So send it to Relic?
Although given your recent posts on reddit, twitch, and coh2 this is some kind of weird jab at coh2 being the vastly inferior game to coh1. You've already made that insinuation a couple of other times in this thread.
Thats a bit of a strawman, I never said vaulting makes coh2 vastly inferior to coh1. Its one of the smaller bordering moderate things I don't like about the game, others being base MGs covering nearly 100% of the base and killing base rush, units running in from off-map, snipers not shooting the man you click on, etc. The reason I bring it up is because when people say coh2 is better than coh1, they usually point to vaulting as a big reason which is very debatable. This isn't even a conclusion I came to myself, this is something I first heard Marinez say back when he was playing 2v2 with OMGPOP, and now that I can play the same maps in both games I can easily see why.
The things COH2 does right compared to vcoh is a reverse button, toggle only fire at vehicles ability, and continuing to attack the target unit after giving a move order. In coh1 every time you gave a move order your unit would auto attack something else if it had a higher target priority. That is a HUGE improvement that doesn't get much appreciation because people either forgot or didn't play coh1. |
Ok, but seriously. What is the point of this post? To usher in the great CoH1 revival by showing this forum the light of vaulting being overrated?
In COH1 the maps had to be balanced so that there were enough obstacles to steer attacking infantry, but enough entrys/exits to not make MGs completely overpowered. It feels as if vaulting is just a fool proof way to not make MGs overpowered on any map, but at the expense of nerfing the shit out of smart early MG play. I have zero expectation this will be changed in COH2, but its a good lesson to learn from for future COH or DOW games. When the current system is working fine, adding in new features that shakes it up should be avoided unless it without a doubt improves gameplay in a meaningful way. |
Maybe at your ranks MGd aren't good in mid. But in high level play MGs dominate the middle of semos. There is so much green cover and so many good houses to put them in. Unless you're against Brits... #CentaurBalance
There are very few maps left in the pool that MGs aren't strong on.
They are still strong over the course of the game, but they are weaker in early minutes since great awareness very rarely translates to completely shutting down a early game flank with more than 1 MG. Keeping track in your mind where the first 2-4 units will come from matters less when attacker can basically make his own decisions how to approach MGs as opposed to choosing from the options the map provides.
Also that "your level" jab is pretty unfounded, beaten PanzerGrenA badly recently, beaten Pappy ODaniel, rekt your friend Brad long time ago as well, and 1v1 isn't even my preferred mode in coh2. Any high level coh1 player can come to coh2 and do well after shaking the dust off and learning the current meta (which frankly isn't that complex), the mechanical skill sets are very transferable between the two games.
shitpost
I said something like I'm not playing very much if any 1v1 until a better patch.
|
Just put in objects that can't be vaulted... Or put crap on the other side of the wall so you can't vault it?
Map makers can still funnel combat in plenty of ways, and they already do this. Vaulting is a great mechanic and leads to many rewarding situations for good players.
True but none of the ported maps do that. Semois is probably the worst offender, the middle is a no fly zone for MGs early game. |
I think you're mistaken on that point, even 1,07 pre OF there was stug vs sherman then m8 v puma and the ubiquitous riflespam vs. semois pin. Then Ofs elite infantry spam, reborns scout car spam + luftwaffe gf, wehr pio spam to t2, or the particularly irksome which never changed T2 gren spam to KT, brit pins against flamers and an ht. There were very specific strategic flowsand evolutions throughout time, arguably more diverse to your point
This will be by last post here since this is heading back in the direction of global upgrades and doctrines which has been discussed 5000 times so I feel like a broken record here. Even though vcoh had some pretty bad one dimensional balance for a good while, the differences in upgrades and doctrines really enhanced it once the units were balanced. Once COH2 units are balanced, those other 2 systems that were the meat and potatoes of 1v1 still won't be there. Its also worth mentioning I'm pretty sure coh2 has already passed coh1 in number of patches delivered, plus more content is still coming for an indefinite period of time. It could take another 30 patches to get the final product balanced/unbugged.
Something to consider, and this is something Pez told me a while back, is people were more willing to suffer through the faulty stages of coh1 because it was a revolutionary game at the time. When sequel releases 7 years later, a lot of people jump ship when its in a bad state because it doesn't have that novelty factor. |
was that all in the matches which COH2.ORG youtube channel uploaded about SNF4?
I trust you are right. Now I never played coh1 competitively but were those strat in that last coh1 patch that everybody heralds as the great patch? 2.7023042130123 whatever the hell it is?
in OCF broadcast, I saw just as much of variety as how many strat you pointed out. and a hella more from good players if you count casts from imperial dane, atr3uh, computer heat, tight rope, machine and his buddy, ami, devils brigade and on and on and on.
That was just throughout 2.602 so SNF3-4 some of the GR.org tournaments and general automatch trends
Listen, I've watched this thread get essentially dominated by Basilone's posts. Parts of what he has written is true but the majority of what he writes is simply his opinion (and wrong IMHO).
Try the game. Make up your own mind. That's the only way to really know how it compares for you, because I can tell you Basilone's opinions are nowhere close to mine or most of the playerbase of Coh2.
But don't trust me... simply take a look at his post history going back over the months to see what he and others have said in response. It's eye opening.
I've said several times that team games in coh2 is basically on par with coh1, but 1v1 is much more limited and I don't see anyone could dispute that. I've played over a 1000 games (probably over half in the first 6 months) but enough lately to speak from experience rather than some random coh1 player just bashing the game based on how they didn't like the beta.
|
you mean Ami or Yoink saying "will he go BARs or M8" like a million times?
depth is depth but the vcoh depth didn't do much for strategy variety in SNF4. extremely great season but in terms of variety of strategies deployed, it was same as SNF5's con spam vs. gren spam.
I don't remember specifically what happened in season 5 but I remember m3allems Angoville strategy, SiberianPlatoon's unorthodox play on Semois going left instead of center with a early med bunker and building every tier. I remember Aimstrong's VVSM T2 T3 terror, his 3 engineer rifles sticky triage anti PE strategy, Fir3balls getting 8-9 T1 units, Magpies FHQ volk spam, 5 pio T2, Tommy + Aimstrongs T1 support strat (vs Brits), DevM winning early game vs other elite player using good Jeep micro, Nosliw's AC tank destroyer strat, KoreanArmy's 3 rifles grenades M8 strat, 4ES, 4ES Rax, Silence's T17 spam, Dr Horse using Calliopes in a GR tournament finals, Sandlands base rush strats, and more. Maybe COH2 has had that many viable strats since Jun 2013, but coh1 had that in ONE PATCH.
The coh2 patch that produced the most viable ways to play one faction in 1v1 was probably when Soviets had OP T70, OP Shocktroops, OP HTD, OP Ram, or Guard Motor (2 years ago). |
If it was -60% it would be 16 x .4= 6.4 dmg. |
Developer response: KV-8 damage reduced from 16 to 10 ( -60%)
Case closed, thank you relic. Best and most sensible tweaking.
Thats not -60% but ok |
This is just the same thing that ended fucking up DICE: Working on BF4, Star Wars Battlefront, Hardline and an announced Battlefield game simultaneously.
And we all know how bad BF4 and Hardline turned out.
You can't polish a game with such workload and they just rushed them and fix them 2 years later.
Hardline was made almost completely by Visceral (Dead Space). I remember hearing that DICE was split working on BF3 and BF4, and BF4 development started around the same time or shortly after they were working on BF3. So the problem wasn't really lack of manpower or not enough development time, it was probably not enough testing or they broke something mid development but still pushed it out to door to release with the new consoles. They did do a great job fixing the game and patching it though, already released a new free map and have two more in development being made from commnity feedback on the CTE servers which is really good. I think they redeemed themselves for the shitty launch, same with TWR2. |