coh3 is 60% off on kinguin. Is it worth getting it? Heard some anons on here claim that it now is a really good game and better than its predecessors but there being a 20 Dollar DLC that adds p2w units really puts me off
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Yes it's good. Ignore the coh2 nostalgia kids who like to spam heavy tanks and like every video explosion sound to be a nuke.
this
also this
moron
nope, just get 2 instead.
2 is unironically dogshit
this, 2 fricking sucks
Found the russians still salty after all these years. go leave you slaves.
It rehashed the Americans with a Soviet skin and added pay to win commanders. The factions they added weren't any better.
It's fricking bad. It has always been bad. The only thing good about it were the mechanical updates they added to gameplay, but the design choices were shit.
this - also the fricking changes to territory and game pacing were fricking dogshit, glad they learned their lesson in coh3 and reverted that
NTA, it was crap. They took the cool feeling of Saving Private Ryan and turned it into an edgy, boring snoozefest because muh eastern front.
Everyone in COH 2 is either inept or a psycho. Not even the British are spared from that.
Why do people hate eastern front aesthetics ? I thing its so much more interesting then all maps having the same fields with hadges and boring looking french villages or endless sands and clean and sunny italy. Story was a bit edgy but maps and aesthetics were top notch.
Why do people like them? It's all fricking rubble and grey fields. Sometimes a snowy grey field if you are fancy.
Thats how warfield should look like. Not like gay restaurant in Marseille
> endless sands and clean and sunny italy.
The latter of which is literally the first time it's featured in a RTS as something else than "France but rocky". So yeah, frick the Eastern Front, and give me more Italy or Balkans or, Hell, even anything at all in the Pacific.
Yeah honestly the Italy maps look great and it's a refreshing setting, especially the mountainous areas.
There's a dozen slavcore games out there that all have the same bland marshy steppeland Eastern Front aesthetic. I'm so tired of it, by this point it's as played out as the Bocages of Normandy.
The Mediterranean and Asian theatres are completely underserved and also offer a lot of variety and novelty in their environments and how warfare was actually carried out.
The shitty part about the Italian setting is how relic uses it an excuse to not have to include anything post 1943, so we won't get any cool late war tech or vehicles.
Italy only won because it's the only major theater that hasn't been used yet and people who go out of their way to vote in coh polls are likely going to feel like they can't just pick the same settings of the first two games, even though they have way more potential.
Pacific just would just not work. The coolest part of the pacific war were naval and air battles. What would a Japanese roster even look like?
I think there are alot of things post 1943 in the game right? also, i wont lie, i like an earlier war setting with tanks like the matilda, crusader, the italian tankettes, and alot of casemate stuff. its unique
>relic uses it an excuse to not have to include anything post 1943
First of all, the central event of the dynamic campaign, the battle of anzio, took place in 1944. Half of the singleplayer is running concurrently with D-Day. The Chaffee is a 1945 tank
Second, Brits have the fricking Black Prince, a postwar prototype tank that never saw combat and was used as a test platform for the main armament of their future MBT. No, the setting is not an excuse to exclude latewar stuff, it's an excuse to focus on hardware that never gets repped because it's from too early in the war for a D-Day setting.
>Pacific just would not work
This is always the most brainlet take. Do you not realize Japan was 4 years into a major landwar by the time they struck Pearl Harbour? Or that there was extensive amphibious and land combat on the Philippines, Indonesia, New Guinea, Okinawa and on islands all throughout the Pacific? Americans get so caught up on MUH MIDWAY because it's the only part of the war they care about, and forget that the entire pacific region had been in a war of resistance against japanese imperialism for half a decade with some 4 million japanese soldiers involved in the invasion of the mainland.
>what would a japanese roster even look like
Like any other roster? They weren't fighting with sticks and clubs, anon. They had rifles, artillery, tanks, bunkers, AT guns and trenches just like everyone else.
nta but i prefer North africa and italy, sorry anon. not too interested in Japan. im sure they'll add it
Japan was fighting with sticks and clubs comparatively. They never improved their tech and all their shit was obsolete by the forst year. Their only victories were against backwater British and American outposts and colonies while their militaries were busy dealing with Hitler.
>like any other roster
Other rosters have cool tanks and vehicles. Japan has nothing interesting.
Japan had good small arms and bad small arms, just like a lot of euro powers. In comparison to Italy they were better equipped in some ways. In terms of leadership, well, both Italy and Japan have a lot of similarities when it comes to officers.
Japan had a ton of cool prototypes and niche weapons, there is no reason you can;t make an infantry heavy faction with alternative s to heavy vehicles work. Japan could have so many AT weapons that going heavy tanks simply isn't worth it, suicide attackers like T-34 ramming attack in CoH2, more aircraft options and so on. It would actually be interesting to see rather than just 'Uh they're Ostheer but slightly different color palette'.
>What would a Japanese roster even look like?
Infantry
>tier 0 Korean conscripts(engineers)
>tier 1 Japanese regulars
>tier 2 sniper, suicide squad(cheap, fast, poor HP but deadly to vehicles, can camouflage)
>tier 3 SNLF (or whatever, Japanese marines. Upgradable for any range or anti vehicle)
>doctrinal unit or available through something like coh2s hammer or anvil: Imperial guard, paratroopers
>team weapons
Mg and mortar obviously were used very regularly by them. Make the AT gun a shitty low caliber to balance out suicide squad and upgraded marines.
>vehicles
Troop trucks, motorcycles, towable AA guns that shrewd infantry, a couple light tanks, and thier meme heavy tanks since the devs have never ever ever tried to be historically accurate and include prototypes and tanks with less than 50 overall production numbers into the games
Can add British, royal Thailand, usf Philippines, Manchurians, (communist) Chinese(as it would never sell in china with nationalists being the main faction fighting the japs.)
Lots of potential. I’m sold.
I think I'd keep marines doctrinal rather than a core unit
Battlegroups could be like
>IJN
SNLF as elite callin infantry with offmap naval and carrier-based air support, similar to UK Air & Sea. I'd either make them ambush troops with some utility, like Commandos, or an expensive shock unit like Guastatori or Rangers.
>Island Garrison
Defensive doctrine with a twist. They unlock various defensive fortifications, including a camouflage position that conceals and provides ambush bonus whatever is under it (ie an AT gun). But the main gimmick is the ability to build tunnel networks connecting map points for a munitions cost. Tunnels work exactly like the Tyranid ones from DoW2: an engineer builds entry points to the tunnel, and units can be transported from any entry point to any other with a brief delay. Enemy engineers can disable tunnels via a special command (similar to breaching barbed wire) and they can be destroyed by explosives and indirect fire.
>Experimental Armour
Obligatory vehicle battlegroup that builds towards a single meme heavy tank callin lategame.
I think overall they would be an infantry-flavoured faction, with a lot of different flavours of specialist and team weapons meant to support each other, and an emphasis on team weapons, infantry AT and mines to counter vehicles. Their own vehicles would be mostly anti-infantry and supportive, with their final tier medium tank being more similar to the P3 (ie less armour, weaker gun, faster) but without something like the marder to provide mobile AT.
Holy shit, someone finally made Japan in coh sound good. Genuinely good concepts imo, would be fun to play and to play against.
I think this is the only way to make it playable. It would have to be a completely asymmetrical warfare with the US having superior armour and firepower and the Japanese being infantry based with a large variety of units with very useful skills and doctrine abilities.
IJN doctrine giving overwhelming fire support and elite marine troops, your island garrison idea (the tunnel system could be faction wide), veterans from the Chinese front with better armour, jungle warfare specialist, specialty assault doctrines with less emphasis on defense than infiltration & assault. Jap units would be very resourceful, very high morale & good at close combat. All have the ability to camouflage, bayonet charge (amplified by officer units), build fortifications.
Gameplay that could be added to add to the asymmetry: night battles with incredibly reduced vision and FOW; CQC mechanics rather than inf units just shooting rifles at each other from a foot away; a better morale system where units will retreat or cease to follow orders if ambushed or charged (distinct from being pinned, they still fight but stop following orders/reposition unprompted); amphibious units and possibly an amphibious assault game mode; rework air units, they have to be less passive and more crucial to winning a match.
Maps would be full of thick vegetation that nonspecialist vehicles can't pass, they have very limited POV. Japanese offensive strategy would be based around crushing Allied infantry morale, isolating them from their heavy weaponry.
>They took the cool feeling of Saving Private Ryan
It's Enemy at the Gates now, blatant propaganda included. If you really needed it to be based on a movie then you shouldn't be complaining.
why would russians dislike coh2, they're the fricking main faction
>He doesn't remember the reviewbombing russians committed on release because the game portrayed russian forces as uncaring hordes with commissars blamming slow to advance soldiers.
They were that butthurt about it. I can only imagine how assmad chinks would get if they were ever portrayed similarly in a video game, but nobody will ever do that so.
oh, idgaf about that, i still dont like coh2 as much as Iike coh1 and coh3
Because everything russuans are exposed to about their own history is mythologized glorious Slavic ubermensch strategically giving ground to draw the nazis into general winter, then destroying them utterly in a series of tactical master strokes where everything went exactly to plan. Total soviet casualties: 5.
A taste of reality is bitter for them. The Russian spergout over coh2 is absolutely legendary.
you're utterly fricking braindead.
the game literally has missions where you have to burn random farmhouses with civilians inside them as well as empty fields full of soldiers.
The game pretends that this is what "scorched earth" tactics are.
Also there's a commissar who pops up every few minutes and executes every soldier you order to retreat.
You'd have to be the most fluoridated moron ever to believe this has anything to do with "reality"
Nah, at this point I'm fully willing to believe the Reds burned down farms with families trapped inside. They probably did. They for sure sent out NKVD troops dressed as Germans to burn down villages.
NPC moron.
except the game is not depicting some obscure war crime, it's telling the player that this is what "scorched earth" tactics are.
My opinion is the mainstream western one among people who know more than what a random movie told them
not relevant but probably not even true.
The only instances of unarmed soldiers being sent into combat were people who were badly cut off and besieged, the game depicts people literally being shipped across the volga with no gun just to soak up bullets.
> The only instances of unarmed soldiers being sent into combat were people who were badly cut off and besieged, the game depicts people literally being shipped across the volga with no gun
> Batiuk’s 284th Rifle Division reached the western bank of the Volga on the night of 21–22 September. Batiuk’s division totaled about 10,000 men but lacked many of its authorized weapons. In fact, for a time it had sufficient rifles to arm only one of its three regiments [...] The division’s 1045th and 1047th Regiments finally crossed the river overnight on 22–23 September [...] As Batiuk’s division arrived, even though it was short of rifles, Chuikov threw it into combat almost immediately in the sector from Mamaev Kurgan southward to the Krutoi Ravine
- Glantz, Armageddon in Stalingrad Chapter 3
>on arrival only the 1043rd Rifle Regiment was completely equipped, so it was the first to cross. It was briefly held in reserve, before moving forward to relieve the exhausted troops of the 112th Rifle Division from Mamayev Kurgan to the Krutoi Ravine. On September 22, two regiments of the German 295th Infantry Division pierced the defenses of the 112th and reached the west bank of the Volga at several points "after difficult fighting." Later in the day the now-armed 1047th and 1045th Rifle Regiments arrived in time to drive back these tenuous footholds
Woops, looks like you cut out some details there.
> stuff copied from wikipedia
maybe try using the actual source and not some "dude trust me bro it's totally in the book"-article next time
>b-but
lmao you're a lying homosexual.
and where exactly was I lying?
All I did was quote Glantz's book which clearly states that "even though it was short of rifles, Chuikov threw it into combat almost immediately". Meanwhile you quoted some wikipedia article whose claim regarding the equipment status can not only be not be found in the book, but also directly contradicts said statement
Everyone can see exactly where you cut the quotes moron.
> you cut out some non relevant stuff so that means whatever I imagine to be there HAS to be there. Don't ask me why someone should even make it obvious that he cut stuff out if he wanted to hide something though!
here is the full quote including the stuff cut out. Now tell me where it says that the 1047th and 1045th were now suddenly armed?
Your source literally says they were armed before being put into actual combat.
Imagine being this attached to a moronic enemy at the gates meme.
please pay attention in class, your future is more important than getting mad at *current enemy of the elite*.
The fact that enemy at the gates is dogshit propaganda is the mainstream position you fricking downy. Lmao, he's right.
it's a movie, why are you gays so upset about it? Gonna piss your pants about saving private ryan too?
because you think it's a documentary.
So you're saying 20 million russians didn't die in WWII, mostly thrown away because they were poorly equipped and trained?
So was the fight not actually close, or were the germans actual supermen? Come on, pick which lies you want me to believe!
amazingly bad faith post.
I accept your concession.
>current enemy of the elite
Russia?
> Your source literally says ...
> No I will NOT tell you on which page and line said claim is found!
I accept your concession tankiebro
> the game literally has missions where you have to burn random farmhouses with civilians inside
maybe look up "destruction battalions" and the funny stuff they did in estonia (:
yes anon, soviets killing their own civilians and soldiers totally never happened especially in what is today Ukraine and Belarus, it's all just israeli western propaganda
You are genuinely braindead. Calling others propagandized while believing far more ridiculous bullshit.
It fricking depicts units being sent into combat with no weapon in the first few minutes, this is a literal meme born from shitty hollywood movies.
We see that happen in Ukraine today. Wagner convicts being sent in with a shovel.
Couldn't just be that you're a moron who'll believe anything.
>we see that happen in ukraine today
source? I kinda wanna watch that
NTA but look up russia ukraine rusted ak or russia ukraine mosin
Some militia homosexuals still running around with mosin nagants with scopes older than us
i dont know if you remember the campaign or not but it was about a soviet journalist who wanted to record the atrocities committed by the soviets during the war (because they were so heinous) but was at conflict with himself and his commissar friend due to fear of damaging the reputation of the state, hurting the morale of the people and being killed or arrested if the info was released. basically the campaign had nothing to do with the title of the game
generally, if CoH1 was "Band of Brothers/Saving Private Ryan" but as a game, then CoH2 was "Enemy at the Gates" but as a game.
The main difference is, "Enemy at the Gates" repeats or even triples blatant german propaganda which even in the movie was cranked up to 11 due to american red scare.
This doesn't mean that things like Soviets backstabbing polish partisans did not happen (in fact it happened on almost all occasions, even if those partisans were communists themselves), but there is a pretty major difference between showing heinous warcrimes and trying to make you feel guilty for playing the game. In a game called "Company of Heroes" with the game's main advertising campaign trying to portay the ultimate sacrifice of countless of Soviets.
I'm not even Russian, I despise those mongoloids and it's my DNA given my family and nation's story, but to be blind to what happened here is to be ignorant... Or just support what happened.
It's not to say that Russians themselves cannot face negative depictions of their story, watch "Shtrafbat/Penal Battalion" series, focusing on the exact same subject, but executed in a very, very different way. Still very well rated.
Maybe a different approach closer to CoD: World at War would've been better. Pure hatred and hunger for vengeance channeled into war brutality.
I hate to tell you this anon, but the USSR connited warcrimes in WW2, a lot of them in fact. The nazis were attempting to systematically exterminate russian civilians and yet only barely ousted the Soviets on civilian kill count. The Easter Front involved a lot of utter barbarism all around. It was a racewar between two dictators and their ideologically driven military regimes, just one that happened to be convenient to the allies.
it's not about the soviets commiting warcrimes, nobody's denying that, but the way they're portrayed makes them look worse than nazis. and they're supposed to be the protagonists. once again hinting at false advertising.
soviets are worse than nazis though
The nazis literally have a higher kill count so I don't know where you're getting this shit from
what? soviets have the highest kill count
they don't unless you count axis soldiers
Soviets is about 2 million german civilians 30k soviet citizens from the great purge and 2 million rapes of german women compared to 11 million (6 million israelites 5 million slavs) killed in the holocaust and 10 million rapes of soviet women plus the people arrested or killed by the gestapo or SS which I do not have a number for.
That's not even counting Prisoners of War or Soviet, Polish or other civilians of occupied countries who died as a result of starvation or disease thanks to the German invasion or occupation.
oh, you're just pulling my leg
nah he's just correcting your le based edgy post
Brazilians when?
>30k for great purge
Kek, wut. I don't recognize where you got most of these numbers from, or why you didn't include POWs/occupied countries for the Soviets when they died en masse.
Around 30,000 Soviet Civilians were killed by Stalin during the Great Purge excluding occupied countries and why didn't I include occupied countries? Because it's too much of a bother to tally up for some homosexual 14 year old edgelord on the internet who can't be bothered to read a book. And any occupied country where people were killed by the soviets in the 40s you had germans kill easily double if not more the number of people when they occupied that country and then you would need to throw on like an extra 10 million Soviet deaths from starvation or from being PoWs at the hands of Germans so no matter what the Germans still killed more innocent people.
they are all bad
missed out on two great games
yeah, coh1 and coh3
unfunny moron, probably european
i can understand shitting on coh2 and coh3 but not coh1.
It's like complaining about 2&3 but with even more inane and subjective arguments based on solipsism.
If you're here long enough, you saw constant "I hate CoH!" threads on original Ganker, and their content was different based on who made it
>Stargays calling everything that is not farming resources next to base RTT and thus bad
>MoWgays angry about HP bars and their empty servers being fault of CoH
just get coh 1
>kinguin
do people REALLY buy from these scam sites?
never had a problem with it
i have pretty much bought all my keys from kinguin and only one time i had to ask for a refund from kinquin because the seller gave me a bad key.
Yes.
60% is still $20+DLC+tax+tip so no. I'm never buying this garbage until it's 75% off at least
> I'm never giving money to the israelites unless it's A LITTLE BIT cheaper
Kek you really showed them
nope. CoH2 with full DLCs for cheaper and more players. CoH3 can't even surge past CoH2 even after a new update so it won't survive long enough to get the year of support 2 did
Myth. Queue times for CoH 2 are longer. Most of the CoH 2 players are comp stomp gays
wrong and I'm not paying rent up in that head
No weak attempt at a gotcha changes facts, anon. Check coh2stats/coh3stats and you'll see each game has roughly the same amount of games played per day. CoH2 matchmaking is worse due to rank variation.
I just checked. CoH2 has over 100k matches across all game modes from December 12th to 25th. CoH3 has 79k. I bet you feel stupid now, midwit.
>it had less games before the sale
Wow no shit? Brilliant observation, genius. Too bad the past doesn't help your case.
I'm sure that makes more sense in your head.
>too fricking stupid for basic deduction
Let me explain it to you, brainlet. The typical argument for dimwits like you is that CoH 2 has nearly double the players compared to 3. Yet in actual play, the number of multiplayer games is almost the same, especially now that CoH 3 is on sale.
Therefore, a very large segment of CoH 2's population does not play multiplayer and is useless fluff for your arguments about why CoH 2 is better (spoiler: it isn't.)
>79k is almost the same as 100k
I stopped reading right there. I'm sure the rest of what you wrote makes sense to you.
>Has to run away and ignore the current sale increased CoH 3's playerbase and thus number of games, making his numbers useless
I accept your concession.
>le stock 4chin buzzphrase
oh no
> your numbers are useless ... why? WELL THEY JUST ARE OK!
coh2 currently still has 20%+ more ranked matches than coh3
Stop endlessly kvetching. Players play a game based on what is most fun. More players are playing the second game right now.
I comp stomp, cry more. Hardest AI can be tougher than people.
t.50iq brainlet
It's heading in the right direction but isn't there yet. I'd wait a little longer before paying for it, probably when it gets a proper expansion or something.
it's still fun even if i prefer coh2 at this point.
CoH2 was a disaster at launch...
Relic should seriously just go for alt-history or NotWW2 setting, so they can keep the aesthetics but not be bound by any sort of historical accuracy. Not like Iron Harvest though. Tanks > mechs.
they have never been bound by historical accuracy to begin with. That's why Germany has flame grenades and stun grenades in CoH2 even though those hadn't been invented yet.
the game has two unhistorical weapons, one of which isn't necessarily unhistorical and the other maybe being a simple mistake (Quote from Wikipedia: "Concussion grenades, however, were primarily designed to stun opponents at close quarters with the blast of their explosive charge") - that's way off from simply going alt-hist WW2
homie, that's just two examples I came up with at the top of my head. There are also things like Volksgrenadiers being amalgamated with Volkssturms in CoH1 and Knight Cross Holders which are a totally fictional formation. CoH has always been an arcady series that only ever pays lip service to historical accuracy
> Volksgrenadiers being amalgamated with Volkssturms
were they? Volksgrenadiers were late war divisions it makes sense that they are portrayed as a bit lacking in training and morale
> and Knight Cross Holders which are a totally fictional formation. CoH has always been an arcady series that only ever pays lip service to historical accuracy
it isn't 100% historical accurate, like the CoH2 grenadiers uniform which got changed for UI reasons, but i would argue that it tries to be authentic. There were no special "Knights Cross" squads but it's not like we have T28, Maus or IS-3 in the first two games. SD2 also has fake names for units (like Valkyrie or whatever) and some inaccuracies but it still feels authentic and adding alt-hist stuff would destroy this.
But now that they have added a british Maus-eque tank to CoH3 they might as well continue with this. Don't get why they added it though, stun-grenades at least serve a gameplay purpose but tank stats are pretty arbitrary anyways
>were they? Volksgrenadiers were late war divisions it makes sense that they are portrayed as a bit lacking in training and morale
no it fricking doesn't. Volksgrenadiers were professional soldiers who still had proper training and good equipment. The 1st game treats them like a militia unit that has to survive multiple battles to become a regular Grenadier unit, even though there was no difference in status between VGren and Gren in real life.
>but i would argue that it tries to be authentic.
There is nothing authentic about Germany creating a formation entirely out of people who have received the Knight Cross. It's a fictional creation to give Germany a distinct elite unit without having to use the SS.
If you want to use vehicles as an example, then the 2nd game already has that covered with the Ostwind. Only 40 were ever made in real life, rarer than the Jadgtiger and the Elefant, yet it's a stock non-doctrinal vehicle for Ostheer. Not as egregious as the Maus or IS-3, but it shows that Relic doesn't care about reflecting historical rarity.
Volksgren were literally a desperate last-ditch levie hurriedly mobilized as fast as they could put rifles in people's hands after two devastating losses on each front crippled the nazi's manpower. They siphoned veterans from other parts of the army (including the airforce and navy lmao) to serve as tard-wranglers because the rank and file were hurried to the fronts with only what training they had time for.
>Muh SS
They were political "elite" because they were more loyal to the party than the military but in terms of combat performance, they were absolutely not.
again, you are mistaking the Volksgrens for the Volkssturms. Most Volksgren divisions were formed from the remnants of destroyed Gren divisions, inheriting their surviving officers and veterans. Even the bulk of their new recruits were professional militarymen from other branches of the military, not untrained civilians. Even the Gren divisions that hadn't been destroyed and reorganized to Volksgrens still received the same kind of
substandard recruits the Volksgrens did. Battle-hardened veterans leading 17 years old conscripts had been a thing since before Normandy, so there was nothing new about Volksgrenadiers except the StG44 and the slightly altered organization to make full use of it. If Relic wanted to be accurate, both Grens and Volksgrens would have been the same unit with different names.
>They were political "elite" because they were more loyal to the party than the military but in terms of combat performance, they were absolutely not
It's just video game convention to treat Waffen SS as Nazi's super elite soldiers. Even CoH2 does this with the Obers, which are referred to as "Waffen" in the file. Don't nitpick that one too hard.
>no it fricking doesn't
>They were organized around small cadres of hardened veteran soldiers, noncommissioned officers and officers, and then bulked out with anything the
>Replacement Army could supply: "jobless" personnel of the shrinking Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe, recovered wounded soldiers from broken formations
>returning to duty from hospitals, older men who would have been considered too old or too unfit for the peacetime army, and young men and teenagers
>from the latest conscription classes were all recruited into the ranks. [...] Some Volksgrenadier divisions performed well, while others were rushed into battle with a minimum of training.
> 2nd game already has that covered with the Ostwind. Only 40 were ever made in real life [...] yet it's a stock non-doctrinal vehicle for Ostheer
who ever said that what's stock and what's not is decided by numbers built? It was built and it was used - you really see no difference between this and going alt-hist?
verbatim from wikipedia
fricking zoomer. Also, if you actually pick up a history book, you'd know that this is nothing new. Even regular Grenadier divisions were filled with young boys since before Normandy. Volksgrenadiers at least have a higher proportion of people who had training in other branches of the military. In some divisions it was made up of 50% former Luftwaffe ground crew with good morale.
>who ever said that what's stock and what's not is decided by numbers built?
it's rare in real life but not rare in the game. That's alt-hist.
homie out here unironically trying to argue that the quality and morale of the german army didn't decline as the war came to a close
>moronic fogposter
no. I'm arguing that there's no difference between Grenadiers and Volksgrenadiers in the same year.
your OG claim was that it doesn't make sense to portray Volks as lacking training and morale
because they didn't lack it. They fared as well as Grenadiers even though the game treated one as battle-hardened veterans and the other as barely-trained conscripts.
(you)
>there's no difference between Grenadiers and Volksgrenadiers in the same year.
There were no Grenadiers raised when the Volksgren existed. Volksgrenadier was a propaganda rebranding of the basic rank and file, but it corresponded directly to a sharp drop in quality of the units being deployed, both because they were mobilizing those unfit for service in desperation and because they were in such pressing need for manpower that they were being rushed into combat with minimal training, instead relying on experienced NCOs cannibalized from other formations to teach them as they went.
Grenadiers from 1944 onwards were purely existing professional divisions, which had the benefit not only of proper training but also experience fighting WW2 for years. There's really no comparison between professional soldiers with combat experience, many of whom were voluntary servicemen and ideologically motivated, and raw conscripts taken from the young, infirm and elderly and desperately stuffed into trenches to buy time while the Nazis hid their gold and scurried off to Brazil.
>There were no Grenadiers raised when the Volksgren existed
except there were. The 6th Volksgrens and the 394th Volksgren were both reformed as regular Infanterie-Division (which is what Gren divisions were actually called). That's how you know there's zero difference between Gren and Volksgren except the name.
https://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Volksgrenadierdivisionen/6VGD.htm
https://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Volksgrenadierdivisionen/349VGD.htm
>Grenadiers from 1944 onwards were purely existing professional divisions, which had the benefit not only of proper training but also experience fighting WW2 for years
total myth. As early as 1943 the Ersatzheer was sending raw teenage conscripts to replenish Gren divisions in the eastern front. Such an ignorant thing to say that Grenadier divisions somehow had more volunteers. If anything, Volksgrenadiers had tons of volunteers because a decent chunk of their recruits came from the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe, which were mainly made up of volunteers as conscripts were more often sent to the Heer. There is no difference between Grens and Volksgrens because they both had shit recruits led by veterans after Stalingrad. Even the divisions that were still named Grenadier frequently got merged with Volksgrenadier anyway (as was the case with the 170th Infantry Division getting merged with the 547th volksgren), so any distinction between the two was moot.
> 394th Volksgren were both reformed as regular Infanterie-Division. That's how you know there's zero difference
homie, your OWN source says that the 349th Volks was a 32nd wave formation (aka. a true Volksgren divsion) that was created AFTER the destruction of the 349th Infantry divsion
>Der Stab und der Rahmen der Division (etwa 250 Mann) wurden im April ins Reich verlegt und die 349. Infanterie-Division aufstellen, zur Durchführung des Befehls kam es nicht mehr.
dumb frog
you have no clue what you are talking about, do you? The 349th Infantry of 1945 was supposed to be a Field Training Division
Do yourself a favor and get pic-related instead.
100% historical. Fun campaign. Finished game. No woke bullshit about "muh poor north-african israelites".
If it isn't casual enough for you just play CoH2 or 1.
>runs like shit
>AI is so worthless you have to manually control every individual soldier and play bad counterstrike constantly just to do anything
>enemy AI is helpless, so you either sandbox like an autist or deal with russian autists with 2k+ hours in multiplayer.
No thanks. The formula peaked with AS2 and GoH has just been a grim imitation too ambitious for its own good. Fortunately MoW2 is looking good so hopefully it actually comes out sometime next year.
MoW2 is trash and I played the Beta.
It's going to need RobZ mod again to fix it.
Only idiot morons like Robz so your opinion is completely invalid. I'm glad the devs laugh in your face too.
>hurrrrrrr let's add "realistic ranges" in these tiny map
>let's add enough visual effects to lag any computer ever
>let's add a bunch of poorly implemented chore shit like a billion ammo types and weapon jams
>NOO I DON'T WANT MY WW2 RTS TO BE REALISTIC I WANT TO DRIVE TOY TANKS AND ALWAYS PEW PEW FROM 5 INCHES AWAY!!
gays stick to your baby casual games.
>Wowiie! I need to call in my Sd.Kfz. 251/10 and park it somewhere so my guy in a bush set to hold fire can let me get a shot off during this slow-ass game! How exciting!
Yeah it's called "playing the game".
Why WW2 game threads have to suffer you autists?
I do not see any shizos malding in AoE threads over archers with unlimited arrows and catapults used against cavalry.
>RobZ
Oh no, it's moronic.
I love being shot from across the map!
Terribly made game propped up by morons with Fuhrer somewhere in their name who think it's hardcore because it looks all washed out and uses german names. Also
>sixty fricking gigs for a game with four factions and a handful of maps
Not even Steel Division was that unoptimized.
>propped up by morons with Fuhrer somewhere in their name
What are you talking about ? Game doesnt have "the message" where germans soldiers are portraited as baby eating, puppy killing ubermonsters instead purely focus on combat so it means that devs are nazis or what ?
I'll never get over how this was advertised as a standalone game then a month from release they revealed it would actually be an expansion for the other failed slavjank strategy game and now you've basically paid $60 to have men of war with a first person mode
Really good is an exaggeration, but it is slightly improving, I think in about a year it will finally be worth getting, as of now, it still feels like a beta or early access game.
>people pretending you can polish an arcade game into something semi realistic with mods
please everyone, if you want realism - just take the combat mission pill.
No one is saying that and no one cares about your shitty cashgrab games for grandpa. Buy now only on Matrix, 120 USD!
I don't want realism, I want more original meaningful content.
>WORLD war 2 game
>americans! british! germans!... sand germans!
>nobody else fought in the WORLD war pls understand small indie dev
Americans having Chaffee tank is a joke. That tank barely came in the end of the war.
Sucks to suck, homo.
>April 1945
That picture is of the chaffee tank a few days before the war ends dumbass
And the allies fought in Italy until May 1945. Your point?
Company of Heroes 3 doesn't take place in 1945. It mostly takes place in 1943.
No it doesn't. The campaign goes all the way to 1944+ and the skirmish all the way to the end.
They didn't even get into Europe until November 1944 you insufferable homosexual. Why must you come out of the woodwork to defend shit that didn't happen?
one billion times better physics sirs!
I'm sick of shit like this happening to any new game in any series. Everything is dumped down from graphics, details to physics. Homeworld, GTA, Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon. It never ends, everything must be driven to the fricking ground
Red Alert 3 looks better than than CoH graphics
coh3 is great - very worth it
I bought it and I'm having a lot of fun. Factions seem better designed than they were in previous games,
> about 75%+ of all matches are shorter than 30 minutes
> 40%+ are even shorter than 20 minutes
grim.
20-30 minutes is the ideal time frame for a match. Any longer and you're just massing tanks and staring at each other waiting for the other side to charge your AT guns, and the outcome is usually just decided by whichever side has the more overtuned max pop lategame this patch
> Any longer and you're just massing tanks and staring at each other waiting for the other side to charge your AT guns
grim.
Guess I wil stick to CoH2
But CoH2 is even worse for that. Midgame is trench warfare and artillery duels, lategame is tankspam stalemates as both sides hide behind double AT guns.
CoH3 has the mercy that at least half of team games end before devolving into AT gun stalemates with a pop cap full of tanks.
> But CoH2 is even worse for that. Midgame is trench warfare and artillery duels, lategame is tankspam stalemates as both sides hide behind double AT guns
ah, you are that rank 9000 Black person from last thread
coh2 is garbage and you don't sound pleasant, so have fun
>coh2 is garbage
>when coh3 is right there
Cope.
coh2 is garbage yeah. no need to cope, coh3 is better
Good. I don't like drawn out slug fests. Always hated coh2 slugs.
Also. Gay Black person team games are never balanced in RTS. And should never be looked at statistically.
Especially in a game like this. The axis/allies split for teams means that things are going to get extremely skewed to one side of the other depending on what people are choosing to play at any one time, which exacerbates the hell out of minor or perceived imbalances.
The 40% is when DAK wipes and basepins someone in the first 5 minutes who was caught off guard or didn't follow the single viable build vs dak. Because relic thought it was a good idea to make a faction who wins every engagement for the first 10 minutes of every game.
>destroy their halftrack
>win
Wooow so hard
shhh anon, he needs to think its the games fault and not his
I am shackled, SHACKLED by the need to follow the build of... let's see... "getting any unit that can shoot a gun"
Have you not played in months or something? They buffed 250s armor. Only way you're killing a 250 early is if the DAK player's a moron and gets snared. Or if he's even more moronic and lets it get hut by bys or zooks (and if you bought zooks, he knows he can just steamroll you with his pgrens
No they didn't. They only buffed the front. The literally tiny section that is only protected at extreme long range and even then can still be penned by rifle fire.
>1 armor
>front only
WOW WHAT A CHANGE
It matters a lot because its main enemy are small-arms. A 250 at long range will win a shootout against any earlygame allied infantry. It's forced this weird meta where allies need to go double jeep/dingo to deal with 250s early on (because their gun has enough pen to actually kill it), which fricks over the rest of their map presence because those vehicles are much worse vs infantry than the 250 is.
Or you could try not being bad and walk a little to the side with another squad for side shots. You know, the kind of flanking you already do with regular infantry combat
The 250 can reverse you know. It's called kiting, nit sure if you were aware. The 250 will also be supported by 1 pgren and 1 pio minimum in tge early game, so you trying to flank only helps DAK win harder because his pgrens (who also beat stock rifles in close range) will just be getting free shots on your moronic ass trying to chase a 250.
The 250 is only part of the problem. DAK is cancer because the 250 paired with the pgrens + pio absolutely roflstomps even 3 riflemen.
lmao homie walk to the side. It's less than a 60 degree angle for sideshots
Why are you guys so bad?
Ah yes, I am going to outmaneuver this motorized vehicle with ground pounders. My nebulous talent for clicking fast will make soldiers run faster, and I'll easily just win by having more manpower on the field because I just start the game with more resources. I'm just better like that.
250+supporting infantry is faster and stronger than any unit combination the allies can bring to bear at that stage in the game, and you can't afford to disperse your forces to cap because the 250 is cheaper than your own infantry--so DAK will also have more units on the field than you, and it's a transport so they will have more mobility and map presence than you, and within the opening minutes of the game they have the option to put a flamer on their ppios--which will allow the 250 to chase and wipe any infantry squad on retreat if it's caught alone.
This is why the US meta opener vs DAK is 2jeep. They need a unit faster than the 250 so they can avoid a pitched fight because nobody can actually fight a competent DAK until midgame. Brits are just kind of fricked because the Dingo is shit and can't cap, so they cede the whole map while also being unable to actually fight.
This meta has gotten so bad a lot of the sweatlords are avoiding ranked 1s just to get a break from 250 vs 2jeep every match.
>brits can't do anything!
>the one faction that gets DIRT cheap, permanent, 50 muni anti tank rifles on their mainline
God DAMN you guys are fricking bad.
>the one faction that gets DIRT cheap, permanent, 50 muni anti tank rifles on their mainline
When I play DAK against brits, there's nothing better than seeing them converting all their already poor mainline infantry to be even shittier via boys package. Especially as a counter to the 250, which you are just going to convert into a mortar, and then have your pgrens or flaktruck steamroll them
It's actually bizzare to see you presenting the purchase of boys at as anything other than brits shooting themself in the face.
>implying you need more than one boys to shit on any started vehicle
You are just larping now because you have no argument.
>buy boys package after 250 already had most of its fun because 50 munis takes a bit
>maybe get one volley on it
>dak player sees you turned your sections into a useless at squad as your first unit and sends his pgrens to attack move you
>turns his 250 into a mortar so your boys are left dick in hand
DAK is ezmode.
>50 muni takes a bit
hmmmm
Munis are very important when section upgrade packages are required for them to not suck ass. 50 munis is a big investment for brits to spend early on a shitty AT unit that will just get suppressed by flaktruck anyway
It takes two minutes for DAK to build a bike, one squad of grens and a halftrack. The standard build.
It takes at most 2:30 minutes to get 50 munis. That means your boys rifle will arrive, at the latest, at the 3 minute mark. That means you have to "endure" the yoke of a weak-ass halftrack for like 40 seconds.
Can you really not do that?
Is it so hard?
>b-but what if they start with halftrack?
Then they have no bike and you massively outcap them
>b-but what about bike then halftrack?
Then they have no infantry other than the engineers and you can shit on them
You are just fricking terrible at the game. Like so fricking bad that your opinion should be discarded. You are a dunning kruger posterchild.
I dont know what to say other than I don't really have a problem against DAK as brits when it comes to halftracks. It's the americans imo that struggle against the halftracks
They do?
All you have to do is to take Armored doctrine and push out fast vet1 jeeps when you see DAK icon.
You will outcap them early and then you suppress early trucks, while waiting for Grayhound.
jeep spam is a good point. i still haven't had an easy time dealing with DAK using americans as I have w brits. The boys rifles completely negate the halftracks. It's also worth noting that if you go indian arty and get out the mortar and convert the HF you have an early AI vehicle that can frick up and chase the halftracks.
I play 2s and up, so pretty much everything regarding bike and muh capping power literally does not matter. I also play dak, and the opener I am talking about specifically is pgren > 250 >pgren which gives plenty of capping power and lets you face roll the entire early game. It's easy as frick.
You can list any allied opener and this dak build will win every time. For example if brit goes something like sapper > mg > boys section, you can just attack move his boys and keep the 250 out of sight of the boys. By that time you convert the 250 into a mortar. Ezpz.
>I play 2s+ so my capping doesn't matter
F for the teammates that have to carry your shitter ass in this self defeating larp.
Team games would make it much easier to flank your half-track which, I remind you, is still vulnerable to small arms fire. I'm sure life in low ELO must be lots of fun but your shitter experience doesn't match what most of the playerbase sees
I don't use my 250 like a moron. Sounds like you do though. I only clown car if there's an mg or infantry without snares I can bully. When I see they get snares, I just use it for support and turn it into the best mortar in the game.
DAK is literally easy mode. It feels like cheating really. PGren > 250 > pgren > med truck > mg > flaktruck > marder spam with broken armory upgrades and you gg you win.
>the argument has gone from "i can't do anything against halftracks" to "HEH I use my halftracks right", meaning there's a degree of play and it's not as braindead as initially implied
Glad we are done here. I was getting tired of destroying every argument you had.
The argument was and always has been that for the first 2 minutes of the game the 250 is oppressive as frick and forces allies to rush snares or at and allows them to take whatever they want on the map.
The cute thing here is that you had to go and test this because you obviously don't play as or against DAK and have no idea what you're talking about.
As UK, spending your opening muni on Boys is suicidal, because now your mainline infantry gets run over by every infantry in DAK's roster in exchange for zoning out a cheap unit that's mobile enough to just move away and fight wherever the Boys squad isn't (or simply wait out of range until it's forced off), while your infantry now wins the fight without the halftrack by virtue of not being shit.
Spending all your starting muni on Boys also means that you don't have access to any source of anti-garrison capabilities for an excruciatingly long time, which means now you lose any engagement where DAK has access to a building even if you have more manpower in the fight.
And once again, I'll repeat this for the folks that don't actually play the fricking game:
Teching Boys doesn't mean you kill the halftrack, it means you zone out the halftrack. DAK still gets its full value from the vehicle wherever the Boys squad isn't, and whenever the Boys squad is forced off. This is an extremely poor value proposition, especially when later on that Halftrack can be transformed into a mortar unit and provide value that Boys can't answer, while the Boys squad falls off as AT and becomes a liability that can't fight anything.
It can't be helped
DAKistanis cried that their mainline didn't start the game riflemen-tier and they had to work to press their earlygame tempo advantage before their midgame vehicles hit and steamrolled, so Relic just kept buffing them over and over and over again. Now DAK, the mechanized warfare faction, is instead just belching out hordes of overtuned infantry covered by tank destroyers and running over everything that isn't US belching out hordes of overtuned infantry covered by tank destroyers.
if it's anything like 2 then probably not
its probably worth getting at this point. have you played coh1 or coh2?
did they fix the pop-cap problem? Played coh1 and 2 but liked neither approach to it. How is it handled in coh3?
?? What's the pop cap problem
having to sacrifice units for no reason because you can't get more than 100 pop. Not really a "problem" because it is working as intended but it is fricking stupid sometimes. They should just give one the ability to get more than 100 but get like -10% income for every excess pop
639983
> It fricking depicts units being sent into combat with no weapon in the first few minutes, this is a literal meme born from shitty hollywood movies.
> “Those workers not directly involved in producing weapons for immediate use were mobilized in militia 'special brigades' under the commander of the ioth [10th?] NKVD Division, Colonel Sarayev. […]. In the northern industrial suburb of Spartakovka, badly armed worker militia battalions were sent into battle against the 16th Panzer Division with predictable results ”
- Stalingrad, Antony Beevor, p. 109
> “1. In the division there are 3,172 military servicemen; a batch of replacements numbering 1,312 men has arrived and another 2,000 are expected, but in the division there are only a total of 1,921 rifles, 98 automatic rifles and 202 PPSh submachine guns... 2. There are 21 motorized vehicles in the division, but according to the TO&E [shtat] [Table of Organization and Equipment] there should be 114. There are just 7 heavy machine guns, but according to the shtat 108 are necessary. 3. 47 light machine guns, but according to the table there should be 350.
- Igor Sdvizhkov, Confronting Case Blue: Briansk Front's Attempt to Derail the German Drive to the Caucasus, p. 26
You missed the quote where it reads that soldiers were sent in waves unarmed to the front.
CoH 2 made ruskies butthurt that their glorious army was crap and so was the faction, fun fact, ostheer is not that impressive in game when compared to the DLC factions.
>Enemy at the Gates
How fricking based this movie is.
Even after all this years ruski still seethee and cry about it.
Bro UK is dead stfu. There's no skill in beating them. You only have a chance if you go for like 4 sappers and hope your opponent makes mistakes. DAK is strong but all you gotta do is bleed them
>DAK is strong but all you gotta do is bleed them
The core issue is that they're so strong they impose a shitty playstyle on you to beat them. You need to rush a light vehicle to deal with the Flak rush because it instantly suppresses infantry AT and is too durable for an AT gun, but you also need a light vehicle to bleed Guastatori because now they trade favourably into BAR rifles, but you also need a way to counter the inevitable marder spam meant to shut down the light vehicles that shut down their overpowered shit.
In the end this just means ratting with rifles while rushing a greyhound and then spamming Chaffees, and you win or lose based entirely on a straight up check of who generated more resources in the first 10m.
Talking purely 1v1s of course. Team games are their own total shitshow right now because of Coastal.
You guys are wasting your time arguing with a tankie. They will never accept the truth or admit they were wrong.
>open a CoH thread
>ziggers and USSR apologists are having a meltdown
like
fricking
clockwork
why did Relic choose to ruin the series by including non-human factions?
love the coh 3 troony fandom
Every single thread they shittalk CoH 2 as if it was utter unplayed garbage while their favourite RTS, the sequel to said game has half the amount of players.
true and real
ruh roh, we got another assmad coh2 player here! why dont you go back to your boring ass game with no more support instead of posting here
Strong 250 is good and helps form a core of DAK's identity. They are an aggressive faction with the weakest t4 in the game, so their early map pressure is entirely justifiable. Just like how Wehr's T1 is deliberately made weak and their faction is built around playing from behind into a strong lategame.
The issue is that DAK converts that early pressure into a Flakveirling, which is the single most overtuned any unit has been in CoH3 at any point. The Flakv warps the whole game around it, and devolves DAK matchups into racing into tech that can counter the Flakv and then racing into tech that counters the tech that counters the Flakv. For US this means rushing a Greyhound and then rushing Chaffees and nothing else. For UK it means getting slapped around while you rush Stuarts and then stalling until Matildas. Notice how neither of these builds focus on infantry at all? Because DAK's premier light vehicle instantly suppresses them from outside of their firing range, and DAK's premier AT is a vehicle. Infantry against DAK are relegated to side-capping because their strengths devalue infantry, but the counter to their vehicles is just more resource value in vehicles.
At all points DAK has the advantage in tempo and unit value. They SHOULD rely on an early lead earned through effective use of their strong earlygame units to fund a strong midgame (like US does vs Wehr), but instead they just kind of transition into an overtuned midgame unit and then coast.
In previous patches, DAK's earlygame was generally underwhelming and they relied on the strong midgame transition to stabilize, but now that their earlygame is strong their midgame doesn't really make sense..
I like 2 better than 3. Everything in 2 feels so much more punchy.
Agreed. Also more vehicle variety is cool.
I like 2 better than 3 as well(mostly for setting,maps, infantry clusters being deadly late game, and LE HEVIE TONK fun and memes), but find the exact opposite to be true.
In coh2 a single tank takes fricking forever to kill a single squad unless it’s specifically an anti infantry variant like the flame KV or flakpanzer. Meanwhile nearly all tanks in 3 are deadly and kill infantry much quicker. Also artillery and mortars are frustratingly effective in 3, seeming to miss far less and require more immediate counters or retreating. In 2 if a mortar was firing at you you can leave that squad in combat without worrying too much, it’ll only drain a few health points and kill a few guys rather than squad wiping unless you’re being a moron with squad placement.
Main issue I have with 3 is the UI, it just feels like it’s a alot harder to keep track of squads health and numbers compared to 2, the way your units appear in the top corner and are well lit and identifiable. 3s darker unit display on the bottom of the screen seems to blend in to the map and for me it commonly doesn’t register me clicking a squad icon that’s in trouble leading to frustrating wipes that would absolutely never happen in coh2 because it’s so easy to identify who’s in trouble and quickly click them.
There's an option to put them at the top I think
2 has much lower TTK, which makes things feel amazingly deadly, but also has causes some gameplay issues in my opinion. coh3 has the better pacing in my opinion though
>in my opinion
>in my opinion though
god
> Everything in 2 feels so much more punchy.
vehicles don't even move anymore when hit. So much for "100 billion times more physics"
They do.
but just barely (if at all).
Another example of CoH3 feeling less punchy is the arty (https://youtu.be/MPTU7inNj68)
The screenshake is definitely something I'd like to see come back. Helps you realize when you're getting shelled while your camera is elsewhere.
>Tiny bomb makes the screen shake like a nuke went off
CoH 2 is so cartoony
in coh2 the tanks look comical when they get hit be serious
man this looks like shit
the coh2 effects you mean
coh2 isn't perfect but coh3 is worse than a mobile game when it comes to visuals. audio too sometimes.
coh1 with its crunchy. janky 2007 somehow reigns supreme.
>coh1 with its crunchy. janky 2007 somehow reigns supreme.
I don't know how someone says a thing like this and expects to be taken seriously.
elimination method. or rather "the least bad".
coh1's audiovisual design despite no true aim at esports remains clear and everything is easily recognizable. coh2 tried to do that with multiplayer in mind, but also tried to be a bit more realistic, not really succeeding at either. coh3 MAY sound realistic, but falls flat when it comes to readability.
Nah I meant the CoH3 effects. I want artillery to rock my fricking house CoH3 artillery just makes me think of a limp dick, there's just no power behind it.
>sees huge explosion
>thinks of dick
>wants his house rocked
hmm
Well yeah I want the artillery to feel like artillery and not a wet noodle.
The fact they did what they did to the game on top of not even having the balls to set the base game at least in the pacific pisses me off. I want the assymetrical gameplay between japs and the US and calling in massive naval gunfire n shit
i never bought coh3 and only played the beta but i really had fun with the DAK. i dont know if i feel a warm fuzzy feeling from morons being butthurt about the DAK. didnt you have the boys rifles for everything, or something, why cry now?
Bro it's been a year of balance changes, nothing is like it was in the beta.
Brits were OP on launch because Boys rifles were godlike. Boys got nerfed right away, and Brits having been catching nerfs for most of the year. They've been the weakest faction of the 4 for a while now, and with Wehr recently buffed brits are in a very distant 4th.
DAK's been consistently top-tier, trading the top spot back and forth with US from patch to patch as one OP thing gets nerfed and a new thing buffed to replace it.
Both are annoying when they're overpowered but we're in an axis patch right now so it's a bad time to play allies in general.
Yeah they are moronic. Allies have the massively overturned Rangers right now, by far the most disgustingly unbalanced unit in the history of the game, yet they keep whining.
Obvious single-faction playing moron.
Rangers are strong, but theyre fricking infantry at the end of the day with huge MP drain and are vulnerable to all the standard infantry wiping /suppressing shit. They're not even close to as cancerous as the flaktruck. The whole game revolves around flaktruck now. US got Rangers? Buy 2 flaktrucks. Now you instantly lock down 900MP worth of infantry with some trucks that cost 40 fuel each.
CoH3stats.
>runs at you with the captain's flank ability and double bazookas that fire on the move
Nothing personnel, shitter
Instapin and wipe the 4 man captain retinue with the flak. Deploy brap cloud to get out of any situation. God you must really be dogshit at the game if you're struggling to counter Rangers as dak.
Is there a place I can look up like proper info on this game or something? I've been mostly playing USF but I want to try wehr and I have no idea where to start with build orders, starting unit comps, tech priorities and other shit. Why is info about this series so sparse?
tightrope used to make a lot of guides for coh2 - probably does the same for coh3 (just enter tightrope + coh on youtube)
Lmao russians will forever cry and whine about enemy at the gates even as their real army fights in ukraine wearing sneakers and rifles from the 1800s because there's is no gear.
Can't be that bad if I got 2 (you)s
Forever reminder that Relic literally held a poll to decide where the next game would take place. Italy and Africa won. No one cares about Japan.
democracy is a failed concept, how do you even know they didn't rig the vote.
your average ww2 game player is a wehraboo nazi anyway who probably hates asians.
Because their livelihood depends on going with the poll you fricking imbecile moron.
>HURRRRRR LET'S SET THE GAME IN A LOCATION NO ONE WANTS, THAT WILL MAKE US MONEY!
Fricking knuckle-dragging brainlet. Your mom should have spat you out onto the floor of the barn you were conceived in.
and then they shit out coh3 and had to fire half their studio, yeah they do seem moronic, don't they
>wehraboo nazi
They're literally all pencilwristed weebs too.
weebs (as in anime/manga enthusiasts) barely care about historical japan and vice versa.
No they don't care about historical japan but they worship nazi germany.
Italy and Africa were the better choice tbh. A Japan v USA RTS would be severely imbalanced unless you nerfed the American side to a ridiculous degree or added althist Japanese units. Japan would have nothing to counter anything past Tier-2 US units just like IRL.
It's a shame we never got a true sequel to CoH2 instead wienersucking relic failed to even make a game as good looking at CoH2... the graphics look like they are 10 years old.
Both 2 and 3 look hideous, 1 is the only game with style.
1 looks amazing, 3 looks fine, but is hampered by the fact that they toned down all the interesting animations and unit AI to appeal to fricking morons and pro gamers.
2 is basically the worst of both worlds at this point
switch 2 and 3 and you're on target.
yep, then switch them back so 3 looks fine and 2 is the worst of both worlds
1 looks gritty and clearly dated, but has its own style. 2 went for the slightly more realistic look and as a result doesn't stand out. 3 is unironically mobile game tier.
2 looks very bad at this point im not sure why people hang on to it. 1 is definitely dated, but has the best explosions and the units actually fricking move like real people instead of fricking robots like in 2 and 3 so it has the most "soul".
> grenades can't squad-wipe anymore
> tanks can't crush infantry anymore
is this true? Did they really turn CoH into a boring "no fun and skill allowed" game that appeases (console) noobs?
No
Yes
Nades and mortars are deadly as frick in this game but they won't one-shot a squad at full health which is probably what that moron means.
Infantry crush is out.
just watched a (4 month old) video and apparently satchel, gammon and bundel can one shot infantry and only normal ones can't. This is something I'm fine with. Not being able to crush infantry sucks though, always felt great to do so and it's not like it was easy to pull off anyways
They just buffed regular squads to be able to oneshot infantry last patch. It was a good and much-needed change
I don't like infantry crush as mechanic. It's just a meme and encourages meme tactics. Dont you play the game? They brought crushing back but it's for pinned squads only.
Did they? I didn't know. Honestly never tried for the same reasons that it seems goofy. Even in previous games it always seemed dumb that infantry could "bump" into my rank and ragdoll.
COH3 limits how many models of a squad can be damaged by explosives. Everything from tank guns, to grenades, to artillery has arbitrary "caps". Overall time to kill with weapons is also way slower than CoH2. They also added a 25% flat damage reduction to all retreating units on top of the already existing increased evasion chance.
The result is everyone blobs up their infantry into a death-ball to maximize wipe potential since being tactical does not reward you with wipes. Everyone also keeps their squads fighting until the last sliver of health because the retreat button might as well teleport you back to base, it's so easy to survive.
Another funny, but extremely strong tactic you'll see from germany is spamming jaegershreks into a blob and just walking around the map in stealth blowing up every vehicle while also still being strong anti-infantry units. Even the bulldozer, which is supposed to be the ultimate anti infantry tank gets memed on by a moronic blob of shreks.
Just buy two MGs. And you can't fight to the last model as DAK, because you will bleed MP and die.
>just use the worst mg in the game against a stealth anti-everything squad that also has smoke because lol why not
I think you will find it does not work very well.
Something like a nebelwerfer or reccy tractor would work, but relic made the curious decision of giving the best anti-team weapon units in the game to the factions that do not have to deal with cancerous insta-pinning team weapons.
>Jaeger mobs
This homosexual has never played the game. People don't even build jarger
Jaegers are very good, the best infantry in the axis roster
Every where build uses Jaegers, because they're fantastic.
Jaeger blobs are incredibly common in team games and they're not trivial to deal with, because CoH3's anti-blob tools kind of suck.
There was a period where the wehr meta was to techskip right to t4 and rush a P4 but they fixed that a while ago. Every viable Wehrmacht build involves Jaegers right now.
>thread is mostly two teenagers arguing with each other using wojaks
ok so anyway is COH 3 worth it for under $30? Note I have played CoH 1 and really liked it. I did not play CoH 2 yet, it just kind of passed me by.
also, can i compstomp with my friends on 3? or is it mainly designed for 1v1?
It is. And yes. The vanilla AI is fairly easy most of the time but there's an AI mod that makes it ball bustingly hard if you want.
Thank you.
No, just play 2.
>lategame armour exchange
>outplay other side, all tank full hp while theirs are all retreating and almost dead
>dive enemy P4 that's one shot from dead with two hellcats
>both bounce close range side armour hits
>then miss
>then miss again
>then bounce again
>then miss again
>and miss once more
>one hellcat dies
>pull the other one back
>last shot bounces
>alt-F4
Miss me with this diceroll bullshit.
Larp
Is there a decent guide for porting maps from CoH2 to CoH3 or should I just try to build the map from the ground up?
Pls resond
There are a few guides/tutorials on the coh3 forums but I don't think porting maps is a subject anyone's talked about in detail so you're probably building them from scratch
Alright thanks for the info
Missed a chance not being set in the pacific. The scale of the combat is perfect for coh, mostly infantry action and limited tanks. Instead we got reskinned coh2.
>Instead we got better coh2.
Fixed.
And no one fricking cares about Japan. And especially no one fricking cares about US marines.
pacific coh sounds good at first but really wouldn't work. The Pacific theatre was about carrier warfare and island hopping. Japan had shit equipment, so you really have to stretch history to the maximum to get a decent Japan roster for coh. I would take a cold war coh over that or modern day.
Yea, would anyone really complain if CoH3 was about the Korean war?
Actually i already know the answer. Yes they would.
It's called Company of Heroes. Not Company of Jobbers
... wait a minute, I posted a photo of vietnam! Sorry, it gets so hard to tell which one is which what with WW2 being the last time the US won anything.
Look, I'm not sorry the USN just slapped around your favorite group of shitskins, but this board is for white people, so kindly take your leave Ahmed.
i remember some threads about potential korean war coh in the past.
notChina vs notUSA is one thing, but what do we do about the korean forces if we want to prevent faction dupes?
I'd have to do some indepth research into that era of the Korean army, but I bet there's enough notable units and formations to make 3 doctrines and a sprinkle of unique units for em.
Shit, balancing China and America would probably be the easiest part.
Or you could replace a soley American faction for a broader UN faction, with America as the baseline, with each doctrine drawing from notable combatants like Britain.
Yeah they can't pick any setting that would Hurt the Feelings of the Chinese People, because Relic is owned by Sega snd that's an important market for Sega. Same reason theres no chance of a Pacific theatre. China will get pissed no matter what you do because history doesn't align with their propaganda.
It'd actually be similar to COH1 in terms of faction design, kind of.
The ROK vs the KPA would be a fairly similar match-up, with the ROK being more weapon-team and infantry focused with less armored support, while the KPA would have more SPGs and better assault infantry with more armored support.
Whereas, the USA vs the PLA would be a nearly pure infantry force vs a totally mechanized force a la the Panzer Elite from COH 1.
America with Panzer Elite gameplay?
Oh that'd piss a lotta people off.
Korean War would piss off everybody. Just imagine the coping and seething over the battle of Kapyong. The game would set records for the number of countries it's banned in.
And in the west it would get a lukewarm response, most Euros don't care about it and it's too far back in time to appeal to American zoomers who generally want to see modernshit.
There's a reason you rarely see it in games and even Call of Duty skips over it.
The issue is more that American leadership during the war was patently incompetent, there were countless embarrassing defeats where they lost battles they shouldn't have lost just due to poor planning, poor coordination and serially underestimating their foes. Not to mention the tendency for whole units to retreat without orders because they just assumed they'd be fricked over if they held ground. The Korean War is a pretty bad look for everybody involved and emblematic of the political quagmire in asia left by ww2.
Nobody looks back on it with any semblance of pride except some random commonwealth countries made good account of themselves in battle and don't have a good reason to care about the politics.
>Nobody looks back on it with any semblance of pride
Tell that to China
Personally, I would have done a late 50's cold war gone hot setting. Its under-represented in vidya and it has a lot of cool toys like the post war heavy tanks
You don't have to show the battle of Midway. Just focus on the infantry action, there's a shitload of them, from Guadalcanal to Iwo Jima. They could even show the progression in tactics and equipment, Japan getting more and more desperate as the war progresses, with banzai charges and suicide attacks, anything better than having the third iteration in the same setting with the same participants.
japs were fricked there as well.
focusing on japan vs the commonwealth would've made more sense with yankees as the final boss.
and the issue of america being superior on every front still exists, leaving multiplayer balance in question.
Aside from you being absolutely delusional, this game never took historical authenticity seriously especially not when it came to balancing. We're talking about a game where early-war italian tankettes can fight evenly with late-war Shermans, where P3s can penetrate Churchills, where Panthers don't suffer frequent, unserviceable transmission failure and where shaped charge anti-tank RPGs can bounce off tanks, and where an unarmoured halftrack with a flak gun bolted to its cargo bed can drive through the firing line of high-velocity AT guns, take several hits direct hits and come out combat-worthy. They already fudged authenticity for the sake of balance when they made semi-automatic M1 Garands fire at the same rate as bolt-action k98s, company of heroes does not care about that shit.
Your arguments would be more convincing if you didn't wildly exaggerate every single example
there's a mild difference between arcade gamestyle filled with RNG and what's essentially the Zulu war from the Blacks perspective for Japan. Unless we'd go full Men of War with treating prototypes and/or unproduced concepts as fully equal vehicles, the Pacific will simply never work as a setting for CoH.
You might be too american to have this conversation, anon.
I'm not American and I've played the Far East mod for CoH1.
In the mod when the Chinese deploy a lend lease Sherman it's like a King Tiger shows up. There's no way to have Pacific ground war depicted in CoH with factions that are supposed to be balanced against each other.
Literally when has that ever stopped Relic? CoH is not a realistic game at all. The Japs have plenty of options for anti tank.
COH isn't realistic. And you can just add in the late-war Japanese tanks that were never used because they were all kept in Japan to solve the problem if you really wanted to.
>late-war Japanese tanks
yeah, Chi-to existed, even if their gun was aight-ish too bad that they're paper-thin and literally two examples were built, none of which saw actual combat. And I'm not against some light and rather creative takes on historical accuracy, given that we're already seeing fricking Chaffees in Italy in 1943 or Black Princes during WW2 in general, but I don't want the deja vu of the Men of War case of just giving prototypes to the historically underperforming nation, resulting in same-ish faction design.
You'd either have to build the faction around it and give it at least some extreme ability to their infantry or just accept that they're fricked from the get go.
The same problem I had when thinking of an italian faction, but at least they actually had good elite infantry units and could be given some german tanks, both of the issues that I am not sure if you can solve when talking about Japan.
I'm fine with that, especially since it's not like the chinks had literally zero vehicles. USA would have smaller but tougher squads while the PLA would be the opposite. Something like CoH2 Ostheer vs Soviets. Even if that one story of a chinese sniper in Korea is all bullshit, we can put it to work in faction design and make chinese snipers shine, giving them some edge in the infantry fight stage.
As for doctrines, IMO there should be something like unique ones and side-specific ones, like, idk both the north koreans and the chinese would get soviet jet skillplanes while americans and south koreans would get UN elite units as call-ins.
The fantasy that there was some enormous technological gap between US and imperial japanese forces is absolutely just a myth. At the outset of the war most US equipment was decades old, their torpedo fuses didn't work and their aircraft were outdated. Their military was a neglected, underfunded and inefficient apparatus and wholly unprepared for war. Most of the state-of-the-art equipment we associate them with are things that were developed throughout the war and deployed in 1944 for D-Day, or the product of collaborate development efforts between the US and allies. Hell, even during Overlord they had to make ad-hoc modifications to various pieces of hardware to adapt to the circumstances.
Even then, the last two major ground battles between the US and Japanese, Iwo Jima and Okinawa, resulted in mutually high casualties. The difficulty of those battles is part of what informed the US decision to pursue surrender without an invasion of the mainland--because they recognized the human cost would be unacceptably high. Sherman tanks were not "like King Tigers" anywhere in the world at any point.
The consensus has always been that japanese weaponry was good at the start of the war, but failed to keep up with the americans as they kept making new and better stuff. US vs japanese aircraft is the clearest example.
i dont like the way they took the US in coh3 compared to coh2. not as fun since i only play the US.
>wonder why i've never completed the winter assault campaign
>it's going well, -10 company strength at max
>get to a defensive mission, set up AT, bazookas, HMG, mortar, howitzer, and looted german vehicles, all's looking good
>hans suicide charges 5 tanks directly through the lines (who all survive because front-facing armor), distracting all of my vehicles who then turn and show their rear to the advancing panzerschrecks, and then the tanks blast at the clumped up infantry who don't have cover advantage
this is painful
I never completed it because it's buggy as frick
Fox company ranger Right+A works every time
i have no idea how i beat it on hard a few years ago but twice now when i start a new one i get filtered by wiltz and its invincible stuart tanks
>axis win percentage:80%
>allies win percentage:35%
Am I the only one? Am I missing something? Are ally gays just literally retarted or is axis a fair bit OP
>4v4 gay btw
Only 1v1 matters.
Balance is very fricky right now.
In 3v3s and 4v4s, Wehr coastal is extremely overpowered and basically ruining both modes
In 2v2s, DAK is overpowered (followed closely by USF) and their presence is essentially defining the entire metagame.
In 1v1s, USF Armored is overpowered with DAK in a distant second place.
Coastal becomes stronger in big team games because each player has relatively less of the map to cover, allowing coastals to stack and layer bunkers until they're just impractical to crack. The key issue is that upgraded bunkers have no population cost, meaning the coastal player can still maintain a credible mobile force to support allies or apply pressure. The key thing here is that abusing coastals in 4s is idiot-proof and doesn't require a particular build or crutching on one specific unit--it's just that their whole gimmick is overtuned and easy to exploit.
In 2s, DAK is strong because of some key units, generally high mobility and their ability to apply pressure early on. Some 2v2 maps are extremely DAK-favoured while others are less so and that impacts their winrate a lot.
In 1v1s US armored is insane because of specific timing pressure with a very particular build that just happens to be dominant against basically everything. There's also a DAK cheese build for that involves rushing the L6 tankettes and is extremely strong in 1s and 2s, but overall USF armored is still considered better. Other USF battlegroups are not nearly as imbalanced and the strengths don't translate as well on bigger modes where US can't apply as much timing pressure.
When the perception is that one side is overpowered, it also leads to matchmaking being skewed as players switch sides. The majority of players in team modes are playing axis because nobody wants to have to play against bunker spam, which impacts the caliber of the players willing to play as allies.
You are a baddie, I'm afraid.
But my win average is higher than everyone else’s win average apparently.
So stay mad about this if you like.
In the current meta for 4v4s, allies are required to build multiple very specific counters against many varieties of eary cheese available to axis, which means if at least one of your lane mates is not prepared against wirbel, luftwaffe, clowncar, flaktruck, l6 cheese, they can easily get completely wiped out in 5 minutes and its gg. At the same time coastal bg eventually pumps out bunker cities that cost no popcap and include 70 range at bunkers that essentially make the lategame impossible. You have a very small window to win as allies, and more often then not, if you mess up at all in the forst 10 minutes, you may as well gg and quit.
The pop thing is honestly the biggest issue.
Brits can wipe bunker networks with a single naval strike callin or dismantle them systematically with Bishops that are too mobile for Obice/nebel counterfire (unlike the emplaced howitzers). The problem is that naval strike creates small windows of opportunity on a long cooldown, and Bishops take up a lot of pop cap to serve specifically as a bunker counter, while the bunkers don't. On paper killing bunkers with a bishop is a good resource trade but as the game's drag on any coastal player who isn't blundering their whole army away will eventually have enough resources to get close to their pop cap while still building up bunkers, and the brits will be forced to tie down a portion of their pop cap on an anti-bunker unit while their mobile forces get out-valued and out-scaled by a larger quantity of lategame axis ones. This means allies, assuming they even have a brit player on the team, will have a window to gain a serious upper hand and once that passes they'll just fall more and more behind.
I think when they fix the bunker issue (ideally, just adding a pop cost to the bunker upgrades), team modes will be vastly more playable. The L6 is also an issue but it honestly probably just needs an extra CP cost so that it can't come out before USF realistically has any AT to answer it. They're a weird problem in that you gain CP much faster for damage taken than damage dealt. Under normal circumstances the L6s comes out late enough to be counterable (if still strong), but the DAK player gets rewarded for fricking up and taking a few bad fights (or, for example, losing your ppios early) can give you enough of a boost to have those two tanks way too early.
4v4 always ends up in tank and artillery. axis have best vehicles so yea allies never have it easy. i mainly do 1v1 USF and it's extremely painful. if you frick up majorly vehicle like lose your first greyhound/chaffe then it's gg. meanwhile, axis can lose a couple of 8rads and still make a comeback from vet infantry.
It's more that axis tends to have the stronger lategame in general. USF is an aggressive faction but they fall off hard in the lategame since their T4 sucks at fighting other T4. Brits have a similar problem in that none of their lategame units are good at fighting vehicles so they eventually just get outscaled by axis armour when their soft AT isn't cost-effective anymore.
A frustrating thing about playing an incomplete game is that some mechanics have clearly had less devtime than others. The last update helped a lot of neglected axis units to mature and now they're strong and well-rounded, while the stuff that desperately needs more dev time now tends to fall more on the allied side of things, so even when they're strong they feel like one-trick ponies that can't adapt as easily to the course of a match.
I hear a lot of people who adamantly support Coh3 so I suppose it must have something going for it. I'm more of a Coh2 fan and the sequel has yet to win me over.
Again though, it does have diehard support groups. So it must be doing something right?
It's mainly because it shifts things back towards CoH1's design in terms of ttk and the way a lot of unit types interact. A lot of diehard coh1 fans appreciate that, plus the fact that it's bundled with a lot of valuable QoL. As a game it's not perfect but it's gotten a lot better after a year of support so it's pretty reasonable that folks are holding out hope that it gets the same treatment CoH2 and DoW1/2 got where years of content and expansions eventually carved a good game out of a terrible launch, and trying to make the most of it in the meantime.
Supposedly they have "something big" planned for the anniversary patch but we'll see.
>we will never get full mod tools again
This is why COH1 is still the best. I get to blast Chinks with cruise missiles.
Do you think that Relic will break and finally add the italian faction if they'll run low on players?
I think Relic has thrown in the towel at this point. I don't expect CoH to get a whole lot more support. Relic really needed a hit title and they just aren't getting that.
This game is in maintenance mode, they already realized it's doomed so no more support is coming. Please look forward to CoH4 in 3 years from a different studio.
The playerbase is already low. There's almost a faction's worth of Italians split between the two Axis factions, so at this point a dedicated Italy faction is basically impossible.
This was probably a political decision. Italy made off like a bandit for its fascism, still has an active fascist party and Mussoulini's daughter is a fricking politician. Throwing a bone to real, existing ethnic nationalists is a bad look, WW2 games already have a bad reputation for being a nest of cringe holocaust deniers and tankies and coh's marketing clearly wants to distance themselves from that. The last thing they need is a groundswell of modern blackshirts cheering "Duce Duce Duce" in their socials.
>all that b8
Reminds me of that Mad Men episode where some television company was making mad cash selling mostly to Black folks since the tvs were cheap and reliable. Upon hearing this from some marketing guy, they got disgusted and tried distancing from the ghetto image.
You wouldn't know the company's name even if I remembered it and wrote it here. Apparently, Lelic chooses similarly.
Dude, the game barely has more players than the first game, its player count is already low.
Let’s be real, 3 not being playable on poverty box third world PCs is 90% of the reason the player base has not moved on to it. The other 10% is setting not being as interesting.
my pc barely meets 2014 standards and coh3 runs fine.
the issue is just that the game is bad. coh2 wasn't the best either but if you combine the giveaway + pretty solid mp then it's okay. if anything, coh3 runs better than coh2 for me.
Nice cope, got any more?
randomly checked coh1's ww1 mod multiplayer and to my surprise there are people doing it
The first game has almost as many players as the third if you count the mod players and legacy edition/expansions
i think the 3rd games playercount has gotten away from coh1 since the new update dropped
Not really.
not to be pedantic, but I usually look at the 24 hour peak of a game for a true measure of the playercount.
coh3: 3,070
coh1: 1,879
so coh3 is more than 1k
that's pathetic anon.
not really - for RTS games 1k players is alot. not to split hairs but, i dont think coh1 has "almost" as many players as coh3 at this point. coh3 clearly has more daily players by a long shot.
No. he's right. It's pretty bad considering you're comparing CoH 3 to a 15 year old game and only that one specific instance of that game's player data and not all the other parts split off from it like mods or standalone packs. 3 has a daily peak of a bit over 3k and the first game with all its elements combined has a daily peak of about 2.5k. It's hardly doing better than the original.
i disagree - i think with RTS games the scale of players is just different, especially considering how RTS players can be VERY selective about iterations of the game they originally fell in love with. 3k vs 2k is a big jump the way its not a big jump in another game. im not trying to be combative, i just think that coh3 has a bigger playerbase than coh1, and with successive updates it'll probably continue to grow. the general temperament on the subreddit for example, is slowly shifting
It did when the update released. It had a bit more than twice as many players, but it has dropped considerably since then.
It was up, then back down.
Bunker spam from the new battlegroup literally killed team games and drove a lot of players back to CoH1/2. The fact that they dumped a load of imbalanced content on us right before the holidays and then fricked off for 2 months means these numbers shouldn't be surprising.
They removed the swastika. The game isn't worth 3 cents.
The first game didn't have a swastika either.
this patch is fricked, time to put coh3 on ice again. it reminds me of when they took smokes and frags from rifles. they will swing the pendulum to allies eventually because if there's no allied players there's no way for axis players to play.
Supposedly the next patch is planned for late Feb so check back around then. I peaced out a while ago too. Facing simcity bunker spam every game as allies is anti-fun (and repetitive as frick) and it's impossible to get a game as axis because nobody is queuing allies.
i've never really faced bunker spam (i play extremely aggressive), but coastal artillery officer is fricked. just get a unit a to catch an MG's attention, spam arty, kill or force retreat. then my cutoff gets capped. literal pay to win bullshit even more than wehrmacht elite doc.
coop is kinda fun to around in though, but i'm just not open the game to help drive the player base numbers down.
ill be opening it on two computers to drive the playerbase numbers up - between us both the numbers will go up 🙂
have fun, i'm just gonna hop on palworld. RTS and specifically COH are dead. no one cares what some neckbeard wehraboos wanking themselves off in a dead game thinks.
sure anon! you should play the games you want too, no use in playing something you don't find fun 🙂
im glad you agree, games made in dead genres by failing companies also deserve to die out for games that are fun.
sure! good thing neither coh nor palworld is one of those 🙂 I got an awesome win on Gazala airfield last night, and then caught my first mammorest! a great day for good games
>crying again
>even when rangers are mega broken right now
Lmao
The perpetual asshurt of allied players
Yeah bro rangers are so broken I can sit in queue as axis for 11 minutes and not find a US player to play against but the instant I queue up US I'm put into a match against 4x wehr coastals.
These homosexuals can't make a decent RTS to save their asses anymore, and their AI is fricking braindead as shit the coder in charge needs to be removed from the industry
just play multiplayer.
Which CoH games have single player worth playing?
All of them at least once.
Especially 1 has great campaign in all parts.
2 is eh, but Ardennes Assault is top tier.
3 has the dynamic campaign, but it changes monthly with fixes, so the fun aspect can vary from time to time.
all campaigns of CoH1
CoH2's vanilla is shit both story-wise and gameplay-wise, but Ardennes Assault (DLC needed) is breddy gud
CoH3 is pretty much average, even if you enjoy Total War style campaigns
1 and 3
2 is boring on the soviet side and super buggy in the American side
3's singleplayer still needs some work but it's getting there. The missions are generally solid, it's just the 'campaign' layer that's still a bit tedious. In another couple patches it could be worthwhile.
For me it's how both campaigns basically just go "We're done now ." It feels like they should have at least one more mission each, the Italian campaign is especially bad as the final mission doesn't really feel like one and you can fricking see Rome on the map but it's like "We broke the line and then took rome, hooray freedom." It makes it feel even more egrigious that there's a thing saying "buy the dlc" whenever you're buying another company.
coh3's problem is units that are vs everything. coh works when you have a rock paper scissors system. its dogshit when you can do volkshrek blobs or ranger blobs and win every possible matchup.
im not convinced they are as bad as people say. i agree that vs everything units can be tough, but rangers haven't been so much of an issue for me. if you get 2-3 MG's you completely totally shut rangers down, denying the usf player something like 4-600 resources per surpressed squad and something like 33 mp every kill. I think there is just a huge variety of units in coh3 and people aren't used to the increased ttk
If you get 2-3 MGs he just gets a tank and kills them and steals them. He can also flank and cap the map while your immobile MGs can hold maybe half at best, better hope he doesn't catch one out of position too. MGs and AT guns are simply too weak in 3.
If it's so late in the game that the US player has both multiple Rangers and tanks out, and all you built to counter them are the 2 mgs you got in the first 3 minutes, that's your problem. 42s instasupress Rangers like every other infantry. I really don't get how people struggle so hard vs Rangers. If they're spamming them, you just get 2 wirbels or 2 flaktrucks. You'll bleed them so hard it'll be ages before they can get a tank out.
they are pretty terrible. on launch the wehr strat was jaeger spam with schrecks. Generalist units have no business being in coh and the game is boring to play every time we are in a balance phase where they exist
CoH 3 looks like a better 2. The only "downgrade" is that only massive explosions have a huge boom but personally I think it's a good change. 2 looks like a cartoony Michael Bay movie