Profile of herr anfsim

what i liked about coh1 is the tactical usage of combined arms. positioning and manouvering certainly is a part of it and specificly flanking is very effective but also isn't the dominating factor in coh1.

i also feel that the performance of nosin nagant and kar98k is pretty bad at closer ranges. the result is as seen in many vids: you flank a team weapon, get close, nothing happens. team weapon packs up, runs away, you chase, still nothing happens.
true, this looks stupid and it feels stupid. and though i hope this will change but it is not going to be like in coh1 ever (design decision).

the reason why i think it is a good decision is because i dont like the alternative scenario you describe. the "infantry play" as you name it is nothing else than plain inf spam. its boring and for me though a suberb game coh1 was missing a little in deverisfied weapons besides basic infantry.

seeing the basic infantry (= cons/grens) in coh2 their perks are movability and field presence. counters to these perks are supression and pinning which is what an MG can provide. so for me it's counter-intuitive to react with even more regular infantry to a weapon which is meant to negate their main perks. A mortar would fit much better in my eyes cause it can exploit the weakness of MGs being stationary, or a scout car which is not effected by supression, and etc.

and those units are no hard counters. they are all combat effective besides the said scenario. start to mix them up and we have combined arms gameplay with importance shifted towards more deversified weapons instead of basic infantry doing all the damage.

Regards
ace

I have to disagree with you about COH1 flanking making infantry more spammable. The main problem in vCOH, in my oppinion, was elite units "supersprinting" thus making MGs and Bunkers useless. If a player was spamming regulaier infantry an mass at well prepared machinegunpositions he would be chewed up without dealing much damage. Thats how I think COH2 should be as well, if the russian player spams conscripts, wich he often does, I can easily punish him by ambushing large forces of infantry, though not inflicting all that much damage. If he outmanouvers me, however, I wount be punished that much. I see that as a big problem.

Manouevering infantry tacticly smart to outflank the enemy has little to do with spamming, and spamming wouldnt be effective against MGs, as long as they are kept as they are, though more voulnerable to flanking.

But I guess people have different ideas about how the game should be. As you say, to you its counterintuitive that MGs could be countered by infantry, while for meg its the most natural thing in the world that an MG should be powerful while confronted head on, and nearly helpless if attacked in the flank or rear by an infantryunit. To me, it makes the gameplay more fun and varried, while also much more realistic. vCOH nailed that in many ways, and it seems to me that a lot of people fell the exact same way.

Seeing how vCOH is better than COH2 in most areas, maps included, I think its a good thing that they start copying moore stuff from the better game.

In my oppinion the MG would be ok if the made flanking and close quarters effective again and cover more meaningfull. Though this concernes all weapons teams on both sides, especially the Soviet ones as they have the six man crews.

I dont see them fixing this, though, as it seems to be theire new philosophy that the smood infantryplay from vCOH is replaced with longer skirmishes where flanked support weapons arent really punished. The fact that it looks ridicilous and totally ruins what made the infantrycombat of vCOH great dosent seem to concerne them much. I mean, its been this way since closed Beta and they have hade plenty of time to change this. Still, they stick with this sollution, and even increased german team sizes, to make the awkwardness even.

But say they fixed flanking, and fixed the infantrycombat closer to vCOH. How on earth would they then balance out the clowncars? It would eat an unflanked MG in a second.

Only real problem I see is that they somehow managed to ruin the effect of flanking and the reward for managing to outmanouver enemy heavy weapons. This ruins much of the game for both sides and I really hope they fix it.

The problem in my oppinion isnt the MG but that they ruined this crucial game mechanic that worked great in vCOH.

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.