Profile of HS King

Brilliant, brilliant post.

It pretty much sums up what most are thinking about VCOH and COH2.

Yet, we're just powerless to do anything, except maybe boycott COH2 while their DLC P2W model is still around. I did this for 3 wks.

Thanks man I took me ages to come up with. There is stuff we can do, I mean relic wants the game to be a success and if they start fixing it up it will be, more sales, more happy customers win win.

They need know know that is what the fans actually think not just that they can keep releasing DLCs that take them a few days to make and milk the name for what its worth.

The more experience you have with something, the more hour sunk into studying and participating in it the more you can see its flaws.

The exact opposite of this applies when something has incredible depth and detail.

With vCOH this process took years.

Sure people complained about the kangaroo, the balance between PE and Brits vs Wher and Us and yet, there was still some epic 2v2 games played with all factions and to this day it remains the best RTS ever created.

To this day every good game will have something different.

When I fired up coh2 for the first time within seconds I already spotted problems.

I think this statement from Tommy sums it up perfectly ( in case you were wondering he is a shoutcaster who has watched more games of vcoh, coh2 then just about anyone as well as being a top teir vcoh player. So his skills and his love for the game can not be questioned)

Tommy: Although true in the case of many RTS games, it doesn't have to be the case. Take chess, for example. Or vCoH, for that matter. Games can continue to remain fresh and interesting as long as they have sufficient depth (by which I mean, a great number of strategic choices where no single unit/build order/tactic is objectively superior to any other in a vacuum). It is a sign that a game lacks depth when additional units are required to keep it fresh- that game is substituting depth for sheer mass.

Balance Is Not The Biggest Issue

The real issue with Coh2 doesn’t lie in the “balance” of the game or even with the completely retarded 5 billion DLC.

In my opinion the real problems lie with the hidden game mechanics and the physics behind the game engine.

Now before you call me a moron hear me out - I apologize about the lenght

The game is inferior to vcoh in nearly all levels of quality and detail. It shipped out with cartoon engine, lackluster physics and none of the attention to detail that was prevalent in the original.

I can still remember seeing a mg42 literally shoot off the windscreen off a jeep, see a perfect shot from the Hummel ( which I timed and predicted masterfully hit 2 clumped up vet 3 AB squads and showered the terrain with their body parts) or even seen a jeep get hit made out of control, and then run into an enemy mine ... while the enemy was near wiping his squad.

Stuff like this cannot be scripted, or even predicted - its the workings of a brilliantly made engine with incredible physics and a great mechanics underneath.

Its been 8 years since and vcoh has barely aged.

Issues like lag and units not firing on retreat are being looked into but it does not mitigate the fact that coh2 was an inferior product in every way but the graphics.

The campaign for example was like a bad joke when compared to the tact and story telling of the first game.. but onto the real problems.

Now I’m not some guy that gets impressed by pretty graphic unless they add something to the game. In my opinion although coh2 has better and more detailed graphics but they are considerably less effective than in vCOH to the point where they are ruining the game. I’ll explain

• There is a huge discrepancy between what a weapon effect looks like on screen and the physical effects it has on the environment and squads/units – prime example railway arty.. if that shell hit anything its dead in real life, it would be vaporised, and ripped to shreds, with pieces flying everywhere, in coh 2 its explosion is huge but the damage is not that big, and bodies drop straight to the ground – not in pieces but full bodies.

• Lets compare a 105mm arty strike to the rail way arty in coh2 – which one looks more powerful and which effects enhance the game?

Now it’s easy to see that coh2 has better graphics but in the end it ends up being outclassed by its 8 year old predecessor.

• Check out 1:40 of this video ( it game editing tool which allows crazy arty spam) and notice how destructible even the ground was in coh start at 1 minute. The volume of arty simply craters the ground in a massive way which gives green cover ( and totally kicks ass) nothing like this is possible in coh2. Mostly the ground just gets blackened but there’s very limited effect on the ground

If you think im being a bit stupid here then read on - In the latest Frontline Network shoutcast Tommy was discussing how goliath and PE boobytrap craters were the only ones in the game that gave 360 degree green cover and how he use to use that to his advantage to make his riflemen beat superior opposition.

Name another game where the after effects of an explosion n cause the terrain to change and actually create the opportunities for new strategies.

You know something was done right there.

• In vcoh call ins like that did exactly what they looked like it did, v1 flattened everything, 280mm rocket strike could be a game ender, 105mm art barrage did massive damage in the small confines of the call in. Check out 43 seconds and 2:03 for V 1 strike (27:27) for 105mm

• If a tank shot a man the man would explode and those pieces would then be move by the shot and react with the environment and the kinetic energy from the damage would in a realistic ( if someone what over the top manner) move the body/ parts and they would react with the environment.

• Tiger vs inf damage and physics at 3:18 <while in coh 2 seems like physics have no effect ( tiger vs pio) 3:30

• Example of random but beautiful physics 42:09

• This had a profound effect on the game as it meant you knew what to expect from the muniton type, effected the physical environment in a way that is never seen in a game again.
They obviously have physics in the game but they need to apply it to a wider range of actions not just 30% of goings on (33:30)

• 
  ]Mortars are great example of this – in vcoh if a mortar landed on your guys, the guys in the AOE were dead, end of story, nothing to argue about or even debate. Exactly the way it should be – now i see a shot going off in the middle of a squad and the effect ranges from nothing to squad wipe, its so random there is a huge congruency problem between what you see/how it is represented, what you think will happen and what actually does happen.
  
  

• 
  In vCOH it felt like every single unit/building/ piece of debris was governed by an advanced physics engine and all objects with the game world all effected by the physical confines of that world
  
  

• 
  They way weapon effects were displayed in vcoh is vastly superior to coh2. Since when did tanks shoot balls of glowing material that exploded like something out of a bad hollywood movie? When did arty shells have a fuel-air mix that makes a fireball happen? Watch arty explode in vcoh, the amount of destructive force it unleashes is a thing of beauty, and when it connects with a squad... oh my, such carnage- limbs where sent sky high in all directions, any squad that got hit directly was vaporized and thrown half the map away, huge fountains of dirt exploded viciously out of the ground. Now when arty connects a man is lying on on the ground or crawling.. that’s it.
  

Don’t get me started with the game mechanics ( cover unit movement) how suppression worked ( not just from mgs but from other things that would cause suppression like explosions, other mg weapons)

How AT guns worked - how awesome penetrating hits and glancing blows looked and felt. The better mechanics of stickies and fausts.

The incredible detail of damage tables ( or seeing a tread being blow off on a mobility kill)


In summary this is what vCOH does to COH 2


So now I have had my say and if you are sick of being taken for a joke - send this to relic. Comment, post on it and generally show them this is what you want is what is mean to be a "successor" to COH.

Would making changes like this take time and effort?

Absolutely but they have got my purchase as well as all of yours, and many have bought their DLCs ( and would continue to ) if the game gets fixed.

ATTENTION TO DETAIL SPEAKS VOLUMES AND WORD OF MOUTH IS THE BEST FORM OF ADVERTISING - REMEMBER THAT

ZiS Barrage is A-grade AI and forces Setup teams right off their position.
SU85s do indeed seem to be sniping infantry too effectively.
There is no need for that, since at T4, SU76 at their low cost provide all the AI screening you really need for SU85s.

Its almost impossible to infantry assault a SU85+SU76 position. Even with combined arms, the SU76s alone are cqpable of staving off infantry advance, and leaving the SU85 free to deal with the armor. These two units synergy is very good.

PGrens, however, are fine.
Shreks could possibly use a cost drop to 100 Munis. They are good, but PGrens themselves are so vulnerable to Sov armor AI that you are more or less guaranteed losing 2 models at least unless you manage a complete flank surprise out of LoS. Its a huge amount of muni to drop on a unit that is itself so vulnerable to the targets its supposed to soft counter.

Towards late game, Sov AI superiority starts raising its head, as compensated by Ost superior AT.

Combined with the smaller Ost unit sizes and how vehicle shells generally ignore infantry armor, especially the PGrens with their high reinforce cost, get pushed into remaining out of LoS. All armor is a massive threat to PGrens if caught in the open.

The general trend is Ost infantry becomes increasingly vulnerable the more Sov armor hits the field, because a)its infantry armor advantage is negated b) Sov armor AI is generally better. 1-2 model losses are common from T70s, to T34s to a single SU76 Barrage hit to SU85 sniping when there is no armor to target. This 1-2 model loss may not seem much to a Sov players mindset, but that is 1/4-1/2 of Ost infantry squad sizes, making them vulnerable to even basic Sov infantry sweeps.

Right on, I agree with you. With all the feedback I got from you and others its probably more a of a at weapons sniping p grens issue rather than p grens needing a buff.

The expense of PGrens is intentional because they are one of the most powerful and versatile infantry in the game. A single squad, used well to flank, or sometimes right down the center can cause multiple squad wipes and route an entire infantry force, all at vet 0. No other infantry can do that in the game. They also hard counter SU-85s.

They have to have some weakness, and thus their bane is HE weapons and other things that blow up the squad or pick off members by ignoring their armor and speed. Even if you lose 1 man, they are still quite potent at their roles.

As for damage for cost and risk, unless I'm mistaken or it has changed, the stats on PGrens weapons are such that their assault rifles should work at medium range. People only close in for short range fights because, again, PGrens are just so deadly when they get in close. They evaporate squads if they get in close, so in comparison it may seem like their guns are weak at medium range, where instead you're just doing normal damage. If their stats are giving them only SMG style range, then I think that's actually something that should be changed.

Then there's that amazing grenade.

Here's where I really disagree with the whole premise. AT guns, tank cannons, etc are all still CANNONS. For all of warfare where we've had cannons, those cannons have been used to good effect for killing infantry. You know those tank destroyers and tank hunters? They were used throughout the war more for firing on infantry positions. All infantry should be affected by cannons of all types, 1 regular kill is fine in a short engagement and doesn't happen that often. You only think it happens all the time due to confirmation bias. It's actually an intentional design decision as well since a problem in CoH2 was super infantry running around ignoring tanks.

And you know what, the same thing happens to shock troops and guards. The P4's scatter was changed so they're a little worse at it, but that was due to P4 spam becoming a problem since it could kill both tanks and infantry with equal speed. Even now, it has 3 MGs on it, turn that P4 to face all its cannon and all MGs on any target and they will have to retreat.

However, what you need to realize, and what most dedicated German players don't realize is that for all your problems with HE shots killing your guys, almost everything Soviets have die much more quickly to direct fire.

Which brings me back to the PGrens. Your PGrens are one of the direct fire things that quickly wipes out things like conscripts.

Play as Soviets for a while and you'll see this. And it's why people think you are trolling and are not receptive. You are demonstrating a very limited view of the game, a tunnel vision in regards to PGrens alone.

It's also a topic that has been discussed already.

If you want PGrens to be more durable, you will have to lose a large chunk of that squad wiping ability. Are you willing to do that?

Look in real war AT guns would decimate infantry, so would a lot of things. In the coh universe AT guns were only for killing vehicles and almost never hit inf only on very lucky shots.

At guns in coh2 should be the same, barring the barrage ability from the zis gun.

They are strong against infantry I will give you that and vet 3 grens are great with the shrecks but to say they are a hard counter to su 85 is false, as they will get sniped by su85s and then the weight of fire on them from blobbed inf, at guns or any other ranged unit picks them apart really quickly causing huge mp cost and force them off the feild.

The fact they cost so much and have 4 men is enough of a offset to give them a buff. If they had 5 man squads id agree with you but at 4 man its too fragile.

In a normal encounter with cons they kill 3-4 cons and usualy take 1 casultie sometimes 2. This is 80 mp vs either 45 or 90.. do you see what I mean here, its not like the p grens completely overpower even the most basic of squads.

They can decrew weapons but it does actually take quite a lot of time, and in the case of maxims and 120mm mortar the super fast retreat speed means they actually struggle to wipe out squads.

So i can see where you are coming from but I took all that into account. I watch every single replay from many great casters so I see more from both sides of the game then the average player and this is with fog of war removed.

Im not some angry ost player with an axe to grind I am a lover of COH and I want the game to be better.

Do keep writing, there are always people who will read your entire post. Don't get drawn of topic or keep down figurative language and use literal language, if you want to be understood better.

Using figurative expressions, especially extended metaphors and satire doesn't get desired effect on forums. Only headache

Those are great points thanks man.