Profile of Willy Pete

no i dont, because for balance reasons. This is a game not a simulation

My point exactly...

any tank used in battle during ww2, can be in a ww2 game. There is your line in case it hasn't been clear enough for the last 100 posts

But u dont care at all about how that tank is portrayed, thats my point

Doesnt matter that it has a forumla 1 engine, and is fast enough offroad to crush entire squads? Apparently not

Doesnt matter to u that these tanks appear in all sorts of fictional battles on fronts they never particpated in?

Let's finally get the hell out of what's okay and what's not okay:
- A BP who has never been to the War is okay
- M1 Abrams whose appearance is as realistic as a BP in a war is not okay
- If the IS-7, which was produced in 1946, was added to the game, would it be okay?
- Or ARL-44 for Free France. The number 44 which means that the tank was designed in 1944 but started being produced in 1948 and has a World War I design, is that okay?

Where do we draw the line which tanks that were not in the war are OK and which are not.

Being completed while the war was going on works for me... I rly shouldnt have to explain the difference between 1945 and the 1970s, i would hope thats relatively obvious

But answer my question? Where do u draw the line for authenticity?

Its okay for tanks to be portrayed completely innacurately, as long as the models were real? Their speed and handling can be on par with modern cars, the battles they are fighting in can be completely fabricated, they can be reliably lazered from the sky by planes, they can be spotted by a flare launched from a mortar, but as long as the names and appearance are correct its still considered "authentic"?

That makes zero sense to me. The BP breaks immersion for u, but how the hell were u ever immersed in the first place???

I guess you agree then that the availability of the Sturmtiger and the BP will be roughly equal. So, it follows that the only other thing we can look at is the timeline. In which case the BP is more immersion breaking than the ST. The BP probably isn’t limited to one, so I don’t know why you’re comparing your ideal scenario for the BP with the few months that the ST was broken. I’m not interested in what you think should happen but what is happening in reality. Right now, the ST and BP are going to have more or less the same availability. Even if the ST was a bit more common to see, it did fight in the period and place on which OKW is based. It has every right to be more common than the BP. The Pershing is also a rarely seen vehicle in COH2 but you still think it is on the level of the BP.

I am comparing the immersion of the entire games, not just the units included. If tanks being too fast for soldiers to dodge crushing doesnt break immersion for u, i dont see why the BP does. If a flare providing any kind of visual assistance in broad daylight doesnt break immersion, why does the BP?

U can say its different all u want, the result is the same. Coh2 was not historically immersive by any means

I guess nobody ever though of not overbuffing units. What a brilliant idea.

Well it happened constantly in coh2 so its a valid concern to bring up.....

Implying other options aren’t viable right now because of the ST and JT, is such a laughable statement.

Then its a good thing i didnt say that. I said that i was talking about the specific patch that launched ST meta:

Another way u limit it is by making other options viable, and avoid doing things like overbuffing ST (which caused the temporary period where u saw one every game)

Do u know what the word temporary means? I was not talking about right now for ST

JT and elefant on the other hand clearly dominate team games. Thats not even debateable, the stats literally back it up. Breakthrough and jaeger armor are the most popular commanders in 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4...https://coh2stats.com/stats?range=month&statsSource=all&type=2v2&race=wermacht&timeStamp=1661990400

You can limit certain vehicles to one but that doesn’t mean you won’t see them every game.

OF course it doesnt, but it does require ppl to be much more careful with them. Rather than being able to replace them easily which happens all the time in team games due to resource float

I’m trying to figure out at roughly what point you considered something to be too inauthentic for COH.

ANd ive been wondering the same thing about u this whole time. U have no issue with tanks having absurd speed, flares providing reconaissance, the brits fighting on the eastern front, planes being able to track vehicles as if they have targeting computers. But suddenly a prototype shows up and NOW the game is inauthentic? That makes no sense at all

You can duck out of the example of little boy and fat man but the point obviously wasn’t about balance.

Ur point isnt about balance, but mine is. I care more about competitive balance than i do about history for the video game. THat doesnt mean history is unimportant, its just a secondary concern to balance...

You’re stating that this isn’t an authentic WW2 game, so the inclusion of the BP is fine. Then it follows that any inclusion (as long as it was designed during WW2 like you stated) is fine. Then little boy and fat man could be off-maps and every German unit can get IR StG44s. You should probably commit to that position instead of walking away from it every time I try to counter it.

Im not walking away from it. Im saying that the m1 Abrams is an absurd exaggeration of my argument

Little boy and fatman would be bad for gameplay reasons. Nobody wants to play an rts game where they can lose everything all at once to an uncounterable unit

It all depends on frequency. Irstgs on every single squad would be too much. Just like if BP is closing out every single game for brits it would be too much. Have to wait and see how its implemented

Irstgs in coh2 are good exanple of the right balance. Only available on elite squads thru specific doctrines. That itself is still an exaggeration but at least it was well limited

If you agree that the BP is more of a stretch than the JT and ST and some things are too unhistorical for COH, then we can formulate at what point something is too fictional for COH.

I didnt say i agree its more of a stretch, i said they are different. They are different stretches but the result is the same: breaking immersion from a realistic ww2 experience

Its only "more of a stretch" if the timeline is the only thing u care about. Why does BP bother ppl while tanks having nascar engines does not? I do not understand that

When you’re saying that you don’t expect Relic to keep the ruse up, that’s pretty synonymous with anything goes. If the fundamental disagreement here is that you don’t think COH should strive for some authenticity and I think it should, then there isn’t any point in discussing this further.

BUt the 1st two games didnt strive for authenticity, so why shuld the 3rd?

I would rly just like them to be honest. They were dishonest in coh2 when they said they would never add pershing because it didnt fit USF design. Then they added it

With BP they are at least acknowledging up front that they have gone in a more fictional direction. Is BP alone enough to stop you from buying the game? Cuz thats the main thing i don't understand