4 things that would make CoH2 instantly better

100% agree OP, havent played coh2 for week now and actually i miss more playing coh1 than 2. Atm im kinda angry to myself why did i pre-order it. Tho it might be too early to make final conclusion and many things will maybe be fixed but atm it doesnt feel good

In the past Relic has done some great stuff, its still 2 months before the game is released, so there is a chance they can turn COH2 into a really good game, however that chance diminishes with each passing week.

pretty much everything thats said here...

during thwe alpha I got the feeling that CoH2 plays alot like sudden strike. A friend of mine then pointed out, if he wanted to play suddenstrike he would be playing sudden strike.
Though alot of things have been changed ever since regarding pace and gameplay mechanics it still is different from vCoH.

To me it feels like we have the classical who-should-we-balance-for situation. On the one hand the majortiy of players will not consider itself competitive in that sence. Also a not to be underated part of the target audience consists of people who are really into this WW2 stuff but don't care about our little pvp problems. This people will most likely not care about how well the UI aggregates the information relevant for playing (I don't even think a big part of the CoH public match community does either), but will be happy to read useless information about the units from time to time. Same concept goes for blizzards and so on.
So when you create a game, or any piece of software for that matter, that targets a great audience (not a single group of skilled professional users) it seems logically to address the needs of the bigger part first, because they also make the majority of the money.
However, then you will give away alot with what I hereby refer as professional audience (you and me).
Then again the things Tommy pointed out are really easy to fix. Swap the sprites for the blizzard, change some weights in the crit equations no big deal.

I would even go as far as saying an UI overhaul would be a manageable effort. But this will most likely not happen, because this is not starcraft 2. There is no 20 year old, million strong pvp community waiting. Maybe we will be getting stuff, but not too soon.

a game is as good as its budget and with THQ going out of business, that budget couldn't have been huge. Maybe the fresh money from Sega will rescue Coh2. If not there will be DoW3.

Nothing I mentioned here has anything to do with budget, but design choices. It doesn't even have anything to do with 'newbs' vs 'pros' or anything like that- that is literally the entire point of why I gave the thread such a title. They could change these things with just fixing a few numbers in a spreadsheet and instantly make the game better, but the fact that they haven't shows that they either don't want to or they just haven't done it yet. If it's the latter then fine, great. If it's the former then we're all fucked.

a game is as good as its budget and with THQ going out of business, that budget couldn't have been huge. Maybe the fresh money from Sega will rescue Coh2. If not there will be DoW3.

Good point, JimRaynor has been warning the community about this for over a year. But, this community likes to shoot the messengers.

The low budget is made clear with such poor quality cinematics and lack of hype.

Nothing I mentioned here has anything to do with budget, but design choices. It doesn't even have anything to do with 'newbs' vs 'pros' or anything like that- that is literally the entire point of why I gave the thread such a title. They could change these things with just fixing a few numbers in a spreadsheet and instantly make the game better, but the fact that they haven't shows that they either don't want to or they just haven't done it yet. If it's the latter then fine, great. If it's the former then we're all fucked.

Exactly this. The stuff that needs to be doen, is completely undependent from funds. Give me the assets and the code documentation and I will do it myself. For free even and due tomorow.


EDIT: Also the whole noobs vs pro thing was more to show what they most likely had in mind when making this design choices. I don't think they intentionally made choice against the pro community.

All great suggestions.

Regarding blizzard stuff. Custom game options which allows you to turn it off would be nice at least just for tournaments.

Upkeep does need to go back to how it was. The way it is now is too simple and dynamic-less.

Base buildings need to be more unique instead of all trenches so people can identify tech a lot easier.

Upkeep does need to go back to how it was. The way it is now is too simple and dynamic-less.

The Upkeep mechanic is basically game-breaking

The Upkeep mechanic is basically game-breaking

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Even if it doesn't, I think it can apply pretty well to upkeep in its current form...

The cold tech should be changed in that way, that Freezing and Blizzard change values (for example accuracy).
Freezing to death should be limited to Blizzard only or removed at all. Cold weather could even change a value, that one unit type has an advantage during that episode of Blizzard, so that you do particular strategy once it occurs.
This way Cold and Blizzard could enhance the basic map properties, which are cover type, walking slower in water, shot blockers, ...

Even if it doesn't, I think it can apply pretty well to upkeep in its current form...

Do you think that the mp income should be fixed only by making the reduction due to pop less steep or it should be somehow to tied to the map control and upkeep reducing upgrades as well ?

a game is as good as its budget and with THQ going out of business, that budget couldn't have been huge. Maybe the fresh money from Sega will rescue Coh2. If not there will be DoW3.

Wrong. There are some amazing indie titles out there and I'm sure anyone here could name quite a few AAA titles that suck balls.
High budget does not equal high quality. What we, as seasoned COH automatch players, consider game flaws are conscious design decisions made by the devs, so it's clearly a problem with how they envision their game.

And let's not forget that most of the original Company Of Heroes devs left the company quite a while ago. Some of them formed Smoking Gun. The original COH experience has no chance of being recreated without them, as unfortunate as that sounds.

Do you think that the mp income should be fixed only by making the reduction due to pop less steep or it should be somehow to tied to the map control and upkeep reducing upgrades as well ?

I don't see the point in Supply Yard type upgrades when both factions have the exact same upkeep. It worked for US because US and WM were beautifully distinct from each other and had different takes on upkeep. There's no diversity in that area between Soviets and Ostheer, outside of the oversight of Conscripts taking 6 Pop vs Grenadiers 4 Pop.

I would like to see map control encouraged a bit more since they're really downplaying it so far in CoH2, but some of these maps have only a handful of points, so it wouldn't make much difference.

Simply changing the values of the current system would go a long way, but I'd welcome the old +3 MP/Min per point too.

I would like to see map control encouraged a bit more since they're really downplaying it so far in CoH2, but some of these maps have only a handful of points, so it wouldn't make much difference.

Blizzard can also shutdown potential attempts to harass / take points back as it drastically reduces vision for both the player and the units themselves.

This game just need matchmaking fixes(dedicate server, balanced teams, etc...) for be absolutely better of coh1 (IMHO)

Albeit the new upkeep system being in need of quite a bit of tweaking and tuning, I actually see potential in it. I think it introduces an interesting dynamic, which either punishes a player for over-investing into an army or rewards him/her for creating one that is well-balanced. That being said, I think that adding an associated manpower income (i.e. +2mp) to all sectors would further improve the system, as it would allow a player to attempt to off-set his/her increased upkeep through dominant map-control. However, this can just as well backfire if his/her opponent manages to mount a comeback and said player finds him/herself at their base with an army that (s)he are no longer able to reinforce due to the territory, and consequently manpower income, that (s)he has lost. It would be a very compelling comeback mechanic all in itself.

Even if it doesn't, I think it can apply pretty well to upkeep in its current form...

well, the upkeep system probably needs tweaking in order to make the game "fairer" or whatever, but still, it's far from gamebreaking.