Was dog water from the announcement trailer onwards. Clearly Relic has no talent left and your only savor would be a Black Bird Interactive competitor to save the IP from SEGA and Nu-Relic
Still playing coh2. The only thing that bothers me is the chinks rage quitting every game if they lose the first engagement for a fuel point because thier bug brains can’t comprehend building counters or going for another point.
What even is coh3? Germans and British in North Africa? They gonna add Italy or USA/Canada/Australia?
CoH EF > CoH2
this tbh
CoH 2 added some features I wanted, but took away the fun factor in favor of trying to be an Esport and charging for companies with the same stuff mixed around
Despite having some attempts to have good changes to the game, it doesn't have enough new or different features for the MP/compstomp crowd to drop the game that's had years of refinement and was given away for free at least once every year for the last 5 years or so. For SP, you have a rather straightforward campaign with a moronic story that spends much of its time on something only tangentially related to the meat of the game, and a buggy Total War knock off that's only now starting to work as it should. It's also 60 bucks when most of CoH2's current player base is going to be on older hardware and cost conscious.
If it follows the trend of CoH2 it'll hit its stride (or get good) some time after it's first expansion, but we'll have to see.
Somehow thats pretty accurate, loved CoH1. CoH2 completely didnt click with me and i didnt like it.
Tried CoH3 during the open betas/demos and had a blast
I dont know how people can say that CoH2 > CoH3
yeah, i think theres a level of polish in coh2 that isn't quite there yet in coh3, but the fundementals and the armies and in my opinion the setting, is so much better
As a matter of fact, I can. But before I start, I must warn you that I'm a single-player only type, so if you expected any sort of criticism as to the multiplayer part of the game, you'll be sorely disappointed.
First of all, campaigns. The original campaign and both of Opposing Fronts were very, very good. Nothing outstanding compared to other RTS campaign, but they did their job. CoH2's campaign is, simply put, mediocre. I don't give a shit about russian whining, it's just that the story isn't engaging and the missions aren't entertaining. Ardennes Assault, however, is quite an improvement, and I honestly think that was the correct direction for the evolution of the franchise. CoH3 is offensively bad, in both of its campaigns. Anons in this thread have explained why already. The Italian Campaign is pure jank, and the North African one seems like a parody. Who the frick gave the green light for that one, holy shit.
Next up, gameplay. Let's be honest here, we've been stuck with the same four factions for year (americans, brits, standard nazis and weird nazis). At least CoH2 had the soviets, but in exchange it killed most of the uniqueness of the factions. I know, I know, they were seriously unbalanced in CoH1. But they were fun to use, and when you have such a limited amount of factions, you want them as differentiated as possible. Seeing CoH3 is back to the same 4 factions (and NO italian faction, what the frick were they thinking???) is extremely disappointing. There are almost no improvements or innovations, and when there's one, they remove it because it is not "convenient" to use in online play (I'm looking at you, ColdTech)
I am not saying that CoH is objectively a superior game compared to CoH2, and in turn this one to CoH3. It's just that every time a play one of those games, I find myself asking, why not play CoH1 instead? I enjoy it far more, and at least it isn't trying to squeeze me dry through MTX.
Italians jobbed so hard that Greece and Romania deserve faction slots before they do
6 months ago
Anonymous
That may be true, but in that case, why not have the game take place in the Balkans/southeast Europe? I mean, if it takes place in Italy, you HAVE to include an italian faction, it is absurd to do otherwise. We all know they used the Italian Front because of its popularity, and god knows I would've chosen other fronts first. But if they felt forced to locate the game there, they should do the bare minimum, whether the italian army is a jobber or not.
ive found that over the years i have stopped not being bored with campaigns. i never finished coh1 and coh2 campaigns, they never kept me interested for more than halfway in.
good thing about coh3:
better visual effects, better path finding, better unit movement, 4 factions on release
bad things about coh3:
very poor release quality, bugs, no Italy faction, lame singleplayer session, shit art and UI designs, not enough exicting new features compared to Coh2
Coh2 had years to improve and fix many shits, it will be the same for Coh3. But damn, this is a game from 2020s, the standard is pretty damn low now, to be compared with 10+ yo game
Most WW2 games operate under the false pretense that the SS did everything bad and the Wehrmacht were just the german army following orders heckin good little guys that didn't know nothin.
Of course this is totally untrue in reality and there's been a great deal of study into the Wehrmacht's crimes and culpability in WW2 but the pretense lets games like CoH make the nazis playable without handwringing about nazis. They just substitute every instance of swastika with an iron cross and pretend they dindu nuffin they was just good little volks guarding der fatherland.
For most of the war the waffen SS on the field were attached to wehrmacht command structure in terms of strategy and tactics. Wehrmacht and Waffen SS committed war crimes yes. However SS units are political units whether they are soldiers or police. Their symbols coincide with the Nazi party. Wehrmacht symbols have longer history before and after the Nazi party to represent German units. It's not about who was bad and who was good. All WW2 games have to abide by certain laws for certain countries to increase sales.
>too much focus on israeli women
This was weirdly annoying. Of all the things to fixate on, this was the least interesting thing they could have possibly put forth. I know it's a meme to say this, but what the frick were they thinking? How was this idea legitimately pitched, let alone legitimately greenlit?
It's because that campaign has you assume the role of the Nazis. They needed something to offset that so they wouldn't get angry letters from the Israeli embassy.
I think anybody can plainly see the North Africa campaign was fricking terrible, but it's also like 5 missions total so it's barely even a tutorial. It's more concerning that this game which was blatantly unfinished on launch had two fricking campaign modes that are completely disconnected from each other and covering different battles in different theatres at different points in the war. What the hell was going on with their management?
Uhhh buddy? Did you miss the whole "Holocaust" thing? Their "plan" was the extensive extermination of an entire people and culture and it was only thwarted by the very fortunate fact that germans are terrible at war.
It simply needed half a year more to cook.
The amount of incompetence in management made them wait unreasonable amount of time to fix basic shit like proper icons for motorbike.
Still I think the game is okay, just needed more to stand out.
It has less obvious shilling like Men of War2, where I can't distinguish it from the last one by screens, yet gets far less hate.
Relic rushed an undercooked project out the door in a desperate attempt to generate some liquidity and save their failing company. The circumstances surrounding their acute financial woes will remain an absolute mystery but it's definitely no coincidence that Creative Assembly shat out a half-finished game and then announced mass layoffs only months after Relic did when both are owned by SEGA.
Whether it's just SEGA mismanaging two projects at the same time, or a malicious attempt to extricate itself from the strategy genre by sinking studios it has contractual obligations to--we'll never properly know.
As it is, Company of Heroes 3 is just Company of Heroes 2 but less polished, less balanced, with less content, and with an art style that looks like it was a compromise made for a phone port that never materialized. It's not really just the similarity to the previous game that lets it down, but the utter failure to progress or innovate or even match its predecessor in any degree--this game has no real business existing in its current state.
MoW2 gets a lot of good word of mouth because its had a bunch of free public playtests and it was actually pretty good, so the people that actually got their hands on it have good things to say about it. I don't thing the two are similar enough to bear comparison beyond the fact that they're WW2 games. CoH is a traditional RTS in the vein of Dawn of War that just abstracts basebuilding to its minimum to focus on capture point control and macro-play. It's a proven effective model.
MoW has the autistic granularity of a topdown RPG that makes it overwhelming to control more than 4 or 5 units at a time and a manual control mode that takes center stage. It plays like Warthunder or Word of Tanks with a Diablo-like top down strategic layer and the way those 2 interact and the organic way you constantly shift between them is what makes it novel.
actually men of war 2 leaned a lot more towards coh gameplay where some infantry units were inseparable because they were specifically, squads. it was a surprising change which does catch some mow hardliners off balance but there are still some usable normal infantry units that are not squads.
what i do like about it is that it at least tries to do some fun new things. and i think the devs are putting in the option for "classic mode" which sounds like what youd expect (extreme control over every individual, classic mow) but honestly i havent bothered with it.
the meat of mow2 is the deck-building system like wargame or steel division, and in team games of 4v4 you have to leverage your team's specialized decks against the other team's to capture the most territory (the system of which is pretty novel in itself because territory is not distinctly marked by flags or boundaries now. a single infantryman walking forward can actually capture territory if he doesnt die) under a time limit.
The autism about those squads is fricking wild. There's like 4 of them, they're in their own separate category of infantry that clearly delineates them from all the normal infantry and they suck ass. They only exist to give non-infantry battalions a cheap, shitty way to cap territory and yet looking at the steam forums you'd think they were the only kind of unit in the game and their existence is a personal affront.
i was really surprised that they were a thing too because i was in a situation where i got them and really needed to capture a field gun. but yea i guess just dont fricking take them if you dont like them
Yeah this was baffling to me. The setting was an odd choice, made even more odd by the fact that there's only like 5 missions in North Africa and the fricking italian campaign is an unfinished and half-assed mess.
What were they even fricking thinking with this game? How did the studio that made DoW Soulstorm's campaign somehow regress to this?
Why the FRICK would they pick Italy and not actually feature the Italians?
They could have squeezed like three different factions out of Italy with Fascist Italy, the RSI and the post-Truce Kingdom
They didn't actually want to design a new faction's gameplay from scratch so they just remade Panzer Elite with a desert skin and threw in some token italian callin units
CoH1 brits won the contest for most stupid design of RTS faction. I was farming them in 1vs1 ladder all the time.
PE is just buffing its single infantry unit they do everything, with choosing production paths of what your vehicle will be countering.
DAK at least makes the tech apply new upgrade paths to transports (that PE ditches really fast)
they took a community vote about 5 years before release and it had a "what theatre" would you prefer, and if I remember correctly the results had italy/NA on the top of the list. there's a longstanding belief in the coh community that the Pacific wouldn't work with the coh format
>there's a longstanding belief in the coh community that the Pacific wouldn't work with the coh format
This is predicated btw on the belief that Relic wouldn't be able to make playable Empire of Japan without being overtly offensive to either modern Japanese, Chinese, Koreans or all of the above. The game format would work fine but CoH's factions works in caricatures and those are only okay when they're euros pissing in euros.
i swear i've never seen anyone saying that - most people think the pacific front wouldn't work well because of the style of combat that happened there compared to the european/eastern front.
FWIW I don't really agree at all, but that's always been the general feeling in the community.
It wouldn't work because CoH model is based around infantry from tiers 1-2 and medium to heavy tanks & support from tiers 3-4; the Japanese army and navy in the Pacific theatre simply didn't any armour comparable to US/Allied stuff except like one shitty medium tank that they built like 20 of.
A Japan/USA CoH would have to be infantry based but the gameplay system isn't really meant for that and the US faction would be hard to balance.
That's just not really true in CoH3, though.
Look at Wehrmacht; their t2 is dominated by a strong anti-everything infantry generalist and in t3 they access an elite infantry unit. In the current patch, wehr players barely build tanks and instead opt for battlegroup callin tanks lategame.
Britain; midgame focuses on upgrading earlygame infantry, lategame features strong t3 elite infantry and typically relies on a battlegroup callin tank, offmap abilities, or fricking Crusader spam.
Even DAK, while being light on infantry options, never fields a vehicle heavier than a panzer 3. Are you telling me you seriously think Japan wouldn't work in this game because they have nothing equivalent to a Challenger 1? We've got casemate Easy 8s from Normandy and the 1946 Black Prince facing off against P3s. Historical symmetry is clearly not an overriding concern. This is not like CoH2 or DoW2 where lategame devolves into symmetrical tank spam. It's a much more infantry and light vehicle-focused game.
>Japanese army and navy in the Pacific theatre simply didn't any armour comparable to US/Allied stuff except like one shitty medium tank that they built like 20 of.
dumbass statement, Black. CoH has never adhered too much to historical accuracy or scarcity. Look at how the Ostwind is a base unit for the Ostheer in CoH2 even though only 40 were ever made in real life.
The Coh model isn't based on tiers at all. The factions are built arond what part of the game they perform well in. OKW is an early game aggressor faction. It relies on securing VPS early with your mobile units and possibly even forcing a surrender. Soviets and wehr are the two balanced factions based on attrition (especially with the last coh2 patch that brought Wehr more in line with this). They have average units with special call-ins that dictate playstyle. USF are the mid game specialists while brits dominate late game but suck early game. The pacific theatre could work by having the US as your late-game faction and Japs as early game dominant. The Japanese had extremely aggressive infantry, and the USF rarely used heavy mgs for example. If a Jap player is unable to secure a decisive win before the Shermans turn up, its gg however they may be able to rely on call-in artillery counters or rush light tanks to wipe defenses and snag victory in the late game. As another anon observed, not having the pacific is more to do with the gigantic portion of the playerbase that would be butthurt at playing as or against the Japanese
>This is predicated btw on the belief that Relic wouldn't be able to make playable Empire of Japan without being overtly offensive to either modern Japanese, Chinese, Koreans or all of the above.
partly correct, but main issue would be how would the game balance melee combat/fighting in caves/jungle ambushes? if you've played rising storm then you should know it's not possible, the pacific theatre is not meant for RTS, at least if we're talking non-naval combat. the setting worka just fine with FPS games.
if anything they should've done korean war. reuse most of the assets and have good basis for unique factions. china is loosing up with that war it could be possible to make an SP campaign no one gives a shit about catered to the chinese censors.
but since ever since they were bought out by sega they CoH never really stood a chance.
This is true, which makes it baffling they chose to make Italy the 'dynamic' campaign and not North Africa. We could have actually managed the logistic challenges from both sides suffering blockades and supply shortages while skirmishing in small scale positional battles that snowball back and forth. Instead we have a couple disjointed tutorial missions where Rommel tells us to do warcrimes and then some local cries about it.
The amount of pussyfooting in prerelease alone shows how bad the atmosphere in Relic got.
Giving tribute to Dark Gods takes priority over bugfixing.
>Japanese army and navy in the Pacific theatre simply didn't any armour comparable to US/Allied stuff except like one shitty medium tank that they built like 20 of.
dumbass statement, Black. CoH has never adhered too much to historical accuracy or scarcity. Look at how the Ostwind is a base unit for the Ostheer in CoH2 even though only 40 were ever made in real life.
Going with this logic we can add French army with B2 spam and Polish army with Panther call-ins.
All the "strategy" part of the Jap war were happening with navy and not landing troops vs entrenched japs.
Korean War would make more sense than this.
>going with this logic
I'm going to have to stop your Black person ass right there because it ain't my logic to be debated. That's what Relic is already doing with CoH2 you spastic.
>Going with this logic
We would have a fun game, yes. You have to accept that CoH never was or even tried to be sensible. Your example wasn't even that crazy of a hyperbole, this isn't like having BMWs driving around with plasma cannons.
>people
Funny way to spell Americans
Literally nobody gives a frick about that front other than Americans and Japs (whom don't play RTS)
North Africa/ Italy is a much better front choice, lots of irregular skirmishes, focus on brazen mobile tactics while also having space for artillery/support heavy plays due to difficult terrain and presence of mutlitple types of specialized troops on both sides, pioneers, paras, marines, mechanized divisions etc.
I never really liked CoH.
I liked DoW2 a lot, but that felt like it was a vastly more fleshed out vision of the same formula. Without melee combat, mobility tools etc. CoH just feels like half the game with nothing filling in the gaps.
>This was supposed to revive RTS genre sirs
who told you this awful lie? Even if it was true, CoH3's extremely limited faction roster prevents it from surpassing CoH1 right off the bat
>make new game >it's not better in ANY way than the first game made 20 years ago
kys moron do you tease your dad this much too when you suck his wiener at night?
i think COH3 is overall better in a lot of ways, but i stopped playing after 2 weeks because >very few maps, and at least half of them are so atrocious that i just want to alt f4 in the loading screen >too similar to the previous game, didn't really feel like there was enough to keep me going after 200 hours of playing CoH2 >once again, wonky balance because the devs keep trying to balance for a bunch of team formats (usually 1v1, which only psychos play) >fewer cheesy units than CoH2, which is good in a way, but it also makes it harder to throw a curveball at your enemy and or turn the game around >more punishing manpower mechanics also make it harder to make a comeback or change your unit composition, making matches kind of lopsided and stale
I agree with all of this. I gave it an honest and sincere try before I even know the controversy surrounding it. The tiny map pool would be a big issue even if it was a vastly better game, and points to how rushed and messy the development was. It's also baffling that there are so many maps in the singleplayer campaigns that weren't reused for multiplayer.
I found 1v1s to be in a weird place where individual combats feel like they take too long to resolve without enough to actually do in them, but the actual pace of a match is blindingly fast compared to CoH2 or DoW2 and makes it hard to keep up with everything that's happening. There's something subtly wrong that throws the game's pacing completely out of whack, and I say this as someone who played DoW2 competitively. I agree that manpower feels extremely limiting in a way I don't think previous games felt, and it both makes me feel extremely bad for taking any unfavourable fights or making any mistakes, and makes it feel awful using any unit with an above-average manpower cost unless they're completely broken.
Team matches have similar issues to CoH2 where they devolve into each player fortifying their lanes with team weapons and narrow map design that doesn't allow any room for flanking, there's no incentive for the player holding the VP to push forward and take any risks, and the only viable means of attacking into a chokepoint fortified with team weapons is to spam artillery and offmaps and hope to bleed them off--but with a forward med truck reinforcing them it just becomes a slow manpower grind.
>Team matches have similar issues to CoH2 where they devolve into each player fortifying their lanes with team weapons and narrow map design that doesn't allow any room for flanking
i think there is a very thin line between a map being too small, which turns it into a team weapon meatgrinder, and a map being so big it turns into musical chairs shit. there are a bunch of 2v2 maps (mostly in CoH2) that feel just right for me, but they're drowned out by all the shitty meatgrinder maps. i think there should be a reason to sometimes try to assault an entrenched position, but it also shouldn't be the only thing you do.
at least in CoH2 i could veto most of the shit maps
He had the point thou, First you wait like 5-6 years only to be released as DLC to save flop "modern warfare men of war" (Which even more ironically since people play cold war/modern warfare mod on Gate of Hell instead.)
Second GoH start with focus in eastern front in mind and now they have to pump out western front dlc, when MoW2 need to released complete package with all major faction and player will do the rest.
6 months ago
Anonymous
aw another esl third-worlder flocks to its kind's rescue
6 months ago
Anonymous
Can't handle the truth, Clearly you not real /vst/ then.
I really liked team games in DoW2 as a way to casually frick around and part of what made it fun was that you absolutely had the tools to attack through chokepoints, munitions being rewarded for kills encouraged you to constantly take fights even at the risk of losing manpower, and diving backline tech resources could actually impact how quickly the opposing side teched--while teching actually mattered a lot.
I really liked how in that game, manpower was plentiful but upkeep ramping quickly as you filled out your population cap meant that it created a natural incentive to not spam units, while you could afford to sustain some model losses (or even lose a squad early) and still recover.
In CoH3 combat only costs you resources, and thus you only want to take fights when you can practically ensure you'll win the trade overwhelmingly. And since team weapons are so strong, it means the defender is almost always advantaged. Raiding fuel barely matters because manpower bottlenecks will fix the pace of your teching no matter how much fuel you have, and lategame manpower will bottleneck your ability to deploy tanks and other high tier units far more than fuel. That also means there's no real reason to push past your mid-map VP since denying your opponent fuel doesn't matter unless you can control all of their fuel for an extended period--at which point you're just controlling 99% of the map anyway. And manpower feels really poorly balanced; the relative low impact of upkeep means there's no reason to not just spend it as it comes in and blob up to your unit cap as soon as possible, it also means a player who falls behind on manpower because they lose some fights early on, or frick up and lose a unit, will be stuck on the back foot indefinitely with no good way to come back into the game since manpower is not only bottlenecking how quickly you can spam your best units towards the pop cap, but also bottlenecking how quickly you tech much more than fuel is.
yeah the fact that you can't ever really trade manpower for anything else completely cripples the strategic gameplay. there's really no reason to ever take a bad trade. just retreat as soon as you are slightly outmatched and try again, because the map resources don't matter.
yeah the fact that you can't ever really trade manpower for anything else completely cripples the strategic gameplay. there's really no reason to ever take a bad trade. just retreat as soon as you are slightly outmatched and try again, because the map resources don't matter.
i feel like the new (old I guess) resource system mean that the map, and how you take engagements means alot more than in coh2. I've taken bad engagements to decap a cutoff, or a +10 fuel before, knowing it will stall out my enemies ability to make vehicles or get other resources. I play most game modes and feel like coh3 is more engaging than coh2 was. I agree that there's room for improvement in some aspects.
Apparently this dumpster fire is actually getting an expansion in December, what the frick.
Aside from the obvious fact that it's a dumpster fire that nobody bought, it came out half-finished 8 months ago and still isn't finished now. What could they possibly add in a paid release after less than a year of devtime that they think is going to A: turn this shitfest around and B: actually be worth anybody dropping money on it?
>You don't spam heavy tanks like in coh2.
This is true and it's refreshing after a long time with coh2 but there was a reason they chose to make lategame into tank slugouts. Fuel is limited and vehicle vs vehicle battles are decisive and produce single winners and losers. A single big tank fight essentially ends the game, while the infantry and combined-arms phase leading up to it tries to position you to hit your tank push sooner or have a stronger tank force when the hammer falls. DoW2 took this approach as well, and through all its expansions it further emphasized it because it wasn't accidental. The game needs to end.
CoH3 changed that--which is fine--but doesn't seem to have a clear vision of what replaces it. Sometimes the winning move is still just big tank spam (ie Wehr P4 rush, US E8s, UK Stuart spam into Crusader spam) but without the coherent structure and pacing to make that fun, sometimes the winning move is just abusing a manpower discount and grinding the other side down with a critical mass of infantry, sometimes the winning move is to just lock down 2/3 of the map with weapon teams and stall the other side over a miserable 40+ minute grind.
This game frustrates me because the skeleton of a good game is there and clearly shows that someone knows what they're doing but the guiding vision behind the big picture gameplay design seems so myopic and disinterested in making it a game. Technical issues will eventually get cleaned up but will they ever move past the guy in charge telling them "this faction is for beginners, so it should be simple and bad"
not sure i agree with what youre saying - it's a good thing if there are multiple "end conditions" ie tank mass, grinding manpower, map control, as opposed to just "who wins the 34 minute mark tank duel" which plagued coh2. I feel like which faction do you think is for beginners? the brits? i feel like the brits are really good, the relatively simple tech tree doesn't take away from the complexity that they have
Earlier in the game's life, a patch nerfed brits into the dirt, hitting about half of their roster, even units that weren't seeing play with random nerfs. The devs justified their approach in a devblog by claiming brits are a beginner faction so they shouldn't be doing as well as the other factions.
I’ve been played steadily since release, Brit’s as my main faction - was this the patch that nerfed the boys spam? That was badly needed. Brits are really good atm actually. Most factions are besides Wehrmacht
Brits got nerfed because they were so absurdly overpowered that playing 1v1 was a pointless exercise.
Relic overnerfed them because they've always overnerfed and overbuffed things since the DoW1 days but Brits have since become solid again.
6 months ago
Anonymous
That fact is irrelevant. At the time, brits were overperforming because an upgrade on their t1 infantry were overtuned and it was rightly nerfed. But then Relic nerfed a bunch of unrelated units that weren't even seeing play on top of it and justified it by saying the beginner faction is supposed to suck.
The last part there is the issue. Balance patches hit or miss the mark, it's a fact of gaming. But when you go out and say "we've determined that faction X and Y are made to suck and faction A and B are supposed to be the meta" then you undermine the whole premise of performing balance patches.
And we see the consequence of that vision over the past year. Relic stated that DAK and US were the two factions they considered 'complex' and the past 8 months have been an arms race between those two factions, with them taking turns between which is dominating winrates each patch. Taking turns not because Relic is sincerely trying to reach a point where winrates approach 50/50 and players are happy with 'stable' balance, but because they create problems every patch so they can fix them every new patch.
And as long as that's their approach there's just no point in waiting for the game to get better, because nobody's working on improving it.
6 months ago
Anonymous
If that were true DAK would've seen play in any tournament in the last 10 months but it hasn't. It only became viable in the last 2 patches.
Yes. In the story mode there are several missions where you recruit or work alongside italian partisans, most of whom are just folks in ratty civilian clothes.
Looking at the latest patch, balance is actually approaching a pretty good place >Brits are playable with a solid winrate across all 3 battlegroups and almost all units see play >US Armored is overperforming due to chaffee spam but is otherwise in a good place >DAK nerfs finally put it in a good place, with strong early map pressure, versatile tech options and infantry that isn't worthless without being able to bulldoze games on one or 2 overpowered options >Wehr is underperforming in 1v1s due to its weak earlygame but performs very well in team games thanks to its extremely strong lategame. Probably needs some compensatory buffs to offset the (much needed) MG nerfs
What's interesting is that outside of Wehr being the outlier, 1v1 and team game winrates are much closer than they've traditionally been.
There's still some outstanding sources of frustration, like copious manpower reinforcement discounts that skew the cost-effectiveness of different matchups and some loiters still being janky and uninteractive "I kill u" buttons but generally the game's actually in a pretty good place gameplay-wise. Relic just fricked up reverting the Chaffee nerfs but it's almost certainly getting slapped down again in December's patch.
Relic just had a livestream for CoH3 revealing its first """expansion""" coming at the start of december.
It includes two battlegroups and some cosmetics, one for the US and one for the Wehrmacht, for 16.99USD. That's it.
That’s laughable, they couldn’t even manage to muster one battlegroup for each faction. And this is announced right after the aoe4 expansion that has 6 new playable civs and a campaign for l cheaper. Frick this game lol.
Considering most of the assets in the "new" battlegroups are recycled or ripped straight from the campaign I'm actually flabbergast that they could only muster 2.
>It includes two battlegroups and some cosmetics, one for the US and one for the Wehrmacht, for 16.99USD. That's it.
And outside of the one SP only battlegroup the two MP ones can be gotten with Merits. So basically this shit is completely pointless. At least the patch itself looks good? I'm a big fan of the visual improvements.
Considering most of the assets in the "new" battlegroups are recycled or ripped straight from the campaign I'm actually flabbergast that they could only muster 2.
I dont think they're from the campaign, I don't remember any of those units.
>US Battlegroup
Rangers: new
Artillery Radio Beacons: from Italian campaign
105mm M1 Howitzer: from italian campaign >Wehrmacht battlegroup
Coastal Reserves: new
Artillery Officer: italian campaign
Bunkers: recycled
Obice da 210/22: italian campaign
So yeah only the infantry is actually new. Not that it's the end of the world or anything considering they're unlockable with ingame stuff and clearly dev priorities have been patches and fixing their game. But it just shocks me that they couldn't scrounge up enough leftover campaign assets for every faction to get a new battlegroup instead of just 2.
ahh I see, my bad anon, i didn't really pay close attention in the campaign and mostly worked w/ the brit companies. i feel like they're spreading it out for more content bc of the small(er) team that they have now. either way idgaf about the battlegroups - all the free update shit looks amazing
The expansion reeks of “we promised Premium owners they’d have the first expansion by the end of the year so we have to make SOMETHING”
So yeah paypiggies got cucked lol
6 months ago
Anonymous
yeah, updates gonna be really good though
6 months ago
Anonymous
Relic's been around for decades now if you're dumb enough to ever pay them full price+ at launch you only have yourself to blame.
... no it doesn't. They just removed the shitty fog. I expected actual new graphics. Also the video has been watched by like eighty people in the world and I'm supposed to believe three are here? Frick off. Don't make moronic extensions, relic plant. And optimize your fricking textures
CoH was always shit. Only games that worhed wit this shitty squad andno base building trope are DoW1 and Ancestors Legacy. All the other CoH clones are complete and utter crap.
>JAPAN JAPAN JAPAN
No one fricking cares about Japan. And especially no one fricking cares about US marines. It's a theatre with zero appeal to the vast majority of the world. No one fricking cares. It's not ingrained into pop culture like Normandy or Stalingrad. It's never going to happen, shut the frick up.
>Useless homosexuals with 0 tactics beyond "hide in hole then let's kill ourselves" versus crayola eating morons
Nah. Italy at least has nice locations and historical landmarks. Bumfrick Africa was home to some of the biggest armored battles. The Pacific was literally fighting over useless islands.
Just say you're a Wehraboo and move on. That's the real reason we'll never get a game outside the European front.
Wehraboos whines and dump too much money in these games so they can play goose-stepping simulator while their mom is ravaged by Tyrone.
Relic would be 100% based if they pulled the same shit in CoH2 and called out Jap Imperials for all of their warcrime and how it never got admitted even to this day.
>imagine being such a dickwad that even the Mafia turns on you also your daughter's husband tried to kill you, so you kill him and alienate even your own family
>The Hammer & Shield Expansion Pack introduces two new Battlegroups for Multiplayer, Co-op and Single Player Skirmish, an all-new Campaign Company that allows you to tackle the Single Player Italian Campaign with bold combined arms tactics, and four premium cosmetic packs. Hammer & Shield is releasing on Dec 5th 2023 along with the Steel Shepherd Update and will retail for $16.99 USD. >two battle groups, singleplayer missions that will probably suck, and epic skjins bro!! for SEVENTEEN DOLLARS
what a fricking joke
Honestly pretty standard for a Relic DLC. The battlegroups--which are the main content--are 'free' (unlockable ingame) and the actual price comes from the stupid cosmetic reskins (which are also sold separately). The singleplayer "content" is just one of the base multiplayer groups being added to singleplayer and is basically not worth mentioning, a literal bone-throw just to check the "singleplayer" box on their content drop.
So yeah all of the 'price' of the pack comes from skins and the things people might actually care about is free. Which seems stupid but this is the same relic that sold a bunch of overpriced skin packs for DoW2 and then started selling DLC for the fricking pve side mode.
I know most people didn't bother wading through the Dynamic Campaign because the overworld layer was total ass, but the mission design was extremely typical of Relic's singleplayer mission design. Some of that shit was straight out of DoW1/CoH1 (and a lot of it was actually decent). And the map layer itself, while ass, is pretty typical of Relic campaigns. Almost all of their singleplayer games have had some kind of stupid turn-based strategic gimmick and they're usually ass. Yes, including Dark Crusade. I swear on me mum some folks working at Relic are still holdovers from the old days--and I also maintain that Relic has always been kind of shit and 'fixes' their bad releases ad hoc via expansions. I think a lot of folks are just too young to remember how bad DoW1 was before it got a bunch of expansions that progressively fixed everything or that DoW2 actually got enough support to become a really fricking good game (certainly a better CoH than CoH1). Despite the passage of time, Relic hasn't changed. They still shit out bad releases and then slowly fix them over the intervening years. They still release decent singleplayer missions stapled to a stupid Total War-style gimmick and have the gall to call it "grand strategy" and they still shit out overpriced cosmetic DLCs and then lose their nerve and make half of the shit unlockable for free anyways.
And as an aside, I think that makes DoW3 even funnier. That a studio which has never had a successful new game launch in their entire history thought it was such a fricking turd that they wouldn't even try to rescue it. I gotta wonder who fricked up there.
>think a lot of folks are just too young to remember how bad DoW1 was before it got a bunch of expansions that progressively fixed everything or that DoW2 actually got enough support to become a really fricking good game (certainly a better CoH than CoH1).
This is something a lot of people forget. I can't speak for HW2 or DoW1 on release (due to having a computer that was too dog shit for either at the time), but DoW2, which nowadays is praised for its campaign, was considered a terrible slog until they overhauled it just before Chaos Rising. No one remembers Impossible Creatures and CoH2 was practically unplayable on release. CoH3 is a surprisingly competent release for relic.
Is this game really that horrible? I was gonna wait for the Steam Christmas sale to pick it up. I've been wanting to get back into RTS games for a while now and no one plays DoW2 anymore so I figured this was the next best thing.
No, it's not that horrible and assuming Sega doesn't shutter Relic, it'll be an excellent game in time. If you're looking for multiplayer, it'll do you alright on a discount.
i don't remember vanilla DoW2 being praised much at all, it's some literally nothing story about chasing down a hive tyrant on a bunch of reused maps, the game changer for DoW2 was getting it off the dead of arrival GFWL and onto Steam
It's embarrassing when you look at dlc that just came out for Gates of Hell (regardless of what your opinion of that game is) for like $6 more, which has a frickload more content
This is one complaint I can't get behind. For all its shit, the voice acting is fantastic. The brits all being absolute fricking stereotypes with silly accents, the german tankers bickering with their crew etc.
They're not totally awful but I feel that coh2's voice lines were definitely more emotive and engaging. I remember the USF vehicle death lines being pretty intense, especially if you were looking elsewhere and it came through with the radio effects.
rts player tend to be very harsh to new releases.
What would count as an okay "sequel" in any other genre , would get labeled as "zero innovacation/same game, i will just stick to older one".
While it is good to have high standards, that means almost every dev avoid rts and those who try have little room for mistake/end up in trouble in term of sales
Is this game really that horrible? I was gonna wait for the Steam Christmas sale to pick it up. I've been wanting to get back into RTS games for a while now and no one plays DoW2 anymore so I figured this was the next best thing.
Nah. We live in a post-fact world where nothing matters because morons can share their uninformed opinions. Case in point, if you look at the Steam thread announcing the expansion and patch you'll see a million morons angry that they have to pay for the patch, when that's simply incorrect. Likewise with the endless whining about the game being unbalanced or somehow broken, when in fact faction win rates are the closest they've ever been in the history of the franchise.
COH3's real problem is a lack of maps in matchmaking and meh graphics. There are not enough maps so it gets repetitive and the special effects/textures are barely better than CoH 2; The former because console port and the latter because AMD sponsorship locked ultra textures to 16GB of VRAM and High textures look horrendously shit.
>COH3's real problem is
: >pricing for the amount of content >not enough content (full separate factions missing - italians, japanese, soviets) >not enough maps >not enough units >not enough fun factors differentiating the game from coh2 and coh1
don't make an RTS if you're not willing to surpass CoH1, AoE2 and SC2. Frick off and make more turn-based slop for morons.
>unreasonable moronation
This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. What you want is absolutely moronic and your opinion should go in the trash. Unfortunately, society prohibits slaughtering subhumans like you.
>just put in more effort than games released over 20 years ago with 100x smaller budgets and dev teams and worse tech that limits the shit out of what you can do >durr this is completely unreasonable you're moronic!!1
get a load of this guy
>more effort
The irony is that while the capabilities have improved enormously, the tools used to produce them have atrophied. 20 years ago it was acceptable for a 3d model to have a few dozen vertices and a texture with less resolution than a fricking smart watch. A competent 3d artists could shit out a dozen of them in a day, largely using the same base model with a few adjustments for everything.
A modern 3d model is a thousand times more complex, but the tools to make that model have not really improved much. It takes more time, effort and manpower to make modern things, even though the gameplay impact for the end-user is minimal. It's partly an issue of scalability--no amount of technical improvements to modelling software will make a thousand polygons a thousand times quicker and easier, which means you just need more and more and more 3d artists working in tandem to keep up with the technical bloat.
And that's only on aspect of design that's gotten bigger, more complicated, more expensive and more labour-intensive with time. Like I'm sympathetic to OLD GOOD--I go back and replay older games quite frequently and I'm always surprised at how well they've aged--but it's not like there's some ubiquitous social atrophy that just makes all modern things bad. There are concrete reasons why game development has become more challenging and more expensive with time, and it's a major factor driving both the shitty monetization models and the tendency to release games unfinished and 'fix them later.' It's especially difficult for studios, like Relic, who found most of their success in the 32bit era, because the transition to 64bit was expensive, slow, and rendered large amounts of existing asset libraries worthless while also setting many, many developers at the mercy of highly centralized 3rd party proprietary software licenses necessary to even make their games work.
6 months ago
Anonymous
tl;dr israelites are responsible
6 months ago
Anonymous
>The irony is that while the capabilities have improved enormously, the tools used to produce them have atrophied. 20 years ago it was acceptable for a 3d model to have a few dozen vertices and a texture with less resolution than a fricking smart watch. A competent 3d artists could shit out a dozen of them in a day, largely using the same base model with a few adjustments for everything. >A modern 3d model is a thousand times more complex
It doesnt have to be, nobody forces devs to make models with 9000+ polygons
I wouldnt mind if COH3 models looked like COH1 ones if we had more reactivity, more factions, proper campaign with strategic map ala total war etc
6 months ago
Anonymous
>I wouldnt mind if COH3 models looked like COH1
Almost every single review talk about how graphics didn't evolve much and half of negative reviews cite that a negative point/flaw for why they hate the game.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>Almost every single review talk about how graphics didn't evolve much and half of negative reviews cite that a negative point/flaw for why they hate the game.
On one hand those complaints are mainly targeted towards how washed out the game looks and the really bad explosion effects.
On the other I'm sure if the models were CoH1-level people would lose their fricking minds.
6 months ago
Anonymous
that's because CoH3 graphic is even shittier than CoH1 and 2.
6 months ago
Anonymous
you dont mind, and neither would I, but everyone else would unfortunately.
Unless you propose that they reuse assets and/or game engine.
How is redoing something that tooks them years of developement and updating to do in previous games and not only that but also adding more for a shrinking niche market ?
We can have nice thing if this wasn't this obessession of "i want everything done before again".. If they devs could just focus on giving new experience and new features even with less content than past stuf.
>They put in the aforementioned effort to ship the game with four factions, a first in the franchise >NOOOOO IT'S NOT ENOUGH I WANT FACTIONS AND MAPS FROM TWO MORE, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS
Dumb child.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>a first in the franchise
Dawn of War 2.
The only reason CoH2 launched the way it did is because the publisher imploded and Relic suddenly found itself with nobody paying them.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>a game in another franchise
Astoundingly stupid.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>They put in the aforementioned effort to ship the game with four factions >NOOOOO IT'S NOT ENOUGH
this but unironically, still playing coh
6 months ago
Anonymous
>They put in the aforementioned effort to ship the game with four factions
oh wow! Four factions! Please roll out the red carpet and sound the fanfare for all the titanic, nigh-impossible effort put in coh3. I wonder how many millions of dollars in diversity hires were necessary to reach the IMPOSSIBLE, COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE GAME DESIGN PEAK already achieved 21 years ago
6 months ago
Anonymous
never played this game so i dont really care sorry 🙂
6 months ago
Anonymous
>he pretends these 20 polygon units with limited animations are equivalent to units in a modern RTS >and he does it thinking he'll get more than a patronizing scoff
If your parents cared about you, they'd be disappointed
6 months ago
Anonymous
6 months ago
Anonymous
moron
5 months ago
Anonymous
keep seething
5 months ago
Anonymous
I’m not the one seething lol
5 months ago
Anonymous
there has never been a case of anyone typing "lol" without malding their brain out.
Redditor soi word, we have never lived in a fact world to begin with. Its just now the authority doesn't have complete control over the 'facts' so redditor shills like you seethe when the system - in this case Relic and garbage games like COH3 - get attacked for being shit.
Cool. I'm gonna grab it on the Steam Christmas sale probably. I bought the original CoH on day 1 of release way back (holy shit was it really 17 years ago) and also played CoH2, so feels weird skipping out on this one so far.
>post-fact world
Redditor soi word, we have never lived in a fact world to begin with. Its just now the authority doesn't have complete control over the 'facts' so redditor shills like you seethe when the system - in this case Relic and garbage games like COH3 - get attacked for being shit.
What "authority"? The ones that prove you wrong, because you chose to listen to other "authorities" with no actual qualifications instead? Put on another israelite rogan podcast before your head explodes, sweaty.
From someone actually playing it, it does have a lot of issues.
Faction rosters are pretty narrow relative to the number of units you're actually able to field, which makes the game blobby and 'spammy' even if not intentionally. You're going to have 8-10 units on the field at once by midgame and there just aren't enough units in your roster to fill that out, so it ends up with like one or 2 utility pickups and then just repeatedly grabbing copies of your most efficient combat unit for the matchup. Comparing it to DoW2 (fewer units on the field with similar roster size) or CoH2 (more worthwhile units to smooth out the recruitment curve) it's very apparent that you end up taking an extra squad or 2 of something not because you want it but because you're floating manpower and there's nothing else to get.
The map pool is narrow and mediocre. There are a few good maps, but also a few bad ones and just not enough in general. The samey maps make things really repetitive, especially when you get into one of the shit ones that's asymmetrical for no good reason and gives one side a huge advantage.
Balance. This is an extension of the small unit pools more than anything. A lot of units or battlegroups are just plain bad choices and that makes the rosters feel even smaller than they are. It doesn't help that some of the tech paths are bizarre and divide units in weird and expensive ways, like US needing a separate building for weapon teams when they could just rush light vehicles instead, or the nazis having their t2 divided between two different buildings with an absolutely arbitrary pool of units between them--both of which they can skip entirely to rush tanks instead
Some overhead balance issues with things like mobile units vs setup teams vs artillery that make team games feel extremely static and uninvolved (CoH2 had similar issues but in the opposite direction). Not to mention globals being their worst iteration ever.
As a CoH addict (1000s of hours) I like 3, especially right now (sans the new wehrmacht battlegroup which is slightly overtuned). The game has really come together recently and while it still has a way to go I reckon it's better than 2 was at this stage in its life cycle.
You know, this is something that bothers me about RTS sequels.
CoH2 had 4 factions. Yes, it took several expansions to get there, but that's the state it is in now. Its enduring status quo is a 4-faction game with a tonne of content and a lot of polish.
Why would I pay full price for a new game that has less content? What does CoH3 actually offer, objectively, over its predecessor?
Better graphics? Sort of. The fidelity is higher but there's been no end to visual and art design issues they've had to slowly patch since release
There's a new singleplayer campaign but it's not particularly good
There's only 2 factions and despite using new assets (I'm not even sure why they do) they play very much like CoH2 factions, just with the roles and playstyles shuffled around a little.
There's a number of QoL changes but an equal number of new issues introduced.
It just seems like a hard sell. Why spend so much devtime remaking assets you already have for a marginal graphic improvement? Why couldn't CoH3 have just reused CoH2 models with higher resolution textures? Were there actually so many improvements under the hood that it was worth just dropping all the old assets and remaking most of them, just to release a smaller game with fewer features at full price?
It's just baffling to me. Dawn of War 1 to Dawn of War 2 was a huge shift in game design and player experience that made them meaningfully distinct, but each CoH is just an iteration of the previous. There's no reason to play CoH1 once CoH2 got enough content. There's no reason to play CoH3 until its content surpasses CoH2. How does this model make sense, business-wise?
Nah. We live in a post-fact world where nothing matters because morons can share their uninformed opinions. Case in point, if you look at the Steam thread announcing the expansion and patch you'll see a million morons angry that they have to pay for the patch, when that's simply incorrect. Likewise with the endless whining about the game being unbalanced or somehow broken, when in fact faction win rates are the closest they've ever been in the history of the franchise.
COH3's real problem is a lack of maps in matchmaking and meh graphics. There are not enough maps so it gets repetitive and the special effects/textures are barely better than CoH 2; The former because console port and the latter because AMD sponsorship locked ultra textures to 16GB of VRAM and High textures look horrendously shit.
CoH3 has 4 factions and CoH2 has 5. CoH3's factions are also generally much better designed than 2's which relied to heavily on locking core units behind commanders and then making them OP to justify it (i.e. Dodge truck).
I think it's pretty likely that Relic sticks with CoH3 for a long time and several expansions. This is their only 64 bit title, and thus the only product they have out there making money with any long-term prospects of soft/hardware compatibility and platform stability as time goes on. They have a tonne of precedent, as a business, for releasing mediocre games and then supporting them doggedly for years until they end up ultimately being pretty good and loaded with content. The only reason Dawn of War 2's support was cut short after its second expansion was that their publisher went bankrupt. They literally had two factions in the works for an upcoming 3rd expansion and got cucked.
The only game they've ever abandoned in DoW3, but well there are some pretty good reasons for it. It flopped hard, much harder than CoH3 has. It was not what the fans wanted at all, and that perception really did harm long-term prospects for it. And frankly it was just so drowned in terrible fricking ideas that there really was no hope of making a good game out of it short of successively redesigning it until it's just a different game altogether. By comparison, CoH3's landing was softer and there IS a good game buried under here--the design is very conservative and stuck very closely to the things that made the first two CoH games so good. What CoH3 needs isn't a total redesign or a mountain of issues fixed to just begin to match its predecessors. It just needs bugfixes, balance patches and more content. In the process it looks like they're also doing stuff like improving the art and visual design, upgrading the soundscape, improving the UI, unit control and behaviour and so on, which is great. This isn't the kind of stuff you focus on if the plan is to ditch the game next year; it's long-term groundwork-laying so that there's a more solid platform for future content.
Relic doesn't own anything from AoE4, they were just the content mill that Microsoft took on. They won't make any money from the project unless Microsoft comes back and offers to pay them more, because they don't hold any of the intellectual property rights for it.
It's alright? I was hoping for some more substantive changes to Battlegroups because there's a lot of shit ones but I guess that just trimming a lot of munitions costs is probably good enough of a start.
Changes to buildables is obviously just laying the groundwork for the new content since one of the BGs is focused on buildables.
Mortar changes will have to be seen in action but better mortars doesn't necessarily solve the issues with team weapons that have been ongoing
British T4 just got taken out in the back and shot, which seems pretty unnecessary.
DAK truck needed the nerf badly but the tank changes are questionable. I don't think P3s needed a straightfoward buff to cost-effectiveness and we're just creeping towards a point where they spam 1 tank lategame and A-move
Murdering Wehr techskipping is such an absolutely fundamental change to their faction because it was the core of basically every build for the longest time. I understand why they did it but I don't think there are enough compensatory changes here to salvage how big of a nerf this is.
Overall not really impressed with the balance changes considering how much they spun this up. I'm happy they were willing to make such a high impact change like killing Wehr techskipping and giving the US a pack howitzer but I'm not sure the scope of these changes were wide or comprehensive enough to support the big ones. Hopefully team games don't turn into absolute shite with the emplacement/indirect fire changes.
>last patch introduced 100% consistent CTD that prevents me from playing at all >this patch didn't fix it
Welp guess I'm spending another few months not touching a game I paid full price for. Shitsux
The new DLC is getting shat on in reviews which is deserved but most of them seem to be from morons who think they're paying for the patch OR are premium paypiggies mad they got scammed.
Are you serious Relicjews? I'd let you israelite me for the new commanders because I considered buying Merit to unlock them, but now I see I can only buy the yellow israelite currency which does not unlock commanders. Not buying the DLC, frick you, I only wanted the commanders
Wehrmacht is unplayable lol. You completely lose the map within 5 minutes because Grenadiers get shat on by everything and MG42s aren't good enough to compensate.
Wehr is supposed to be the 'weak earlygame strong lategame' faction. Your goal isn't to actually win fights early, just slow your opponent, minimize your losses and try to hold your fuel as much as possible, then come back later. You outscale everyone so you just have to not left yourself fall too far behind.
Brits also have weak map presence early and can't deal with weapon teams well. While the US has strong infantry pressure but lacks good ways to deal with vehicles.
The main issue right now, which the patch didn't address, was the US Chaffee being too strong after reverting its previous nerfs, which can make midgame vehicle play more difficult than it ought to be. But the buffs to Jager shreks and Marder should seriously function as an answer to Chaffee spam.
>Wehr is supposed to be the 'weak earlygame strong lategame' faction. Your goal isn't to actually win fights early, just slow your opponent, minimize your losses and try to hold your fuel as much as possible, then come back later. You outscale everyone so you just have to not left yourself fall too far behind.
Numortars make MG play impossible. By the time you've packed one up its already lost half its health just from the barrage because its rate of fire is insane >Brits also have weak map presence early and can't deal with weapon teams well.
Just build a mortar lol it shuts down team weapons >The main issue right now, which the patch didn't address, was the US Chaffee being too strong after reverting its previous nerfs, which can make midgame vehicle play more difficult than it ought to be. But the buffs to Jager shreks and Marder should seriously function as an answer to Chaffee spam.
You'll never get there because you can't defeat the Rifle/Tommy blob if they build even one mortar to counter your MG.
That's what I was thinking, but then you just roll back to how it was before where your infantry is going to struggle mightily against Rifles and Tommies.
Anecdotal but I played 15 games as allies (10 as US and 5 as Brits) and 15 games as Axis (all Wehr). Every game as Allies I won very easily (though to be fair a lot of those were against Wehr players trying out coastal and bunker memes) and I lost every game as Wehr.
I know you're talking about team games and not 1v1s though you're doing your hardest to pretend otherwise. Have you considered the fact that your opponent needs to spot your MG before they can shell it? That you can move your MG when not in combat, or even keep it back so that they don't have an easy time shelling it? Have you considered that your MG doesn't need to be set up until it's actually time to fight, and that you can keep it mobile to avoid incoming shells until it's needed?
Right from the outset of the patch the consensus among competent players is that Wehr's new battlegroup is horrendously overtuned--particularly the coastal infantry and artillery officer--and their winrates are skyrocketing across all modes. Have you considered that being unable to win with your precious nazis because you leave your set up team sitting still to get shot at might be a skill issue?
>know you're talking about team games and not 1v1s though you're doing your hardest to pretend otherwise
False. I never play team games unless I’m playing with friends. All of these games were 1v1. >lol just micro better bro
Of course if you just leave an MG sitting around it’ll get blasted, that’s not new. The problem is the new barrage dps. It’s so blisteringly fast that you WILL take a lot of unavoidable damage just packing up your MG to reposition. Given how suppression works in CoH3 this means that you have to build multiple MGs if you’re going to build any (which has its own set of problems) or none at all. >Right from the outset of the patch the consensus among competent players is that Wehr's new battlegroup is horrendously overtuned--particularly the coastal infantry and artillery officer--and their winrates are skyrocketing across all modes
Proofs? Because from my own experience I have destroyed every single person I’ve played that’s using it. Seems like the usual simcity meme: you spend way to much on shit that gets countered hard by artillery and can’t capture the map.
I haven’t played it myself though because I’m not a moronic paypiggy. >Have you considered that being unable to win with your precious nazis because you leave your set up team sitting still to get shot at might be a skill issue?
Lol stop it. I play Allies and Axis equally because I’m not a mongoloid. Wehr is just bad this patch.
>Seems like the usual simcity meme
Lmao you don't even play the game.
Nobody is building bunkers with the battlegroup, except maybe for 1 lategame just as a way to activate some of the broken abilities at the end of the tree.
The battlegroup is strong because Coastal Reserve are the best axis mainline and they get the broken officer (a unit Relic just stole from a dawn of war mod) before even building a tech structure.
Folks are going ketten -> Coastal -> Coastal -> MG -> Coastal (yes, 3x infantry. They're that good) -> techskip to luftwaffe and rush a scout car, as well as picking up an officer as soon as CP allows.
Triple-mainline gives a tonne of map presence earlygame and they'll fight evenly against other mainline infantry so you're just straight up winning from minute 1 against brits with their low-presence earlygame and fighting evenly against US, the faction tuned for strong earlygame aggression at the expense of their midgame. The officer hits the field and hard counters setup weapons, including mortars while also giving you a marked advantage in every infantry vs infantry fight.
The existence of this battlegroup rendered all other wehr builds obsolete because their defining weakness--a lack of competent earlygame infantry--was just patched by giving them a 6-man tommy squad
5 months ago
Anonymous
>USF >weak mid game >Greyhound >Chaffee
Anyway I haven’t seen costal infantry be that effective but maybe I just played against a long string of morons, which isn’t unbelievable.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Anon is an exaggerating moron. Coastal infantry is insanely sturdy but they have very low firepower. Pioneers at close range do more damage.
>game still at mixed reviews >new dlc is mostly negative
It’s over lol. This patch was their hail mary opportunity to save the game and their moronation blew it.
By this time next year development will have ceased and Relic hopefully will finally be shut down.
>game releases to mixed reviews >dev takes forever to implement requested changes >after 10 months everyone has already moved on to better games >dev releases dlc that doesnt address issues of vanilla version launch >nobody cares and those who did just stopped
how could anyone predict this???
I don't know what they were thinking with the Artillery Officer. It would be one thing if it was an overtuned ability, but it's the combination of the strong, spammable ability, the aura that makes Reserve Infantry stronger than riflemen, the dirt cheap cost on a very high impact elite unit and the fact that it's a 4-man squad with solid entity hp that can hold its own in a firefght.
Reinstalled this game and team matches are unplayable, bunkers everywhere and arty going off every fricking 3 seconds, if i dont move an infantry squad every 2 seconds its going to be wiped by arty.
get mortars as USF and upgrade them with HE shells, or get mortars as ukf and just spam the barrages on one bunker at a time, it completely crumbles them, as long as you're diligent about keeping the barrages going (and attack grounding when the barrage is off CD)
i've been playing alot, i'd say that people are adjusting to the new sim city arty fest, but it wont last long. when axis players doing go into bunkers it completely fricks up the arty spam of the allies and vice versa. just be mobile
get mortars as USF and upgrade them with HE shells, or get mortars as ukf and just spam the barrages on one bunker at a time, it completely crumbles them, as long as you're diligent about keeping the barrages going (and attack grounding when the barrage is off CD)
In real history indirect fire was used to actively suppress fighting positions during an assault, covering for mobile force's advance. In coh you just facetank the mortar with your hmg, suppress the attack, then hit the retreat button when your hp gets low.
Reinstalled this game and team matches are unplayable, bunkers everywhere and arty going off every fricking 3 seconds, if i dont move an infantry squad every 2 seconds its going to be wiped by arty.
Stop playing team games
Gain competency and freedom
It's the opposite, really. In any strategy game, team modes are always the most popular and most played with the lowest barrier to entry and the highest skill ceiling.
Developers are frequently afraid of designing with team modes at the forefront because it's hard to collect concrete data on them. A 1v1 brit vs dak gives you concrete w/l data. What about 3v3 UK UK US vs wehr wehr dak? Suddenly faction win ratios are worthless and they have more data that says less.
In every long-running multiplayer rts that was taken over by fans after the devs moved on, like FAF or DoW2Elite, team modes gradually became the main focus through natural selection and the game's became deeper and more competitive as design embraced it.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>highest skill ceiling
are you serious? teammates can carry. in 1v1, everything is on you. i've never seen any teamgame tournaments.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I seen some for CoH1 Sheldt comps, obviously they were a joke league.
Pros could do stupid shit like destroying 222 scout car with alpha strike of 5 snipers.
5 months ago
Anonymous
more complexity = more skill I guess you could argue but it also means more margin for error because you can rely on teammates to compensate for your mistakes
5 months ago
Anonymous
In competitive team games every player has to do their part. You can't afford 'carry' dead weight when the other team isn't.
Here's a great example:
The finals of a DoW2 team tournament from last year. The game has had a fairly active competitive community for team games.
The perspective player is a competitive 1v1 player and frequent 1v1 tournament champion brought in as a sub for a team that had one of its core members absent. Inexperienced with competitive teamplay, he struggles hard with the coordination and macro-level strategy and drags his team down, leading to a one-sided stomp.
The essential basics of team games in DoW2 is that you have to invest Requisition (Manpower) in building up your Power (fuel) points necessary for teching and building higher-tier units. The opposing side can destroy this investment to limit your power income and delay your teching, necessitating you invest more Req to replace it. Team meta revolves heavily around coordinated action between 2 or more players to push and threaten the opposing side's power and zone them off of it while protecting your own. Thus there isn't really room for mistakes or getting 'carried'. If you don't pull your weight defending your side, your whole team is put behind. If you don't pull your weight in a combined push, your ally may be stuck facing multiple player's worth of units and micro without proper support, will lose the fight and be pushed off the field, freeing up enemy units to apply pressure elsewhere. You can't rely on someone to carry you when everyone is playing at a high level.
It's a major issue. Lanes are too narrow in team games so your only choice is to ram through a chokepoint narrow enough to be covered by a single MG over and over again.
Weapon teams are oppressively strong, so in a context where flanking is literally not an option all you can do is displace them with mortars
But the only counter to mortars are your own mortars to shoot back with
And from there the whole things devolves into an artillery value slog. You can never push because you're pushing into MGs and AT guns, and with no room to maneuver and position the outcomes of fights are decided by which side has more stat value in units thrown into the grinder and which side gets to shoot with their MGs and AT guns first.
Why are you all terrible players not buying snipers? >Unit designed to counter exactly what you are whining about >NOOOOO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE THERE'S NO COUNTER
blows my mind they didn't learn from sniper imbalance in CoH2. But then again they pushed out this turd so I can't be too surprised they messed it up again.
in coh1 snipers were underpowered then they broke ("fixed") their animations and made them overpowered. and they're still broken despite a bunch of a update roll outs.
every match against some halfwit chink where you stomp them early game turns into mines and cloaked at guns with sniper spam (and maphacking) dragging it out into a 60 minute game
5 months ago
Anonymous
>mines and cloaked at guns with sniper spam (and maphacking)
there's no jumping over maphacking, but surely you can mortar/artillery your way out of such gay way of playing? Once a single halftrack goes past the mines, snipers get cucked hard. And they have their own cost too...
5 months ago
Anonymous
they'll generally spam a few volks and rely on panzerfausts to counter midgame vehicles with AT as backup in combo with mines it delays you long enough and saves them enough manpower to sniper spam (mgs or bunker mgs maybe zombie grens might be added in here as well) bottom line meaning you have to counter sniper spam with sniper spam at disadvantage because you wasted manpower on teching (and not hacking)
you can arty or micro hard with smoke mortars/targeted bursts but with hacks and half decent micro both can be avoided for the most part. though the real complaint is that it just drags the game out. I prefer airborne so I just tank rush the snipers force retreat them and then bombing run their HQ and wipe the game. Early on you can also drop airborne on snipers to disable cloak and get free kills too
>early vehicles
Surely you're not talking about the fricking (still bugged and borderline unusable) dingo and halftrack. Those die to infantry (in fact, lose 1:1 vs a basic squad outside of cover while costing the same) and have no ability to displace or force a retreat on a weapon team aside from just sitting and shooting at them until they die. In practice 'flanking' with them in a poorly designed team map lane just means diving behind the MG, where the rest of your army can't support you because there's an MG pointing at them, and getting focus-fired by the rest of your opponent's force.
By the time DAK has an 8-rad or any other faction has a real light vehicle anybody can have AT guns and snares, and once again there is no room to flank or maneuver so you're either diving them frontally and throwing your vehicle away or you're just not actually using your vehicle.
You see this shit even lategame. It takes multiple players dogpiling a single spot on the map with their whole pop cap filled with tanks to 'break through' a lane covered with AT guns just because team weapons are balanced entirely around being flankable in maps designed to prevent any and all flanking.
You never come out favourable in a push on a 3v3 or 4v4 map unless you've already driven off the target's team weapons, which necessitates spamming indirect fire and hoping to score enough attrition to outpace forward reinforcement and out of combat healing (because for some brilliant reason being barraged by artillery doesn't stop healing) which devolves the match into an artillery grind trying to bleed the other side's resources over the course of 20 fricking minutes until it's no longer possible to just sit with team weapons covering a victory point.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Sounds like you are a baddie if the enemy has that many units over you. Not to mention moronic and seemingly unable to use smoke too. Alas, a tragic case of mad cause bad.
The reason why most all WW2 war games are set in France is for good reason. The Anglo Americans vs the western German forces is the most iconic of all WW2 matchups. It's the most balanced gameplay for all strategy games. The french countryside with farms and bocage hedges is the epitome of tactical WW2 combat. The rest of the war is weird.
The Liberation of France is largely just the allies steamrolling an outmatched and largely depletes german force desperately retreating towards the Rhine or putting up isolated pockets of resistance in desperate bids to not get encircled, until the allies overstretch their supply lines and progress stalls.
North Africa has the desperate back amd forth with mutually desperate supply shortages and largely armored/mechanized maneuver warfare over open desert. Italy has infantry-centric combined arms through difficult, mountainous terrain and features the buckbreaking of the luftwaffe, the Pacific is a rare showcase of holistic naval combined arms and amphibious cage match slugouts on islands only a few km wide, and the eastern front showcases basically every kind of warfare imaginable, including some of the heaviest urban fighting of the war.
It's boring just focusing endlessly on Sherman's and M1 Garands shitting on Hitler Youth in spring vineyards. It's the intellectual lazy setting for a ww2 game that received no more research than a Saving Private Ryan/A Bridge Too Far/The Devil's Brigade movie marathon.
Do any of the top players still playing CoH2? Will there still be CoH2 tournaments? I enjoy watching those games on youtube. I'm playing CoH2 trying to get good.
some do, but the pro scene is now split between those who still prefer coh1, those who prefer coh2, and then a slightly larger amount who have moved on to coh3. so the tournaments are coming slow, but it's usually for all three games.
The 3 games all basically share the same pool of players and they just rotate between them and most competitive players and tourney organizers still do all 3 games.
I expect CoH2 will eventually die to death once 3 gets patched into an acceptable state but it still feels like we're a long ways off from there.
eventually the game will get to a state where its more balanced/diverse/fun than coh2 and people will move on. when coh2 came out it was so fricking bad that i thought people would never move over from coh1, but over time they fixed coh2 and added new factions and shit and people moved over and i was wrong. I still think coh1 is better but I imagine it'll happen with coh3 over time.
because coh2 was fricking garbage on release and didn't get good until a few months before TWF armies. im not saying coh3 is any better, but its the truth.
>They should've just remastered 1
if only...
i was also hoping they'd just remaster 1 it was perfect (besides balance kek)
5 months ago
Anonymous
>coh2 had issues
lets be honest with ourselves anon
But company of heroes 3 is still trash. What kind of troony cope keeps you going?
5 months ago
Anonymous
yeah its trash now like coh2 was on release. wont be forever though, then the pro scene will gradually shift over. they've already got a tournament planned for next feb.
I'm sorry anon. I know you didn't want it to go like this, but it did. Can I do anything to help you cope?
5 months ago
Anonymous
> 2 more weeks!
5 months ago
Anonymous
more like a year or two, but yeah basically.
> when coh2 came out it was so fricking bad that i thought people would never move over from coh1
and yet coh2 was never even close to having less players than coh1. Meanwhile coh3 is on a flat line for almost a year by now
sure, good point. I still think in a while most people will move to coh3, or it'll get a sizeable stable population with tournaments (the aoe4 effect)
5 months ago
Anonymous
>the aoe4 effect
...bleeding playerbase with every update? drastically reducing price?
5 months ago
Anonymous
you should have probably checked the steamstats for aoe4 before you pressed post
5 months ago
Anonymous
...it's still bleeding players, check the timeline beyond 1 week moron. There was a free weekend and it's going down since
5 months ago
Anonymous
No it isn’t lmfao, it literally had a higher player count than aoe2hd at a certain hour yesterday. This is beyond debate - aoe4 might not be a game you like, but it’s found an audience and is continuing to grow
5 months ago
Anonymous
aoe4 xistes ... have we been too wienery?
5 months ago
Anonymous
aoe4 effect = game releases insanely badly and then after a year of work and expansions the perception on it changes completely and the playerbase returns IE what happens with every fricking game nowadays. It's a smart move - RUSH development at a low cost, and then in a year you basically get a community driven "success story" about how your stupid game turned around ect ect ect.
5 months ago
Anonymous
You're the one coping defending a steaming pile of dog shit
5 months ago
Anonymous
if it's a steaming pile of dogshit why am I enjoying it? That's what I thought anon - you were dead wrong. Now apologize for wasting my time.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Because you have a shit taste and you hopelessly want to be part of the new current thing. That's why you pretend to like it. You are the new thing kind of person. You just want to feel like you are part of a community, but you are in completely defensive cope because you realize that the game you base your existence around is dead.
5 months ago
Anonymous
That's not the case, I enjoy it because it's fun and in a setting I like, in addition to having a better resource capture system and new features. Im curious how you came to think all that other stuff though - mind explaining? It's alright if you need to take a second
5 months ago
Anonymous
Every time a new game comes out and it's shit, new fans, usually extremely leftwing and liberal fans, will go out of their way to defend the game. That's you.
5 months ago
Anonymous
no it isn't and also why would fans of coh3 be leftwing. what are you talking about anon? Why would liberals play coh3 lmfao
calling it now that they will either shut down coh2s servers (or at the very least cut back on them) in an attempt to force players to move on to the new one or that coh3 will become f2p. possibly both
I hope not, it's still fun to do blizzard conditions inhouses with my friends sometimes.
5 months ago
Anonymous
A game that allows you to play communists and national socialists is full of progressives
5 months ago
Anonymous
coh2 is the game that allows you to play as communists. progressives play games like fricking red dead or fall guys, they're not playing coh
5 months ago
Anonymous
> no it isn't and also why would fans of coh3 be leftwing
go ask the coh3 devs
5 months ago
Anonymous
that's the devs - i asked why the fans would be leftwing. I dont give a shit about a cinematic trailer - you don't play as that lady, you play as an army from ww2. I think you need to take a breath anon
5 months ago
Anonymous
they point I was trying to make was that the game tries to pander to the left - which means that it isn't that much of a stretch to assume that there are such people actually playing the game (not saying that they are common in this game; relic obviously tried to appeal to the wrong audience in a lot of ways)
5 months ago
Anonymous
the game does not try to pander to the left and half the playerbase is still named SS_Dirlewanger_Dachau_Destroyer_88 so they must have done a fricking shitty job
5 months ago
Anonymous
> the game does not try to pander to the left
whatever you say
5 months ago
Anonymous
how is that pandering to the left? you play as the fricking germans in that campaign and spend the entire time killing allies lmfao. thats basically a disclaimer at BEST
5 months ago
Anonymous
> thats basically a disclaimer at BEST
tell me you haven't played the game without telling me you haven't played the game. Yes, you get to play as the germans but the cutscenes are all about le hekking israeli PoC and their tragic sob story
5 months ago
Anonymous
no they arent, the cutscenes are all about how Rommel is fricking running roughshod over the allies and beating everyones ass. but who gives a frick anyway? it's the cutscenes - you don't play as that guy, you basically spend the entire campaign killing his buddies. the campaign sucks as a whole because the missions aren't fun but you need to actually step away from the computer if you think the coh3 is "progressive" brainwashing and not just covering their own asses for a AXIS campaign released under a major publisher. I don't mean to come across as harsh or rude to you, but be serious.
5 months ago
Anonymous
> they do not pander to the left! > ok they do, but who cares anyways! > also they have to do this because of their publisher!
coh2 didn't have stuff like pic related and they got away with having german singleplayer just fine. I am btw. not saying that the game is "giga-pozzed" (or whatever the term is), like for instance newer Battlefield games, but it most certainly is more "progressive" than the previous games
5 months ago
Anonymous
no one plays the campaign Black person
5 months ago
Anonymous
And yet it is in the game and took dev time and money. They care more about israeli women than gameplay.
5 months ago
Anonymous
take a breath anon, we know that's not true
5 months ago
Anonymous
coh2 did not have german singleplayer campaign - it had a few one off missions lmfao
i also am maintaining that the game is not pandering to the left - including cutscenes from some randoms morrocan civilians perspective on how Rommel is kicking everyone's ass is not pandering to the left. pandering to the left is, as you said correctly, the new battlefield games.
not to detract from this argument, which we can continue talking about if you'd like but, we're getting distracted from the main point - which was why the game is shit. you've cited the campaign is woke garbage ect ect but i played it once, found it very boring, and then have been having a blast in multiplayer. You said I'm "pretending" to like it, but I like it because NA and Italy are Kino ww2 settings and the gameplay improvements to coh2 have been huge. I guess I'm just confused as to what you're getting at.
I might take a minute to respond, I've got to go grocery shopping.
5 months ago
Anonymous
> coh2 did not have german singleplayer campaign - it had a few one off missions lmfao
which changes exactly ... what?
genuinely wonder why so many seem to see it this way. Multiple missions on their own seem to be fine but when a game has a campaign as germans it suddenly is seen as risky and daring (or problematic depending on whom you ask) even though its the exact same stuff
> You said I'm "pretending" to like it, but I like it because NA and Italy
NTA btw. but yes, Italy it kino and this is part of the reason I dislike this game. > make ww2 game set in italy > no italian faction though
5 months ago
Anonymous
it's not the exact same stuff, one off missions with no context isnt the same as a storyline that progresses.
Italy is definitely kino and im upset that they arent in as an army, but i might have heard they'll be added
>coh2 had issues
lets be honest with ourselves anon
5 months ago
Anonymous
did coh2 even add backcapping at any point? it was a core aspect of the strat layer
5 months ago
Anonymous
No of course not. Because the territory layout of a coh2 game basically doesn’t matter since everyone isn’t gives you ammo and fuel and MP is tied to your army
5 months ago
Anonymous
did coh2 even add backcapping at any point? it was a core aspect of the strat layer
Backcapping is integral to CoH2. Most maps have a large, long, cutoff sector which connects your base to about half the map. It's very common for players to decap this, cutting off the entire economy of the opponent.
5 months ago
Anonymous
yeah, there's back capping idk what the other guy was saying, but its definitely not as pronounced as it was in coh1
> when coh2 came out it was so fricking bad that i thought people would never move over from coh1
and yet coh2 was never even close to having less players than coh1. Meanwhile coh3 is on a flat line for almost a year by now
Company of Heroes 3 looks fricking awful. 60 bucks+ 16 bucks for the new patch + tax + tip and the game is still a broken mess. I was watching Helping Hans test out the patch and holy shit the game looks broken. I love building barbed wire and bunkers with defenses in Company of Heroes 2 but they look so fricking boring in 3. ALL combat of company of heroes 3 looks like shit. I'm actually thinking about buying company of heroes 1 instead of 3.
calling it now that they will either shut down coh2s servers (or at the very least cut back on them) in an attempt to force players to move on to the new one or that coh3 will become f2p. possibly both
I see we are back to arguing the same moronic shit. >paid for patch lie >muh sjws >coh 2 best >muh Italy
Just as a reminder, you are wrong.
The patch was free and you are moronic
No one cares about your /misc/ fantasies
You are incapable of accepting 90% of the CoH 2 playerbase are poors that got the game literally for free in one of the half a dozen giveaways they've had
Italians were cowards who surrendered soon as Americans landed on their shitty, rustic third-world country
CoH 3 plays much better than 2
These are facts, No matter how much you pretend to be le ebin troll, you are simply malding.
>N-no I'm right despite it being obvious I'm not!
lmao. Embarrassing.
Uhoh, we got a consooooomer boys! Suck up every drop of relic's rancid semen you peon. Happily, gladly pay AAA price for an inferior game. I hope some day you realize the lie you are telling yourself and move on, but until then I'll just play the superior game, CoH2, along with the other sane people.
You have fun with that. You play your abandoned, pay to win game with none of the new QOL features. Enjoy it, truly.
>coh2 is all people doing ai Sittard summer seven hour arty party snoozefest single player games with their GuP skins
LMFAO it’s over anon. I’m sorry.
This kind of cope is not healthy anons. CoH3 can't be amazing and good while also losing to a game you claim is much worse in every way. Old games simply do not outperform new games unless they are better, like AoE2.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>ignoring the price argument completely because it destroys his
Womp womp
5 months ago
Anonymous
It’s not my concern if one thousand extra people are playing a ten year old game because it was free. Coh3 is simply better. Any questions?
5 months ago
Anonymous
coh2 was sitting at around 5k players during its first year, even regularly breaking 10k, meanwhile coh3 struggles to even break the 4k mark. Whats your cope for this?
5 months ago
Anonymous
No cope needed - it’s not important to me how many people were playing coh2 ten years ago when coh3 is the better game. Any more questions?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Coh3 had 30k players on release 🙂
5 months ago
Anonymous
... you do realize that your point makes coh3 look in fact even worse? coh2 had 20k at its launch and managed to sit around 25 to 50% (sometimes even 75%) of that during its first year. Meanwhile coh3 launched with 36k and now has around 10% and for the longest time it was even lower than this.
This is not something positive anon.
5 months ago
Anonymous
his point is that coh3 is better than coh2 mechanically and going to eventually become the more popular game
5 months ago
Anonymous
CoH3 has less mechanics. Less unit variety. Less strategic options. Graphics look worse than Company of Heroes 2, a game 10 years older than itself. It's also got faster pace which is also not appreciated by the community. We don't want faster asiatic click simulators.
5 months ago
Anonymous
anon that is all completely wrong. coh2 devolved into 2 at gun, 2 mg, 2 mortar, medium spam in almost every game. coh3 has so much more diversity, even with less units. even coh3's critics admit that the mechanics of it are great, an excellent balance between coh1&2. the graphics also look much better than coh2, you might need to get your eyes checked.
5 months ago
Anonymous
> anon that is all completely wrong. coh2 devolved into 2 at gun, 2 mg, 2 mortar, medium spam in almost every game.
ranklet detected.
5 months ago
Anonymous
that's how the game is played at the pro level what are you on about anon
5 months ago
Anonymous
>CoH2 Pro Game >Build order that leans on weapon crew
Bruh, pick one. Pro build orders are heavy on mobile infantry, Wehr being probably the only faction that has a higher chance of going double weapon crew on every category, and that is rare.
5 months ago
Anonymous
No they are not - go watch some casts, obviously they use inf but most games are double at gun double mg as the backbone. The low ttk encourages incredibly safe campy gameplay
5 months ago
Anonymous
> No they are not - go watch some casts
5 months ago
Anonymous
Please watch something other than propagandacast and tightrope where half the cast they do is paid to be casted.
AECOH actually casted the tournaments.
5 months ago
Anonymous
aeCoh has been very critical of the coh2 camp meta, just watch his recent orangepest vs zulu bo5, he starts talking about it halfway through the last game.
>When CoH2 released
why is the bar getting lower instead of higher? This isn't just concerning CoH series btw, it's all video games.
It shouldn't matter what other games did beyond the fact that the new sequel is ALWAYS supposed to be better, higher quality and have MORE content than the predecessors. I don't care what CoH1 had on launch or CoH2 had on launch, both these titles had a much smaller production budget. There is no excuse for CoH3 being this barren and shit, just corporate greed and useful morons enabling said greed.
bar doesn't need to get lower - the battlegroup system is infinitely more interesting then having a trillion commanders that all basically do the same thing, that change alone has made coh3 much better than coh2
5 months ago
Anonymous
AECOH sucks as a caster, he talks about off topic shit most of the time and misses plays all day long. He can't even compete himself. All these youtube channels have the same kind of stick up their ass like the copers defending COH3. Only they are motivated and sweating that their channels will lose popularity. Well, frankly they will. I don't watch their COH3 content so if they stop covering COH2 theres no reason for me to follow them.
5 months ago
Anonymous
i started watching coh3 content and got my brother to watch as well, so between the three of us AECoh just netted one viewer 🙂
5 months ago
Anonymous
aecoh please stop shilling your channel on a mongolian basket weaving forum. Also shave your hair - or whatever is left of it - off. If tightrope is rocking bald-man style then so can you!
5 months ago
Anonymous
im not ae, hes british and im not
5 months ago
Anonymous
aeCoh has been very critical of the coh2 camp meta, just watch his recent orangepest vs zulu bo5, he starts talking about it halfway through the last game.
[...]
bar doesn't need to get lower - the battlegroup system is infinitely more interesting then having a trillion commanders that all basically do the same thing, that change alone has made coh3 much better than coh2
Who the frick cares how much shit AeCoh is. That's not the point of why I'm asking you to watch the casts. Those are the actual casted videos of the tourneys, which is the whole point of this conversation. Check the build order on those.
5 months ago
Anonymous
i have been, and its mainly been 2 at gun 2 mg camp gameplay
5 months ago
Anonymous
it really isn't.
in fact some of these units will often be skipped entirely.
also i don't get what you are getting at with "medium spam". Heavy tanks are quite popular and it is basically impossible to spam mediums while having "2 at guns, 2 mgs and 2 mortars"
5 months ago
Anonymous
medium & heavy spam are symptoms of the same problem - team weapons and their placement have more utility than LV's and infantry in the meta of things. Im looking for an AeCoh cast where he goes more in detail about this, and how that inspired alot of the changes made in coh3.
5 months ago
Anonymous
you make all those claims yet you have provided 0 to back them up
heavy spam isn't a thing since ages anymore btw. ... unless a single heavy tank is somehow spamming
5 months ago
Anonymous
read it again and extrapolate
5 months ago
Anonymous
i extrapolate that you didn't touch the game in 10 years and / or are some rank 4000 scrub
5 months ago
Anonymous
i have over 4000 hours and was very competitive
5 months ago
Anonymous
being competitive doesn't equal 3 digit rank or smaller. Hours mean close to nothing too. Some of the best players had less than 400 hours and I've met a guy with 10k hours who played worse than someone in his first match
5 months ago
Anonymous
im closer to the first guy
Impressive, now let's see the map pool
it launched with more maps as well lol. you guys gotta double check before you go off saying this stuff
5 months ago
Anonymous
> im closer to the first guy
so rank 1999?
10 months in CoH2 had 23 maps - coh3 currently has 18
5 months ago
Anonymous
nope! you would accuse me of lying if i told you :^)
5 months ago
Anonymous
> makes wild claims regarding the games meta > doesn't link a single video where said thing is happening; despite it allegedly happening in almost every game > "i am a top tier player so my claims are true; no i will NOT tell my rank"
gee ... why would anyone ever accuse you of lying?
5 months ago
Anonymous
i dont need to link the videos. the fact that campy double mg double at gun is the meta for coh2 is as common knowledge as the sun rising in the east. go look up an AECoh tourny cast or some shit and count the number of times you see double mg and double AT gun. The low TTK means that its
1. harder to attack
2. promotes high alpha strike strategies (like having 2 fricking at guns)
i wont tell you my rank because, like i said, you wont believe me.
5 months ago
Anonymous
please go back to the steam forum
5 months ago
Anonymous
no thanks 🙂 i think ill go back to playing a game of coh3
5 months ago
Anonymous
no rank = you are automatically wrong. That is all
nta but he's not wrong about at guns especially when every faction has snares on their mainline infantry
5 months ago
Anonymous
yeah but I'm gonna call him a fake ass homie anyway for his limp dick excuse
5 months ago
Anonymous
yes, but 2 AT guns is perfectly reasonable and there is literally 0 problems with it - also its still not something that happens in every game (UKF has no snares on their mainline infantry btw)
5 months ago
Anonymous
no rank = you are automatically wrong. That is all
5 months ago
Anonymous
you wont believe me if I post it and you wont believe me if I dont. why should I go through the trouble?
5 months ago
Anonymous
you already went through the trouble of writing up all that bullshit. The only reason why you don't post your rank is because you are some rank 9000 chink talking out of your ass. Any further question?
5 months ago
Anonymous
leave her alone !!! you're being mean
5 months ago
Anonymous
thank you. finally some decency.
yes, but 2 AT guns is perfectly reasonable and there is literally 0 problems with it - also its still not something that happens in every game (UKF has no snares on their mainline infantry btw)
it is what happens every game, that's the problem with it. the fact that inf snares hit engines so easily is also a problem
5 months ago
Anonymous
> it is what happens every game, that's the problem with it. the fact that inf snares hit engines so easily is also a problem
you didn't play the game
5 months ago
Anonymous
>doesn't deny being a "her"
you know the rules
5 months ago
Anonymous
what rules?
> it is what happens every game, that's the problem with it. the fact that inf snares hit engines so easily is also a problem
you didn't play the game
I did. for most of coh2's lifespan, at nades crit engines. they reduced it to 75% of the tanks health to be able to proc the engine crit (two nades I think). it makes the gameplay so fricking boring. no diving with vehicles, defensive super static front lines, two at guns, two mgs. every. single. game.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>she doesn't know.
5 months ago
Anonymous
know what? that coh3 is great? i knew that 🙂
5 months ago
Anonymous
>she still doesn't know
5 months ago
Anonymous
interesting
5 months ago
Anonymous
>CoH3 has less mechanics.
Absolutely not, especially if we take the redacted mechanics from 2 (like cold and blizzard) into consideration.
Just towing and height advantage is enough. > Less unit variety. Less strategic options.
Hurr durr 10 years advantage.
When CoH2 released almost no soviet non-doctrinal units saw real play because they were pure shit. For them it was only 1 extra conscript and mortar/Maxim spam.
Graphics are also mostly to do with early low map variety. 2 had to wait for americans for nice looking not-winter maps.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>When CoH2 released
why is the bar getting lower instead of higher? This isn't just concerning CoH series btw, it's all video games.
It shouldn't matter what other games did beyond the fact that the new sequel is ALWAYS supposed to be better, higher quality and have MORE content than the predecessors. I don't care what CoH1 had on launch or CoH2 had on launch, both these titles had a much smaller production budget. There is no excuse for CoH3 being this barren and shit, just corporate greed and useful morons enabling said greed.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>MORE content
This is not true for 2 decades at least, since content needs extra work from teams, when the base is not ready.
The exact same complaint was leveled at CoH2 by CoH1 fanatics.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>This is not true for 2 decades at least, since content needs extra work from teams
then do the extra work, israelite. Pay the frick up. Make it GOOD. Excuses upon excuses
5 months ago
Anonymous
I only have CoH2 and the game lacks content. The problem with Company of Heroes as a whole is it's only good for multiplayer. Most people only play RTS for singleplayer because multiplayer is not enjoyable for most RTS market.
5 months ago
Anonymous
And it did. COH 3 launched with double the factions and campaigns than previous games.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Impressive, now let's see the map pool
5 months ago
Anonymous
This. People who defend modern game developers always use this excuse. It's so fricking moronic. I don't care what game X Y and Z did. Normies are programmed to always blame something so they can give some sort of normal explanation for why their product is shit. They always have to make excuse for why favorite brand is worth consuming. It's so fricking stupid. Why do people want to defend companies and products in a free market?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Because you are moronic and proving you wrong is more pleasurable. As mentioned before, CoH 3 did launch with double the content. >B-BUBUBUT COH 2 HAD MORE CONTENT BY THE END OF ITS LIFE CYCLE
That's great. Good on you. That's not how anything works and you know it.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The gameplay itself isn't very good has nothing to do with content. It's like baby version of the previous games. There's less units, less choices, and even the capture points are less dynamic.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>less units
wrong >less choice
wrong >even the capture points are less dynamic
the most wrong thing stated in this entire thread are you stupid?
5 months ago
Anonymous
No amount of repeating that lie will make it true, anon. Fact is, CoH 2 is a wasteland of unused units and commanders because they are not "meta". Half the OKW roster for example, no one ever builds it. When was the last time you saw a spotlight halftrack or a fricking sniper on OKW? Even the MGs are sometimes ignored in favor of rak spam
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Why do people want to defend companies and products in a free market?
its the same with consoletards, they go full defense when faced with their own life decisions. They wasted so much money on a useless piece of shit their mind is doing all sorts of mental somersaults to justify it, console warring included. It's primal tribalism at work >"Why would I spend $3000 on a PC when the PS5 is so much cheaper and plays all the games?" >"Nintendies in shambles" >"Xbox? more like SHITBOX LOL" >"Bloodborne port never ever"
No one even cares about Bloodborne anymore, but they'll hold onto it as long as their ego is in danger of being exposed as a stupid moron who wasted a bunch of time and money
5 months ago
Anonymous
I can go buy indie games that outdo one another year-on-year for a third CoH3's price. I'm not 'investing' in a AAA game. I can happily play CoH2 for 5 more years then buy 3 for 5-10 bucks when it has as much or more content. There is no excuse putting out a product inferior to the predecessor in every way(except cash shop).
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yees
5 months ago
Anonymous
You are arguing with a delusional relic shill. He's a troony that's upset that people are not playing his game.
5 months ago
Anonymous
no im not. I love playing coh3 and I wouldn't want to play with you anyway, you're a sourpuss with a nasty attitude. sorry!
Uhoh, we got a consooooomer boys! Suck up every drop of relic's rancid semen you peon. Happily, gladly pay AAA price for an inferior game. I hope some day you realize the lie you are telling yourself and move on, but until then I'll just play the superior game, CoH2, along with the other sane people.
Watched this 1v1 form helping hans... this game looks so boring. What the frick is the draw? I enjoy watching CoH2 and CoH1 but not this game. It feels so soulless.
Probably not, no. I don't watch him or hans much any more, but sometimes I put them on when I'm playing something else. Watching goliaths wipe 2+ squads is still hilarious.
nope, I bought my first copy (pre order edition) and have since bought it for 3 friends and convinced about 5 others to get it themselves. we do big inhouses and 1v1 tournaments alot. the games fun 🙂
lmfao are you seriously going to attribute that your enjoyment of coh3's terrible state as some sort of tough guy act. You're so strong for being able to enjoy lesser products made by devs that should and have proven to know better, anon.
did you have to take a deep breath when you booted up coh3 for the first time?
sadly it's just not a good game. it's a shame that relic got totally gutted after it flopped but they probably needed it, since it's clear it wasn't team that made dow1/2 and coh1/2. Maybe some other studio can acquire the IPs and make something worthwhile
sadly it's just not a good game. it's a shame that relic got totally gutted after it flopped but they probably needed it, since it's clear it wasn't team that made dow1/2 and coh1/2. Maybe some other studio can acquire the IPs and make something worthwhile
its pretty good now, i'd give it a shot
5 months ago
Anonymous
It's just another MP centered clickfest. I prefer engaging singleplayer content.
5 months ago
Anonymous
fair enough - coh3 has sp campaign but its not amazing, its mostly mp. assuming you've heard of GoH:Ost?
5 months ago
Anonymous
I heard the ai is still fubar. I played a lot of mowas2 tho, mostly coop
If coh3 had coop that'd be pretty cool
5 months ago
Anonymous
I dont think it has coop. I haven't played a ton of the campaign but they made the campaign ai better, and I never thought it was awful. However, I mostly play MP, so im not good at detecting things like bad campaign ai
5 months ago
Anonymous
There's no real coop in CoH campaigns. CoH2 had these "theaters of war" but they're random little challenge scenarios than anything. No consistent plot, just some PVE with special conditions that occasionally had a slot for a second player. Definitely not worth picking up this series if you're looking for coop strategy games. Could always fall back on Civ V?
5 months ago
Anonymous
yeah, or like I said above GoH Ostfront, which has really good COOP missions.
that's rather unlikely. I can see one or two models getting accidentally splashed, but 14? The panther can't even kill 14 models if it tries, let alone by accident.
I dont know about 3 because I aint buying that shit but in coh1 it's designed around attention management (throwing, dodging, distracting for grenades for example) and focusesd on micro in general
sadly it's just not a good game. it's a shame that relic got totally gutted after it flopped but they probably needed it, since it's clear it wasn't team that made dow1/2 and coh1/2. Maybe some other studio can acquire the IPs and make something worthwhile
Why do historygays keep comparing it with gates of hell, which aside from the theming is a completely different type of game? It's like comparing street fighter to a wwe game. I like them both, but they're not remotely similar. GoH and all the MOW type games are far more simmy and more concerned with grognard details, while Coh is a far more game-y and designed to have a more competitive flow with abstracted mechanics that are only historically themed, rather than attempting to reflect it.
It's a relic game. It was always going to be shite at launch. the first dow/coh were the exceptions.
Dow 2=shite at launch. Wasn't until chaos was introduced, the Army sizes increased and GFWL was stripped out that it was good.
Coh 2=shite at launch, unplayably awful with 500ms input lag, awful performance, god awful cold tech, bugs that caused shit to fall through maps and a completely ruined battle group system replaced by a p2w commander system.
It was 3 years before it was any good and it wasn't until they gave up trying to balance it themselves and started doing community patches that it became a patch on coh 1.
Dow 3 was so shite at launch that it was unsalvagable and they just killed it.
Aoe 4 killed its own hype at launch and it took a good 2 years before it started recovering its popularity.
Coh 3 was shite at launch and its taken them 9 months to get it to a respectable state, which is a speed run for them.
The game is average yes, but i like the fact that it seems to rely more on early-mid war stuff than COH2, like how english top tank is the Matilda or Grant (not counting battlegroups) and the DaK relies on panzers III, Americans and Wehrmacht too are not that advanced and i like It more than COH2 Americans and Wehrmacht, in fact i Hope we get to see early-mid war soviets
> i like the fact that it seems to rely more on early-mid war stuff
i was excited for this when they first announced coh3 but then they added a prototype tank from 1945 that never even left england to the game
I've never seen fans shill a game harder than this one. Does Relic really pay someone to post here? It's so fricking desperate. Never buy a Relic game. Their last 3 games have been bad. This game doesn't even have period accurate tanks. One of the main tanks the Americans use is from 1944 and the war is set mostly in 1943 and earlier.
>. Does Relic really pay someone to post here?
no that's ridiculous, you think relic would pay some indians 30 cents a post to shill their trash product? obviously sega would handle that
> claims aoe4 is continuing to grow > sees graph of aoe4 not continuing to grow - in fact even losing players > claims that it is growing regardless
top kek
it's literally growing in the picture you posted starting from the left and ending at the right. nobody thought it would ever have even close to aoe2hd players but it does. sorry anon, it's not looking good
> moving goalpoast
steadily going down for a month is not "continuing to grow" anon - no matter how many goalposts you move. > nobody thought it would ever have even close to aoe2hd players but it does
?this happend 2 times before already what are you talking about
Was dog water from the announcement trailer onwards. Clearly Relic has no talent left and your only savor would be a Black Bird Interactive competitor to save the IP from SEGA and Nu-Relic
Still playing coh2. The only thing that bothers me is the chinks rage quitting every game if they lose the first engagement for a fuel point because thier bug brains can’t comprehend building counters or going for another point.
What even is coh3? Germans and British in North Africa? They gonna add Italy or USA/Canada/Australia?
>Germans and British in North Africa?
just a quick web search before posting isn't so hard is it?
I’m not interested in the game why would I do that?
I'm still playing CoH1 Eastern Front, I tried 2 but couldn't get into it, it.lools worse than Eastern Front Somehow
CoH EF > CoH2
this tbh
CoH 2 added some features I wanted, but took away the fun factor in favor of trying to be an Esport and charging for companies with the same stuff mixed around
does anyone actually play EF multiplayer? I still play vanilla sometimes
Warcraft 3 is probably even worse for this considering the snowball effects from xp and items and respawn timers on slain heroes.
>What happened sirs?
Plenty of better WW2 RTS have come out since CoH 2 - Gates of Hell, Graviteam and Assault Squad 2
none of those are good rts games
>none of those are good rts games
Define 'good rts games'
You men the Men of war clones?
snarky, just like a gay or a woman.
>Graviteam
Its a simulator, and a pain in the ass if you want to learn how to play it
AS2 is buggy as shit, but good.
GoH has less content, DLC out the ass, still just as buggy and runs worse.
I struggle to point to a single feature that GoH added that's an improvement. Supply radius on ammo trucks and boxes I guess? Conquest mode I suppose?
Despite having some attempts to have good changes to the game, it doesn't have enough new or different features for the MP/compstomp crowd to drop the game that's had years of refinement and was given away for free at least once every year for the last 5 years or so. For SP, you have a rather straightforward campaign with a moronic story that spends much of its time on something only tangentially related to the meat of the game, and a buggy Total War knock off that's only now starting to work as it should. It's also 60 bucks when most of CoH2's current player base is going to be on older hardware and cost conscious.
If it follows the trend of CoH2 it'll hit its stride (or get good) some time after it's first expansion, but we'll have to see.
this is probably true - i'll add that coh1>coh2 fans generally like coh3 because alot of the mechanics have reverted back to coh1
Somehow thats pretty accurate, loved CoH1. CoH2 completely didnt click with me and i didnt like it.
Tried CoH3 during the open betas/demos and had a blast
I dont know how people can say that CoH2 > CoH3
yeah, i think theres a level of polish in coh2 that isn't quite there yet in coh3, but the fundementals and the armies and in my opinion the setting, is so much better
CoH1 > CoH2.
CoH3 is dogshit made by people that have never played CoH1 and probably haven't played CoH2 either.
Haha, no.
I fricking love CoH1, I'm apathetic to CoH2, and I detest CoH3. This franchise has been going down with no brakes.
Would you even be able to articulate why or is it a kneejerk reaction?
As a matter of fact, I can. But before I start, I must warn you that I'm a single-player only type, so if you expected any sort of criticism as to the multiplayer part of the game, you'll be sorely disappointed.
First of all, campaigns. The original campaign and both of Opposing Fronts were very, very good. Nothing outstanding compared to other RTS campaign, but they did their job. CoH2's campaign is, simply put, mediocre. I don't give a shit about russian whining, it's just that the story isn't engaging and the missions aren't entertaining. Ardennes Assault, however, is quite an improvement, and I honestly think that was the correct direction for the evolution of the franchise. CoH3 is offensively bad, in both of its campaigns. Anons in this thread have explained why already. The Italian Campaign is pure jank, and the North African one seems like a parody. Who the frick gave the green light for that one, holy shit.
Next up, gameplay. Let's be honest here, we've been stuck with the same four factions for year (americans, brits, standard nazis and weird nazis). At least CoH2 had the soviets, but in exchange it killed most of the uniqueness of the factions. I know, I know, they were seriously unbalanced in CoH1. But they were fun to use, and when you have such a limited amount of factions, you want them as differentiated as possible. Seeing CoH3 is back to the same 4 factions (and NO italian faction, what the frick were they thinking???) is extremely disappointing. There are almost no improvements or innovations, and when there's one, they remove it because it is not "convenient" to use in online play (I'm looking at you, ColdTech)
I am not saying that CoH is objectively a superior game compared to CoH2, and in turn this one to CoH3. It's just that every time a play one of those games, I find myself asking, why not play CoH1 instead? I enjoy it far more, and at least it isn't trying to squeeze me dry through MTX.
Italians jobbed so hard that Greece and Romania deserve faction slots before they do
That may be true, but in that case, why not have the game take place in the Balkans/southeast Europe? I mean, if it takes place in Italy, you HAVE to include an italian faction, it is absurd to do otherwise. We all know they used the Italian Front because of its popularity, and god knows I would've chosen other fronts first. But if they felt forced to locate the game there, they should do the bare minimum, whether the italian army is a jobber or not.
not
but the singleplayer is not good in coh3, so I understand why you'd dislike it
ive found that over the years i have stopped not being bored with campaigns. i never finished coh1 and coh2 campaigns, they never kept me interested for more than halfway in.
>Jank
>Parody
Stopped reading. That's nothing but the most vapid fricking analysis despite you claiming otherwise. Literally a one word review.
Ardennes Assault was very good and it’s a shame that Brits and OKW didnt get their campaigns of similar style
im the same way and I love coh3, feels like they finally realized what was good about coh1
>revive
why does this genre need reviving? people still play RTS games
He means "popularize".
well frick him then. they'll never be popular and that's good
A popular enough game gets released for free. Can't complain about DLC in that case.
it needs to be dumbed down for mouth breathing morons
You enjoy playing AOE2 for the millionth game? The new RTS games are Cossacks 3, a remake, and AOE4 a remake.
nice goalpost movement
Still playing COH2 because 3rd world exchange rates... and being poor.
just finished a game and it was really fun - RTS has been saved.
good thing about coh3:
better visual effects, better path finding, better unit movement, 4 factions on release
bad things about coh3:
very poor release quality, bugs, no Italy faction, lame singleplayer session, shit art and UI designs, not enough exicting new features compared to Coh2
Coh2 had years to improve and fix many shits, it will be the same for Coh3. But damn, this is a game from 2020s, the standard is pretty damn low now, to be compared with 10+ yo game
no Waffen SS faction no buy. Simple as.
COH has never officially had Waffen SS.
I mean, half the units have obviously been SS, but they refuse to call them as such.
Obersodaten are SS units in all but name. You could throw a couple other of the elite infantry accross COH2's German factions in that mix.
Most WW2 games operate under the false pretense that the SS did everything bad and the Wehrmacht were just the german army following orders heckin good little guys that didn't know nothin.
Of course this is totally untrue in reality and there's been a great deal of study into the Wehrmacht's crimes and culpability in WW2 but the pretense lets games like CoH make the nazis playable without handwringing about nazis. They just substitute every instance of swastika with an iron cross and pretend they dindu nuffin they was just good little volks guarding der fatherland.
For most of the war the waffen SS on the field were attached to wehrmacht command structure in terms of strategy and tactics. Wehrmacht and Waffen SS committed war crimes yes. However SS units are political units whether they are soldiers or police. Their symbols coincide with the Nazi party. Wehrmacht symbols have longer history before and after the Nazi party to represent German units. It's not about who was bad and who was good. All WW2 games have to abide by certain laws for certain countries to increase sales.
It's better than coh2, no matter what graphic Black folk say
Ugly plastic toy aesthetic
Not fixing any of the major problems of the previous games
Clear focus on making money and nothing else
I will stick with CoH 1 and 2 and the various mods there are for them.
too much focus on israeli women, not enough work on making a good multiplayer game.
also too much time spent on cashshop.
>too much focus on israeli women
This was weirdly annoying. Of all the things to fixate on, this was the least interesting thing they could have possibly put forth. I know it's a meme to say this, but what the frick were they thinking? How was this idea legitimately pitched, let alone legitimately greenlit?
It's because that campaign has you assume the role of the Nazis. They needed something to offset that so they wouldn't get angry letters from the Israeli embassy.
I think anybody can plainly see the North Africa campaign was fricking terrible, but it's also like 5 missions total so it's barely even a tutorial. It's more concerning that this game which was blatantly unfinished on launch had two fricking campaign modes that are completely disconnected from each other and covering different battles in different theatres at different points in the war. What the hell was going on with their management?
>better to make a shitty game that loses us money than to listen to a handful of israelites kvetch, which they're gonna do no matter what.
These companies need to go bankrupt so good ones can take over.
That's what the money printer is for
Gotta keep that intellectual/spiritual flowing
*intellectual/spiritual goyslop*
The Nazi didn't even care about israelites outside of Europe. Their entire plan was to deport israelites to Africa.
Uhhh buddy? Did you miss the whole "Holocaust" thing? Their "plan" was the extensive extermination of an entire people and culture and it was only thwarted by the very fortunate fact that germans are terrible at war.
yes, who can forget the israelite masturbator 9000. Oh the horror...
can you show me where this plan was documented and distributed so that it could be implemented
Never happened but they deserved it.
b8
>what the frick were they thinking
ESG score.
It simply needed half a year more to cook.
The amount of incompetence in management made them wait unreasonable amount of time to fix basic shit like proper icons for motorbike.
Still I think the game is okay, just needed more to stand out.
It has less obvious shilling like Men of War2, where I can't distinguish it from the last one by screens, yet gets far less hate.
Relic rushed an undercooked project out the door in a desperate attempt to generate some liquidity and save their failing company. The circumstances surrounding their acute financial woes will remain an absolute mystery but it's definitely no coincidence that Creative Assembly shat out a half-finished game and then announced mass layoffs only months after Relic did when both are owned by SEGA.
Whether it's just SEGA mismanaging two projects at the same time, or a malicious attempt to extricate itself from the strategy genre by sinking studios it has contractual obligations to--we'll never properly know.
As it is, Company of Heroes 3 is just Company of Heroes 2 but less polished, less balanced, with less content, and with an art style that looks like it was a compromise made for a phone port that never materialized. It's not really just the similarity to the previous game that lets it down, but the utter failure to progress or innovate or even match its predecessor in any degree--this game has no real business existing in its current state.
MoW2 gets a lot of good word of mouth because its had a bunch of free public playtests and it was actually pretty good, so the people that actually got their hands on it have good things to say about it. I don't thing the two are similar enough to bear comparison beyond the fact that they're WW2 games. CoH is a traditional RTS in the vein of Dawn of War that just abstracts basebuilding to its minimum to focus on capture point control and macro-play. It's a proven effective model.
MoW has the autistic granularity of a topdown RPG that makes it overwhelming to control more than 4 or 5 units at a time and a manual control mode that takes center stage. It plays like Warthunder or Word of Tanks with a Diablo-like top down strategic layer and the way those 2 interact and the organic way you constantly shift between them is what makes it novel.
everyone thought coh3 would be a coh2 but it might be a dow3, it's flopping so bad the mtx may not be enough to keep the support going
actually men of war 2 leaned a lot more towards coh gameplay where some infantry units were inseparable because they were specifically, squads. it was a surprising change which does catch some mow hardliners off balance but there are still some usable normal infantry units that are not squads.
what i do like about it is that it at least tries to do some fun new things. and i think the devs are putting in the option for "classic mode" which sounds like what youd expect (extreme control over every individual, classic mow) but honestly i havent bothered with it.
the meat of mow2 is the deck-building system like wargame or steel division, and in team games of 4v4 you have to leverage your team's specialized decks against the other team's to capture the most territory (the system of which is pretty novel in itself because territory is not distinctly marked by flags or boundaries now. a single infantryman walking forward can actually capture territory if he doesnt die) under a time limit.
The autism about those squads is fricking wild. There's like 4 of them, they're in their own separate category of infantry that clearly delineates them from all the normal infantry and they suck ass. They only exist to give non-infantry battalions a cheap, shitty way to cap territory and yet looking at the steam forums you'd think they were the only kind of unit in the game and their existence is a personal affront.
Is this autism a Russian thing?
i was really surprised that they were a thing too because i was in a situation where i got them and really needed to capture a field gun. but yea i guess just dont fricking take them if you dont like them
>Diablo-like top down strategic layer
The moronic shit you morons spew never ceases to amaze me.
People wanted Pacific War, instead we got the part of the European War nobody gives a shit about.
Yeah this was baffling to me. The setting was an odd choice, made even more odd by the fact that there's only like 5 missions in North Africa and the fricking italian campaign is an unfinished and half-assed mess.
What were they even fricking thinking with this game? How did the studio that made DoW Soulstorm's campaign somehow regress to this?
>How did the studio that made DoW Soulstorm's campaign somehow regress to this?
>implying even 1 person from SS team is left on CoH3 production
>DoW Soulstorm's campaign
That wasn't made by entirely by Lelic, Iron Lore Entertainment also worked on it, the guys behind Titan Quest.
So that's why it sucked ass.
Why the FRICK would they pick Italy and not actually feature the Italians?
They could have squeezed like three different factions out of Italy with Fascist Italy, the RSI and the post-Truce Kingdom
They didn't actually want to design a new faction's gameplay from scratch so they just remade Panzer Elite with a desert skin and threw in some token italian callin units
bruh DAK is gameplaywise the most unique faction in the franchise
Not even close to CoH 1 PE or brits, sorry.
CoH1 brits won the contest for most stupid design of RTS faction. I was farming them in 1vs1 ladder all the time.
PE is just buffing its single infantry unit they do everything, with choosing production paths of what your vehicle will be countering.
DAK at least makes the tech apply new upgrade paths to transports (that PE ditches really fast)
>coh1 brits
lmfao
they took a community vote about 5 years before release and it had a "what theatre" would you prefer, and if I remember correctly the results had italy/NA on the top of the list. there's a longstanding belief in the coh community that the Pacific wouldn't work with the coh format
>there's a longstanding belief in the coh community that the Pacific wouldn't work with the coh format
This is predicated btw on the belief that Relic wouldn't be able to make playable Empire of Japan without being overtly offensive to either modern Japanese, Chinese, Koreans or all of the above. The game format would work fine but CoH's factions works in caricatures and those are only okay when they're euros pissing in euros.
i swear i've never seen anyone saying that - most people think the pacific front wouldn't work well because of the style of combat that happened there compared to the european/eastern front.
FWIW I don't really agree at all, but that's always been the general feeling in the community.
It wouldn't work because CoH model is based around infantry from tiers 1-2 and medium to heavy tanks & support from tiers 3-4; the Japanese army and navy in the Pacific theatre simply didn't any armour comparable to US/Allied stuff except like one shitty medium tank that they built like 20 of.
A Japan/USA CoH would have to be infantry based but the gameplay system isn't really meant for that and the US faction would be hard to balance.
That's just not really true in CoH3, though.
Look at Wehrmacht; their t2 is dominated by a strong anti-everything infantry generalist and in t3 they access an elite infantry unit. In the current patch, wehr players barely build tanks and instead opt for battlegroup callin tanks lategame.
Britain; midgame focuses on upgrading earlygame infantry, lategame features strong t3 elite infantry and typically relies on a battlegroup callin tank, offmap abilities, or fricking Crusader spam.
Even DAK, while being light on infantry options, never fields a vehicle heavier than a panzer 3. Are you telling me you seriously think Japan wouldn't work in this game because they have nothing equivalent to a Challenger 1? We've got casemate Easy 8s from Normandy and the 1946 Black Prince facing off against P3s. Historical symmetry is clearly not an overriding concern. This is not like CoH2 or DoW2 where lategame devolves into symmetrical tank spam. It's a much more infantry and light vehicle-focused game.
>Japanese army and navy in the Pacific theatre simply didn't any armour comparable to US/Allied stuff except like one shitty medium tank that they built like 20 of.
dumbass statement, Black. CoH has never adhered too much to historical accuracy or scarcity. Look at how the Ostwind is a base unit for the Ostheer in CoH2 even though only 40 were ever made in real life.
The Coh model isn't based on tiers at all. The factions are built arond what part of the game they perform well in. OKW is an early game aggressor faction. It relies on securing VPS early with your mobile units and possibly even forcing a surrender. Soviets and wehr are the two balanced factions based on attrition (especially with the last coh2 patch that brought Wehr more in line with this). They have average units with special call-ins that dictate playstyle. USF are the mid game specialists while brits dominate late game but suck early game. The pacific theatre could work by having the US as your late-game faction and Japs as early game dominant. The Japanese had extremely aggressive infantry, and the USF rarely used heavy mgs for example. If a Jap player is unable to secure a decisive win before the Shermans turn up, its gg however they may be able to rely on call-in artillery counters or rush light tanks to wipe defenses and snag victory in the late game. As another anon observed, not having the pacific is more to do with the gigantic portion of the playerbase that would be butthurt at playing as or against the Japanese
There is nonexistant wunderwaffe in every coh game. Japan having barely any armor isn't the same as it having 0 armor.
>This is predicated btw on the belief that Relic wouldn't be able to make playable Empire of Japan without being overtly offensive to either modern Japanese, Chinese, Koreans or all of the above.
partly correct, but main issue would be how would the game balance melee combat/fighting in caves/jungle ambushes? if you've played rising storm then you should know it's not possible, the pacific theatre is not meant for RTS, at least if we're talking non-naval combat. the setting worka just fine with FPS games.
if anything they should've done korean war. reuse most of the assets and have good basis for unique factions. china is loosing up with that war it could be possible to make an SP campaign no one gives a shit about catered to the chinese censors.
but since ever since they were bought out by sega they CoH never really stood a chance.
North Africa is the most kino theater of the war, Italy not so much
This is true, which makes it baffling they chose to make Italy the 'dynamic' campaign and not North Africa. We could have actually managed the logistic challenges from both sides suffering blockades and supply shortages while skirmishing in small scale positional battles that snowball back and forth. Instead we have a couple disjointed tutorial missions where Rommel tells us to do warcrimes and then some local cries about it.
The amount of pussyfooting in prerelease alone shows how bad the atmosphere in Relic got.
Giving tribute to Dark Gods takes priority over bugfixing.
Going with this logic we can add French army with B2 spam and Polish army with Panther call-ins.
All the "strategy" part of the Jap war were happening with navy and not landing troops vs entrenched japs.
Korean War would make more sense than this.
>going with this logic
I'm going to have to stop your Black person ass right there because it ain't my logic to be debated. That's what Relic is already doing with CoH2 you spastic.
>Going with this logic we can add French army with B2 spam and Polish army with Panther call-ins.
Do it
>Going with this logic
We would have a fun game, yes. You have to accept that CoH never was or even tried to be sensible. Your example wasn't even that crazy of a hyperbole, this isn't like having BMWs driving around with plasma cannons.
>people
Funny way to spell Americans
Literally nobody gives a frick about that front other than Americans and Japs (whom don't play RTS)
North Africa/ Italy is a much better front choice, lots of irregular skirmishes, focus on brazen mobile tactics while also having space for artillery/support heavy plays due to difficult terrain and presence of mutlitple types of specialized troops on both sides, pioneers, paras, marines, mechanized divisions etc.
I never really liked CoH.
I liked DoW2 a lot, but that felt like it was a vastly more fleshed out vision of the same formula. Without melee combat, mobility tools etc. CoH just feels like half the game with nothing filling in the gaps.
>This was supposed to revive RTS genre sirs
who told you this awful lie? Even if it was true, CoH3's extremely limited faction roster prevents it from surpassing CoH1 right off the bat
The extremely limited faction roster of just as many factions as COH1?
>make new game
>it's not better in ANY way than the first game made 20 years ago
kys moron do you tease your dad this much too when you suck his wiener at night?
>waaahh I got BTFFO
It plays better, virgy. Try actually playing instead of slinging your second-hand internet opinions.
it is better
i think COH3 is overall better in a lot of ways, but i stopped playing after 2 weeks because
>very few maps, and at least half of them are so atrocious that i just want to alt f4 in the loading screen
>too similar to the previous game, didn't really feel like there was enough to keep me going after 200 hours of playing CoH2
>once again, wonky balance because the devs keep trying to balance for a bunch of team formats (usually 1v1, which only psychos play)
>fewer cheesy units than CoH2, which is good in a way, but it also makes it harder to throw a curveball at your enemy and or turn the game around
>more punishing manpower mechanics also make it harder to make a comeback or change your unit composition, making matches kind of lopsided and stale
I agree with all of this. I gave it an honest and sincere try before I even know the controversy surrounding it. The tiny map pool would be a big issue even if it was a vastly better game, and points to how rushed and messy the development was. It's also baffling that there are so many maps in the singleplayer campaigns that weren't reused for multiplayer.
I found 1v1s to be in a weird place where individual combats feel like they take too long to resolve without enough to actually do in them, but the actual pace of a match is blindingly fast compared to CoH2 or DoW2 and makes it hard to keep up with everything that's happening. There's something subtly wrong that throws the game's pacing completely out of whack, and I say this as someone who played DoW2 competitively. I agree that manpower feels extremely limiting in a way I don't think previous games felt, and it both makes me feel extremely bad for taking any unfavourable fights or making any mistakes, and makes it feel awful using any unit with an above-average manpower cost unless they're completely broken.
Team matches have similar issues to CoH2 where they devolve into each player fortifying their lanes with team weapons and narrow map design that doesn't allow any room for flanking, there's no incentive for the player holding the VP to push forward and take any risks, and the only viable means of attacking into a chokepoint fortified with team weapons is to spam artillery and offmaps and hope to bleed them off--but with a forward med truck reinforcing them it just becomes a slow manpower grind.
>Team matches have similar issues to CoH2 where they devolve into each player fortifying their lanes with team weapons and narrow map design that doesn't allow any room for flanking
i think there is a very thin line between a map being too small, which turns it into a team weapon meatgrinder, and a map being so big it turns into musical chairs shit. there are a bunch of 2v2 maps (mostly in CoH2) that feel just right for me, but they're drowned out by all the shitty meatgrinder maps. i think there should be a reason to sometimes try to assault an entrenched position, but it also shouldn't be the only thing you do.
at least in CoH2 i could veto most of the shit maps
Its over
what is this
A shit expansion for a shit game that runs like shit.
CoH3 got an expansion?
No, GOH will. Which is why I wrote what I wrote. Because it's shit. Glad this helped clear up any confusion!
ok indian
He had the point thou, First you wait like 5-6 years only to be released as DLC to save flop "modern warfare men of war" (Which even more ironically since people play cold war/modern warfare mod on Gate of Hell instead.)
Second GoH start with focus in eastern front in mind and now they have to pump out western front dlc, when MoW2 need to released complete package with all major faction and player will do the rest.
aw another esl third-worlder flocks to its kind's rescue
Can't handle the truth, Clearly you not real /vst/ then.
poo in the loo, brown man
I really liked team games in DoW2 as a way to casually frick around and part of what made it fun was that you absolutely had the tools to attack through chokepoints, munitions being rewarded for kills encouraged you to constantly take fights even at the risk of losing manpower, and diving backline tech resources could actually impact how quickly the opposing side teched--while teching actually mattered a lot.
I really liked how in that game, manpower was plentiful but upkeep ramping quickly as you filled out your population cap meant that it created a natural incentive to not spam units, while you could afford to sustain some model losses (or even lose a squad early) and still recover.
In CoH3 combat only costs you resources, and thus you only want to take fights when you can practically ensure you'll win the trade overwhelmingly. And since team weapons are so strong, it means the defender is almost always advantaged. Raiding fuel barely matters because manpower bottlenecks will fix the pace of your teching no matter how much fuel you have, and lategame manpower will bottleneck your ability to deploy tanks and other high tier units far more than fuel. That also means there's no real reason to push past your mid-map VP since denying your opponent fuel doesn't matter unless you can control all of their fuel for an extended period--at which point you're just controlling 99% of the map anyway. And manpower feels really poorly balanced; the relative low impact of upkeep means there's no reason to not just spend it as it comes in and blob up to your unit cap as soon as possible, it also means a player who falls behind on manpower because they lose some fights early on, or frick up and lose a unit, will be stuck on the back foot indefinitely with no good way to come back into the game since manpower is not only bottlenecking how quickly you can spam your best units towards the pop cap, but also bottlenecking how quickly you tech much more than fuel is.
yeah the fact that you can't ever really trade manpower for anything else completely cripples the strategic gameplay. there's really no reason to ever take a bad trade. just retreat as soon as you are slightly outmatched and try again, because the map resources don't matter.
i feel like the new (old I guess) resource system mean that the map, and how you take engagements means alot more than in coh2. I've taken bad engagements to decap a cutoff, or a +10 fuel before, knowing it will stall out my enemies ability to make vehicles or get other resources. I play most game modes and feel like coh3 is more engaging than coh2 was. I agree that there's room for improvement in some aspects.
>nuRelic
I always said the BBI were old Relic since Deserts of Kharak, which is good, but BBI is also estrogen fueled nowadays
Canadians and their water
Apparently this dumpster fire is actually getting an expansion in December, what the frick.
Aside from the obvious fact that it's a dumpster fire that nobody bought, it came out half-finished 8 months ago and still isn't finished now. What could they possibly add in a paid release after less than a year of devtime that they think is going to A: turn this shitfest around and B: actually be worth anybody dropping money on it?
im going to buy it, im really enjoying coh3
You need to have a nice day.
watch your tone. its not my fault people like the game when you dont
It's the best in the series. Gameplay is way better, no matter what graphic Black folk think. You don't spam heavy tanks like in coh2.
>You don't spam heavy tanks like in coh2.
This is true and it's refreshing after a long time with coh2 but there was a reason they chose to make lategame into tank slugouts. Fuel is limited and vehicle vs vehicle battles are decisive and produce single winners and losers. A single big tank fight essentially ends the game, while the infantry and combined-arms phase leading up to it tries to position you to hit your tank push sooner or have a stronger tank force when the hammer falls. DoW2 took this approach as well, and through all its expansions it further emphasized it because it wasn't accidental. The game needs to end.
CoH3 changed that--which is fine--but doesn't seem to have a clear vision of what replaces it. Sometimes the winning move is still just big tank spam (ie Wehr P4 rush, US E8s, UK Stuart spam into Crusader spam) but without the coherent structure and pacing to make that fun, sometimes the winning move is just abusing a manpower discount and grinding the other side down with a critical mass of infantry, sometimes the winning move is to just lock down 2/3 of the map with weapon teams and stall the other side over a miserable 40+ minute grind.
This game frustrates me because the skeleton of a good game is there and clearly shows that someone knows what they're doing but the guiding vision behind the big picture gameplay design seems so myopic and disinterested in making it a game. Technical issues will eventually get cleaned up but will they ever move past the guy in charge telling them "this faction is for beginners, so it should be simple and bad"
not sure i agree with what youre saying - it's a good thing if there are multiple "end conditions" ie tank mass, grinding manpower, map control, as opposed to just "who wins the 34 minute mark tank duel" which plagued coh2. I feel like which faction do you think is for beginners? the brits? i feel like the brits are really good, the relatively simple tech tree doesn't take away from the complexity that they have
Earlier in the game's life, a patch nerfed brits into the dirt, hitting about half of their roster, even units that weren't seeing play with random nerfs. The devs justified their approach in a devblog by claiming brits are a beginner faction so they shouldn't be doing as well as the other factions.
I’ve been played steadily since release, Brit’s as my main faction - was this the patch that nerfed the boys spam? That was badly needed. Brits are really good atm actually. Most factions are besides Wehrmacht
Brits got nerfed because they were so absurdly overpowered that playing 1v1 was a pointless exercise.
Relic overnerfed them because they've always overnerfed and overbuffed things since the DoW1 days but Brits have since become solid again.
That fact is irrelevant. At the time, brits were overperforming because an upgrade on their t1 infantry were overtuned and it was rightly nerfed. But then Relic nerfed a bunch of unrelated units that weren't even seeing play on top of it and justified it by saying the beginner faction is supposed to suck.
The last part there is the issue. Balance patches hit or miss the mark, it's a fact of gaming. But when you go out and say "we've determined that faction X and Y are made to suck and faction A and B are supposed to be the meta" then you undermine the whole premise of performing balance patches.
And we see the consequence of that vision over the past year. Relic stated that DAK and US were the two factions they considered 'complex' and the past 8 months have been an arms race between those two factions, with them taking turns between which is dominating winrates each patch. Taking turns not because Relic is sincerely trying to reach a point where winrates approach 50/50 and players are happy with 'stable' balance, but because they create problems every patch so they can fix them every new patch.
And as long as that's their approach there's just no point in waiting for the game to get better, because nobody's working on improving it.
If that were true DAK would've seen play in any tournament in the last 10 months but it hasn't. It only became viable in the last 2 patches.
>foid on cover
>italian front
Is she a partizano at least?
Yes. In the story mode there are several missions where you recruit or work alongside italian partisans, most of whom are just folks in ratty civilian clothes.
After the latest patch I literally can't play the game. Few minutes into any match or mission I crash with a bugsplat error. Thanks, Relic
CoH1 + Blitzkrieg Mod is best.
CoH2 is hardly prefect but CoH3 really just shows how low the game can get.
It hurts to see that Relic is making a video series of map design. Maybe actually just make maps so we have more than four in rotation.
>This was supposed to revive RTS genre sirs
[Citation needed]
>What happened sirs?
Nothing, Pajeet
Damn. What a sequel.
Actually kind of funny the coh2 playerbase basically doubled after 3 launched and has largely stayed there.
Looking at the latest patch, balance is actually approaching a pretty good place
>Brits are playable with a solid winrate across all 3 battlegroups and almost all units see play
>US Armored is overperforming due to chaffee spam but is otherwise in a good place
>DAK nerfs finally put it in a good place, with strong early map pressure, versatile tech options and infantry that isn't worthless without being able to bulldoze games on one or 2 overpowered options
>Wehr is underperforming in 1v1s due to its weak earlygame but performs very well in team games thanks to its extremely strong lategame. Probably needs some compensatory buffs to offset the (much needed) MG nerfs
What's interesting is that outside of Wehr being the outlier, 1v1 and team game winrates are much closer than they've traditionally been.
There's still some outstanding sources of frustration, like copious manpower reinforcement discounts that skew the cost-effectiveness of different matchups and some loiters still being janky and uninteractive "I kill u" buttons but generally the game's actually in a pretty good place gameplay-wise. Relic just fricked up reverting the Chaffee nerfs but it's almost certainly getting slapped down again in December's patch.
Here's your problem.
Relic just had a livestream for CoH3 revealing its first """expansion""" coming at the start of december.
It includes two battlegroups and some cosmetics, one for the US and one for the Wehrmacht, for 16.99USD. That's it.
That’s laughable, they couldn’t even manage to muster one battlegroup for each faction. And this is announced right after the aoe4 expansion that has 6 new playable civs and a campaign for l cheaper. Frick this game lol.
Considering most of the assets in the "new" battlegroups are recycled or ripped straight from the campaign I'm actually flabbergast that they could only muster 2.
>It includes two battlegroups and some cosmetics, one for the US and one for the Wehrmacht, for 16.99USD. That's it.
And outside of the one SP only battlegroup the two MP ones can be gotten with Merits. So basically this shit is completely pointless. At least the patch itself looks good? I'm a big fan of the visual improvements.
wtf
damn new graphics and ui overhaul with new audio looks great - we're fricking back lads
??? New graphics?
check the stream, it looks great
I dont think they're from the campaign, I don't remember any of those units.
>US Battlegroup
Rangers: new
Artillery Radio Beacons: from Italian campaign
105mm M1 Howitzer: from italian campaign
>Wehrmacht battlegroup
Coastal Reserves: new
Artillery Officer: italian campaign
Bunkers: recycled
Obice da 210/22: italian campaign
So yeah only the infantry is actually new. Not that it's the end of the world or anything considering they're unlockable with ingame stuff and clearly dev priorities have been patches and fixing their game. But it just shocks me that they couldn't scrounge up enough leftover campaign assets for every faction to get a new battlegroup instead of just 2.
ahh I see, my bad anon, i didn't really pay close attention in the campaign and mostly worked w/ the brit companies. i feel like they're spreading it out for more content bc of the small(er) team that they have now. either way idgaf about the battlegroups - all the free update shit looks amazing
The expansion reeks of “we promised Premium owners they’d have the first expansion by the end of the year so we have to make SOMETHING”
So yeah paypiggies got cucked lol
yeah, updates gonna be really good though
Relic's been around for decades now if you're dumb enough to ever pay them full price+ at launch you only have yourself to blame.
... no it doesn't. They just removed the shitty fog. I expected actual new graphics. Also the video has been watched by like eighty people in the world and I'm supposed to believe three are here? Frick off. Don't make moronic extensions, relic plant. And optimize your fricking textures
Don’t speak to me like that. It hurt my feelings.
moron
based, tell'em
you replied to the wrong post anon
I'm more excited for the update instead of the dlc
CoH was always shit. Only games that worhed wit this shitty squad andno base building trope are DoW1 and Ancestors Legacy. All the other CoH clones are complete and utter crap.
Didn’t ask MoWtard
cope
>JAPAN JAPAN JAPAN
No one fricking cares about Japan. And especially no one fricking cares about US marines. It's a theatre with zero appeal to the vast majority of the world. No one fricking cares. It's not ingrained into pop culture like Normandy or Stalingrad. It's never going to happen, shut the frick up.
It's a lot more engaging than
>Germans in tan uniforms??? Oh my science!!!!
and
>pasta makers who barely did anything
The mainstream world deserves to know that Italy really, really sucks at war.
>Useless homosexuals with 0 tactics beyond "hide in hole then let's kill ourselves" versus crayola eating morons
Nah. Italy at least has nice locations and historical landmarks. Bumfrick Africa was home to some of the biggest armored battles. The Pacific was literally fighting over useless islands.
>useless islands
Just say you don’t actually understand how the Pacific war was fought
Just say you're a Wehraboo and move on. That's the real reason we'll never get a game outside the European front.
Wehraboos whines and dump too much money in these games so they can play goose-stepping simulator while their mom is ravaged by Tyrone.
>No one fricking cares about Japan.
Wrong. Easily the most interesting combatant of WW2.
Relic would be 100% based if they pulled the same shit in CoH2 and called out Jap Imperials for all of their warcrime and how it never got admitted even to this day.
I liked coh1.
I didn't like coh2.
I like choke point maps, annihilate game mode and hosting my own game with my friends stacked on my team.
Would I enjoy coh3?
I just bought this for 22 squid on kinguin. It's pretty decent.
Coh2 was fricking gay. This is a lot more like Coh1.
>What happened sirs?
Relic
>WW2
>female on cover
>she's not Soviet
?
>pov: you're Mussolini
What major battles did they fight in
Hard mode : before the Allies showed up
monte cassino
>imagine being such a dickwad that even the Mafia turns on you
also your daughter's husband tried to kill you, so you kill him and alienate even your own family
>try to eradicate criminals
>they dislike you
>dickwad
>The Hammer & Shield Expansion Pack introduces two new Battlegroups for Multiplayer, Co-op and Single Player Skirmish, an all-new Campaign Company that allows you to tackle the Single Player Italian Campaign with bold combined arms tactics, and four premium cosmetic packs. Hammer & Shield is releasing on Dec 5th 2023 along with the Steel Shepherd Update and will retail for $16.99 USD.
>two battle groups, singleplayer missions that will probably suck, and epic skjins bro!! for SEVENTEEN DOLLARS
what a fricking joke
Honestly pretty standard for a Relic DLC. The battlegroups--which are the main content--are 'free' (unlockable ingame) and the actual price comes from the stupid cosmetic reskins (which are also sold separately). The singleplayer "content" is just one of the base multiplayer groups being added to singleplayer and is basically not worth mentioning, a literal bone-throw just to check the "singleplayer" box on their content drop.
So yeah all of the 'price' of the pack comes from skins and the things people might actually care about is free. Which seems stupid but this is the same relic that sold a bunch of overpriced skin packs for DoW2 and then started selling DLC for the fricking pve side mode.
>this is the same relic
I'm willing to wager that not even 5% of the people who worked on DoW2 still work at Relic.
I know most people didn't bother wading through the Dynamic Campaign because the overworld layer was total ass, but the mission design was extremely typical of Relic's singleplayer mission design. Some of that shit was straight out of DoW1/CoH1 (and a lot of it was actually decent). And the map layer itself, while ass, is pretty typical of Relic campaigns. Almost all of their singleplayer games have had some kind of stupid turn-based strategic gimmick and they're usually ass. Yes, including Dark Crusade. I swear on me mum some folks working at Relic are still holdovers from the old days--and I also maintain that Relic has always been kind of shit and 'fixes' their bad releases ad hoc via expansions. I think a lot of folks are just too young to remember how bad DoW1 was before it got a bunch of expansions that progressively fixed everything or that DoW2 actually got enough support to become a really fricking good game (certainly a better CoH than CoH1). Despite the passage of time, Relic hasn't changed. They still shit out bad releases and then slowly fix them over the intervening years. They still release decent singleplayer missions stapled to a stupid Total War-style gimmick and have the gall to call it "grand strategy" and they still shit out overpriced cosmetic DLCs and then lose their nerve and make half of the shit unlockable for free anyways.
And as an aside, I think that makes DoW3 even funnier. That a studio which has never had a successful new game launch in their entire history thought it was such a fricking turd that they wouldn't even try to rescue it. I gotta wonder who fricked up there.
>think a lot of folks are just too young to remember how bad DoW1 was before it got a bunch of expansions that progressively fixed everything or that DoW2 actually got enough support to become a really fricking good game (certainly a better CoH than CoH1).
This is something a lot of people forget. I can't speak for HW2 or DoW1 on release (due to having a computer that was too dog shit for either at the time), but DoW2, which nowadays is praised for its campaign, was considered a terrible slog until they overhauled it just before Chaos Rising. No one remembers Impossible Creatures and CoH2 was practically unplayable on release. CoH3 is a surprisingly competent release for relic.
No, it's not that horrible and assuming Sega doesn't shutter Relic, it'll be an excellent game in time. If you're looking for multiplayer, it'll do you alright on a discount.
i don't remember vanilla DoW2 being praised much at all, it's some literally nothing story about chasing down a hive tyrant on a bunch of reused maps, the game changer for DoW2 was getting it off the dead of arrival GFWL and onto Steam
It's embarrassing when you look at dlc that just came out for Gates of Hell (regardless of what your opinion of that game is) for like $6 more, which has a frickload more content
I don't feel very embarrassed
ok, waste your money.
CoH2 had better expansion packs by a fricking mile
CoH2’s first “expansions” were commanders and those shitty co-op missions. They sucked ass.
okay sure, i just bought the expansion and because of your rude comment I also went and bought $60 worth of skins
'member when expansion packs actually expanded the game? I 'member.
I have never been so underwhelmed by unit barks in a strategy game
Its almost as bad as Act of Aggression
>unit barks
Is there a dog faction in the game or something?
This is one complaint I can't get behind. For all its shit, the voice acting is fantastic. The brits all being absolute fricking stereotypes with silly accents, the german tankers bickering with their crew etc.
They're not totally awful but I feel that coh2's voice lines were definitely more emotive and engaging. I remember the USF vehicle death lines being pretty intense, especially if you were looking elsewhere and it came through with the radio effects.
rts player tend to be very harsh to new releases.
What would count as an okay "sequel" in any other genre , would get labeled as "zero innovacation/same game, i will just stick to older one".
While it is good to have high standards, that means almost every dev avoid rts and those who try have little room for mistake/end up in trouble in term of sales
yeah its pretty bad, i've noticed with basically every modern RTS release
Is this game really that horrible? I was gonna wait for the Steam Christmas sale to pick it up. I've been wanting to get back into RTS games for a while now and no one plays DoW2 anymore so I figured this was the next best thing.
Nah. We live in a post-fact world where nothing matters because morons can share their uninformed opinions. Case in point, if you look at the Steam thread announcing the expansion and patch you'll see a million morons angry that they have to pay for the patch, when that's simply incorrect. Likewise with the endless whining about the game being unbalanced or somehow broken, when in fact faction win rates are the closest they've ever been in the history of the franchise.
COH3's real problem is a lack of maps in matchmaking and meh graphics. There are not enough maps so it gets repetitive and the special effects/textures are barely better than CoH 2; The former because console port and the latter because AMD sponsorship locked ultra textures to 16GB of VRAM and High textures look horrendously shit.
>COH3's real problem is
:
>pricing for the amount of content
>not enough content (full separate factions missing - italians, japanese, soviets)
>not enough maps
>not enough units
>not enough fun factors differentiating the game from coh2 and coh1
don't make an RTS if you're not willing to surpass CoH1, AoE2 and SC2. Frick off and make more turn-based slop for morons.
>unreasonable moronation
This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. What you want is absolutely moronic and your opinion should go in the trash. Unfortunately, society prohibits slaughtering subhumans like you.
>What you want is absolutely moronic
lmao. Kys moron. You are the reason modern gamedev is only goyslop.
>just put in more effort than games released over 20 years ago with 100x smaller budgets and dev teams and worse tech that limits the shit out of what you can do
>durr this is completely unreasonable you're moronic!!1
get a load of this guy
>more effort
The irony is that while the capabilities have improved enormously, the tools used to produce them have atrophied. 20 years ago it was acceptable for a 3d model to have a few dozen vertices and a texture with less resolution than a fricking smart watch. A competent 3d artists could shit out a dozen of them in a day, largely using the same base model with a few adjustments for everything.
A modern 3d model is a thousand times more complex, but the tools to make that model have not really improved much. It takes more time, effort and manpower to make modern things, even though the gameplay impact for the end-user is minimal. It's partly an issue of scalability--no amount of technical improvements to modelling software will make a thousand polygons a thousand times quicker and easier, which means you just need more and more and more 3d artists working in tandem to keep up with the technical bloat.
And that's only on aspect of design that's gotten bigger, more complicated, more expensive and more labour-intensive with time. Like I'm sympathetic to OLD GOOD--I go back and replay older games quite frequently and I'm always surprised at how well they've aged--but it's not like there's some ubiquitous social atrophy that just makes all modern things bad. There are concrete reasons why game development has become more challenging and more expensive with time, and it's a major factor driving both the shitty monetization models and the tendency to release games unfinished and 'fix them later.' It's especially difficult for studios, like Relic, who found most of their success in the 32bit era, because the transition to 64bit was expensive, slow, and rendered large amounts of existing asset libraries worthless while also setting many, many developers at the mercy of highly centralized 3rd party proprietary software licenses necessary to even make their games work.
tl;dr israelites are responsible
>The irony is that while the capabilities have improved enormously, the tools used to produce them have atrophied. 20 years ago it was acceptable for a 3d model to have a few dozen vertices and a texture with less resolution than a fricking smart watch. A competent 3d artists could shit out a dozen of them in a day, largely using the same base model with a few adjustments for everything.
>A modern 3d model is a thousand times more complex
It doesnt have to be, nobody forces devs to make models with 9000+ polygons
I wouldnt mind if COH3 models looked like COH1 ones if we had more reactivity, more factions, proper campaign with strategic map ala total war etc
>I wouldnt mind if COH3 models looked like COH1
Almost every single review talk about how graphics didn't evolve much and half of negative reviews cite that a negative point/flaw for why they hate the game.
>Almost every single review talk about how graphics didn't evolve much and half of negative reviews cite that a negative point/flaw for why they hate the game.
On one hand those complaints are mainly targeted towards how washed out the game looks and the really bad explosion effects.
On the other I'm sure if the models were CoH1-level people would lose their fricking minds.
that's because CoH3 graphic is even shittier than CoH1 and 2.
you dont mind, and neither would I, but everyone else would unfortunately.
Unless you propose that they reuse assets and/or game engine.
How is redoing something that tooks them years of developement and updating to do in previous games and not only that but also adding more for a shrinking niche market ?
We can have nice thing if this wasn't this obessession of "i want everything done before again".. If they devs could just focus on giving new experience and new features even with less content than past stuf.
>They put in the aforementioned effort to ship the game with four factions, a first in the franchise
>NOOOOO IT'S NOT ENOUGH I WANT FACTIONS AND MAPS FROM TWO MORE, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS
Dumb child.
>a first in the franchise
Dawn of War 2.
The only reason CoH2 launched the way it did is because the publisher imploded and Relic suddenly found itself with nobody paying them.
>a game in another franchise
Astoundingly stupid.
>They put in the aforementioned effort to ship the game with four factions
>NOOOOO IT'S NOT ENOUGH
this but unironically, still playing coh
>They put in the aforementioned effort to ship the game with four factions
oh wow! Four factions! Please roll out the red carpet and sound the fanfare for all the titanic, nigh-impossible effort put in coh3. I wonder how many millions of dollars in diversity hires were necessary to reach the IMPOSSIBLE, COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE GAME DESIGN PEAK already achieved 21 years ago
never played this game so i dont really care sorry 🙂
>he pretends these 20 polygon units with limited animations are equivalent to units in a modern RTS
>and he does it thinking he'll get more than a patronizing scoff
If your parents cared about you, they'd be disappointed
moron
keep seething
I’m not the one seething lol
there has never been a case of anyone typing "lol" without malding their brain out.
Yeah how dare people want games that are actually good
>WHY DOESN'T THE GAME HAVE 10 FACTIONS EACH WITH A HUNDRED UNITS JUST LIKE MY SHITTY BLOATMOOOOOOOOOOODS!!!
autistic screeching is not an argument
are you ok?
Literally both previous games started with 2 factions.
The only problem is avoiding Italy centered faction.
>post-fact world
Redditor soi word, we have never lived in a fact world to begin with. Its just now the authority doesn't have complete control over the 'facts' so redditor shills like you seethe when the system - in this case Relic and garbage games like COH3 - get attacked for being shit.
Cool. I'm gonna grab it on the Steam Christmas sale probably. I bought the original CoH on day 1 of release way back (holy shit was it really 17 years ago) and also played CoH2, so feels weird skipping out on this one so far.
What "authority"? The ones that prove you wrong, because you chose to listen to other "authorities" with no actual qualifications instead? Put on another israelite rogan podcast before your head explodes, sweaty.
No. It's overblown and plenty of hyperbolic tKds. The gameplay is quite good and they caved into doing Hollywood sounds instead of realistic sounds.
From someone actually playing it, it does have a lot of issues.
Faction rosters are pretty narrow relative to the number of units you're actually able to field, which makes the game blobby and 'spammy' even if not intentionally. You're going to have 8-10 units on the field at once by midgame and there just aren't enough units in your roster to fill that out, so it ends up with like one or 2 utility pickups and then just repeatedly grabbing copies of your most efficient combat unit for the matchup. Comparing it to DoW2 (fewer units on the field with similar roster size) or CoH2 (more worthwhile units to smooth out the recruitment curve) it's very apparent that you end up taking an extra squad or 2 of something not because you want it but because you're floating manpower and there's nothing else to get.
The map pool is narrow and mediocre. There are a few good maps, but also a few bad ones and just not enough in general. The samey maps make things really repetitive, especially when you get into one of the shit ones that's asymmetrical for no good reason and gives one side a huge advantage.
Balance. This is an extension of the small unit pools more than anything. A lot of units or battlegroups are just plain bad choices and that makes the rosters feel even smaller than they are. It doesn't help that some of the tech paths are bizarre and divide units in weird and expensive ways, like US needing a separate building for weapon teams when they could just rush light vehicles instead, or the nazis having their t2 divided between two different buildings with an absolutely arbitrary pool of units between them--both of which they can skip entirely to rush tanks instead
Some overhead balance issues with things like mobile units vs setup teams vs artillery that make team games feel extremely static and uninvolved (CoH2 had similar issues but in the opposite direction). Not to mention globals being their worst iteration ever.
As a CoH addict (1000s of hours) I like 3, especially right now (sans the new wehrmacht battlegroup which is slightly overtuned). The game has really come together recently and while it still has a way to go I reckon it's better than 2 was at this stage in its life cycle.
agreed
You know, this is something that bothers me about RTS sequels.
CoH2 had 4 factions. Yes, it took several expansions to get there, but that's the state it is in now. Its enduring status quo is a 4-faction game with a tonne of content and a lot of polish.
Why would I pay full price for a new game that has less content? What does CoH3 actually offer, objectively, over its predecessor?
Better graphics? Sort of. The fidelity is higher but there's been no end to visual and art design issues they've had to slowly patch since release
There's a new singleplayer campaign but it's not particularly good
There's only 2 factions and despite using new assets (I'm not even sure why they do) they play very much like CoH2 factions, just with the roles and playstyles shuffled around a little.
There's a number of QoL changes but an equal number of new issues introduced.
It just seems like a hard sell. Why spend so much devtime remaking assets you already have for a marginal graphic improvement? Why couldn't CoH3 have just reused CoH2 models with higher resolution textures? Were there actually so many improvements under the hood that it was worth just dropping all the old assets and remaking most of them, just to release a smaller game with fewer features at full price?
It's just baffling to me. Dawn of War 1 to Dawn of War 2 was a huge shift in game design and player experience that made them meaningfully distinct, but each CoH is just an iteration of the previous. There's no reason to play CoH1 once CoH2 got enough content. There's no reason to play CoH3 until its content surpasses CoH2. How does this model make sense, business-wise?
Factions that are actually different.
CoH 3 has 4 factions too, idiot moron. Have you even played the game?
I think I see why anon would think this.
CoH3 has 4 factions and CoH2 has 5. CoH3's factions are also generally much better designed than 2's which relied to heavily on locking core units behind commanders and then making them OP to justify it (i.e. Dodge truck).
please do a google search before writing an essay next time
Really liked the Soviet faction in coh2, shame they're not in coh3, loved the playstyle...
Maybe they'll be added later anyway idk :I
I think it's pretty likely that Relic sticks with CoH3 for a long time and several expansions. This is their only 64 bit title, and thus the only product they have out there making money with any long-term prospects of soft/hardware compatibility and platform stability as time goes on. They have a tonne of precedent, as a business, for releasing mediocre games and then supporting them doggedly for years until they end up ultimately being pretty good and loaded with content. The only reason Dawn of War 2's support was cut short after its second expansion was that their publisher went bankrupt. They literally had two factions in the works for an upcoming 3rd expansion and got cucked.
The only game they've ever abandoned in DoW3, but well there are some pretty good reasons for it. It flopped hard, much harder than CoH3 has. It was not what the fans wanted at all, and that perception really did harm long-term prospects for it. And frankly it was just so drowned in terrible fricking ideas that there really was no hope of making a good game out of it short of successively redesigning it until it's just a different game altogether. By comparison, CoH3's landing was softer and there IS a good game buried under here--the design is very conservative and stuck very closely to the things that made the first two CoH games so good. What CoH3 needs isn't a total redesign or a mountain of issues fixed to just begin to match its predecessors. It just needs bugfixes, balance patches and more content. In the process it looks like they're also doing stuff like improving the art and visual design, upgrading the soundscape, improving the UI, unit control and behaviour and so on, which is great. This isn't the kind of stuff you focus on if the plan is to ditch the game next year; it's long-term groundwork-laying so that there's a more solid platform for future content.
AoE4 is also 64 bit
Relic doesn't own anything from AoE4, they were just the content mill that Microsoft took on. They won't make any money from the project unless Microsoft comes back and offers to pay them more, because they don't hold any of the intellectual property rights for it.
Microsoft is pretty committed to supporting AoE as a franchise but I get what you mean.
Patch notes are out
https://community.companyofheroes.com/coh-franchise-home/company-of-heroes-3/blogs/93-pc-steel-shepherd-1-4-0-patch-notes
It's alright? I was hoping for some more substantive changes to Battlegroups because there's a lot of shit ones but I guess that just trimming a lot of munitions costs is probably good enough of a start.
Changes to buildables is obviously just laying the groundwork for the new content since one of the BGs is focused on buildables.
Mortar changes will have to be seen in action but better mortars doesn't necessarily solve the issues with team weapons that have been ongoing
British T4 just got taken out in the back and shot, which seems pretty unnecessary.
DAK truck needed the nerf badly but the tank changes are questionable. I don't think P3s needed a straightfoward buff to cost-effectiveness and we're just creeping towards a point where they spam 1 tank lategame and A-move
Murdering Wehr techskipping is such an absolutely fundamental change to their faction because it was the core of basically every build for the longest time. I understand why they did it but I don't think there are enough compensatory changes here to salvage how big of a nerf this is.
Overall not really impressed with the balance changes considering how much they spun this up. I'm happy they were willing to make such a high impact change like killing Wehr techskipping and giving the US a pack howitzer but I'm not sure the scope of these changes were wide or comprehensive enough to support the big ones. Hopefully team games don't turn into absolute shite with the emplacement/indirect fire changes.
My takeaway is that 1v1 will remain fairly balanced and team games will remain a shit show.
>last patch introduced 100% consistent CTD that prevents me from playing at all
>this patch didn't fix it
Welp guess I'm spending another few months not touching a game I paid full price for. Shitsux
New Italian boys are really good in cover.
The new DLC is getting shat on in reviews which is deserved but most of them seem to be from morons who think they're paying for the patch OR are premium paypiggies mad they got scammed.
Are you serious Relicjews? I'd let you israelite me for the new commanders because I considered buying Merit to unlock them, but now I see I can only buy the yellow israelite currency which does not unlock commanders. Not buying the DLC, frick you, I only wanted the commanders
Then play the game
Wehrmacht is unplayable lol. You completely lose the map within 5 minutes because Grenadiers get shat on by everything and MG42s aren't good enough to compensate.
ive been dominating tonight as wehr
Wehr is supposed to be the 'weak earlygame strong lategame' faction. Your goal isn't to actually win fights early, just slow your opponent, minimize your losses and try to hold your fuel as much as possible, then come back later. You outscale everyone so you just have to not left yourself fall too far behind.
Brits also have weak map presence early and can't deal with weapon teams well. While the US has strong infantry pressure but lacks good ways to deal with vehicles.
The main issue right now, which the patch didn't address, was the US Chaffee being too strong after reverting its previous nerfs, which can make midgame vehicle play more difficult than it ought to be. But the buffs to Jager shreks and Marder should seriously function as an answer to Chaffee spam.
>Wehr is supposed to be the 'weak earlygame strong lategame' faction. Your goal isn't to actually win fights early, just slow your opponent, minimize your losses and try to hold your fuel as much as possible, then come back later. You outscale everyone so you just have to not left yourself fall too far behind.
Numortars make MG play impossible. By the time you've packed one up its already lost half its health just from the barrage because its rate of fire is insane
>Brits also have weak map presence early and can't deal with weapon teams well.
Just build a mortar lol it shuts down team weapons
>The main issue right now, which the patch didn't address, was the US Chaffee being too strong after reverting its previous nerfs, which can make midgame vehicle play more difficult than it ought to be. But the buffs to Jager shreks and Marder should seriously function as an answer to Chaffee spam.
You'll never get there because you can't defeat the Rifle/Tommy blob if they build even one mortar to counter your MG.
what if you build a mortar to counter their mortar
That's what I was thinking, but then you just roll back to how it was before where your infantry is going to struggle mightily against Rifles and Tommies.
Anecdotal but I played 15 games as allies (10 as US and 5 as Brits) and 15 games as Axis (all Wehr). Every game as Allies I won very easily (though to be fair a lot of those were against Wehr players trying out coastal and bunker memes) and I lost every game as Wehr.
makes sense. also totally anecdotal but I haven't lost a game as axis since this patch dropped and i've played like 10 axis games
homie build a single sniper lmao Tommies are like a million dollars each rofl
I know you're talking about team games and not 1v1s though you're doing your hardest to pretend otherwise. Have you considered the fact that your opponent needs to spot your MG before they can shell it? That you can move your MG when not in combat, or even keep it back so that they don't have an easy time shelling it? Have you considered that your MG doesn't need to be set up until it's actually time to fight, and that you can keep it mobile to avoid incoming shells until it's needed?
Right from the outset of the patch the consensus among competent players is that Wehr's new battlegroup is horrendously overtuned--particularly the coastal infantry and artillery officer--and their winrates are skyrocketing across all modes. Have you considered that being unable to win with your precious nazis because you leave your set up team sitting still to get shot at might be a skill issue?
>know you're talking about team games and not 1v1s though you're doing your hardest to pretend otherwise
False. I never play team games unless I’m playing with friends. All of these games were 1v1.
>lol just micro better bro
Of course if you just leave an MG sitting around it’ll get blasted, that’s not new. The problem is the new barrage dps. It’s so blisteringly fast that you WILL take a lot of unavoidable damage just packing up your MG to reposition. Given how suppression works in CoH3 this means that you have to build multiple MGs if you’re going to build any (which has its own set of problems) or none at all.
>Right from the outset of the patch the consensus among competent players is that Wehr's new battlegroup is horrendously overtuned--particularly the coastal infantry and artillery officer--and their winrates are skyrocketing across all modes
Proofs? Because from my own experience I have destroyed every single person I’ve played that’s using it. Seems like the usual simcity meme: you spend way to much on shit that gets countered hard by artillery and can’t capture the map.
I haven’t played it myself though because I’m not a moronic paypiggy.
>Have you considered that being unable to win with your precious nazis because you leave your set up team sitting still to get shot at might be a skill issue?
Lol stop it. I play Allies and Axis equally because I’m not a mongoloid. Wehr is just bad this patch.
>Seems like the usual simcity meme
Lmao you don't even play the game.
Nobody is building bunkers with the battlegroup, except maybe for 1 lategame just as a way to activate some of the broken abilities at the end of the tree.
The battlegroup is strong because Coastal Reserve are the best axis mainline and they get the broken officer (a unit Relic just stole from a dawn of war mod) before even building a tech structure.
Folks are going ketten -> Coastal -> Coastal -> MG -> Coastal (yes, 3x infantry. They're that good) -> techskip to luftwaffe and rush a scout car, as well as picking up an officer as soon as CP allows.
Triple-mainline gives a tonne of map presence earlygame and they'll fight evenly against other mainline infantry so you're just straight up winning from minute 1 against brits with their low-presence earlygame and fighting evenly against US, the faction tuned for strong earlygame aggression at the expense of their midgame. The officer hits the field and hard counters setup weapons, including mortars while also giving you a marked advantage in every infantry vs infantry fight.
The existence of this battlegroup rendered all other wehr builds obsolete because their defining weakness--a lack of competent earlygame infantry--was just patched by giving them a 6-man tommy squad
>USF
>weak mid game
>Greyhound
>Chaffee
Anyway I haven’t seen costal infantry be that effective but maybe I just played against a long string of morons, which isn’t unbelievable.
Anon is an exaggerating moron. Coastal infantry is insanely sturdy but they have very low firepower. Pioneers at close range do more damage.
Can people mod the campaign yet? They promised indepth modding tools.
>game still at mixed reviews
>new dlc is mostly negative
It’s over lol. This patch was their hail mary opportunity to save the game and their moronation blew it.
By this time next year development will have ceased and Relic hopefully will finally be shut down.
>2 more weeks!!!
>game releases to mixed reviews
>dev takes forever to implement requested changes
>after 10 months everyone has already moved on to better games
>dev releases dlc that doesnt address issues of vanilla version launch
>nobody cares and those who did just stopped
how could anyone predict this???
>better games
Like?
coh1 and coh2
Played those to death.
I will just play 3 until I get bored/angry again.
Maybe Broken Arrow will be the breath of fresh air.
>Maybe Broken Arrow will be the breath of fresh air.
Its never coming out.
Hasn't the competitive scene moved over to AOE3 though?
the patch is a legit 10/10 though?
Yes it is. Only problem it seems is Coastal Reserves is overtuned.
I don't know what they were thinking with the Artillery Officer. It would be one thing if it was an overtuned ability, but it's the combination of the strong, spammable ability, the aura that makes Reserve Infantry stronger than riflemen, the dirt cheap cost on a very high impact elite unit and the fact that it's a 4-man squad with solid entity hp that can hold its own in a firefght.
His skill sucks, are you joking? It takes ages and it's inaccurate as frick.
just gave the game a positive review. i'm sorry anon but its over. coh3 is back in a big way.
DLC reviews are always negative because people don't like spending money
It's funny because they buy the DLC just to talk shit about it in the reviews. Paypigs.
>This was supposed to revive RTS genre sirs
>over 9000 new rts players
looks like it did.
>new
disingenuous on purpose. I guess that's all that's left for cohgays, cope.
count the numbers and add them together, that's all new people
Reinstalled this game and team matches are unplayable, bunkers everywhere and arty going off every fricking 3 seconds, if i dont move an infantry squad every 2 seconds its going to be wiped by arty.
get mortars as USF and upgrade them with HE shells, or get mortars as ukf and just spam the barrages on one bunker at a time, it completely crumbles them, as long as you're diligent about keeping the barrages going (and attack grounding when the barrage is off CD)
even playing as the axis I still feel the same. just constant arty barrages on both teams.
art is good this patch, but if the allies are doing it to you, then rush LV like the 8rad or the flak halftrack the DAK get.
Try to kill (and steal) as many of their mortars as you can. It sets people back immensely if they cant just recrew them
I mean that's my point, team games have just become who can throw the most the most arty and matches are just so boring and static now.
i've been playing alot, i'd say that people are adjusting to the new sim city arty fest, but it wont last long. when axis players doing go into bunkers it completely fricks up the arty spam of the allies and vice versa. just be mobile
You mean like how most wars are fought?
>You mean like how most wars are fought?
Totally translate into an arcade ww2 rts
Yeah?
Use breakthrough tactics
In real history indirect fire was used to actively suppress fighting positions during an assault, covering for mobile force's advance. In coh you just facetank the mortar with your hmg, suppress the attack, then hit the retreat button when your hp gets low.
no you dont
Stop playing team games
Gain competency and freedom
If they weren't shitters they wouldn't play team games
t.shitter
I never liked team games in RTS. Just always turns into a spam fest. The game has to be designed for team games which is never the case.
It's the opposite, really. In any strategy game, team modes are always the most popular and most played with the lowest barrier to entry and the highest skill ceiling.
Developers are frequently afraid of designing with team modes at the forefront because it's hard to collect concrete data on them. A 1v1 brit vs dak gives you concrete w/l data. What about 3v3 UK UK US vs wehr wehr dak? Suddenly faction win ratios are worthless and they have more data that says less.
In every long-running multiplayer rts that was taken over by fans after the devs moved on, like FAF or DoW2Elite, team modes gradually became the main focus through natural selection and the game's became deeper and more competitive as design embraced it.
>highest skill ceiling
are you serious? teammates can carry. in 1v1, everything is on you. i've never seen any teamgame tournaments.
I seen some for CoH1 Sheldt comps, obviously they were a joke league.
Pros could do stupid shit like destroying 222 scout car with alpha strike of 5 snipers.
more complexity = more skill I guess you could argue but it also means more margin for error because you can rely on teammates to compensate for your mistakes
In competitive team games every player has to do their part. You can't afford 'carry' dead weight when the other team isn't.
Here's a great example:
The finals of a DoW2 team tournament from last year. The game has had a fairly active competitive community for team games.
The perspective player is a competitive 1v1 player and frequent 1v1 tournament champion brought in as a sub for a team that had one of its core members absent. Inexperienced with competitive teamplay, he struggles hard with the coordination and macro-level strategy and drags his team down, leading to a one-sided stomp.
The essential basics of team games in DoW2 is that you have to invest Requisition (Manpower) in building up your Power (fuel) points necessary for teching and building higher-tier units. The opposing side can destroy this investment to limit your power income and delay your teching, necessitating you invest more Req to replace it. Team meta revolves heavily around coordinated action between 2 or more players to push and threaten the opposing side's power and zone them off of it while protecting your own. Thus there isn't really room for mistakes or getting 'carried'. If you don't pull your weight defending your side, your whole team is put behind. If you don't pull your weight in a combined push, your ally may be stuck facing multiple player's worth of units and micro without proper support, will lose the fight and be pushed off the field, freeing up enemy units to apply pressure elsewhere. You can't rely on someone to carry you when everyone is playing at a high level.
It's a major issue. Lanes are too narrow in team games so your only choice is to ram through a chokepoint narrow enough to be covered by a single MG over and over again.
Weapon teams are oppressively strong, so in a context where flanking is literally not an option all you can do is displace them with mortars
But the only counter to mortars are your own mortars to shoot back with
And from there the whole things devolves into an artillery value slog. You can never push because you're pushing into MGs and AT guns, and with no room to maneuver and position the outcomes of fights are decided by which side has more stat value in units thrown into the grinder and which side gets to shoot with their MGs and AT guns first.
Why are you all terrible players not buying snipers?
>Unit designed to counter exactly what you are whining about
>NOOOOO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE THERE'S NO COUNTER
In team games? No they just shit out bunker like madman and Sniper is useless
Half of the factions in the game literally don't have a sniper you frickwit
blows my mind they didn't learn from sniper imbalance in CoH2. But then again they pushed out this turd so I can't be too surprised they messed it up again.
in coh1 snipers were underpowered then they broke ("fixed") their animations and made them overpowered. and they're still broken despite a bunch of a update roll outs.
every match against some halfwit chink where you stomp them early game turns into mines and cloaked at guns with sniper spam (and maphacking) dragging it out into a 60 minute game
>mines and cloaked at guns with sniper spam (and maphacking)
there's no jumping over maphacking, but surely you can mortar/artillery your way out of such gay way of playing? Once a single halftrack goes past the mines, snipers get cucked hard. And they have their own cost too...
they'll generally spam a few volks and rely on panzerfausts to counter midgame vehicles with AT as backup in combo with mines it delays you long enough and saves them enough manpower to sniper spam (mgs or bunker mgs maybe zombie grens might be added in here as well) bottom line meaning you have to counter sniper spam with sniper spam at disadvantage because you wasted manpower on teching (and not hacking)
you can arty or micro hard with smoke mortars/targeted bursts but with hacks and half decent micro both can be avoided for the most part. though the real complaint is that it just drags the game out. I prefer airborne so I just tank rush the snipers force retreat them and then bombing run their HQ and wipe the game. Early on you can also drop airborne on snipers to disable cloak and get free kills too
lmao homie those factions have fricking early vehicles. Why are you struggling with a cum slurping MG? Have you tried driving past rolf
>early vehicles
Surely you're not talking about the fricking (still bugged and borderline unusable) dingo and halftrack. Those die to infantry (in fact, lose 1:1 vs a basic squad outside of cover while costing the same) and have no ability to displace or force a retreat on a weapon team aside from just sitting and shooting at them until they die. In practice 'flanking' with them in a poorly designed team map lane just means diving behind the MG, where the rest of your army can't support you because there's an MG pointing at them, and getting focus-fired by the rest of your opponent's force.
By the time DAK has an 8-rad or any other faction has a real light vehicle anybody can have AT guns and snares, and once again there is no room to flank or maneuver so you're either diving them frontally and throwing your vehicle away or you're just not actually using your vehicle.
You see this shit even lategame. It takes multiple players dogpiling a single spot on the map with their whole pop cap filled with tanks to 'break through' a lane covered with AT guns just because team weapons are balanced entirely around being flankable in maps designed to prevent any and all flanking.
You never come out favourable in a push on a 3v3 or 4v4 map unless you've already driven off the target's team weapons, which necessitates spamming indirect fire and hoping to score enough attrition to outpace forward reinforcement and out of combat healing (because for some brilliant reason being barraged by artillery doesn't stop healing) which devolves the match into an artillery grind trying to bleed the other side's resources over the course of 20 fricking minutes until it's no longer possible to just sit with team weapons covering a victory point.
Sounds like you are a baddie if the enemy has that many units over you. Not to mention moronic and seemingly unable to use smoke too. Alas, a tragic case of mad cause bad.
they dont want to listen anon
>why are you people not playing against Easy AI??? I'm so good and smart when I do it!
I hate 4v4gays so much it’s unreal
>competitive team games
pls don't laugh
Got lost on your way to /vt/? There's an extra letter here
It was shit. What else is new?
wrong actually, sorry anon 🙁
CoH was never good.
Too small scale for an RTS.
SupCom and Wargame are the only good multiplayer RTS games tbh.
>MOAR SHIT MEANS ITS DA BEST
Never stops being funny
>arcade MP games
I was perma banned from steam forums by the CoH3 devs for questing their intelligence. Never going to buy the game.
*ahem*
>[distant lonely cough reverbing in a long hallway]
The reason why most all WW2 war games are set in France is for good reason. The Anglo Americans vs the western German forces is the most iconic of all WW2 matchups. It's the most balanced gameplay for all strategy games. The french countryside with farms and bocage hedges is the epitome of tactical WW2 combat. The rest of the war is weird.
The Liberation of France is largely just the allies steamrolling an outmatched and largely depletes german force desperately retreating towards the Rhine or putting up isolated pockets of resistance in desperate bids to not get encircled, until the allies overstretch their supply lines and progress stalls.
North Africa has the desperate back amd forth with mutually desperate supply shortages and largely armored/mechanized maneuver warfare over open desert. Italy has infantry-centric combined arms through difficult, mountainous terrain and features the buckbreaking of the luftwaffe, the Pacific is a rare showcase of holistic naval combined arms and amphibious cage match slugouts on islands only a few km wide, and the eastern front showcases basically every kind of warfare imaginable, including some of the heaviest urban fighting of the war.
It's boring just focusing endlessly on Sherman's and M1 Garands shitting on Hitler Youth in spring vineyards. It's the intellectual lazy setting for a ww2 game that received no more research than a Saving Private Ryan/A Bridge Too Far/The Devil's Brigade movie marathon.
Do any of the top players still playing CoH2? Will there still be CoH2 tournaments? I enjoy watching those games on youtube. I'm playing CoH2 trying to get good.
some do, but the pro scene is now split between those who still prefer coh1, those who prefer coh2, and then a slightly larger amount who have moved on to coh3. so the tournaments are coming slow, but it's usually for all three games.
The 3 games all basically share the same pool of players and they just rotate between them and most competitive players and tourney organizers still do all 3 games.
I expect CoH2 will eventually die to death once 3 gets patched into an acceptable state but it still feels like we're a long ways off from there.
Why would 2 die in favor of 3 when nobody likes 3?
the same reason why 1 died in favor of 2 when nobody liked 2
eventually the game will get to a state where its more balanced/diverse/fun than coh2 and people will move on. when coh2 came out it was so fricking bad that i thought people would never move over from coh1, but over time they fixed coh2 and added new factions and shit and people moved over and i was wrong. I still think coh1 is better but I imagine it'll happen with coh3 over time.
Why do you people always rationalize that because CoH2 had issues that it excuses the garbage that is CoH3?
because coh2 was fricking garbage on release and didn't get good until a few months before TWF armies. im not saying coh3 is any better, but its the truth.
i was also hoping they'd just remaster 1 it was perfect (besides balance kek)
But company of heroes 3 is still trash. What kind of troony cope keeps you going?
yeah its trash now like coh2 was on release. wont be forever though, then the pro scene will gradually shift over. they've already got a tournament planned for next feb.
I'm sorry anon. I know you didn't want it to go like this, but it did. Can I do anything to help you cope?
> 2 more weeks!
more like a year or two, but yeah basically.
sure, good point. I still think in a while most people will move to coh3, or it'll get a sizeable stable population with tournaments (the aoe4 effect)
>the aoe4 effect
...bleeding playerbase with every update? drastically reducing price?
you should have probably checked the steamstats for aoe4 before you pressed post
...it's still bleeding players, check the timeline beyond 1 week moron. There was a free weekend and it's going down since
No it isn’t lmfao, it literally had a higher player count than aoe2hd at a certain hour yesterday. This is beyond debate - aoe4 might not be a game you like, but it’s found an audience and is continuing to grow
aoe4 xistes ... have we been too wienery?
aoe4 effect = game releases insanely badly and then after a year of work and expansions the perception on it changes completely and the playerbase returns IE what happens with every fricking game nowadays. It's a smart move - RUSH development at a low cost, and then in a year you basically get a community driven "success story" about how your stupid game turned around ect ect ect.
You're the one coping defending a steaming pile of dog shit
if it's a steaming pile of dogshit why am I enjoying it? That's what I thought anon - you were dead wrong. Now apologize for wasting my time.
Because you have a shit taste and you hopelessly want to be part of the new current thing. That's why you pretend to like it. You are the new thing kind of person. You just want to feel like you are part of a community, but you are in completely defensive cope because you realize that the game you base your existence around is dead.
That's not the case, I enjoy it because it's fun and in a setting I like, in addition to having a better resource capture system and new features. Im curious how you came to think all that other stuff though - mind explaining? It's alright if you need to take a second
Every time a new game comes out and it's shit, new fans, usually extremely leftwing and liberal fans, will go out of their way to defend the game. That's you.
no it isn't and also why would fans of coh3 be leftwing. what are you talking about anon? Why would liberals play coh3 lmfao
I hope not, it's still fun to do blizzard conditions inhouses with my friends sometimes.
A game that allows you to play communists and national socialists is full of progressives
coh2 is the game that allows you to play as communists. progressives play games like fricking red dead or fall guys, they're not playing coh
> no it isn't and also why would fans of coh3 be leftwing
go ask the coh3 devs
that's the devs - i asked why the fans would be leftwing. I dont give a shit about a cinematic trailer - you don't play as that lady, you play as an army from ww2. I think you need to take a breath anon
they point I was trying to make was that the game tries to pander to the left - which means that it isn't that much of a stretch to assume that there are such people actually playing the game (not saying that they are common in this game; relic obviously tried to appeal to the wrong audience in a lot of ways)
the game does not try to pander to the left and half the playerbase is still named SS_Dirlewanger_Dachau_Destroyer_88 so they must have done a fricking shitty job
> the game does not try to pander to the left
whatever you say
how is that pandering to the left? you play as the fricking germans in that campaign and spend the entire time killing allies lmfao. thats basically a disclaimer at BEST
> thats basically a disclaimer at BEST
tell me you haven't played the game without telling me you haven't played the game. Yes, you get to play as the germans but the cutscenes are all about le hekking israeli PoC and their tragic sob story
no they arent, the cutscenes are all about how Rommel is fricking running roughshod over the allies and beating everyones ass. but who gives a frick anyway? it's the cutscenes - you don't play as that guy, you basically spend the entire campaign killing his buddies. the campaign sucks as a whole because the missions aren't fun but you need to actually step away from the computer if you think the coh3 is "progressive" brainwashing and not just covering their own asses for a AXIS campaign released under a major publisher. I don't mean to come across as harsh or rude to you, but be serious.
> they do not pander to the left!
> ok they do, but who cares anyways!
> also they have to do this because of their publisher!
coh2 didn't have stuff like pic related and they got away with having german singleplayer just fine. I am btw. not saying that the game is "giga-pozzed" (or whatever the term is), like for instance newer Battlefield games, but it most certainly is more "progressive" than the previous games
no one plays the campaign Black person
And yet it is in the game and took dev time and money. They care more about israeli women than gameplay.
take a breath anon, we know that's not true
coh2 did not have german singleplayer campaign - it had a few one off missions lmfao
i also am maintaining that the game is not pandering to the left - including cutscenes from some randoms morrocan civilians perspective on how Rommel is kicking everyone's ass is not pandering to the left. pandering to the left is, as you said correctly, the new battlefield games.
not to detract from this argument, which we can continue talking about if you'd like but, we're getting distracted from the main point - which was why the game is shit. you've cited the campaign is woke garbage ect ect but i played it once, found it very boring, and then have been having a blast in multiplayer. You said I'm "pretending" to like it, but I like it because NA and Italy are Kino ww2 settings and the gameplay improvements to coh2 have been huge. I guess I'm just confused as to what you're getting at.
I might take a minute to respond, I've got to go grocery shopping.
> coh2 did not have german singleplayer campaign - it had a few one off missions lmfao
which changes exactly ... what?
genuinely wonder why so many seem to see it this way. Multiple missions on their own seem to be fine but when a game has a campaign as germans it suddenly is seen as risky and daring (or problematic depending on whom you ask) even though its the exact same stuff
> You said I'm "pretending" to like it, but I like it because NA and Italy
NTA btw. but yes, Italy it kino and this is part of the reason I dislike this game.
> make ww2 game set in italy
> no italian faction though
it's not the exact same stuff, one off missions with no context isnt the same as a storyline that progresses.
Italy is definitely kino and im upset that they arent in as an army, but i might have heard they'll be added
i think its fun
>coh2 had issues
lets be honest with ourselves anon
did coh2 even add backcapping at any point? it was a core aspect of the strat layer
No of course not. Because the territory layout of a coh2 game basically doesn’t matter since everyone isn’t gives you ammo and fuel and MP is tied to your army
Backcapping is integral to CoH2. Most maps have a large, long, cutoff sector which connects your base to about half the map. It's very common for players to decap this, cutting off the entire economy of the opponent.
yeah, there's back capping idk what the other guy was saying, but its definitely not as pronounced as it was in coh1
> when coh2 came out it was so fricking bad that i thought people would never move over from coh1
and yet coh2 was never even close to having less players than coh1. Meanwhile coh3 is on a flat line for almost a year by now
Company of Heroes 3 looks fricking awful. 60 bucks+ 16 bucks for the new patch + tax + tip and the game is still a broken mess. I was watching Helping Hans test out the patch and holy shit the game looks broken. I love building barbed wire and bunkers with defenses in Company of Heroes 2 but they look so fricking boring in 3. ALL combat of company of heroes 3 looks like shit. I'm actually thinking about buying company of heroes 1 instead of 3.
>I'm actually thinking about buying company of heroes 1 instead of 3.
1 is an improvement over 3 in every way. They should've just remastered 1
>They should've just remastered 1
if only...
calling it now that they will either shut down coh2s servers (or at the very least cut back on them) in an attempt to force players to move on to the new one or that coh3 will become f2p. possibly both
I hope that every person at Relic goes into poverty and can't afford to pay their mortgages.
>Italy setting
>Italy faction
>Italy setting
>NO Italy faction
ftfy
All games are free if you aren't a retarf
I see we are back to arguing the same moronic shit.
>paid for patch lie
>muh sjws
>coh 2 best
>muh Italy
Just as a reminder, you are wrong.
The patch was free and you are moronic
No one cares about your /misc/ fantasies
You are incapable of accepting 90% of the CoH 2 playerbase are poors that got the game literally for free in one of the half a dozen giveaways they've had
Italians were cowards who surrendered soon as Americans landed on their shitty, rustic third-world country
CoH 3 plays much better than 2
These are facts, No matter how much you pretend to be le ebin troll, you are simply malding.
CoH3 is still a shit game. Yes it's a patch you pay for. Frick off troony.
>N-no I'm right despite it being obvious I'm not!
lmao. Embarrassing.
You have fun with that. You play your abandoned, pay to win game with none of the new QOL features. Enjoy it, truly.
UHOH STINKY!
>the game that has been given away half a dozen times has barely a 1000 players over the 60 dollar game
UH OH
This kind of cope is not healthy anons. CoH3 can't be amazing and good while also losing to a game you claim is much worse in every way. Old games simply do not outperform new games unless they are better, like AoE2.
>ignoring the price argument completely because it destroys his
Womp womp
It’s not my concern if one thousand extra people are playing a ten year old game because it was free. Coh3 is simply better. Any questions?
coh2 was sitting at around 5k players during its first year, even regularly breaking 10k, meanwhile coh3 struggles to even break the 4k mark. Whats your cope for this?
No cope needed - it’s not important to me how many people were playing coh2 ten years ago when coh3 is the better game. Any more questions?
Coh3 had 30k players on release 🙂
... you do realize that your point makes coh3 look in fact even worse? coh2 had 20k at its launch and managed to sit around 25 to 50% (sometimes even 75%) of that during its first year. Meanwhile coh3 launched with 36k and now has around 10% and for the longest time it was even lower than this.
This is not something positive anon.
his point is that coh3 is better than coh2 mechanically and going to eventually become the more popular game
CoH3 has less mechanics. Less unit variety. Less strategic options. Graphics look worse than Company of Heroes 2, a game 10 years older than itself. It's also got faster pace which is also not appreciated by the community. We don't want faster asiatic click simulators.
anon that is all completely wrong. coh2 devolved into 2 at gun, 2 mg, 2 mortar, medium spam in almost every game. coh3 has so much more diversity, even with less units. even coh3's critics admit that the mechanics of it are great, an excellent balance between coh1&2. the graphics also look much better than coh2, you might need to get your eyes checked.
> anon that is all completely wrong. coh2 devolved into 2 at gun, 2 mg, 2 mortar, medium spam in almost every game.
ranklet detected.
that's how the game is played at the pro level what are you on about anon
>CoH2 Pro Game
>Build order that leans on weapon crew
Bruh, pick one. Pro build orders are heavy on mobile infantry, Wehr being probably the only faction that has a higher chance of going double weapon crew on every category, and that is rare.
No they are not - go watch some casts, obviously they use inf but most games are double at gun double mg as the backbone. The low ttk encourages incredibly safe campy gameplay
> No they are not - go watch some casts
Please watch something other than propagandacast and tightrope where half the cast they do is paid to be casted.
AECOH actually casted the tournaments.
aeCoh has been very critical of the coh2 camp meta, just watch his recent orangepest vs zulu bo5, he starts talking about it halfway through the last game.
bar doesn't need to get lower - the battlegroup system is infinitely more interesting then having a trillion commanders that all basically do the same thing, that change alone has made coh3 much better than coh2
AECOH sucks as a caster, he talks about off topic shit most of the time and misses plays all day long. He can't even compete himself. All these youtube channels have the same kind of stick up their ass like the copers defending COH3. Only they are motivated and sweating that their channels will lose popularity. Well, frankly they will. I don't watch their COH3 content so if they stop covering COH2 theres no reason for me to follow them.
i started watching coh3 content and got my brother to watch as well, so between the three of us AECoh just netted one viewer 🙂
aecoh please stop shilling your channel on a mongolian basket weaving forum. Also shave your hair - or whatever is left of it - off. If tightrope is rocking bald-man style then so can you!
im not ae, hes british and im not
Who the frick cares how much shit AeCoh is. That's not the point of why I'm asking you to watch the casts. Those are the actual casted videos of the tourneys, which is the whole point of this conversation. Check the build order on those.
i have been, and its mainly been 2 at gun 2 mg camp gameplay
it really isn't.
in fact some of these units will often be skipped entirely.
also i don't get what you are getting at with "medium spam". Heavy tanks are quite popular and it is basically impossible to spam mediums while having "2 at guns, 2 mgs and 2 mortars"
medium & heavy spam are symptoms of the same problem - team weapons and their placement have more utility than LV's and infantry in the meta of things. Im looking for an AeCoh cast where he goes more in detail about this, and how that inspired alot of the changes made in coh3.
you make all those claims yet you have provided 0 to back them up
heavy spam isn't a thing since ages anymore btw. ... unless a single heavy tank is somehow spamming
read it again and extrapolate
i extrapolate that you didn't touch the game in 10 years and / or are some rank 4000 scrub
i have over 4000 hours and was very competitive
being competitive doesn't equal 3 digit rank or smaller. Hours mean close to nothing too. Some of the best players had less than 400 hours and I've met a guy with 10k hours who played worse than someone in his first match
im closer to the first guy
it launched with more maps as well lol. you guys gotta double check before you go off saying this stuff
> im closer to the first guy
so rank 1999?
10 months in CoH2 had 23 maps - coh3 currently has 18
nope! you would accuse me of lying if i told you :^)
> makes wild claims regarding the games meta
> doesn't link a single video where said thing is happening; despite it allegedly happening in almost every game
> "i am a top tier player so my claims are true; no i will NOT tell my rank"
gee ... why would anyone ever accuse you of lying?
i dont need to link the videos. the fact that campy double mg double at gun is the meta for coh2 is as common knowledge as the sun rising in the east. go look up an AECoh tourny cast or some shit and count the number of times you see double mg and double AT gun. The low TTK means that its
1. harder to attack
2. promotes high alpha strike strategies (like having 2 fricking at guns)
i wont tell you my rank because, like i said, you wont believe me.
please go back to the steam forum
no thanks 🙂 i think ill go back to playing a game of coh3
nta but he's not wrong about at guns especially when every faction has snares on their mainline infantry
yeah but I'm gonna call him a fake ass homie anyway for his limp dick excuse
yes, but 2 AT guns is perfectly reasonable and there is literally 0 problems with it - also its still not something that happens in every game (UKF has no snares on their mainline infantry btw)
no rank = you are automatically wrong. That is all
you wont believe me if I post it and you wont believe me if I dont. why should I go through the trouble?
you already went through the trouble of writing up all that bullshit. The only reason why you don't post your rank is because you are some rank 9000 chink talking out of your ass. Any further question?
leave her alone !!! you're being mean
thank you. finally some decency.
it is what happens every game, that's the problem with it. the fact that inf snares hit engines so easily is also a problem
> it is what happens every game, that's the problem with it. the fact that inf snares hit engines so easily is also a problem
you didn't play the game
>doesn't deny being a "her"
you know the rules
what rules?
I did. for most of coh2's lifespan, at nades crit engines. they reduced it to 75% of the tanks health to be able to proc the engine crit (two nades I think). it makes the gameplay so fricking boring. no diving with vehicles, defensive super static front lines, two at guns, two mgs. every. single. game.
>she doesn't know.
know what? that coh3 is great? i knew that 🙂
>she still doesn't know
interesting
>CoH3 has less mechanics.
Absolutely not, especially if we take the redacted mechanics from 2 (like cold and blizzard) into consideration.
Just towing and height advantage is enough.
> Less unit variety. Less strategic options.
Hurr durr 10 years advantage.
When CoH2 released almost no soviet non-doctrinal units saw real play because they were pure shit. For them it was only 1 extra conscript and mortar/Maxim spam.
Graphics are also mostly to do with early low map variety. 2 had to wait for americans for nice looking not-winter maps.
>When CoH2 released
why is the bar getting lower instead of higher? This isn't just concerning CoH series btw, it's all video games.
It shouldn't matter what other games did beyond the fact that the new sequel is ALWAYS supposed to be better, higher quality and have MORE content than the predecessors. I don't care what CoH1 had on launch or CoH2 had on launch, both these titles had a much smaller production budget. There is no excuse for CoH3 being this barren and shit, just corporate greed and useful morons enabling said greed.
>MORE content
This is not true for 2 decades at least, since content needs extra work from teams, when the base is not ready.
The exact same complaint was leveled at CoH2 by CoH1 fanatics.
>This is not true for 2 decades at least, since content needs extra work from teams
then do the extra work, israelite. Pay the frick up. Make it GOOD. Excuses upon excuses
I only have CoH2 and the game lacks content. The problem with Company of Heroes as a whole is it's only good for multiplayer. Most people only play RTS for singleplayer because multiplayer is not enjoyable for most RTS market.
And it did. COH 3 launched with double the factions and campaigns than previous games.
Impressive, now let's see the map pool
This. People who defend modern game developers always use this excuse. It's so fricking moronic. I don't care what game X Y and Z did. Normies are programmed to always blame something so they can give some sort of normal explanation for why their product is shit. They always have to make excuse for why favorite brand is worth consuming. It's so fricking stupid. Why do people want to defend companies and products in a free market?
Because you are moronic and proving you wrong is more pleasurable. As mentioned before, CoH 3 did launch with double the content.
>B-BUBUBUT COH 2 HAD MORE CONTENT BY THE END OF ITS LIFE CYCLE
That's great. Good on you. That's not how anything works and you know it.
The gameplay itself isn't very good has nothing to do with content. It's like baby version of the previous games. There's less units, less choices, and even the capture points are less dynamic.
>less units
wrong
>less choice
wrong
>even the capture points are less dynamic
the most wrong thing stated in this entire thread are you stupid?
No amount of repeating that lie will make it true, anon. Fact is, CoH 2 is a wasteland of unused units and commanders because they are not "meta". Half the OKW roster for example, no one ever builds it. When was the last time you saw a spotlight halftrack or a fricking sniper on OKW? Even the MGs are sometimes ignored in favor of rak spam
>Why do people want to defend companies and products in a free market?
its the same with consoletards, they go full defense when faced with their own life decisions. They wasted so much money on a useless piece of shit their mind is doing all sorts of mental somersaults to justify it, console warring included. It's primal tribalism at work
>"Why would I spend $3000 on a PC when the PS5 is so much cheaper and plays all the games?"
>"Nintendies in shambles"
>"Xbox? more like SHITBOX LOL"
>"Bloodborne port never ever"
No one even cares about Bloodborne anymore, but they'll hold onto it as long as their ego is in danger of being exposed as a stupid moron who wasted a bunch of time and money
I can go buy indie games that outdo one another year-on-year for a third CoH3's price. I'm not 'investing' in a AAA game. I can happily play CoH2 for 5 more years then buy 3 for 5-10 bucks when it has as much or more content. There is no excuse putting out a product inferior to the predecessor in every way(except cash shop).
Yees
You are arguing with a delusional relic shill. He's a troony that's upset that people are not playing his game.
no im not. I love playing coh3 and I wouldn't want to play with you anyway, you're a sourpuss with a nasty attitude. sorry!
>coh2 is all people doing ai Sittard summer seven hour arty party snoozefest single player games with their GuP skins
LMFAO it’s over anon. I’m sorry.
If it’s a shit game how come it’s fun and I love playing it
Uhoh, we got a consooooomer boys! Suck up every drop of relic's rancid semen you peon. Happily, gladly pay AAA price for an inferior game. I hope some day you realize the lie you are telling yourself and move on, but until then I'll just play the superior game, CoH2, along with the other sane people.
I played 4K hours of coh2. It’s not as good as coh3. sorry anon
Watched this 1v1 form helping hans... this game looks so boring. What the frick is the draw? I enjoy watching CoH2 and CoH1 but not this game. It feels so soulless.
?si=9No7AxZx7-9crGxG
damn those coastal reserves need nerf they're so good in the right hands. also hans sucks, watch an aecoh or tightrope cast
Those channels are shills
what?
>watching a mediocre player AND a terrible caster who is quiet 95% of the time
Gee I wonder why it seems boring
I can watch vonivan play CoH2 silently for hours and remain completely entertained.
do you think you have autism?
Probably not, no. I don't watch him or hans much any more, but sometimes I put them on when I'm playing something else. Watching goliaths wipe 2+ squads is still hilarious.
wow, all 2 of coh3's remaining players are in this thread shilling it.
coh3 is best coh
>slow, over a month old thread
>suddenly two trannies start fellating each other on cooldown
im just talking about coh3, idk the problem
their favorite game still can't beat its 10-year old predecessor even with a new update. Let them grieve.
no grieving necessary, just good, honest, fun gameplay! I really think coh3 knocks coh2 out of the water. and it's not even had 10 years of updates
>What happened
it was shit, refunded it and went back to CoH2 like everyone else
had to happen after relic ruined dow3 I guess though
i just bought 2 copies for my friends because of this post. between you and me, relic just netted 1 sale:)
You didn't do shit. You probably pirated your first copy too.
nope, I bought my first copy (pre order edition) and have since bought it for 3 friends and convinced about 5 others to get it themselves. we do big inhouses and 1v1 tournaments alot. the games fun 🙂
I'm gonna keep insulting you and this shit game until you have to take out a loan and die in poverty.
Fricker.
it wont work, i really enjoy the game and take breaks between playing it to post in here. also the games not shit, its very good
(no you)
the bait is too blatant.
Neat interview of previous top players and contributors and their take on CoH3.
>coh2 diehards saying the release of coh3 was "traumatic" for them
LMFAO
To be honest I wouldn't call it traumatic but holy cow my standards were low for relic and they found a shovel to present on release.
did you need a safe space when you booted it up for the first time?
missed shots still do full damage - its likely it missed, the miss hit some low health models
lmfao are you seriously going to attribute that your enjoyment of coh3's terrible state as some sort of tough guy act. You're so strong for being able to enjoy lesser products made by devs that should and have proven to know better, anon.
did you have to take a deep breath when you booted up coh3 for the first time?
its pretty good now, i'd give it a shot
It's just another MP centered clickfest. I prefer engaging singleplayer content.
fair enough - coh3 has sp campaign but its not amazing, its mostly mp. assuming you've heard of GoH:Ost?
I heard the ai is still fubar. I played a lot of mowas2 tho, mostly coop
If coh3 had coop that'd be pretty cool
I dont think it has coop. I haven't played a ton of the campaign but they made the campaign ai better, and I never thought it was awful. However, I mostly play MP, so im not good at detecting things like bad campaign ai
There's no real coop in CoH campaigns. CoH2 had these "theaters of war" but they're random little challenge scenarios than anything. No consistent plot, just some PVE with special conditions that occasionally had a slot for a second player. Definitely not worth picking up this series if you're looking for coop strategy games. Could always fall back on Civ V?
yeah, or like I said above GoH Ostfront, which has really good COOP missions.
>listening to competitivgays
not even once
I have zero fricking idea how this happened. How the frick did my Panther teamkilled anything bros?
Panther shots still have splash. You may or may not have splashed some to death if they're hanging around near enemy tanks.
that's rather unlikely. I can see one or two models getting accidentally splashed, but 14? The panther can't even kill 14 models if it tries, let alone by accident.
these stats are buggy as hell, it counts stuff like wrecks and environment elements too
This game takes no brainpower. It's all just asiatic clicking. I hate RTS so much it just needs to die.
I dont know about 3 because I aint buying that shit but in coh1 it's designed around attention management (throwing, dodging, distracting for grenades for example) and focusesd on micro in general
same in 3, very close to coh1
sadly it's just not a good game. it's a shame that relic got totally gutted after it flopped but they probably needed it, since it's clear it wasn't team that made dow1/2 and coh1/2. Maybe some other studio can acquire the IPs and make something worthwhile
sirs?
it did. end of story
Why do historygays keep comparing it with gates of hell, which aside from the theming is a completely different type of game? It's like comparing street fighter to a wwe game. I like them both, but they're not remotely similar. GoH and all the MOW type games are far more simmy and more concerned with grognard details, while Coh is a far more game-y and designed to have a more competitive flow with abstracted mechanics that are only historically themed, rather than attempting to reflect it.
It's a relic game. It was always going to be shite at launch. the first dow/coh were the exceptions.
Dow 2=shite at launch. Wasn't until chaos was introduced, the Army sizes increased and GFWL was stripped out that it was good.
Coh 2=shite at launch, unplayably awful with 500ms input lag, awful performance, god awful cold tech, bugs that caused shit to fall through maps and a completely ruined battle group system replaced by a p2w commander system.
It was 3 years before it was any good and it wasn't until they gave up trying to balance it themselves and started doing community patches that it became a patch on coh 1.
Dow 3 was so shite at launch that it was unsalvagable and they just killed it.
Aoe 4 killed its own hype at launch and it took a good 2 years before it started recovering its popularity.
Coh 3 was shite at launch and its taken them 9 months to get it to a respectable state, which is a speed run for them.
There's a denuvo-less version of CoH 3 out there now, it's pirateable if someone wants to try the campaigns or skirmishes for some reason.
This shits still mediocre at best, right?
no, id say its pretty good.
Better than CoH2
The game is average yes, but i like the fact that it seems to rely more on early-mid war stuff than COH2, like how english top tank is the Matilda or Grant (not counting battlegroups) and the DaK relies on panzers III, Americans and Wehrmacht too are not that advanced and i like It more than COH2 Americans and Wehrmacht, in fact i Hope we get to see early-mid war soviets
> i like the fact that it seems to rely more on early-mid war stuff
i was excited for this when they first announced coh3 but then they added a prototype tank from 1945 that never even left england to the game
I've never seen fans shill a game harder than this one. Does Relic really pay someone to post here? It's so fricking desperate. Never buy a Relic game. Their last 3 games have been bad. This game doesn't even have period accurate tanks. One of the main tanks the Americans use is from 1944 and the war is set mostly in 1943 and earlier.
>. Does Relic really pay someone to post here?
no that's ridiculous, you think relic would pay some indians 30 cents a post to shill their trash product? obviously sega would handle that
no, i like it, so when i see people asking if it's good, i say yes. take a minute and sit with that anon.
graph literally proves my point. GG's anon, maybe next thread <3
> claims aoe4 is continuing to grow
> sees graph of aoe4 not continuing to grow - in fact even losing players
> claims that it is growing regardless
top kek
it's literally growing in the picture you posted starting from the left and ending at the right. nobody thought it would ever have even close to aoe2hd players but it does. sorry anon, it's not looking good
> moving goalpoast
steadily going down for a month is not "continuing to grow" anon - no matter how many goalposts you move.
> nobody thought it would ever have even close to aoe2hd players but it does
?this happend 2 times before already what are you talking about
This game still is too expensive even with the 33% off on steam