I'm probably doing it wrong, but shreck rush doesn't work most of the time for me once the position is built. The brace stance makes the position very tanky : it gives a lot of time to the brit player to react. A braced position can deal with more than 10 schrecks shots.

Hi !

When playing as Axis, I always struggle if the British player build any position.

- The mortar pit comes quite early in the game and is a major threat to anything that stops within its range. The double shot can wipes out most of infantry units and MGs.
- The Bofors just rapes anything on foot and all light vehicules. Its barrage prevent it from being countered by mortars, which is very annoying.
- The 17 pounders, well placed, locks down an huge aera for any tank.

The problem I face is that they are just way too tanky with their brace ability. It is very risky to destroy them by rushing with some shrecks for example, because their brace ability make them to tanky, and gives the British player a lot of time to react, which exposes your troops a lot.
Making artillery to destroy them doesn’t work most of the time, because it takes ages.
• As Werhmacht :
- Panzerwerfer are good at killing infantry, but poorly damages structures and tanks, so even if its barrage is really quick, is does nearly nothing to structures.
- Howitzers barrages are ineffective. Even if, on the paper, shells deal high damages to positions, the British player will activate the brace ability as the first shell lands near his positions and doing so negate most of the damages. Also, despite the howitzer barrage ability reloads quickly and is around one minute long, it has an important scatter, so most of the shells will miss. Overall, the amount of damages dealt will be really low.
• As OKW :
- The Stuka barrage : even if a rocket deals fairly decent damages to structures, only one or two can land of a position because the barrage is being fired in a straight line. And, if the British player is aware enough, he can activate the brace ability before the rockets' impact.
- The ISG simply doesn’t deal enough damages.

Well, even if I'm posting this is the balance thread, I'm not telling these positions are OP. They cost a lot and their effectiveness reflects that. I'm just saying that their hitpoints should be decreased.

Their germans counterparts, the Pak 88 and Flak 38, are very powerful too, but can be easily decrewed. An infantry rush with some nades or an artillery strike is plently enough to take out a Flak 88. The Flak 38 can be decrewed with two nades or destroyed with some zook or tank shots (maybe that's why no one builds it ). Also, the fact than they can be decrewed mean they can be captured, which make them like a double edged sword.

Thanx for reading and replies.