Profile of AvNY

Now there is a tournament for COH1 could you guys please vote to patch and just remove the bugs from steam edition? I really hate CoH2, but CoH1 compared to CoH2 is too broken that I rather to play CoH2 with all of its stupid casual pay to win features.

What I want to see getting fixed:

1. Ranked system

2. Players rank being shown in Loading

3. Return of Arranged Teams mode

4. Volksgrenadier upkeep cost bug (USA is autoloss against both PE and Wehrmacht because of no upkeep cost for Axis)

5. Riflemen veterancy not being awarded correctly

There are certainly some bugs that could be EASILY fixed (we know because modders have done so easily). M10 misfire bug, Stag constant MG, others. None of these are hard coded bugs nor are they balance issues, though they would affect balance some.

And it is possible they might be able to fix showing rank in lobby since that was part of the original code, though it was easily gamed, so... meh.

Not sure what you mean about rifle veterancy. They get awarded vet just fine. Yes, it is annoying that they still need to kill 8 vet3 volks to vet up from 0 to 1, but fundamental parts of game design will not be changed at this point.

Arranged teams? That is a player base issue. If enough use it it will work. The logic of it is tautological. Nobody goes there because nobody goes there. If enough people used it then people would use it.

One other problem with Pacific campaign is that jungle is involved, and whilst its easy to think of lots of battlefields that weren't, you couldn't really miss them out without compromising the theme.

Jungle maps would mostly suck - like Bryant Forest with mosquitos.

They could go to a whole new level of "gritty game design" by modeling the dysentery both armies suffered.

More emphasis on 2v2s or team gameplay in general. 1v1 shouldn't HAVE to dictate the direction of the game for all modes

There is a big business argument for balancing around 3v3 and 4v4. Even with a game balanced for 1v1 there are far more player hours on the larger team formats. We are no longer in 2005 and since then not only has the competitive gaming industry grown, but it is now focused on team games.

Pacific war. It's the big theater that hasn't been explored by the franchise, and if it's fair to give the Germans the Ostwind(40 built) it's fair to give the Japanese the Chi-Nu(140-160 built.)

The Cold War would also be fun, but it's hard to see how they'd do stuff like air support without it feeling either super cheesy or irrelevant.

The problem with Pacific theater is the reality. Japan went to war with a WWII navy and air force, but a WWI army. This was enough vs the Chinese and when they got the drop on the US and Brits early in the war, but later it was really all about rooting out dug in troops that wouldn't surrender. They didn't even have an AT weapon that could take out US medium tanks. (IIRC in some places the only plan was a 500 lb aviation bomb in a covered over pit.... with a soldier with a hammer to set it off!)

That is why air simulators and naval combat games in this region have worked where ground combat really hasn't (without buffing the japanese kit and units).

To actually make it somewhat historical it would the Japanese forces would be all emplacements with "brace". How much fun that would be!! (~s)

Hey everyone,

Would love to get your feedback on something. We all know COH1 was and is a great game. It doesn't get to be called the highest rated WWII RTS of all time for nothing. And although COH2 may have never lived up to the same level of greatness, it still has some pretty awesome elements and is a ton of fun to play.

That being said, we want to get your opinion on:

What you loved about COH1 that COH2 didn't quite deliver on
What could be improved on COH1 that COH2 did and did not deliver
What you love about COH1 - Where did it excel (balance, commander design, campaign, etc.)
What you love about COH2 - its best features (campaign, faction design, TrueSight, commanders, etc.), whatever you feel they may be
If you could, what you would cut from COH2
What would you wnat to carry forward from COH2
Where possibly both COH1 or COH2 fell short - where in your opinion is the untapped potential?
We'd also love to hear what your favorite way to play either game is. Do you play mainly team games, competitive 1v1, competitively or casually, comp stomps, modded games, etc.?

As always, please keep the conversation civil, on topic and the feedback of high quality so we can actually use your feedback in the future.

Thanks!

Writing this as an avid COH1 player (still) and someone who tried COH2 several times and just couldn't get into it. (though I loved the idea and still troll these forums).

Where COH2 gets some things right:
- Trusight seems to add a new element of gameplay and strategy.
- QoL items like reverse and the unit status bar on the top right.
- sniper war is much tamer. it was/is cancer in COH1 (and feels less like WW2 and more like a mini-game).
- getting more experience for killing same units but which have higher veterancy.

Where COH2 fails:
- lack of global upgrades and commander "tree" (Inverse's complaint of lack of strategic choices.)
- squad wipes in general seem too easy
- way WAYYY too much difference for difference's sake. Some has been fixed but let's just talk about original design:
- unit composition was really really different.
- HQs and teching was very different (US officer squads?)
- veterancy was not consistent (vet5?!?)
- resource incomes were different
- repair systems (US vehicle crews)
I probably missed some big ones, but that is in addition to all the little ones. It makes for too much to balance.

Popcap - COH2 always has a 100 man cap. This takes away one element of strategy you could use in COH1. If you got behind you had an additional way to win. You could choke your opponents ability to be able to call on units.

The best balance of this game was late stage (2.602?) US vs Wehr. It still had some issues (snipers, though US needs them in case of vet3 inf, and I think vet3 armor was either too cheap or too powerful) but small differences, either separate, or combined with other differences, made for really different feels in each faction. (US mortar vs Wehr mortar, Mg vs MG, Stug vs m10, m4 vs p4, croc vs ost, etc.)

I think COH2s biggest sin (the part that put me off the most) was asymmetrical balance over time. It is just stupid. While there were times in COH1 when the balance shifted, it was smaller, and if there were major discrepancies (wehr vet3) they occurred much later in a game than they do in coh2. Also there was a much later bit of a balance.... late game US units could start to compete, mostly the infantry, at vet3, and could help you get back on the field. But that was fair since if you lost them you could only get back a vet0 (not the case for wehr who could rebuild a vet3 unit).