Login

russian armor

Company of Heroes III - Your expectations

PAGES (12)down
14 Sep 2016, 06:52 AM
#141
avatar of easierwithaturret

Posts: 247


- -- ---
- You are right.
- COH3 should be about USA vs ISIS.
M1 Abrams battletanks crushing terrorists hiding in mud houses in the middle of the desert.
- The terrorists would fire AK style weapons vs Predator drones and H-bomb MIRVs and 50x Strong
A-10 passes with 30mm auto gatling gun + Apache. Games would take 0.0004% seconds.

You are correct. These future games should be playable as Americans exclusively driving up sales :)

- Think BF3 and BF4 and... BF Hardline :)



Jesus how can you misinterpret a post so badly? Did you reply to the wrong person or are you just drunk?
14 Sep 2016, 10:20 AM
#142
avatar of Felinewolfie

Posts: 819 | Subs: 5



Jesus how can you misinterpret a post so badly? Did you reply to the wrong person or are you just drunk?


----
- I'd just worked night and was sick.
- But generally, am tired of everyone saying "Let's make it modern combat"
"Let's make MLP about Modern Combat USA vs ISIS"
"Let's make chess about Modern Combat USA vs ISIS"
"Mario Brothers would be SO much better if it were about Modern Combat USA vs ISIS"
"LEFT 4 DEAD games would be SO much funner if it was about Modern Combat USA replacing zombies w ISIS"

twitch twitch

COH1 has a mod for Modern Combat.
If you want proper modern combat, both players should have a huge red button saying FIRE ALL NUKES
So if one player starts to lose, he can just push that button, and everyone dies.

"It would be so much more funner" - Right? :D

Edit : NUKE button is available at Battle's start and cannot be deactivated through abilities or
or mods :)
Edit2: NUKE effect also makes spectacularily loud noise that blasts players off their seats :D
- Will be heard at max sound even if volume turned down, or game muted.
14 Sep 2016, 12:00 PM
#143
avatar of Smoky82

Posts: 36

Company of Heroes 1 is still the Greatest Strategy Game.
My Wishes for a COH3 are:

No absolutely never DLC Content in Multiplayer
UI like Company of Heroes 1
No Freaky Comic Style Graphics and Bad Faction Design like COH2
No Gardening Skins like COH2
No Steam, this Quazal Server was fine


But Guys this will be Never happen go and reactivate the vCOH Community.


15 Sep 2016, 18:58 PM
#144
avatar of Marcus2389
Admin Black Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 4555 | Subs: 2

Just one wish: to be in the team that will make it.
16 Sep 2016, 06:58 AM
#145
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 2

My expectation is flashy-cartoony graphics like they did in DoW3.

I never liked or disliked games purely because of graphics. Actually I've played a lot of old games.

But this trend is... repulsive (at best). Look at that new Civilization game. That's just ugly.

Compare WC3 graphics to DotA2 or any other MOBA game. In WC3 you had perfectly readable animations, you could clearly see the radius of AoE-abilities. In new games sometimes you can't even tell what just happened.
16 Sep 2016, 14:33 PM
#146
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1

Well the DotA strategy is to throw SO much stuff into every game that it takes full-time dedication to understand all the heroes, abilities, and synergies.
16 Sep 2016, 15:57 PM
#147
avatar of steffenbk1

Posts: 131

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Sep 2016, 12:00 PMSmoky82
Company of Heroes 1 is still the Greatest Strategy Game.

No absolutely never DLC Content in Multiplayer



I'm very for DLC's in a game after launch. Because game devs cant only live on the sales of the game for a longer period of time. Yes there are some shitty company's that just shits them out for a quick buck or just bad dlc content(EA,Ubisfot). But with a game like this, funding is important over longer time, and having DLC's means another month or so of paychecks for the devs. Meaning they can still work on it long after launch. Now how coh2 handled dlc's was shit. So i'd like to see a better handling of that. And if they sell a lot of the dlc content it means they can make more, therefor add more to the game, might be free or not. But still, it adds to it rather than just releasing, patch it for a few months and then letting it die because they cant fund devs anymore.
16 Sep 2016, 23:46 PM
#148
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 893

Honestly, there's not a lot that needs to be changed for CoH3 to be a great game; the game play is fundamentally great, as is the general design. There's really just a few 'key' things that need to be done in a specific way to ensure a fantastic game (most of these would be done anyway).


New engine. I feel like we've fallen into the problem where the same engine gets upgrades and additions, but they only end up making things worse. Essence 3 is really just a large update to 2, which was an update to 1... which shipped with CoH1; 10 years ago (+years of development). Let's say the engine took 1.5 years to develop - that puts the planning phase back in early 2005; before even Core 2 Duo was a thing.

Only so many things can be added to the initial framework before a total restart or overhaul is needed. Multi-core CPUs are standard in even the most budget-oriented of laptops, multi-GPU setups are far more common, 64-bit is basically universal (as well as 8gb+ of ram)... but CoH2 doesn't take advantage of any of these things for one reason or another. Combine that with all the other performance problems people talk about, and a new engine is pretty much a necessity.

They could easily license a 3rd-party engine (there's a lot of very high-end engines out there) that would solve pretty much every problem; I'm just unsure about how much work would be needed to get a proper RTS framework up.


New patch schedule. I think we can all agree that COH2's patch history hasn't been as good as it could have been. In general, patches need to be smaller and quicker. The whole "giant patch every quarter" thing doesn't work in a competitive game, where a small change can cause a massive swing in the meta, causing massive problems.

What we need is a weekly "update" system, where small things can be changed by small amounts. Is the AEC under-performing? Let's buff one stat and see how that works. Is it still weak next week? Buff it a small amount again. The whole "buff 5 stats" and then don't update the game for a month thing doesn't work - it makes people stop playing while they wait for a patch. At most, something should only be glaringly OP/UP for a week or so.


More evident 'design document'. I think one of the main problems in figuring out how things should be balanced in COH2 (at least from the communities view) is the lack of any idea on how certain factions are supposed to play. For example, the USF is supposed to be a combined arms "flexible" faction, but instead is played like a giant blob. OKW is supposed to be the resource starved faction with expensive but powerful late-game vehicles, but instead floats tons of MP and generally uses lots of infantry backed up by massive amounts of tanks.

Let's get some clear documentation on how the units, and the game, is supposed to play.



More focus. This is probably the most debatable idea, but I personally think the game would need a lot more 'focus' in order to become an "E-sports" competitive game. What I mean by that is focus in design and balance; it's hard to support 4v4 comp-stomp bridge maps AND 1v1 close-quarters maps with the exact same units and changes. It's also hard to support a game which is often extremely contradictory.

On the one hand, we have focus on tactical movement (cover to cover), flanking (true-sight) and positioning (weapon facing, optimal ranges, etc.); but on the other hand we have stuff like the IR-halftrack (ignores true sight), a blob-focused meta (ignores flanking) and LMGs being best in almost every situation.

Then there's emplacement-heavy factions (UKF), mobile bases (OKW flak base), forward retreat points (just mass-retreat your blob and attack 30 seconds later), various AoE duration abilities (loiters, long-duration targeted arty, etc.). None of these play to the game's strong points.

If it were up to me, I would strongly focus the game on smaller-scale tactics. The maps can stay about the same size (although 2v2 maps in 1v1 are too big), but let's get it to a point were you only have 4-5 squads and 2-3 vehicles at one point; not 5 panthers and 6 volks. Similarly, offensive emplacements should just be removed (use sandbags instead), forward retreating should be removed (although forward healing is OK). Of course, all of this would require a MUCH more responsive game as well as much better and more predictable pathing.


/edit
Refined placement matches. Kind of small, but it's really needed for new players. No one wants to get crushed 10 times in a row. Instead, when a totally new player starts the game, give them a 'default' ELO score (like 1,000). While their rank shouldn't be shown until a few placement matches have been played (ideally, 5), just use that 1,000 ELO starting point like any other score.

Also, when playing new factions, just average the player's existing ELO score; a different faction isn't an entirely new game - the player will still have a good understanding of counters, micro, game mechanics, etc.

19 Sep 2016, 22:22 PM
#149
avatar of Noun

Posts: 454 | Subs: 9

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Sep 2016, 12:00 PMSmoky82
Company of Heroes 1 is still the Greatest Strategy Game.
No Steam, this Quazal Server was fine



a) the Quazal server frequently crashed. Near the end we were having hours long outages often without warning. It was pretty terrible. At the start it was great, but by the end before the transition it wasn't because their focus was shifting to supporting their own projects and away from vCoH.

b) they were bought by Ubisoft who had no desire to host SEGA (or anyone's) games on their servers. So Relic are as likely to go with them again as they are of having EA host a game on their servers.


Say what you will about the Steamworks performance, but Relic/SEGA invested a lot of time, effort and money to keep vCoH online at a time when most studios/publishers would have closed the game.
19 Sep 2016, 23:00 PM
#150
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1593

I don't want to see a 3rd Company of Heroes. Ever.

Not from Relic that's for sure.
20 Sep 2016, 13:18 PM
#151
avatar of Trubbbel

Posts: 695

Idk...
I mean, if we take out bugs, optimization, OP and UP stuff, CoH2 would be perfect WW2 game so I hardly see new stuff in CoH3.

Maybe Africa theme or alternative history like single campaign where Reisch invade USA and UK (aka Panzer Corps <444>3)

I agree. That and the massive old artillery explosions and brought back sound like soldier speech (like idle speech) and old machine gun. And fleshed out single player. Meaning more ToW missions I guess. I appreciate those.
20 Sep 2016, 14:17 PM
#152
avatar of Trubbbel

Posts: 695

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Sep 2016, 05:05 AMNoun
They'd sold well over 4 million copies while I was there and presumably more since then. Relic games also have long tails, meaning they continue to bring in revenue well after other games no longer do. The studio makes a significant amount of money from its back catalogue. Just because you don't feel like CoH2 was a success doesn't change that it had a strong launch for sales and continued well after that.

Don't you think we will get a CoH3 then? To me it seems crazy not to do it when CoH is unrivalled in the gengre(starcraft is not the same), has a good sales history and presumably lots of work already done and paving the way. I so hope for it.
20 Sep 2016, 15:21 PM
#153
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2016, 22:22 PMNoun



a) the Quazal server frequently crashed. Near the end we were having hours long outages often without warning. It was pretty terrible. At the start it was great, but by the end before the transition it wasn't because their focus was shifting to supporting their own projects and away from vCoH.

b) they were bought by Ubisoft who had no desire to host SEGA (or anyone's) games on their servers. So Relic are as likely to go with them again as they are of having EA host a game on their servers.


Say what you will about the Steamworks performance, but Relic/SEGA invested a lot of time, effort and money to keep vCoH online at a time when most studios/publishers would have closed the game.


Truth. World in conflict for instance. That game has no online multilayer anymore. Just played coh 1 and world of conflict at a small lan. I'm so glad I can still play coh1 outside of it. Been enjoying myself all week in automatch.
20 Sep 2016, 22:00 PM
#154
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269

It would be nice if they simply shut down COH2 and forced everyone to revert to COH1. Superior game in every way.
21 Sep 2016, 11:30 AM
#155
avatar of Trubbbel

Posts: 695

It would be nice if they simply shut down COH2 and forced everyone to revert to COH1. Superior game in every way.

That's why almost everyone plays CoH2 and not vCoH huh? Because of oblivion?
21 Sep 2016, 17:04 PM
#157
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10622 | Subs: 9

Complaint about libelous post upheld - post invised.

Back to topic.
21 Sep 2016, 21:42 PM
#159
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

I expect them to actually have a stable game that doesn't require a restart from time to time to avoid bug splats and crashes.

To not hire a bunch of ..... who have no clue on what they are doing.

To not make a 5 year plan then drag out balance issues for that duration just so they can keep their job.

More advertising, more promotions, and more of an active communication.

If a mod revise this post then you need to read your own rules. This site is held together by duck tape. so yeah I changed the word that might be found offensive. Other then that this is a reasonable reply to what I expect to see in coh3.

26 Sep 2016, 13:52 PM
#160
avatar of Smoky82

Posts: 36

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2016, 22:22 PMNoun



a) the Quazal server frequently crashed. Near the end we were having hours long outages often without warning. It was pretty terrible. At the start it was great, but by the end before the transition it wasn't because their focus was shifting to supporting their own projects and away from vCoH.

b) they were bought by Ubisoft who had no desire to host SEGA (or anyone's) games on their servers. So Relic are as likely to go with them again as they are of having EA host a game on their servers.


Say what you will about the Steamworks performance, but Relic/SEGA invested a lot of time, effort and money to keep vCoH online at a time when most studios/publishers would have closed the game.


And i have to give thanks to you that u and your Team Invest so much to keep this Game alive.
Thanks for the Information about the Server Change, Things i dont knowed.
Better Steamworks than Nothing.

PAGES (12)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
  • Ostheer flag T.R. 6 squads, 4 maxim 2 engies
  • U.S. Forces flag °NOSMarkov.-
uploaded by KahootKing

Board Info

201 users are online: 9 members and 192 guests
achpawel, Von_Smedman, Smaug, MMX, Milky, Toyvendor, Evankose90s, Hannibal, adamírcz
181 posts in the last 24h
980 posts in the last week
4732 posts in the last month
Registered members: 22348
Welcome our newest member, 8jordane2823eN7
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM