Login

russian armor

Black Prince Poll

PAGES (13)down
21 Jul 2021, 15:33 PM
#201
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2021, 15:18 PMPip

But even if this is the case: They ought to just use the Comet for both tech trees. They really shouldn't be using fantasy vehicles to fill rosters as you're suggesting...


And that's where we're just going to disagree.

Some more variety with units that are only one human decision to ship away from seeing combat is fine.

BP is not a fantasy. The Ratte is a fantasy. The BP is a real bit of kit available from January 45 that just never got moved to the frontline.

But it could have been.

And so, in a campaign where we have some freedom to choose how we play out the war, is fine.


There's also, as has been mentioned, the 75mm Churchill.

Anyway, instead of using the BP they could instead simply use the Challenger, which WAS actually used in combat. I refuse to believe they're going to have three separate tech trees that all require an "unique" 17-pounder toting medium/heavy tank.


The challenger is a medium, and would not fit the heavy lumbering aesthetic they have clearly gone for specifically with the Armour Company.

The 75mm would cause all matter of wehraboo whining if it was given the same punch as a 17pdr would about how the gun is overpreforming.

And not all of them need to end in a 17pdr. But they should all end with something. Asymmetry in basic toolkit is bloody awful for the balance and was the cause of years of overhauls and balance issues in CoH2.

I assume (and we need to wait for it to be out of pre alpha to see) that the list will include the BP, maybe the Crocodile, the Comet. All three of which we know to have existing models.

Royal Artillery has a larger than usual field gun instead, so it's not all heavy tanks, but it is all late game units.

Recycling the same vehicle a dozen times over in marginally different commanders to pad the roster is not good game design.
Pip
21 Jul 2021, 15:34 PM
#202
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1580

well the black is a piece of hardware that is based off the churchill when you see it in game it doesnt stick out that much in the game I FELL. That's why i dont mind, it is just a modified churchillnot like a totally new piece of tank, that's is why I dont mind. like an SKS doesnt look like a WW2 rifle nor an AS44. In the design it fits for me. BUT I get that you don't like that.


The "actual" Black Prince is modified enough from a "standard" churchill for it to be rather different in construction. The one shown ingame is an inaccurate model, which implies its there for testing purposes, and not necessarily intended for the final release.

The SKS looks much like an SVT, in any case.

21 Jul 2021, 15:38 PM
#203
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2079 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2021, 15:30 PMPip


Pretty much the same argument, really.

Hell, in the SKS's case it actually WAS used in limited numbers for testing during WWII, so it would actually be more justifiable than the BP. (I'd still prefer none of these appear however.)


Not really, there was SKS before SKS. In 1941, Simonov created a new carbine chambered for 7.62x54 to replace the SVT-40. But unfortunately, the factories were not up to the production of a new rifle, and by 1944, 50 such rifles were produced. SKS-31. There they were most likely tested on the front line.

Pip
21 Jul 2021, 15:55 PM
#204
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1580



And that's where we're just going to disagree.

Some more variety with units that are only one human decision to ship away from seeing combat is fine.

BP is not a fantasy. The Ratte is a fantasy. The BP is a real bit of kit available from January 45 that just never got moved to the frontline.


But it wasn't available, that's the point. They were prototypes that never saw combat because of more than just "one human decision". The design wasn't close to being viable in 1945, with the main problem being that it was considered almost uselessly slow, and their role was entirely usurped by the superior design of the Comet, which basically obviated the BP, and the Churchill line entirely.

Variety for the sake of variety isnt a virtue, especially if you have to start dredging unfinished prototypes for some unexplainable reason.

The BP isnt analogous to the Ratte. It's Analogous to the Maus, which should not appear for exactly the same reason as the BP.


But it could have been.


But it wasn't, and the British went with tanks in the style of the Comet instead. Plenty of things "could have been", and weren't, and there's seriously no reason to include them in a CoH game, since CoH is distinctly /not/ an Alt-history series.




The challenger is a medium, and would not fit the heavy lumbering aesthetic they have clearly gone for specifically with the Armour Company.


This aesthetic would be fit just as well as with the Comet. A commander that needs a "fast" 17 pounder tank would then have the Challenger. How many commanders really need slightly distinct 17 pounder tanks?

The 75mm would cause all matter of wehraboo whining if it was given the same punch as a 17pdr would about how the gun is overpreforming.


What? How have you come to that conclusion? Anyone who's arguing that Aesthetics should come before functionality is not someone who should be commenting on balance. This is a bit of a strawman argument. I don't know why people keep inventing these magical "Wehraboos" who exist to support any any all arguments.

A 75mm churchill overperforming would be more believable than a BP being magicked into being a workable tank and appearing in Italy.



And not all of them need to end in a 17pdr. But they should all end with something. Asymmetry in basic toolkit is bloody awful for the balance and was the cause of years of overhauls and balance issues in CoH2.


Then how many DO need to end in a 17-pounder? Just one? If so: Just use the Comet. If two? Then the Comet and Challenger. If you have two commanders who both need heavy tanks with 17 pounders for some reason, I'd both ask WHY this is the case, and why you need to have two slightly different heavy tanks with 17 pounders for these two commanders.



I assume (and we need to wait for it to be out of pre alpha to see) that the list will include the BP, maybe the Crocodile, the Comet. All three of which we know to have existing models.

Royal Artillery has a larger than usual field gun instead, so it's not all heavy tanks, but it is all late game units.


I'm not seeing "well we don't KNOW that the game doesn't ALSO have the Comet, Croc, AVRE, etc, so we might totally 'need' the BP!" as a really convincing argument. There's nothing that currently justifies using the BP when the Comet exists as an actually used alternative.

Theres also absolutely nothing supporting the idea that there are going to be a million billion commanders that all have totally unique rosters, either, so I'm not sure why you're floating that as a possibility. We don't yet even know how the "commander" system will function in the final version of CoH2.


Not recycling the same vehicle a dozen times over in marginally different commanders to pad the roster is not good game design.


Right, but you're the one suggesting that there are going to be a "dozen" commanders that must have a 17-pounder equipped heavy tank in them.
Pip
21 Jul 2021, 15:59 PM
#205
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1580



Not really, there was SKS before SKS. In 1941, Simonov created a new carbine chambered for 7.62x54 to replace the SVT-40. But unfortunately, the factories were not up to the production of a new rifle, and by 1944, 50 such rifles were produced. SKS-31. There they were most likely tested on the front line.



I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with, exactly.
21 Jul 2021, 16:02 PM
#206
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2079 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2021, 15:59 PMPip


I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with, exactly.


Were not tested SKS under 7.62x39 which has been developed since 1944 and which I assumed where the weapon for the USSR under the new M43 cartridge. And the old carbine of 1941 was tested at the end of the war. Showing the absurdity of the Black Prince's ideas.
21 Jul 2021, 16:03 PM
#207
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1201

Giving everyone a big tank is not only lazy balancing but takes out a huge aspect of the setting. Facing a Tiger in 1943 was a problem. In Coh3 it is solved by fielding your own imaginary counterpart. How incredibly boring.
21 Jul 2021, 16:57 PM
#208
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2840 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2021, 16:03 PMButcher
Giving everyone a big tank is not only lazy balancing but takes out a huge aspect of the setting. Facing a Tiger in 1943 was a problem. In Coh3 it is solved by fielding your own imaginary counterpart. How incredibly boring.

To be fair though the game will likely range until 1945. Unless there will be a restriction to certain years this will always be the case, just as it was in CoH2 and CoH1.
Pip
21 Jul 2021, 18:34 PM
#209
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1580


To be fair though the game will likely range until 1945. Unless there will be a restriction to certain years this will always be the case, just as it was in CoH2 and CoH1.


This is true, which is why I'm not terribly bothered about the exact time-frame of certain units in each army, I'm not sure if they're intended to represent armies of a certain timeframe (Like OST and OKW are), at least not in MP.

Though that's hard to know until the game actually releases. I am thinking that the Campaign and MP factions will be rather different though, in terms of what they have access to.
21 Jul 2021, 19:51 PM
#210
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1189 | Subs: 1

On the one hand, I get the want to not have units too far removed from what fought in Italy for the campaign. On that point, go ahead and remove the Black Prince (BP) from SP, and replace with something that fits the timeframe and historical accuracy better (I would do this across the board, so no Chaffee in SP campaigns before late war, etc.)

That said, I see no reason the BP should not be in multiplayer. COH multiplayer has always not just used "fantasy" weapons that are more thematic than realistic, but also done the same to actual unit statlines. Don't believe me?:

1) Why does the P4 have more armor than the T34 and Sherman in COH2? Both of these tanks historically had better armor than even the late war 80mm frontal plate P4, but in game it serves to be the most well armored medium tank available to stock armies. This is to thematically convey that German tanks have high armor, in the context of the game. It was for balance reasons as well that the P4J does not have the unusably slow turret rotation it had at launch.

2) V-1, IR STG, lava-nade, fucking infra-red halftrack. None of these units were utilized tactically in anywhere near the numbers you see them in game, and in fact some of these just straight don't exist. They exist to convey the thematic design of the Germans as a high tech, "space magic" faction (particularly OKW). Hell, the KT being a stock unit should tell you all you need to know about the "historicity" of the faction. Personally, I would argue that a game that cared about realism enough to not have a unit just out of the war like the BP, should also refrain from using what were essentially field-tested prototypes like the above, for the sake of authenticity.
(Also, it kind of makes less sense when you realize the reason Germany had to rush so many of these half-tested weapons and kit to the front was because of their sheer desperation. If the allies had started running out of troops and equipment you bet your ass they would have fast tracked their prototypes.)

There are other examples, but I think I made my point. In a multiplayer setting I do not see the Black Prince as sufficiently out of reality to not fit in. One of COH's strengths has always been to bring the more interesting elements of a nation's army, and build a thematic representation of them as a faction.

Americans are mobile, Soviets are versatile. In the case of the British, the BP fits perfectly as a late game lumbering behemoth to represent the cautious but steady advance of the British Army in popular mythos.
21 Jul 2021, 21:50 PM
#211
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2840 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2021, 18:34 PMPip


This is true, which is why I'm not terribly bothered about the exact time-frame of certain units in each army, I'm not sure if they're intended to represent armies of a certain timeframe (Like OST and OKW are), at least not in MP.

Though that's hard to know until the game actually releases. I am thinking that the Campaign and MP factions will be rather different though, in terms of what they have access to.

Well even the armies in CoH2 spanned from at least 43 to 45, which basically justifies every weapon in the game.

If people play a WW2 RTS, they want to get a Tiger and other icons of the war. Relic surely knows and will implement their stuff accordingly.
I just hope that for campaign and scenario missions they will stick to what has been used back in the time. I think the same as you of the difference between MP and SP
22 Jul 2021, 00:23 AM
#212
avatar of Spoof

Posts: 449

What is more annoying than the Black Prince is how Relic stays wedded to this retarded notion that Panzergrenadiers all used StGs and that Jagers were all crackshot marskmen. Even more annoying is that Stosstruppen use LMGs and Kars despite the fact that they are literally shock troops by name. A more suitable switcharound would be giving Stosstruppen StGs or MP40s and giving Panzergrenadiers the MG42 and the Kars (so just renaming the units).

At the very least I hope they can make the weapon DPS profiles realistic this time (mid range StGs and long range G43s, not the crap we have right now in CoH2).
22 Jul 2021, 02:09 AM
#213
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1738

this site isn’t representative of the whole player base, most people don’t care


i agree.

i am shocked the longest thread about coh3 feedback here, is about a tank called Black Prince, which i dont care to search its wikipedia
22 Jul 2021, 04:22 AM
#214
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2079 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jul 2021, 02:09 AMmrgame2


i agree.

i am shocked the longest thread about coh3 feedback here, is about a tank called Black Prince, which i dont care to search its wikipedia


Let's put Space Marine into the game then - it's a game. It's like it's 100% excuse.
22 Jul 2021, 07:04 AM
#215
avatar of waasdijki

Posts: 76



Let's put Space Marine into the game then - it's a game. It's like it's 100% excuse.


yes, good idea as long as the SP remains authentic. The multiplayer has never been historical anyway

/joke
22 Jul 2021, 08:59 AM
#216
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2021, 15:55 PMPip


But it wasn't available, that's the point. They were prototypes that never saw combat because of more than just "one human decision". The design wasn't close to being viable in 1945, with the main problem being that it was considered almost uselessly slow, and their role was entirely usurped by the superior design of the Comet, which basically obviated the BP, and the Churchill line entirely.

Variety for the sake of variety isnt a virtue, especially if you have to start dredging unfinished prototypes for some unexplainable reason.


It very literally was. It physically existed. The only thing that needed to happen for it to be used on the front line was for somebody to put them onto a boat and move them to the front line.

Not a fantasy. Just not used in the actual war.

Ergo, perfect for a campaign where you take control of decisions about what is and isn't used where in WW2.

If you want to opt for ahistorical decisions, you can. The fact that heavy tanks were near obsolete is irrelevent if you want to play that way.


But it wasn't, and the British went with tanks in the style of the Comet instead. Plenty of things "could have been", and weren't, and there's seriously no reason to include them in a CoH game, since CoH is distinctly /not/ an Alt-history series.


It's a freeform campaign, not a scripted one.

Sorry buddy, but the alt history ship has sailed. You can't have a freeform campaign map and not be alt history. There's no hill left to die on with that one.

Of course, Relic want to keep Historical Accuracy in mind. And that's why they need to fix the BP's model, not remove it.


A 75mm churchill overperforming would be more believable than a BP being magicked into being a workable tank and appearing in Italy.


But it was. It worked. They drove them around and fired rounds out of them and everything

Wasn't good. But it worked.
22 Jul 2021, 09:09 AM
#217
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2079 | Subs: 2



It very literally was. It physically existed. The only thing that needed to happen for it to be used on the front line was for somebody to put them onto a boat and move them to the front line.

Not a fantasy. Just not used in the actual war.

Ergo, perfect for a campaign where you take control of decisions about what is and isn't used where in WW2.

If you want to opt for ahistorical decisions, you can. The fact that heavy tanks were near obsolete is irrelevent if you want to play that way.




It's a freeform campaign, not a scripted one.

Sorry buddy, but the alt history ship has sailed. You can't have a freeform campaign map and not be alt history. There's no hill left to die on with that one.

Of course, Relic want to keep Historical Accuracy in mind. And that's why they need to fix the BP's model, not remove it.




But it was. It worked. They drove them around and fired rounds out of them and everything

Wasn't good. But it worked.


Where are the T-44, IS-3, OSA-76, RD-44, SKS, AS-44? They existed physically, all that remained was to take and send them. But no one in their right mind would send them to the front like the Black Prince, they were unreliable since they were prototypes.
22 Jul 2021, 09:09 AM
#218
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1



Where are the T-44, IS-3, OSA-76, RD-44, SKS, AS-44? They existed physically, all that remained was to take and send them. But no one in their right mind would send them to the front like the Black Prince, they were unreliable since they were prototypes.


Not in Italy.
22 Jul 2021, 09:21 AM
#219
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2079 | Subs: 2



Not in Italy.


Great, since you insist so much on the Black Prince. Then give me the USSR which is equipped with T-44, IS-3, OSA-76 parachute landing self-propelled gun. AS-44 assault rifle with RD-44 for motorized rifle troops and paratroopers and SKS with RD-44 for the rest of the infantry. And also do not forget about the RPG-1 grenade launcher, which was also being developed at the same time. Why not? This will be a new level.
22 Jul 2021, 09:24 AM
#220
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

Can't wait for the Japanese to get Tiger Is in the (possible) DLC because

It physically existed. The only thing that needed to happen for it to be used on the front line was for somebody to put them onto a boat and move them to the front line
PAGES (13)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 Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

90 users are online: 90 guests
13 posts in the last 24h
272 posts in the last week
728 posts in the last month
Registered members: 35011
Welcome our newest member, Sarenntriss
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM