Login

russian armor

Company of Heroes 3 with WhiteFlash

PAGES (7)down
12 Jun 2018, 17:06 PM
#42
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Don't forget the sound design! CoH had superior, more realistic sound design!!!

Explosions were visually more satisfying to see as well.
12 Jun 2018, 18:41 PM
#43
avatar of Mithiriath
Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 286 | Subs: 1

+1 for WhiteFlash

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jun 2018, 02:33 AMCieZ
Some good points, some weird/pointless points but nice article overall.

Some things I disagree with though:

I love the coh2 tact map and use it extensively. It provides a wealth of information at a quick glance, not sure what you dislike about it. Maybe just a preference thing.

[...]



CoH 1 - Angoville


CoH 2 - Angoville


I prefer CoH 1 tactical map design (like size + ww2 style drawing (we see hedges)) with CoH 2 tactical map UI (like retreat, reverse, attack to move action + idle status, health, cover info).

Don't forget the sound design! CoH had superior, more realistic sound design!!!

Explosions were visually more satisfying to see as well.


Mix between CoH 2 and blitzkrieg sound (MG42 in bk :sibHyena: ). :wub:
12 Jun 2018, 19:23 PM
#44
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1935 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jun 2018, 02:33 AMCieZ
Pop cap should not be tied to territory control. Being cutoff is still brutal in COH2 and you still see major pushes/fights over cutoff points on maps like Kharkov, Kholodny, Langres, Crossroads, Crossing, etc. Comebacks are fun and exciting, reducing the comeback potential makes the game worse in my opinion.

That's not how it actually worked in practice though. In COH1 you could field more units before popcap became an issue, the mechanic really didn't come in to play until the late-late game and it often helped players make comebacks. Medium sized armies were not very prone to being capped out. Popcap hurts the person that gets ahead, fields too many units, and plays stupid.
12 Jun 2018, 20:38 PM
#45
avatar of nigo
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 2118 | Subs: 16

Anyone send this article to Relic ASAP pls.

:D
13 Jun 2018, 03:15 AM
#46
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 22

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jun 2018, 02:33 AMCieZ
Some good points, some weird/pointless points but nice article overall.

Some things I disagree with though:

I love the coh2 tact map and use it extensively. It provides a wealth of information at a quick glance, not sure what you dislike about it. Maybe just a preference thing.

The more valuable resource points in coh2 already take longer to cap, I think the foot in the circle capping system is better (it is less binary), but again, maybe personal preference.

Demo charges are visible to all units now, at this point if you lose a squad to one - you goofed hard. They did used to be a problem, but not so much anymore.

Pop cap should not be tied to territory control. Being cutoff is still brutal in COH2 and you still see major pushes/fights over cutoff points on maps like Kharkov, Kholodny, Langres, Crossroads, Crossing, etc. Comebacks are fun and exciting, reducing the comeback potential makes the game worse in my opinion.

Strat points providing resources gives more options for cap orders throughout the game. You have to decide if it's better to rush an important major point or connect as many strat points as possible because those strat points will give you resources while you're connecting the important points. I could see the addition of minor/major fuel/muni points if balanced but I think the overall capping/resource system in coh2 is fine - it adds more options than you give it credit for.

Commanders in coh2 were bad, but my reasoning is that some commanders essentially require another commander to counter them - not a fun system. Commanders should be completely supplemental and never contain anything so threatening that you (basically) MUST pick another commander or lose (ISU requires JT/Ele for example).




+1

+1 for WhiteFlash



CoH 1 - Angoville


CoH 2 - Angoville


I prefer CoH 1 tactical map design (like size + ww2 style drawing (we see hedges)) with CoH 2 tactical map UI (like retreat, reverse, attack to move action + idle status, health, cover info).



Mix between CoH 2 and blitzkrieg sound (MG42 in bk :sibHyena: ). :wub:

+1

Don't forget the sound design! CoH had superior, more realistic sound design!!!

Explosions were visually more satisfying to see as well.

+1
_______________________________________________________

Most of what Whiteflash said was on point. Taking the best elements of VCoH and CoH2, putting them together, and polishing it off with a good engine/design = success for the CoH trilogy. Relic better look at this delicately. Another DoW3 would probably put a big wrench in their future.
13 Jun 2018, 03:31 AM
#47
avatar of Z3r07
Donator 11

Posts: 1004

+1 to CieZ points.

+1 to the rest of your very nice post that is also fueling theses discussions but I think more emphasis and importance needs to be added to some items. I will not go into as much detail as you as I have not been playing enough recently to do so but here it goes:

In my opinion, these elements are crucial for a successful competitive RTS. I will not even say esport for the time being.

1. CRUCIAL / NON-NEGOTIONABLE:
1.1 NO DLC COMMANDERS.
1.2 NO DLC COMMANDERS.
1.3 If Relic and Sega wants micro-transactions to help with funding, cosmetic only and there is so much opportunity here with skins. People love their COH tank skins. More banners and victory strikes. I mean it is not complicated, look at all esport model, none of them has DLC that affects gameplay, purely cosmetic.

2. Important
2.1 Faction design:
2.1.1 I think the vCOH American/Wehrmacht match-up was beautifully designed and this was probably one of their main focus at the time for a new game to be successful. That being said, I think that much effort needs to be applied to any faction, after the game mechanics which I think only needs some adjustment at this point, this is probably the most important aspect.

2.1.2 I would personally limit the number of factions to 4, I would even say 3 but that would make it weird. I personally would even accept 2 or limit which factions can play each other to facilitate balancing (e.g. Wehrmacht vs. Soviet only and OKW vs. Americans only, no mixing) but this I think would only be accepted by a small percentage of the community but the point here is that faction design and balancing is so important that it makes me want to limit the number of factions. Maybe the solution here is 2 factions but with a better commander system as suggested by WhiteFlash, a mix of COH and COH2 meaning, more commanders like in COH2 (but not as many) but different tech-trees like in COH.

2.2 Statistics and replays:
2.2.1 I think you put enough important to statistics and I totally agree with what you said regarding this but I think a revamp replay system is as important. See Rocket League replay system and options.

2.2.2 Proper Leaderboards day 1.

2.2.3 Make sure to keep observer mode and expand on this and more twitch integration and competitive/tournament functionalities.

2.3 RNG:
2.3.1 Totally agree with terrain elevation but this is very important, not only some side note in my opinion.

2.3.2 Some RNG needs to be totally eliminated in my opinion. e.g. Panzerfaust: I think it should be a clear hit or miss depending on the direction of the shot when it was used/called by the player. If my grenadiers are facing the rear or side of a vehicle, it should penetrate and disable the engine 100% of the time. This is just an example and details are up for debate but I would want a clear hit/miss system for these type of abilities.

2.3.3 Again, as in 2.3.2, I think tank battles should have a more hit or miss system. Although I love the current RNG for the sense of realism, I think there should be a better system here. Maybe eliminating terrain elevation is enough ? Or maybe have different armor quality via munition upgrades. I want to avoid details here and give more of a general idea.

2.3.4 Button to manually spread out bunched up squad. This was in C&C Generals and it was brilliant!!! Not only does it remove the potential of squad wipes because of bunched up squads but also demonstrates a player's skill and reaction time. WIN WIN!

13 Jun 2018, 04:20 AM
#48
avatar of SpectreFTL

Posts: 5

Looks like my profile from 2009 (!) was ported from GR back in 2012. That's super nice. I'm glad my clanmate (love u whiteflash) is generating discussion at this level.

THE UI/UX WAS THE PRIMARY REASON COH 1 HAS BETTER GAMEFEEL.

There are four elements to this:

1) The commander interface. In CoH 1, the dash was muted, grey, and in the background. The whole point was to have it melt into the monitor so the focus can be had on the gameplay. In CoH 2, it's extremely bright and distracting in appearance. UI/UX is design, not art, and the focus should be on providing the player with information. vCoH always placed player feedback over realism, the result is crisp and immediate understanding. This is the most important point of my post.

2) The sound design. I don't care about realism. I want to be able to hear an American 57 popping AT rounds from half the map away. I want to hear the crack of the sniper. That's completely important information.

In CoH 2 a sniper doesn't have a distinct crack, or a vapor trail to trace. It shoots, a unit dies, and you're left wondering what's going on. The same thing happens in most engagements with AT guns as your vehicles approach; without distinct audio cues it is very difficult to react to an off-screen threat immediately. The sound mix in general is a muddy mess, even if all the individual sounds are nice.

3) The number of unit abilities. It is awfully unclear which infantry units have anti-armor abilities, their range, and their effects. In some cases this is due to unit symbols being similar (guards rifles, penal battalions, again a UI issue); in others it's the fact that there are simply too many abilities. Seems that every unit has some sort of instant engine damage AT, but no substantial non-critical ability a la stickies for American riflemen in vCoH.

This is compounded by the vehicle handling in CoH2 being sluggish and unresponsive. vCoH units may have been less realistic, but their handling was much more aggressive and they were not glass cannons or lumbering giants -- you could brawl with almost all tanks, which is what gave good engagement balance between two shermans and a panther, or three stugs and a pershing. The new system gimps gameplay dynamics in favor of linear push/pull which boils down to range and armor.

4) Lack of clarity in time to kill/damage received. There are only two unit types from a game feel perspective in CoH2: glass cannons, and damage sponges. Damage received is very unclear and inconsistent with regard to the hp bar -- again, brawling is less likely as units are killed abruptly. Suppression is also immediate and limits the majority of flanking opportunities.

This again limits the brawling and flow of the gameplay. vCoH is more dynamic mostly due to the rate at which units take damage and the clarity in how far players are able to push their units; it causes interesting gambles between risking a unit and achieving an objective.

I would hope this provides some perspective for the devs.
13 Jun 2018, 19:47 PM
#49
avatar of MiltToast

Posts: 11

Nice article, u were able to synthesize my fully consideration about a potential coh3. Well done! And ofc +1

EDIT

I would add a little thing. COH3 should show during the loading screen of a game the ranks of players. It's a non sense i need a third part software for knowing who i'm facing


AGREE!
14 Jun 2018, 13:26 PM
#50
avatar of Budwise
Admin Red  Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2067 | Subs: 2

It would be nice to have a competitive COH game again... I don't think I've played in almost a year now and don't see myself playing again. That's after almost 10 years of dedication to the series, that's how bad IMO COH2 is/was. After how poorly Relic listened to the community for COH2 I don't have high hopes, but deep down I secretly hold a sliver.
14 Jun 2018, 13:42 PM
#51
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4847 | Subs: 16

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jun 2018, 13:26 PMBudwise
It would be nice to have a competitive COH game again... I don't think I've played in almost a year now and don't see myself playing again. That's after almost 10 years of dedication to the series, that's how bad IMO COH2 is/was. After how poorly Relic listened to the community for COH2 I don't have high hopes, but deep down I secretly hold a sliver.


That are hard words man^^.

It's fine that you prefer coh1, tho atm we have good competitive cups for coh2 and also i think the balance is very well done atm; when i think back...
14 Jun 2018, 16:53 PM
#52
avatar of gunther09
Donator 22

Posts: 353

nice gesture from relic, featuring this article on the facebook page.
+7 for the article!
14 Jun 2018, 19:51 PM
#53
avatar of ltaustinpowers

Posts: 56

+1. Amazing write up and I hope Relic/Sega read it and listen to what the community has to say.
15 Jun 2018, 08:11 AM
#54
avatar of Leveltake

Posts: 11

15 Jun 2018, 18:33 PM
#55
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1935 | Subs: 2



That are hard words man^^.

It's fine that you prefer coh1, tho atm we have good competitive cups for coh2 and also i think the balance is very well done atm; when i think back...

The problem wasn't just balance related tbh, its the overall game design. Terrible commander system, lackluster tech counterplay, and too many get out of jail free cards for players that aren't good flankers. All that = too many COH2 games feel more like Brits vs Wehr rather than US vs WM/PE.

15 Jun 2018, 19:34 PM
#56
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4847 | Subs: 16


The problem wasn't just balance related tbh, its the overall game design. Terrible commander system, lackluster tech counterplay, and too many get out of jail free cards for players that aren't good flankers. All that = too many COH2 games feel more like Brits vs Wehr rather than US vs WM/PE.



Well atm you don't see brits at all anymore :P Too risk and you are death vs wehrmacht too often, does no matter if 1vs1 or 4vs4. So its more about Wm+ okw vs soviet+ usa.
16 Jun 2018, 02:33 AM
#57
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182


That's not how it actually worked in practice though. In COH1 you could field more units before popcap became an issue, the mechanic really didn't come in to play until the late-late game and it often helped players make comebacks. Medium sized armies were not very prone to being capped out. Popcap hurts the person that gets ahead, fields too many units, and plays stupid.


That's the genius of dynamic popcap: it works both ways. In essence, all it does is reward good play. In Coh1, you could easily capitalize on a lategame mistake by your opponent by cutting him off as he retreats, making it nearly impossible for that player to comeback. In Coh2, the static popcap only ever punishes the player that's in the lead, which translate into constant comeback opportunities. It's exciting the first few times, but after a while it becomes both a chore and a bore...

It wouldn't be a stretch for me to say that static popcap is the single thing I dislike the most about coh2.
16 Jun 2018, 10:10 AM
#58
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1445 | Subs: 4



That's the genius of dynamic popcap: it works both ways. In essence, all it does is reward good play. In Coh1, you could easily capitalize on a lategame mistake by your opponent by cutting him off as he retreats, making it nearly impossible for that player to comeback. In Coh2, the static popcap only ever punishes the player that's in the lead, which translate into constant comeback opportunities. It's exciting the first few times, but after a while it becomes both a chore and a bore...

It wouldn't be a stretch for me to say that static popcap is the single thing I dislike the most about coh2.


I see COH2's popcap/MP income relation more like WC3's upkeep system.

No one is forcing you to build more units if you're ahead (and thus decrease your manpower income). There's no penalty for floating and it's the correct thing to do sometimes. If you're already ahead on the map at 40/100 pop cap, why make more units (spending resources & decreasing MP income)? Why not wait until you see what your opponent fields and use those resources and pop cap to counter him? The exception to this is if you're expecting something like a T70, fielding the AT gun around the time you expect the unit to hit the field can save a lot of map control - but that's a calculated risk.
16 Jun 2018, 17:14 PM
#59
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Jun 2018, 10:10 AMCieZ


I see COH2's popcap/MP income relation more like WC3's upkeep system.

No one is forcing you to build more units if you're ahead (and thus decrease your manpower income). There's no penalty for floating and it's the correct thing to do sometimes. If you're already ahead on the map at 40/100 pop cap, why make more units (spending resources & decreasing MP income)? Why not wait until you see what your opponent fields and use those resources and pop cap to counter him? The exception to this is if you're expecting something like a T70, fielding the AT gun around the time you expect the unit to hit the field can save a lot of map control - but that's a calculated risk.


Hmm, I see your point, but I do not agree in the case of coh. The reason being simple, coh is a game of area control: controlling the map gives you a resource and positional advantage. This is unique to coh compared to games like AoE and SC, where resource gathering is less directly linked to map control. Now I suppose most would agree that a good player would capitalize on any advantage they have, right? As such they would make use of favorable cover and increased resource income by building superior units and/or purchasing upgrades. Floating resources in coh should generally be avoided. The only scenarios I can think of are to be able to reinforce a MP intensive army and like you mentioned to be able to respond to specific strategies that call for a very particular counter (which rarely happens, since units in coh are generally pretty versatile).

I've played 1000s of hours of coh 1 and 2, and while I like both, it's very apparent to me that coh1's resource system has more depth and is more finely crafted. Coh2's system feels good in isolation, but only because it's based on an inherently great resource system that is so heavily rooted in area control.
16 Jun 2018, 17:40 PM
#60
avatar of CrackBarbie

Posts: 182


The problem wasn't just balance related tbh, its the overall game design. Terrible commander system, lackluster tech counterplay, and too many get out of jail free cards for players that aren't good flankers. All that = too many COH2 games feel more like Brits vs Wehr rather than US vs WM/PE.



I especially agree with the lackluster tech counterplayer. I would like to see the return of strategic decision-making when it comes to teching. I loved how in vcoh, as ami you really had to consider whether to spend fuel on bars, grenades or tech to a quick m8. It had huge implications on your strategy (as each tech route had obvious drawbacks) and a good opponent would do their best to quickly discern your teching route and counter it. I realize it's difficult to create such synergistic interplay, but it makes for far more interesting mind-games.

In coh2, 90% of all fuel is spent on tanks and their teching requirements, which feels very 1-dimensional.
19 Jun 2018, 22:35 PM
#61
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 507

What I disliked about coh2:

Visuals and sound effects are mostly of less quality than what they are in COH.
Combined with the new UI, they offered less transparancy to the player.
COH1 had all the macro information (minimap, resources...) on the left and all the action buttons on the right. This makes it easier to digest information and respond to it, rather than having to focus all over the place. CoH2 feels more exhausting, at least for me.

One of my other issues with coh2 is the dumbing down of a lot of mechanics:

- Capping: you only have to be in a circle. What is the decision making here? There is little: it's better to be in the circle than outside of it.

- Units no longer spawn out of buildings, wasn't it cool when you saw that Sherman roll out of the tank depot?
There was also strategy related choices to placing your buildings: place them more forward: get units out on the field faster, but expose your buildings more to the enemy... so it could backfire.
I also remember the famous Seb mine.

- Doctrine choices no longer exist. I also don't like how limited the bulletin system is, it could very well not exist (Maybe it has changed by now, it's been a while since I played coh2.) If it were to be choices to be made: for example each unit, you get to choose a buff for. Or each unit type. And maybe end up with 1 'special ability' choice.

Pay2win:
I don't mind having to pay for expansions, new units, new factions. But at least make meaningful content, that is different and not filled with power creep just to make money. In the end you'll lose players over it.

Designer Philosophy:
I felt the resources spent and overdedication on developing new mechanics, such as snow and true sight, vaulting... Ended up costing sooo much of the other details which made COH great.
It feels like they build the engine from the perspective of the new mechanics rather than starting with the core of the old engine and integrate the new mechanics in smoothly.


All in all, you didn't see much COH pros playing COH2, because it wasn't appealing to them. What this dedicated playerbase wants/wanted is something that strongly resembles COH1: But with support from the developer, An observer mode, good connectivity, bug fixes, balance patches, maybe some new units and abilities here and there, a bunch of new maps, a new campaign, update SOME voice acting, (“If a mouse farts in this goddamn minefield, I want his ass blown sky high!”)

In hindsight, I regret burning down COH:Online, because if that was alive today, I would have definitely loved playing it in comparison to COH2.

Btw: remember the old veterancy ranks art?
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag N1cko
  • Oberkommando West flag Scotch1
  • Soviets flag Frosty
  • Soviets flag Beatricks Swire
uploaded by Frost

Board Info

141 users are online: 7 members and 134 guests
rqd, Aro' D.Raider, ShadowLinkX37, Yukiko, serg_codmod, uwiruf, Stug life
198 posts in the last 24h
1160 posts in the last week
5133 posts in the last month
Registered members: 69197
Welcome our newest member, uwiruf
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM