It's not that starting commander are trash, more like in most, but definitely not all, situations vanguard is better option than the other five. And you know what? All of these commanders are in some way like early ostheer commanders: the core is so good that you can play completely without them.
Don't know if anybody thought about it but there are 2 partisant units in the game that are actually polish. That's why those 2 units probably should get polish sound files for native language option, not russian ones. What do you think guys?
Well I have 3 friends who live in the same area and have same ISP and public IP via wimax as it is the only choice where they live. They all played coh1, now they all play coh2. Good that none of them has account on coh2.org as they would be banned repetedly over and over again if thats a case. I mean I love the site but its a bit disappointing.
Disclaimer: I'm not refering to cheating in this post in any way.
There is also another commander, namely usf mechanised, that counters every okw truck that is build outside of base in no time. And guess what, it is said to be UP by 95% of players. What is the difference? The difference is that mechanised reveals itself with dodge or looses one of its best abilities while commando regiment doesn't so its harder to counter play. That said the 'remove the truck' ability is twice as expensive and it has no early counter to okw, so in my opinion against okw usf mechanised is better than ukf commando regiment! This example also shows how highly accteptable putting trucks in base is and always was.
Coh2 is not about knowing what will happen but about predicting it. There is never one outcome of the engagement: there is worst and best scenario instead with many in between. All players involved should be prepared for both of them. If they are, they are better players and will win in a course of best-of-three in a tournament. That means rng doesn't make a game less e-spots. It makes less predictable and thus much more interesting and challenging to watch or play, thats it. It also makes you #adapt to changing conditions you could not expect and that is a hell of a skill.
It might be interesting if bunkers were cheaper but the upgrades associated with them had an additional MP cost. That way it would still cost the same amount of MP and MU to create a MG/Med/Com bunker but more of the cost would be back loaded so Wher has an easier time bringing out vanilla bunkers for general combat purposes.
You could do the same with USF fighting positions as well.
It is a good idea but in case of usf figting positions it cannot be done as RE benefit too much from them. Building 3 instead of one in the center of semoisky would be I win button for usf in 1v1 and 2v2.
Well, I think that because of the amount of doctrines it comes in, it should be divided into two separate units. For the more used doctrines like Mobile Defense doctrine it should be changed into standard, short barrel p4 that is in the game with its full stats for the purpose of ToW. For other, less appealing doctrines it should stay as is in order to make them more appealing and increase number of usefull commanders and strategies.
That said it shouldn't be tied to tier 3 as it limits the options given to the player. Maybe it could be tied to battlephase 2 in order to make it cheaper than p4, but not cheap ass option.
The choice wheather the doctrine should get command p4 or short barrel p4 should be made by relic as they know all the usage data for those commander but I would personally change Mobile Defence, Festung Armor and Fortified Armor, while leaving Blitzkried and Mechanised as they are right now.
Poland
0
ferwiner
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
