A WWII RTS game is never going to garner the sales needed to justify that much investment.
It's 35th on the Steam top sellers list 2 weeks after launch with 62% positive reviews at $80cdn. It was in the top 20 views on Twitch at launch.
I think this got the exposure it wanted, whether that's good or bad. The marketing department it seems got to polish their part. |
|
Give them a regular mortar that can garrison their trench if they want to go static defense |
This line of reasoning ignores the fact that the current system is a terrible design that is frustrating for all players because units are in some cases not selectable immediately based on map and starting position and some unit abilities are not available for arbitrary periods of time until units manage to walk onto the map proper. Balance and strategic impact take a back seat to poor design here. Arguing against a fundamental design improvement because it might cause a temporary imbalance is extremely short-sighted. Balance is easily tweaked. This change is a net quality-of-life improvement for every single player from a design perspective, which means the game will improve in the long term even if you have to endure a relatively short period of imbalance. And keep in mind that until the change is actually implemented it's impossible to say what balance impact, if any, it will actually have.
Pretty simple solution to this without changing a functional aspect of this game that has been here since release. Either make units controllable immediately or have them spawn directly on the map edge. No need to implement unnecessary, unwanted changes for the sake of your nostalgia or "skillful" building placement. And please stop speaking for a group of people you don't represent, the only ones arguing for this are 1v1 players and vCoH vets who don't play this game. |
|
This is a change made solely to benefit 1v1, and so far the arguments in favour (faster units on field, more "skillful" building placement) are irrelevant in team games and do more to hurt these modes as others have stated.
If this change is implemented there needs to be a way to select where each team mate starts(which on random teams will be horrible to try and get randoms to agree with you or pay attention) as certain maps it is imperative to get an mg setup in specific locations or several players to one side of the map. Ostheer and Soviets are already screwed on large maps by no FRP, this will just make certain maps even more frustrating.
In the end, minor benefits for extra frustration. Don't fix what isn't broken. |
|
I've had a few 2v2 games on the new version of Hamlet and so far I think it is an improvement. However, the east/forest is completely full of smoke which has a massive impact on passive FPS. Probably a simple change to get rid of it but until then this is taking up a precious veto slot. |
|
Has this ability changed in any significant way in 4 years? As others have said, use green cover for 50% dmg reduction or just watch for the animation/assume grenadiers are going to try to use their single AI trick on your stationary infantry. Also as Mittenz said, puts a serious tax on an already munitions starved faction.
Grenades are trouble for all mgs, though maxim probably least of all due to pack up time. I'm more concerned about that brit gammon bomb, since I have no clue which of the various commandos has it and there is no opportunity to dodge what is almost as potent as a satchel. |
|
It does not take skill to look at a house and notice a door, realize green cover is nice, or know that with the way units path they are going to bunch up going through a gate.
Mines should protect flanks and punish unsupported tank rushes, not do your dirty work by wiping full squads; upgraded, vetted or plain. |
|
This thread is full of nonsense and people defending blatantly overpowered tactics(mines on doors). The current state of mines encourages blobbing around a sweeper unit and placing them in spots to exploit the poorly implemented pathing and grouping of units.
Once again I feel wehr have the most effective/fair implementation of a unit/ability, though I feel we should keep the asymmetric factor when it comes to mines. Not sure I like Rollo's suggestion in particular but I feel as aerohank said, mines and demo's have needed a thorough look over for sometime.
As it is I think mines are in a great place for AT, but they are actually removing the best part of CoH infantry fighting by significantly impacting your ability to maneuver individual squads in order to flank and use cover.
Anyone who says a 30 munition "apm" taxing mine should immediately waste 300+ man power should go back to taking candy from children since that is the level of competition that suits you. |
|
AA has always been weird in this game. Used to be awful for soviets in vanilla because other than the m5 quad, IS2, and ISU they had nothing while just about everything from T3 up for ostheer could bring down a plane.
I also have a massive issue with every kind of loiter call in since the start as they were either blatantly overpowered and did all your work for 200muni, or just gave very expensive recon before crashing into your own guys. I would love to see all of these abilities replaced with their single line, skill dependent counterparts.
As for how AA is currently behaving, the randomness is what bothers me the most. M5 quads for USF and soviets are just plain bad, while ostwinds(especially hulldown vet 2) and sdkfz 251/17 can do some serious work. I think if its possible to add health to planes that would probably bring AA units more in line with each other |
|
I seem to remember having to select an option, either in steam or CoH2 to enable downloading of 3rd party items. I can't seem to find it at the moment but if so that is most likely the cause of your issues.
Having it on autodownload is really annoying when you're playing with people who have 100skins/strikes/nameplates/maps as it can take a long time to download a bunch of stuff you won't ever need again. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
