Profile of ThumbsUp

Steam ID#: 76561197963526684
Steam alias: ThumbsUp

I personally love the winter maps, but I find the blizzards coming on and off every 5 minutes and the deep snow in common flanking paths incredibly annoying. For that reason I usually prefer the spring maps but I love the ice feature and the risk associated with it. For instance winter Semoisky or however its spelled is probably going to end up being my favorite for the time being.

I don't know what game you played but in CoH 1 the late game was based around tanks as well. All the units that fought in the late game in CoH appear in late game CoH 2: Tanks, vetted infantry, support weapons and artillery.

I'm not sure where you're pulling this one from but I at no point said something like "COH1 didn't have late game tanks".... maybe you should re read my post.... Also, when I say infantry centric, centric= centralized. That doesn't imply only infantry... right now COH2 feels very vehicle based and it's tougher to work with infantry. It's a change I personally don't welcome and that's my opinion.

AT guns are effective against enemy armour but they aren't effective in isolation. That means you need more than just an AT gun to kill a tank.

Ok, well this is not anything new, I'm not certain why you're suddenly taking me to school on how to use AT guns.

If your looking for manpower only ways to defeat armour they are there, but they are hard, sometimes very hard, to use. The reason is if you get expensive fuel units they should be hard to counter with manpower only units, otherwise everyone would just get manpower only. Like when the shreck was too powerful in vCoH in patch whatever and people only ever got infantry.

I think you've got a point here. However, the question is, does sinking 360 manpower into an anti tank unit really justify its cost. 360 manpower is quite a bit, does it do what it should do for what it costs? Considering their lack of mobility I feel that if an AT gun is positioned well and gets a shot off or two, it should really scare a tank. Right now it's just kind of "meh". You have more than enough time to get your tank out of a bad position. In coh1 if you went balls deep and charged your tank in first to meet even one AT gun, your tank would more than likely be toast by the time it got on the flank or even dead. We don't see AT guns fielded a lot, and I have the opinion that they don't do enough for what they cost, or if they're going to perform this way they likely need to be a bit cheaper.

I agree that they lack effective AT, but I would go a little further. Even though the german PAK is much moore effective vs armour, its still not close to the AT-guns in vCOH.

This affects the gameplay in a verry serious way, neither side have the capability to fight of enemy tanks with units only costing manpower, meaning that the lategame will always be focused arround tankrush, with the odd infantrysquad doing some capturing. Relic obviously sees what the game has turned into, but try to fix this with population caps, rather than having a moore balanced gameplay, like in vCOH.

If they buffed both sides AT-guns closer to vCOH standards, and possibly reintroduced tanktraps, I think the gameplay would be much moore diverse.

Pretty much this is how I feel at the moment. I miss being able to field infantry centric armies with good AT gun micro. It is definitely still possible but I feel like your opponent needs his head up in the clouds for those few extra shots that I feel like the tanks need to go down. Maybe it's just me, dunno.

Edit: disagree with the tank trap part, I don't miss being able to suddenly build giant concrete blocks out of thin air and it would often slow down the game when they were used effectively which can be pretty boring

I'm sure if they banned you for harassing other players it wasn't "without any reason"...