Profile of CieZ

The capping system in coh 1 led to binary decision making: can I cap this point in time or not? The new capping system allows battles to occur over the point: can I keep this pio squad in cover against this conscript long enough for my gren to get into the point to block the cap? You end up with more decision making with the new capping system, since you can block capping by getting on the point.

There is still a consequence going a 4 mg start. You only have MGs. They can't throw AT nades, other nades, or fight without fear of retreating really slow and potentially dropping the mg.

+1, 100% agree. The "foot in the circle" as I like to call it adds a whole level of depth that vCoH simply never had. You can use the CoH 2 capping system to prevent/delay capping of points in a way that didn't exist in vCoH. (This has won me at least 1 tournament game)

@Budwise - Daniel is also spot-on about the binary decision making of the vCoH capping system - you either had the time, or you didn't. Not exactly a deep/skillful system if you ask me. Also the CoH 2 map can change hands a lot faster since every squad can cap, which increases chances for comebacks (good thing) and increases the pace of the game (also a good thing). Weapon crews are already riskier investments than mainline infantry squads, removing their ability to cap is just foolish. Weapon crews are also less mobile than other infantry squads, so you do give up map control/mobility if you choose to build tons of them.

In regard to your comment about sitting squads in green cover to cap - this only applies to a few points on most maps. Generally, but not always, to cap you'll need to be in red/neutral/yellow cover which gives your opponent a significant advantage if he's in green cover.

Even though weapon crews can cap you hardly see anything except for MG squads capping because moving an AT gun/mortar into a cap circle can a) give away it's positioning if you're not careful about where in the circle it goes and b) generally makes it more vulnerable than if it were behind your lines. Regardless, that adds another choice for a player to make and choices correlate highly with skill. (The more choices a game presents players with gives more opportunities for the better player to make the better choice, thus giving the better player an advantage)

There are already tons of drawbacks to going a 4x MG start(or any heavy support weapon start). As I said before you're less mobile, you give up map control, you have no protection against light vehicles (no faust/AT nade) you're highly vulnerable to flanks, you are extremely vulnerable to indirect fire, you have no combat-boosting weapon upgrades (LMG/PPSh/Dp/G43/etc), they can't chase/wipe retreating squads, they don't bleed your opponent as much as normal infantry, you risk giving your opponent the weapon if your squad dies - I think you get the point. Also, build order *IS* considered, and honestly probably more so than in vCoH. It's actually pretty humorous that you seem to think that vCoH had deeper build orders or some crap. Yeah rifle spam into BARS or M8. Wow. Much strategy. Such deep. So vCoH.

Finally - @Porygon - suggesting that a 4 Maxim start will give you as much map control as a 4 Con start is bullshit. Maxims hit the map slower, have to pack up/set up, and don't bleed at all. Please tell me how that's capping the map as fast as cons... =/

As far as I can remember flame weapons effectively ignore retreat modifiers because they don't have accuracy, they just do area of effect damage. What could help however is making it so that retreating units cannot be flame crit. Anything else would be impossible or would screw up too many other things in the game, and even my proposal might not be possible.

Maybe people in other parts of the world don't mind, but I think I speak for 90% of East coast Americans that have other things they could be doing in the middle of the day.

I'm 25, married with a full time job and yet I still find it fun to participate in tournaments even with no monetary prize. It is a lot of time to commit and I really appreciate that my wife lets me spend my weekend playing video games (well she understands that once the kids come GGWP video games).

Anyways, I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that if you're playing video games to make $$$, you're doing it wrong - especially CoH 2. Maybe if you live in Korea and are freakishly talented naturally you could get into it for the money but other than that you should be playing for fun. If you don't have fun playing video games on the weekend then why do you have fun playing them during the week?

See what i mean, the underdogs are f...

Well I think anyone that has won, or perhaps even gotten to the semi-finals of previous tournies shouldn't be allowed to participate. I was just trolling when asking if I could participate. It is really cool that some one is willing to organize a tourney for people that don't have as much time to dedicate to the game. If there's any way I can support it (streaming/casting, ref'ing or whatever) let me know

Can I find a mate and sign up MVGame. Technically I qualify since I'm not in the top 10...