Profile of HS King

On point 1 - I agree with molotovs/rifle grenades in their current state are both too powerful and "no brainer" abilities because of their low cost. I'd really like to see them become more of an investment so that there is more of a choice when using them. I'm not sure drastically increasing the tech cost to obtain them is the right way to do this, but I agree with your general premise.

On point 2 - Could you explain why you don't like crazy comebacks? Personally I find watching games like this most recent SNF (games 2 & 4) to be way more intense than having a KT + P4s + Mg bunker camping the middle of Semoskiy for 20 minutes to drain VPs. Coming back from behind in CoH 2 is still difficult with the munition/fuel disadvantage and can be so fun/intense to watch.

On point 3 - I actually really like this idea. It seems like it'd be the perfect blend of vCoH and CoH 2 capping. If you're in a firefight you can still stand behind cover and cap slowly but if you feel like you're safe you can "click" the point and cap quickly - but be vulnerable. We'd have to play around with the numbers but the idea is pretty cool. I think it would also encourage more flank harassment/cutoff moves because if the enemy leaves their flank/cutoff exposed a squad could cap points very quickly out of combat by "clicking" the point.

Thanks bro. The reason I dont like crazy comebacks is its not due to skill its due to a silly resource/pop cap system. If there is actually a great comeback due to good play then it is awesome in my book. But I often see games lost due to the games inability to properly punish a player who has been losing for the whole game. That is just my opinion

Just watched a old coh shoutcast, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps8DGPZ4Smo this is one of the best games I'v seen and highlights excatly why coh is a great game and why coh2 is not.

I would say the 2 biggest differences are the popcap/resources system and the more advanced damage table/ crit system.

If you are at relic making a new patch for coh2 watch this game first.

You have to get Cons into range during which time they suffer attrition, for a successful throw, and a penetrating hit (which is not guaranteed on heavies).

With MT, you just click on the target. Done.

The trolling is evident in how you are not even bothering to represent any of these considerations in your posts. Its a ridiculous and naive comparison, and serves only to derail the topic.

Further fun facts regarding MT. It turns ATNades to the equivalent of 150dmg, which is 30 more than a T34s normal penetrating shot, and increases Ram dmg to 240, which is the equivalent of 2 T34 normal penetrating shots. T34s hit for equivalent of 180 with MT on. ZiS hits for 240 with MT. For reference, PIV and T34 both have 640hp. PIV does 160dmg.

Started this thread ages ago.. but you are right Nullist in all your posts in this thread.

Man shreks cost 120 munis and dont have anywhere near the impact of mark target. I think MT should cost 150 muni too be honest, it completely nullifies any smart or clever vehicle play in any attack that it is triggered in. Getting an a great armour attack with ost is next to impossible now anyway due to at nades, bad maps , at guns and su85s ect and popping this thing with one click and no thought makes it OP IMO

OK I have written a few posts that suggest big or quite dramatic changes to the game as I saw fit.

I want to talk about smaller stuff that I think would improve the game.

Some of the things that really annoy me is the vagueness, the randomness and the lack of specificity of units and damage.

What I mean is things like the su 85 getting consitant inf kills or the fact that I have watched hundreds of top play games and I still cant tell if a group of cons or grens is going to win a fire fight.

Some things need to be firmed up. such as the cons vs grens there needs to be a hard and fast rule so people know that for example in a con vs grens scenario lets say grens always win unless use of cover or molatovs ect or grens win at range and cons edge it at closer ranges, ect ect. Right not its like 50/50 and in my opinion that is not what you want in a stragey game, you want to be able to tell when to take a risk and when to run, when to stay and fight. Iv watched many times where the player is making a sensible play only to lose a squad due to some RNG bullshit and vice versa.

These sort of things stop great players from being able to create decisive maneuvers which are exciting and win games.

THere needs to be less vagueness and RNG and more concreteness and finesse in the game. That means that some things need a slight buff, and some things need a nerf ( flame weapon crits for example, at guns/at tanks consistently killing inf)

This also means that some units liek at guns need to be the reliable hard counter to tanks while su 85 for example should be made vulnerable to a few more units the same goes with p4 ect but I for one think the panther is at a good spot as it basically cannot kill inf providing it does not have a top gunner.

I still have big issue with mortars and arty as its basically got nothing to do with the player choices and everything to do with randomness which determines its effectiveness, this is a terrible idea and measures need to be taken to bring these units effectiveness and put it back to the players hands.

Id suggest mortar and arty mechanics from coh ( accuracy modifiers at range, slow passive shot timings, and more reliable barrage abilities as well as clear indication of ordinance flight paths and slower mortar ordinance flight to be able to see where its shooting from and where its going to land, for both sides ie the side shooting and the side receiving the shot)

Anything that makes the game more clear cut is good and anything that makes most if not all units "jack of all trades" dilutes the strategy of the game in my opinon, and this is further worsened by the inherent randomness of nearly all types of fire being it, flame, small arms, tank shots and arty/mortar.

I agree with the OP for 2 reason. 1 the single player aspect in coh2 is pathetic. In its execution and in the story it is telling, its cliche, full of complete lies and its extremely poorly executed.

The aim of the german invasion was that of annihilation of the russian human being. Russia was seen as nothing more than living space and by the 70's the plan was for most of russian human beings to be completely wiped out and the rest turned into a slave race.

The russian solider was literally fighting for survival, and none of this was shown in the campaign at all. In fact the only thing portrayed was how bad the soviet state was.. which it was but as everyone else says so was every other nation.

Focusing only on the negatives portrays the soviet military in a light that makes it look worse than the nazis, which it was not. As basically in every maneuver or every new territory capture the Wehrmacht was complicit in genocide by aiding the SS and einsatsgroupen in wholesale murder of civilians ( including women and young children), as well as the inhuman treatment of millions of soviet POW.

The was in the east was the most brutal and large scale combat in the history of humanity - and none of this comes through in the singleplayer camping.

Relic dropped the ball in so many ways its worse than a joke, they made the most dramatic and massive conflict in modern times into a boring, cliche filled and inaccurate snooze fest.

I find it hard to believe that they read any history at all apart from watching some American films about stalingrad ie enemy at the gates. The way the story was conveyed was poor - especially when compared to the elegant way the singleplayer in vcoh was treated, the picture overlay with great voice acting story which humanized both sides of the combat.

A special mention has to be given to how bad the video cut scenes were and how terrible the voice acting was, to me it seemed like a parody and any emotion that it tried to creat was lost, in fact I was almost embarrassed to play through the whole thing. The missons were also rubbish and it was one of the least fun singleplayer experiences I have had in a RTS game, i think it was due to how little i could get into the story.

All in all I can understand why Russian people hate the game and I dont blame them as its propaganda and its actually really bad from a gaming perspective also.