...
I've lost the count of how many times I've read about increasing small arms damage, delay tech and improve infantry late game. And ofc, to get rid of these stupid P2W commanders.
All right, fair enough.
Here is the thing though:
Many changes you and many others (including myself) would like to see are
major changes.
For example: Altering small arms damage (or generally small arms fights) and would change one of the core concepts of the game.
To implement even some of the proposed changes (in a professional way) is a monumental task. This needs a lot of manpower and thus MONEY.
Any larger company has someone who's job essentially consists of asking some questions before they grant any budget. Any CFO or midlevel account worth his or her salt will ask:
- How much money do think you will need?
- What will our company earn and what is the timeframe ?
- How likely is success/failure?
- Why should we be doing this? .. the least important question by a mile
I'd be in a tight spot to come up with satisfactory answers to those questions if I was working at relic.
COH2 sold reasonably well. They've said they are 'happy with the sales numbers', but I doubt they were blown away by the revenue or if they even made their original estimates.
So why exactly should more money be put into CoH2?
EDIT:
I don't want to demonize 'bean counters' as the killers of all creativity. Many a promising company failed miserably because managers chose to ignore these stark but necessary questions.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
