Having a good K/D with a ACW-R in BF3 was not pay to win. It was a pretty good gun but only slightly out performed most others and even then it was still inferior to a few stock guns such as the M16A3. Having the alternative to use a ACW-R doesn't mean very much in a game about shooting people. However having the option to use more units/abilities/tactics in a STRATEGY game is pretty unfair. That would be the equivalent of something like sprint ability or knife attacks in BF3 being locked behind a expansion pack, that would be pay-to-win.
Even if they were all perfectly balanced (which will never happen btw) it is not fair if you paid to have more available choices than your opponent in a game genre that is based around making decisions. Even if by some miracle they do manage to eventually get the balance spot on in the end, they already have I wouldn't be surprised if they continue to release doctrines that aren't remotely balanced for weeks or even months in the case of the Tiger Ace. You might say "well its going to be fixed eventually" but I say look at the large volume of people that have uninstalled because of it and even some of the people that are still playing today either stopped playing for a while or had a terrible experience for months because of this business model.
Just because both players only get 3 doesn't make it fair either. You might have the same number of possible doctrine choices per game, but there are a ton of variables that will give the advantage to the guy rocking the DLC commanders. He has the potential for a stronger combination of 3, he has a wider variety of niche role units that can be fielded, and its also pretty likely that several players out there excel using one strategy repeatedly but are not very well rounded players. For example look at Vesat and CrazyTiger in CoH1. Every single game they spammed Volks with blitz nades and then Pumas. When they tried other playstyles they were only average players, but they were fairly successful doing the same thing over and over again. Now just imagine people like that in CoH2, that aren't very well rounded players, but they do excel at using one cookie cutter strat repeatedly. Except now there is a chance that the cookie cutter strat is only possible through paid DLC. How is that not pay-to-win? If you win a higher amount of games because you paid, its p2w.
If you want to sound off- and make a
real point, Basilone- then let us read your peroration against Ubisoft I may be doing you a disservice- though I doubt it - but I do not recall you condemning Ubisoft for closing the servers which hosted the best patch to date for CoH1.
Unless and until I do read that from you and your ilk, I tend to see attacks on CoH2 from your ilk as feeble asides,since you seem to possess neither the intellect, nor the business acumen to identify what really scorched CoH1.
And honestly, unless and until the good ole boys get stuck in for real against Ubisoft for their attempted hijacking of the servers, I would rather you all shut the f** up about CoH2.
You good ole boys owe a signal debt of honour to Sega/Relic for rescuing CoH1 in whatever devastated form it arrived,particularly given Sega/Relic took on the original dev team to rescue vCoH.
But like I say, unless and until I am satisfied you brats can stop jerking off for no good reason, then FOFF to SC2 or wherever your lowly pleasure lies, and return when you can identify what really counts.
I assume you were rejected by Quantico? No surprise there then.