Alright, I doubt that driving your tank back to base every 5 min to refuel would benefit the gameflow in any way. So no, I would not like that. However, I do like basic macro management in RTS games. That includes reeinforcement management and base buildings. Simplifying that already basic process hurts the game in my eyes. Let me ask you this: why not take this further and move units to a way point after being fully reeinforced? Or automatically search cover?
Btw, I was against adding the "manual reload" button in Coh2. I would have been fine to reset magazines after a short time when out of combat. That is tedious.
There's a downside to autoreinforcing, in that you don't have fine control over the process (which can cost you manpower). The way to alleviate that issue is to disable autoreinforce... Which is still an aspect of macro management. I get where people are coming from regarding this mechanic, but I do think it's a good change. High level players are already adept at reinforcing units, and the addition of autoreinforce isnt going to do anything but allow both players to focus more heavily on engagements.
Moving units to a waypoint after replenishment is honestly not that much different to waypointing a unit you're building, to move to a location as soon as it is built. Is the latter something that should be removed? I might even be more pedantic and ask whether you think attack-move is a bad mechanic that simplifies the game (In terms of, for example, attack moving a rifle squad so that they stay at max range rather than walking directly into an SMG squad).
Autosearching cover would be a terrible mechanic, I don't think it's comparable. Positioning and engagement managment is the core gameplay loop, automating that in some way is indeed simplifying the game in a negative fashion.
A manual reload key is far better than units reloading automatically. Unless you mean that units would just instantly replenish their magazines after a delay... In which case that would honestly be a decent idea. |
Literally anything you could come up with, we have already tested and tried in CoH2 lifespan, it didn't worked as games still devolve into tank/heavy tank fests outside of 1v1.
The only time people didn't spammed them was when they were overnerfed out of the game to the point of being hinderance rather then asset.
It didnt work because any of these ideas had to abide by the CoH2 gameplay framework. CoH3 is a different game with a budget for gameplay changes, I don't see any reason to give up on the concept of balancing heavies right now.
EDIT: Actually, you know what? Implement a resource cost of some type for repairing vehicles, that scales with the "value" of the vehicle. Or just for Heavies. |
Endless whine for last 5 years about doing something about end game always regressing into heavy tank spam was indirectly asking for faster games as attempts of extending mid game itself by strengthening LVs opened an option to play, not the solution to the problem, faster tick rate fixed that.
I think that making games end faster is kind of a band-aid fix for the complaint that lategame devolves into heavy tank spam. I'd rather have games at the length of CoH2 (or perhaps longer) than be as pressed for time as I am in CoH3.
A better solution would be to rebalance heavy vehicles so that they are a less overpowering unit type. They ought to be a tool in your arsenal rather than something so dominating. Admittedly I don't know what this would translate to, precisely. |
I feel like Autoreinforce is an absolutely ludicrous thing to complain about. There's no skill involved in mashing "F" when your units are in the base, it doesnt even take your attention away from the battlefield if you've hotkeyed your units correctly. There's no downside to this.
All Autoreinforce has done is improve the user experience, and keep players' attention on the battlefield, where the actually meaningful player interaction occurs.
There are gameplay changes made in CoH3 that warrant complaining about, but It's a massive reach to call Autoreinforce one of them, particularly if you're devising a strawman where this is akin to DoW 3's removal of veterancy/retreat mechanics. |
tldr wrong
It really isnt the same as the Katy or Werfer (Or Calliope). The stuka is fantastic for displacing/destroying team weapons, and punishing extremely static play, but against blobs it is nowhere near as reliable as the Werfer or Katy. |
Oh, how cute. But there is no such quotation in Chuikov's memoirs. But there is such a quote:
Its apparently a quote from the book "Unconditional Surrender", which is a 1945 publication by a CBS war correspondent.
The impression that I got from the Soviet campaign was not that the soldiers of the Red Army were cowards, but that the commissars and top brass (I.E Stalin and similar) were barbarians.
Though regardless of all else, this stupid topic really doesn't belong on CoH2.org. Please can we stop derailing actually relevant discussions? |
I believe they were also one of the sole reasons that Brits were designed the way they were in vcoh and coh2, but I could be wrong. I remember a lot of blame going there way though back in the day.
I suppose this is it, really. We don't know /exactly/ what Duffy was responsible for in CoH1 or 2, so it's rather hard to say whether his departure is a positive or a negative. I don't think there's any real reason to get all "doom and gloom" about this announcement; Let's see how CoH3 looks on release first. |
Not possible. Sounds and animations are tied to the model, and you can't swap them.
Very unfortunate. I wish lelic released vaguely powerful modding tools, rather than the half-arsed stuff they actually shipped. Or even just better access to "under the hood".
the panzer 2 is the german COUNTERPART of the t-70
and the king tiger is the german COUNTERPART of the IS-2
They are the closest EQUIVALENT UNITS between the factions
learn to fucking read
The German counterpart to the IS-2 is the Tiger (Or maybe the Ace?), not the Konigstiger.
This is a really stupid argument you're making, as even if OKW had a T-70 and IS-2 nondoctrinally the surrounding faction would still be completely different. |
Unfortunately, there is no way to make SVTs function as AVTs aesthetically. You can't just simply turn a single-shot weapon into a burst weapon, unfortunately. Even on the lowest possible weapon cooldowns supported by the engine, they don't even appear or sound close to being automatic.
You can go the other way (burst weapons to single shot) by having extremely short bursts though. This can be used for StG, FG42, etc, although making the SFX sound right will require lots of fine tuning.
Also Penals have badass now-unused voicelines for flamethrowers
Is it impossible to override the model that a weapon uses? If so, one could replace penals' STV-40s with STGs (or some other burst/automatic weapon) that have their models replaced with SVTs. This is the method I was expecting would be used, rather than directly modifying the SVT-40 stats.
Though, of course, this would require that animations and sounds are overridden as well... And having not actually had much experience with CoH2's """""modding tools""""" I don't know whether all of that is easily doable. It does feel like a lot of things that really ought to be trivial are practically impossible when modding this game. |
Regarding penals;
I'd make the suggestion that they ought to remain six men, and their DP upgrade be changed to provide them with ATV-40s instead. (Which would just be, in gameplay terms, SVTs that fire broadly like STGs, being most effective at the mid-ranges that you're suggesting they prefer to fight at)
I'd also suggest giving CEs the flamethrower still... rather than Penals. Especially if they're a five or six man squad. The only problem here is that CEs have rather too many options to upgrade.
I'm pleased to see that soviet team weapons are reduced to 4-man squads, incidentally. As "Thematic" as the six-man teams are; they really are a headache for balance. |