OR because of how the game plays (dynamics, handling, mechanics, engine) it might not make too much sense on having it? IMO it would be a layer of depth which doesn't really add to much due to how positioning and projectiles and handled.
On CoH2, IMO, this not worth it, cause you'll had to implement a new mechanic and stress the PC even more to handle the respective position between the damage dealer and the victim target. Right now, it all depends on what part of the tank, the shell lands. If the vehicle lands an accuracy role, it would most probably land right on a straight line to the vehicle. But when not and with scatter, what would be a "frontal" shot can transform into a "rear" shot with enough RNG. If side armor was implemented this would be even worst.
First of all the stress on the PC is neglegible
Second of all it reduces the amount of RNG: Imagine a tank shooting exactly at the side of the other tank. In vcoh that was always side armor, but in coh2 it is a coin toss between front and rear which makes a huge difference. side armor basically eliminates the situation when you flank an enemy tank but only hit its front
This adds a very nice strategic component, some tanks might have more side armor, some less, which would require more micro and thought put into it.
And yes, pathfinding sucks, but that is another thing for itself
No other option? Maybe it was a tech issue since it was the DOW2 engine.
as the dow2 engine is an pdated version of the coh1 enginge i highly doubt that
It could be a design decision but not laziness.
it would have made the game better, which means it was a stupid decision, but many like those were made
I'll do this later?! LOL There might not be a later, it isn't a good way to run a business and not how developers what to ship a title.
many latest releases beg to difer