What is the goal here? What do you want? What are you trying to demonstrate/discuss in this thread? It's clear you're upset, but otherwise it's all confused. I guess if I take your thread title seriously you want to know what the point of playing is, but people have told you: to have fun. If you aren't having fun, get off the forums, stop playing, get a new hobby. It's incredible to me how many members of this community get so frustrated with the game and instead of just not playing they bitch and moan and continue to play.
If it isn't clear, the discussion has segwayed. Read the thread. If you don't wanna read the thread, well, no one forced you to post |
I noticed a biiig problem. You have 2 starting bulletins for Volks/Rifleman. But every OKW player only builds one Volks, while US build tons of Rifleman.
Yeah this too. Faction dependent, early bulletins might be too spread out
Think about it. One guy has triple bulletin rifles which allows him to bully sturmpios a little. The bulletin effect might be small individually and might only have a real effect on a few fights, but it causes a butterfly effect that resonates through the game. Now instead of the USF player attacking the OKW player, as it should be in the meta game (with intermittent counter attacks of course), it turns into a seesaw battle that the USF is gonna win
Sure, there's ways to play around that, but at the expense of micro, which segways into another debate about how microbalanced the factions are |
Just look at the ladders: their goal is to maximize win/loss ratio on 1 v 1, and not necessarily have fun with the game.
I've been there before in CoH 1. Winning is fun. Most play not to win but for the competition. Plenty get caught up in winning of course, but the underlying idea is that playing for a win is fun (even if I'm not playing to win, it's all in the journey not the destination).
So I would actually lump this under playing for fun. And Relic isn't respecting this cadre, which makes up the "nobility" (pros/dedicated fans) of the COH 2 community |
They didn't change anything about the game itself, so if you were having fun before, you still should be having fun now. The war spoils are just another thing on top of the game that you enjoy.
Missing the point and wrong good sir. War Spoils are built into WFA. I want Rifle, mech, and fortification doctrines |
|
The right bulletins at the right time make a difference. Tripling volks bulletins, for example, will lead to OKW having a slightly better early game that allows them to get their trucks in a slightly better position, that leads to subtle lasting advantages
-from a chess player's perspective
Commanders heavily influence the strategy one uses. Rifle company, for example, allows a slightly better USA early game, that leads to a slightly larger manpower drain for OKW and a slightly worse truck position for OKW. This also leads to lasting advantages. Mech company scales into the late game a little better and is potentially dangerous on the right map with it's jeep.
Airborne, infantry, and armor company offer nothing of value until 2 CP, after all the early game fighting is decided.
Fortification and Luftwaffe offer 1CP in the form of the mg34, which is useful against a strong riflespam. But they aren't the same commander, and one could easily be in a catch 22 where they only have Luft, Spearhead, and Spec Ops, and the map favors fortification style gameplay but they are forced to go with Luftwaffe for the mg34 |
|
I notice some recurring themes in movies and games regarding helmets.
First, the Japanese seem to reserve helmets for assault troops and regular rifle troops never wear them. Russians often are the same way. The Germans tend to wear them but often are also just wearing field caps.
Is there any historical background for this? I've googled it to death and can't come up with anything. Obviously the Russians were in short supply of everything in the beginning of the war, but by 1943 helmets should be standard issue. The Germans shouldn't stop wearing them until the final months. The Japanese probably had metal shortages though |
|
It's easy to demonize the Red Army's rape of Germany, but could you expect any different? Looking at that dude's face, I feel like he has nothing left to live for, except revenge and survival for the sake of survival. He's been reduced to his animalistic urges by the war |
Bulletins barely affect anything, and i dont see how premium doctrines are negatively affecting the competetive aspect of the game as long as they are properly balanced.
1v1 and 2v2 automatch werent really different. If you had a high ELO, you had better opponents, that means "hardcore" players. Same goes for COH2. As soon as i got in the top 100, or rather top 75, i got "hardcore" players matched with me aswell.
1v1 or 2v2 were never reserved for super hardcore players, they were and are for everyone. The opponents you get is caused by your ELO. You get a high ELO, you get matched with better players. Simple as that.
Missing the point. The atmosphere was much more friendly because the players were more constrained (but not too constrained) since they had few doctrine choices and no bulletins. The game's balance always also seemed to be focused on 1v1, followed by 2v2.
My main issue though is that, without all doctrines available to experiment with and practice, you cannot learn them and thus learn how to fight against them. It's like facing a left handed pitcher in baseball. It ruins competitive play until everyone has them. Rifle and Mech companies are far far different than the others. If I could play Rifle, I might say it's OP (but I really have no clue). It seems to fit with the American faction the best though. That can't be discounted. It's the primary/staple doctrine for USA.
I disagree on the bulletins. Tripling on your main infantry unit is quite effective and can lead to lasting positional advantages stemming from winning the first fights.
@up
You do realize that doctrines is exactly what allows to exponentially surpass CoH1 depth by giving a much, much more options to the players and opening much more tactics then vCoH had across its whole life, right?
You don't need to agree with it, but you can't really deny it, unless you don't understand what doctrines do for the game.
Did I say doctrines in CoH 2 are bad? No. I said the implementation is bad because what I just said above |
The Thing is that the COH franchise has never been specifically tailored towards "hardcore" players. Its still a RTS game however, and not everyone likes that. RTS is a niche genre by now, and COH definetly has the depth to keep "hardcore" players playing. CoH2 isnt a game that is purely mainstream. It isnt a CoD, a Battlefield, a LoL, a Assassins Creed. Its CoH, a RTS game that isnt aiming at being a hyperreastical super hardcore game, that only around 20 people can really enjoy. CoH1 wasnt hardcore, CoH2 isnt hardcore aswell. If its too "casual" for you, go ahead, play something more "hardcore".
Of course vCoH wasn't "hardcore" but it had a depth hardcore players could go against, specifically competitive 1v1 and 2v2
"Casuals" (I hate the word for the negative connotations behind it) could slug it out on vire or in custom games, while 1v1 and 2v2 automatch were reserved, at least in the higher echelons, for hardcore players.
Premium doctrines and bulletins defecate on this in a very slimy way  |
|
I guess I've derailed my own thread or perhaps rerouted
Given that there are now a ton of indie games that are just as polished as CoH 2 and have devs that are far more supportive of the community, why are we bothering here? |
TheWalt
Regrowing my Foreskin
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
Heartless Jäger 
