Profile of Jinseual

I don't see the point of changing from two T3485s to one T3485. If the problem is because the player can call them too early without any tech building then the 9 cp change would be enough. I see no reason for the t3485 to be more expensive since it still loses too a Panzer IV ( victory is rng ) and it cost way more.

People argue that it's actually cheaper because it doesn't require a tech building but since it cost a lot more cps to call in, I no longer see the point of waiting such a long time to call in one overpriced mediocre tank so players will be making the T3 or T4 buildings anyways.

The t3485s should be reverted back to it's original price of 320 mp and 120 fuel since 9 cps is already a big nerf.

To Inverse.

If you didn't understand my post, I never said I am content with the few tech options, I said that I would like to have more different builds to diversify gameplay so there would be less repetitiveness in multiplayer. More different ways to play is always better.

What I was arguing against is what Basilone believed that global upgrades is a way to outsmart your opponent he believes that he is superbly brilliant for investing in BARs a few minutes later than he should, to which I said "you did not outsmart him you just invested into it a little later."

I also agree that CoH2 has less options to play and only diversifying game play with commanders is a bad way to go, but I never argued against that.

It's strange that the people defending the game are so much angrier than those stating their issues with it :/

Wrong, the people who are arguing against the game are just as angry, and I wasn't angry at all when I made my post. The way I see it's the people who are criticizing the game who are the angriest.

Even if they are angrier that doesn't mean anything, really. Sometimes it is what some people say that makes others angry.

Every unit has a counter but its not that black and white.

B) Lack of hard hitting global upgrades= less ways to outsmart opponent. Making the right choice between BARs, WSC, M8, or whatever else was extremely important. So was making the right choice between heavy T2 with vet, fast T3 for Pumas, big T1, and so on.

You really think choosing a tech is a way of outsmarting your opponent? That's so ridiculous, they are investments and you either win with that investment or you don't. You either choose to kite your way to victory with the m8 or BAR your way into enemy lines. You're not outsmarting them you are just investing into a tech order and it only pays off if you have good micro and if you use them wisely. That's not "outsmarting" in the sense I see like baiting the opponent into a mine or an excellent flanking attack.

I would like to see upgrades or different build orders as a way to have more diversity in game play, but to say that purchasing global upgrades is a way to "outsmart" your opponent is complete fallacy.

But in reality its a combination of the games lacking strategic depth making it easier to master

The strategic depth in Company of Heroes is already really simple. I see Company of Heroes as a tactical game, what really matters is your judgement and your micro. If you want to know why Company of Heroes 2 has a smaller skill gap between newcomers and excellent players, it's not because of the "strategic depth" it's because that squads die a lot slower to small arms, grenades are easier to dodge, and the impacts of RNG. It has nothing to do with strategic depth.

In another post you complained about players only able to win with conscript spam or grenadier spam, that has nothing to do with strategic depth, that is because of an imbalance issue and Relic only needs to buff the other units to fix it. There could be hundreds of way to play this game yet you only see that one tactic because it's the only tactic that works at the time, hence it's a balance issue.

You got it all wrong.

If you want to keep the DLC system in the game and retain the competitive aspect of it. Make ladder mode free of DLC and bulletins, use fixed positions and put effort into making a commander system in the competitive ladder that is similar to CoH1 with feedback from the community.

That could work if there are lobbies in the game. If the commanders are removed from ladders then a lot of people who paid for the commanders will be livid, because then there is no way to play other than custom matches with friends only, which takes the satisfaction out. If there are lobbies, players can play against other players as much as they want at least.

Relic is trying to sneak something in and hopes we don't notice.