Profile of Lt.Fenix

Steam username: sltfenix@hotmail.com
Steam nickname (In-game name): Lt.Fenix
Estimated Skill level (1-10): 3

But how am I supposed to win any games as Soviets without building the best unit in COH 2?

It is? Really?
Changing a hotekey in code is easy, yes, because if you don't have them customizable you basically can "hard-code" the key.
As soon as you have customizable keys you have to save a file, check what is saved, give the right parameters to the right listener, have to account for dublicated or overlapping keys, have to write an interface, account for the DAU, test all that stuff (ofc)etc.

while it is not rocket science, it still is work and time they probably rather put into something else.

And, pls, while i know coding a website can be a pain in the ass at times, it is noway near the same as coding a game

Is this discussion really going in this direction?
"Re-mappable keys are hard and the developers' efforts are best spent elsewhere?"

Firstly, if they're so crunched on time getting this game finished that they can't even work on something so simple to implement like re-mappable keys compared to everything else that they're coding in the game, then that's a fail right there.

Secondly, I want to emphasize again that being able to re-map keys to the individual user's preferences is a standard feature in PC games and has been for a very long time. Almost every other game has this. Hell even some SNES and Genesis games had re-mappable buttons if I recall.

And lastly, if they had designed this game without even thinking about the possibility of potentially having this "novel" feature called "re-mappable keys", and thus is so hard to implement later, then that's an even harder fail.

Around 19 minutes a 0-man field gun crew continues firing and takes out my god damn halftrack...

Seems like this thread might not need another opinion, but I am pretty much completely in agreement with Yoink.

I might not be able to put it in such a coherent way, but to me the whole historical setting is an important aspect of the game that makes it so enjoyable to me, as I love World War 2.

So all this saying about how the game isn't realistic to begin with and therefore it's okay to have Wehrmacht soldiers shooting at Wehrmacht soldiers for the sake of gameplay is bonkers to me. I think we can acknowledge that there are degrees of realism here (at least that's how I like to see it), and there's just a certain line that shouldn't be crossed if the game is claiming to have any sort of authenticity as a WW2 game.

Even WW2-nuts like me can tolerate whole squads of Knights Cross Holders running around with StG44's on the beaches of Normandy, or airborne guys shooting M18 Recoilless rifles in '44 France (which according to Wikipedia didn't see action until early 1945), or whole Panzergrenadier squads using scoped G43's in close combat, or Grenadiers marching around hip-shooting MG42's all the time like Germanic Rambos. But having a company of Soviet soldiers combat another company of Soviet soldiers is clearly crossing a line that people like me and Yoink would really like to see respected.

I'm thinking we're just a small fraction of people who enjoy CoH not just because of the interesting gameplay mechanics, but also because of all of the artistic effort put into the game that's there for us WW2-nuts to relish in a very fun game to play.

At the same time I get the feeling that most of the high-level players are indeed just playing a "kittens vs. puppies" game as Yoink put it, playing the game purely for the mechanics, which is awesome as long as they still enjoy the game, but whether anyone likes it or not I think people like that are missing half of what CoH is clearly representing; all of that work by the devs to make it the best WW2 RTS game of all time in all aspects, not just the strategy and tactics. To these high-level players I guess having Wehrmacht moon-bases, jetpack-propelled grenadiers, or Soviet bear-cavalries might be just fine as long as it enhances gameplay and is balanced. I myself would just find that difficult to stomach.

To me the names like MG42 team, Ranger squad with Thompsons, and King Tiger have an emotional pull. To me they're not just the tier 1 unit that costs 250 manpower that can instapin a rifle squad, or the US off-map call-in that have good CQB anti-infantry power while sucking against Pumas that cost 400 manpower and 100 ammo, or the strongest tank in the game that you call in for 500 manpower after 9(?) CPs. One of the biggest things that's getting me excited about CoH 2 is being able to see things like the Katyusha rocket trucks in action... you know, actually seeing them rendered in action launching explosive death at German soldiers on a snowy winter battlefield, in the midst of an intense brain-struggle of an RTS game against another person online! I mean where else would you get a combination like that besides CoH? I think it's safe to say that very few people alive now have seen units like that in action, and when they did I can assure you that they did not enjoy any second of it... but we can.. while playing a game we dearly enjoy.

I thoroughly enjoy the historical aspect of the game, and I'll state this blatantly as my own opinion: no facts, no speculation, and no balance arguments, just my feelings. Mirror matching would completely destroy that World War 2 enjoyment I get from playing CoH.

That's all I have to say.