The Blizzard - Ruining Your Gaming Experience

My principle gripe is that it slows down the game--TECHNICALLY regarding computer resources AND Gameplay-wise. The best players in CoH i ever played could end you in 15 minutes. (Incidentally which is why the best games ever played--the long ones that made the hall of fame--were always so rare).

WIth the blizzard mechanic would probably extend that game 10+ minutes when the outcome is never really in doubt... I think once youve played 100s of games (if not 1000s like I probably have) you will come to realize the fast paced games are the most fun. That's just my opinion.

The time needs to be shortened. Maybe you should be able to purchase cold-weather protection/coats for a small munitions cost. The freeze mechanic has to be slowed down. It completely limits the speed of a game that should REWARD the fastest thinking and actions.... hence REAL TIME STRATEGY

Blizzards dont cause performance issues for me and I don't really have a terribly good computer, but if that becomes an issue for a lot of players, then yes it would be a really big problem with the game overall.

From a gameplay perspective I have mixed feelings about it. As someone already said, the reduced vision is kind of cool and adds some depth to the game, but I feel that overall the mechanic is more annoying than it is beneficial. It DOES slow down gameplay. Every movement of infantry has to be calculated. You have to baby sit every squad and move them between fires always monitoring their cold levels. It's just not fun, its a nuisance to baby sit every squad. Overall it just doesn't feel like blizzards add much of anything strategically to the game. You don't really have any opportunities to exploit your enemy they don't exist when blizzards are off. The major difference is just the need for more micromanagement of squads and often the end result of blizzards is just that both players play more passively which just isn't fun for anyone.

I understand how this feature probably sounded cool to relic on paper when they set out to make this game, bun functionally its impact on the game is about 80% negative in my opinion. I think either blizzards need to be removed or their effects need to be changed drastically. Maybe give some sort of debuff based on cold levels but don't kill squad members, or give certain units benefits during blizzarsd or increased movement or combat effectiveness while other units receive negative effects. That kind of thing would create new opportunities for players during blizzards instead of just making everyone feel constricted.

Well, IMO, blizzards are really interesting gameplay wise.

The thing is, when you're moving from point to point, you actually don't freeze enough to lose men in the meantime.

Which means you can assault from point to point during blizzards. It's actually a little bit slower but the lack of vision actually works in your favour most of the time.

So in actual fact, it actually doesn't slow down my battle plans significantly. In fact, it accelerates them because I don't get suppressed by an MG/Get scouted prior due to less vision. So IMO, blizzards make the game more fun

They wanted to have "General Weather" in the game but the implementation in its current form is poor because thad him playing against both players.

The general idea was that blizzards change the pace of the game and "create more strategic depth by adding more strategic opportuntities blah blah blah" which is false because:

1. It gives advantages to immobility, thus artificially slows the game down, not because the player WANTS to be immobile for strategic or tactical reasons but because he HAS to. What made vCOH succesful was the focus on mobility and game fluidity as opposed to other concurrent RTSs which focused on tedious resource gathering micro and building immobile fortresses.

2. Blizzards and cold add useless and tedious micromanagement tasks that have nothing to do with fighting the opponent. In contrast deep snow or ice slowing things down is an excellent tool for mappers. But losing resources to random weather changes or not staying in cover when not fighting is just silly. The biggest example is capping. You shift click a cap order on the mini map and then suddenly you engage in a long firefight somewhere else only to realise you're losing members from the capping squad because they are not capping in cover. The other is repairing. You have to move your tank around to find a place where engineers can cap in cover.

3. Making the game harded to see for the player has nothing to do with strategy or tacticts. It's the same for both players, and it only makes the game less enjoyable. It's like saying playing chess in the dark adds tactical depth.

Blizzards don't give advantages to immobility. Cutting down sight range means it's much easier for your opponent to flank you if they know where your units are.

I agree 100% that the cold adds useless and tedious micromanagement though. That's the worst part of blizzards and I can't understand why they did that. It doesn't make the game more fun or interesting, it just adds an APM tax.

I agree 100% that making the game harder to see is ridiculous. The challenge in CoH should come from fighting your opponent, not struggling to see what is going on.

Blizzards don't give advantages to immobility. Cutting down sight range means it's much easier for your opponent to flank you if they know where your units are.

They do, because if you're not idling in cover/campfire you risk losing health.

I didn't mention unit sight range because I think it's an interesting mechanic (along with movement speed on certain terrain, terrain alteration from weather etc).

Eh, you only have to idle near a campfire for like 5 seconds to get all your warmth back.

in current form though a squad can walk up to an mg during a blizzard before detected and nade it (even in it's face). This honestly makes no sense. I get that it's an opportunity to flank but it shouldn't be an opportunity to walk in front of a loaded machine gun....

Honestly with TrueSight™ it's pretty easy to get the drop on MGs in lots of situations. The whole "get suppressed with 1 squad, flank with others" thing is much less important in CoH 2.

Then "TrueSight" should be extended for deployed mgs...

You shouldn't be able to walk up to a deployed mg undetected within the cone of fire in close enough proximity to throw a molotov before being spotted.

I mean it lets you flank easier because it hides your units while they are flanking. Your opponent can't see them coming.

Eh, you only have to idle near a campfire for like 5 seconds to get all your warmth back.

Warmth yes, health or squad members no. My point is that it gives you a counter-incentive on executing manouveurs and makes it more safe to camp arount campfires and cover when it should be the other way around.

Warmth yes, health or squad members no. My point is that it gives you a counter-incentive on executing manouveurs and makes it more safe to camp arount campfires and cover when it should be the other way around.

EXACTLY!!!!! A little risk is fine... but the 'freeze' mechanic is too debilitating.

Warmth yes, health or squad members no. My point is that it gives you a counter-incentive on executing manouveurs and makes it more safe to camp arount campfires and cover when it should be the other way around.

Eh, if your micro isn't that bad, it's pretty easy just to stop by the nearest fire before you freeze to death.

Eh, if your micro isn't that bad, it's pretty easy just to stop by the nearest fire before you freeze to death.

I didn't say it wasn't possible, they could make you have to stop fighting and cook hot soup for all I care, the point is gives the wrong incentives.

I definitely agree with you about that, but it barely matters what incentives it gives because you can mostly ignore the whole "freeze to death" mechanic.

Love blizzards. NEwtactics, and unpredictable ellement. Likein real ww2.

Blizzards and SU-85's are best of friends, honest!

I don't like blizzards that much. They give some new options because of limited LoS, but honestly I feel they just slowdown game too much.

In current form - the axis on a blizzard map might as well leave at start. As more and more soviet scrubs just abuse the OP crap in the game the frame-rate slowdowns and technical problems associated with a blizzard make the axis play significantly more defensively when a blizzard is "in effect". I sometimes have to hit T like 3 times for a unit to retreat and by then the Molotov has already gone off because the opponent has had it toggled already.

This is significantly debilitating in team games. In 1v1s I've found the situation more manageable but getting 4-5 clown cars with flamers rushing a position during a blizzard while the screen says "blahblahblah 3rd world computer's settings are too high and lagging the game" is impossible to deal with.

As the overall skill level of the collective players increases it will be nearly impossible to win as axis. Blizzards and snow make an impossible situation even more impossible. Future patches will have to take the blizzard into consideration in consequence to balance changes. Relic bit off way more than they can chew with "weather".