But thats my entire point, why r u still taking relic on the word? What were u expecting? They break their rules all the time
If i remember correctly USF in coh2 was supposed to be based around the fights leading to and during the battle of the bulge, where their resources werent as dominantly available as they were throughout the war. And then they added the fucking pershing....
Yes, that's another reason why I'm against the Black Prince. For Relic to start keeping its damn words. First, stating that historicity and authenticity are important to us, and we listen to the community. And then they themselves broke their promises. |
And how about the 3 allied factions consistently fighting alongside each other? Especially with the soviets. Its one thing for the brits and US to work together, that actually happened
But for soviets to be frequently fighting next to US or brits?
I agree thats different than including the BP, but thats not the point. The point is: Why does the BP break immersion for some ppl when the above example does not?
Ask Relic why they broke their word that the second part will be completely devoted to the Eastern Front and now in the third part we will play the same US and Britain factions for the third time, even more USA the third time is a direct copy of the US from the first time . This is not an excuse, but the Allied forces could go to war on the territory of the USSR twice: the first time when the USSR and Britain discussed that Britain would send its troops to Murmansk and they would jointly launch an offensive against occupied Norway (in the end, the USSR did it itself) and when France thought whom send to the USSR: infantry divisions or pilots, in the end we know the famous Normandie-Niemen Aviation Regiment. |
I don't think "evil Nazis" should lose every game, I do think that it's macabre in general to reduce this disgusting conflict to a game but that's a completely different issue altogether.
I know that all sides produced prototypes that never saw action - you're not saying anything new. You're not actually responding to my point, you're reiterating your argument and accusing me of bias, something you loathe other people doing.
The "question" I'm referring to is "is this unit 'authentic'?" when referring to things that should be included in the game, particularly when it comes to things which actually saw combat. The Sturmtiger is a great example of my point - it's a purpose-built machine for a very specific battlefield problem. The British made tons of those types of things, but the reason why the Sturmtiger was deployed on the battlefield, outside of its intended purpose, and why combat-ready units like the Meteor were deliberately kept out of combat, or why things like the Black Prince or Tortoise weren't produced and deployed was that the British weren't losing the war and didn't need them. The question of combat use is therefore biased in favour of German tech for the reasons I've stated. Hopefully that's clear enough for you.
Compounding it is the mystique surrounding the Wehrmacht and their supposed wunderwaffen, something that the Company of Heroes series has gladly fed for sales and what the historical community has long debunked. Again, though, that's a completely different issue, albeit one which has effects in this arena.
It doesn’t matter at all for what reason something was created (no matter in what country) and why it was sent to the front, the main thing was at the front. You can even add T-26-5 to the game, this is a T-26 with a 37-mm anti-aircraft gun 61-K built in Besieged Leningrad, not even photos of this tank have been preserved, but it existed and was used in the 124th tank brigade. Black Prince - existed, but not at the front. |
Most people would agree yes that the Relic has taken generous liberty on history. the always on point part though is a huge nope.
They aren't trying to wreck anything, they are as for 3 games now trying to make something interesting in the gameplay to attract players old and new.
They've got enough on their plate I'm sure and just up and removing the thing isn't a solution, and adding more units isn't either. They've balanced the current product around its presence so just being up in arms to have it pitchforked out, id be concerned for the balance side of things.
I do see how the points of the history was on point and that the Sturmtiger had an interesting combat record would align for some concerningly. But the reality was its performance was pathetic and it was a last gasp deployment, and its representation is a fiction.
Being unable to concede that this game has had extremely generous fictions to create game interest and now suddenly this extra one is the straw that broke the camels back is very eyebrow raising. When you are losing you are much more inclined to use anything you can whether its proven, unproven or not being used for its designed task. So we saw IR halftracks, guns and so on that saw such limited use but for a simple reason, it was cool.
If we are going to start to tailor where and what fiction is permitted in coh3 can start with not adding invincible aircraft again. Personally I think with the timeline to launch id be more concerned about changing it right now beyond a model swap with identical stats.
Don't bother to speak for others, there have already been polls and the poll showed that this is a 50/50 ratio. So it is unnecessary to state here that only a small number of people care that the Black Prince breaks the authenticity and opens the doors for the World of Tanks to the Company of Heroes. |
This is extremely nitpicky logic tbh. Hard to follow ur argument when the representation of cetain things just doesnt matter at all, as long as they existed. Thats a really weird take
The pershing and IS2 are not used? Were used quite a lot at many different stages of the game, and the pershing is defintiely still useable currently
And how the fuk do u know BP will be meta? The game isnt even out yet...
Historical - no. For the false quotes of Chuikov and Malinovsky alone, Relic should be sued for libel. Authentic - yes. The game features units that actually participated in the war, without prototypes, without space marines, without elves.
Are we playing the same game? The IS-2 is extremely rare on the battlefield, it is a rather mediocre tank that is constantly complained about as well as the Pershing, especially reading that the US faction was designed without a heavy tank at all and was not planned to be added to the game until the players demanded. |
Because why not? More options allow for more varied playstyles on all sides. In 1v1s, that kind of asymetric balance works. But in teamgames, even to this day, we can see that balancing a game where once side only has to micro a small number of units vs. another side having to micro more individually weaker units makes for an imbalance.
In addition, it is quite silly to me that Axis factions always seem to need to have the heaviest units in the lategame. Hell, in COH3 the 'light and aggressive Africa Corps' looks like it gets a stock Tiger just to appease certain aspects of the Axis playerbase. Seems boring to me to want to go with the same old design yet again in COH3.
Again, this is a Relic design. It would be possible to completely do without heavy tanks for factions: Italy (if it would have been at the start) would not have heavy tanks, but would be based on faction destroyers. And I consider the Tiger as the main unit to be an unsuccessful design decision. |
Authentic is a matter of opinion. Some people might think just having units that fought (regardless of numbers) in the war as all equally viable units for an authentic experience. I personally think COH is already pretty far off the mark when it tries to represent units like Infrared searchlights or Comets as core components of factions. To me, that is about the same level of sin as seeing the Black Prince as a doctrinal unit.
But at the end of the day, units are just skins. The stats we see in game rarely align with what said units were capable of in real life (IE having tanks like the Sherman having worse armor than a P4, or Comets having more armor than Panthers.) If it would make the community happier to see something like a Churchill with a HV 6lber with the same stats as this 'Black Prince,' then that is what Relic should probably go for if they believe the British need a heavy tank capable of slugging it out with other heavies. But removing the Black Prince should not mean that the British faction loses out on having a heavy tank that can fight toe to toe with Tigers or the like.
Why did you even come up with the idea that the Black Prince is needed? On the example of CoH2, we clearly see that the Soviets and the United States are based on tank destroyers. Their heavy tanks (namely, the tank, not the ISU-152) are practically not used. As we know, Britain will have an Archer who can perfectly fulfill the role of the Tiger destroyer. Asymmetric balance. Relic never managed to clearly explain the appointment of the Black Prince, except for the vague wording about "cool stuff". |
Unfortunately for you this thread doesn't lock on your tailored idea of historical accuracy. They were terrible tactical weapons.
So it was extremely un historical in COH that they could be launched pin point accurate onto individual squads and units if you so wished. Go figure un historical items in a video game.
Historically accurate? No. Is it authentic? Yes. And the Black Prince breaks authenticity. |
The record of aerially launched V1s at southern England the UK analysts weren't sure which of two cities were their intended target from the spread of the rockets. That's a strategic target they cant reliably hit. I mean to say the v1 was a reliable tactical weapon as its represented in COH is outrageously fictional, I'm not sure what kind of justification you need but history shows it as a strategic weapon not a tactical one.
You have nothing more to say. V-1s were used tactically both on the Eastern Front and on the Western. The discussion is closed. The units that were before this game all participated in the fighting. So the game, despite the arcade, is authentic. The Black Prince is not authentic.
|
And did they achieve a 100% on target rate like the COH1 V1?
Oh buddy, you don't know how to justify. You have already been told that the V-1 was used tactically and the soldiers who crossed the crossings and the sappers who built the crossings died. But you keep saying it's a fantasy. The Black Prince has no place in the game. Everything that was in the game before was involved in the war, if I wanted to play paper tanks, I would go to play World of Tanks. |