Login

russian armor

Relic wanted feedback for CoH1 vs CoH2

1 Jul 2017, 23:11 PM
#1
avatar of nigo
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 2161 | Subs: 15

https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/244147/coh1-vs-coh2-feedback-wanted



Hey everyone,

Would love to get your feedback on something. We all know COH1 was and is a great game. It doesn't get to be called the highest rated WWII RTS of all time for nothing. And although COH2 may have never lived up to the same level of greatness, it still has some pretty awesome elements and is a ton of fun to play.

That being said, we want to get your opinion on:

What you loved about COH1 that COH2 didn't quite deliver on
What could be improved on COH1 that COH2 did and did not deliver
What you love about COH1 - Where did it excel (balance, commander design, campaign, etc.)
What you love about COH2 - its best features (campaign, faction design, TrueSight, commanders, etc.), whatever you feel they may be
If you could, what you would cut from COH2
What would you wnat to carry forward from COH2
Where possibly both COH1 or COH2 fell short - where in your opinion is the untapped potential?
We'd also love to hear what your favorite way to play either game is. Do you play mainly team games, competitive 1v1, competitively or casually, comp stomps, modded games, etc.?

As always, please keep the conversation civil, on topic and the feedback of high quality so we can actually use your feedback in the future.

Thanks!




Looks like they wanted some feedback for CoH3. :D
1 Jul 2017, 23:30 PM
#2
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987

Despite reply clearly not needed on .org...

1. Loved about CoH1:
A.. Atmosphere. Realism in terms of voice acting, map appearance.
B. Map balance
C. Mechanisms like suppression. They play a much smaller role in CoH2. Blobbing is rampant.
D. Flanking. In CoH1 this was a huge factor. In CoH2 with the maps being so small, this is less important. Blobbing is more effective than flanking
E. As Nosliw recently explained - global upgrades are lacking and it's more beneficial to simple get a larger army than upgrade what you have. The Wehr CoH1 mechanics of vetting via fuel was inspired. Tech up vs vertical tech offered many strategic options.

2. Don't know. CoH2's Real sight is excellent. It's a huge improvement and offers many interesting possibilities. Vaulting also a big improvement. I don't know what else could be improved from coh1

3. CoH1 excelled: Dynamic gameplay. Turtling was punishedm blobbing was mostly punished. Brits messed CoH1 up a lot with Arty commander but aside from that, the axis-allied match-up was quite fair.

4. Truesight = epic! Commander design = liner, boring and prone to meta.

5. Cut: Emplacements. Garrisons on high res points, one-shot-wipe units / Very powerful AoE units, FRP, godawful voice acting. CUT the point capture mechanic! Being able to sit in a trench and hold a point is severely detrimental to armies without trenchs. I like the fact that in CoH1 capturing a point reduced DPS by X% of your squad.

6. Truesight, faction diversity

7. Untapped potential: Micro-intensive skirmishes where each skirmish matters. CoH2 gives the feeling that mistakes largely go unpunished and assembling a critical mass is more important than making superior micro/marco decisions.

On the whole, CoH2 is an improvement on CoH1 in terms of user-friendly controls, truesight, etc. But the joy of playing it fades compared to CoH1 becuase of blob tacitcs, stale metas and lack of atmosphere.
2 Jul 2017, 02:11 AM
#3
avatar of AvNY

Posts: 862

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jul 2017, 23:11 PMnigo
Hey everyone,

Would love to get your feedback on something. We all know COH1 was and is a great game. It doesn't get to be called the highest rated WWII RTS of all time for nothing. And although COH2 may have never lived up to the same level of greatness, it still has some pretty awesome elements and is a ton of fun to play.

That being said, we want to get your opinion on:

What you loved about COH1 that COH2 didn't quite deliver on
What could be improved on COH1 that COH2 did and did not deliver
What you love about COH1 - Where did it excel (balance, commander design, campaign, etc.)
What you love about COH2 - its best features (campaign, faction design, TrueSight, commanders, etc.), whatever you feel they may be
If you could, what you would cut from COH2
What would you wnat to carry forward from COH2
Where possibly both COH1 or COH2 fell short - where in your opinion is the untapped potential?
We'd also love to hear what your favorite way to play either game is. Do you play mainly team games, competitive 1v1, competitively or casually, comp stomps, modded games, etc.?

As always, please keep the conversation civil, on topic and the feedback of high quality so we can actually use your feedback in the future.

Thanks!


Writing this as an avid COH1 player (still) and someone who tried COH2 several times and just couldn't get into it. (though I loved the idea and still troll these forums).

Where COH2 gets some things right:
- Trusight seems to add a new element of gameplay and strategy.
- QoL items like reverse and the unit status bar on the top right.
- sniper war is much tamer. it was/is cancer in COH1 (and feels less like WW2 and more like a mini-game).
- getting more experience for killing same units but which have higher veterancy.

Where COH2 fails:
- lack of global upgrades and commander "tree" (Inverse's complaint of lack of strategic choices.)
- squad wipes in general seem too easy
- way WAYYY too much difference for difference's sake. Some has been fixed but let's just talk about original design:
- unit composition was really really different.
- HQs and teching was very different (US officer squads?)
- veterancy was not consistent (vet5?!?)
- resource incomes were different
- repair systems (US vehicle crews)
I probably missed some big ones, but that is in addition to all the little ones. It makes for too much to balance.

Popcap - COH2 always has a 100 man cap. This takes away one element of strategy you could use in COH1. If you got behind you had an additional way to win. You could choke your opponents ability to be able to call on units.

The best balance of this game was late stage (2.602?) US vs Wehr. It still had some issues (snipers, though US needs them in case of vet3 inf, and I think vet3 armor was either too cheap or too powerful) but small differences, either separate, or combined with other differences, made for really different feels in each faction. (US mortar vs Wehr mortar, Mg vs MG, Stug vs m10, m4 vs p4, croc vs ost, etc.)

I think COH2s biggest sin (the part that put me off the most) was asymmetrical balance over time. It is just stupid. While there were times in COH1 when the balance shifted, it was smaller, and if there were major discrepancies (wehr vet3) they occurred much later in a game than they do in coh2. Also there was a much later bit of a balance.... late game US units could start to compete, mostly the infantry, at vet3, and could help you get back on the field. But that was fair since if you lost them you could only get back a vet0 (not the case for wehr who could rebuild a vet3 unit).
2 Jul 2017, 02:28 AM
#4
avatar of DonnieChan

Posts: 2229 | Subs: 1

actually the only thing which was better in coh1 was the very early game dynamic (volx+ mg mechanic vs riflemen flanks) which was heavily supported by the smaller cone and faster set up time.

the rest: urrgh :

sniper spam

sniper rng

the Flak88 vs calliope Meta in teamgames

rep bunker simcities

also ho can you say no blobs??? rifleblobs, zombiegren blobs, brit blobs (the brit officer mechanic literally wanted you to blob)
2 Jul 2017, 02:34 AM
#5
avatar of Ægion
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 753 | Subs: 2

What you loved about COH1 that COH2 didn't quite deliver on
Personally I would like to see more global upgrades similar to the Panzer Elites in CoH1.

What could be improved on COH1 that COH2 did and did not deliver
The Modding option in CoH2 is quite limited, especially the Brits with the way how they were programmed in. I would learn how to model new units if it were available to me, also.

What you love about COH2 - its best features (campaign, faction design, TrueSight, commanders, etc.), whatever you feel they may be
The CoH2 Doctrine System, bulletins, and etc were great. The Commanders allow unique assets without changing the identity of the faction and pacing of the game.

Where possibly both COH1 or COH2 fell short - where in your opinion is the untapped potential?
We'd also love to hear what your favorite way to play either game is. Do you play mainly team games, competitive 1v1, competitively or casually, comp stomps, modded games, etc.?



There is really going to be no order with my suggestions but here how I believe things can be adjusted and changed for future titles.


All factions need access non doctrinal basics with similar timings

1. T0 Combat infantry - I mainly looking at Grens here and locked behind a building which just slows them down out the gate. Additionally, not having infantry overlapping in roles and timings.

2. Suppression platforms - This also correlates with map design in where some factions could rush an MG into a building which can dominate parts of map for a very long time. Then something like the USF mortar comes along and hard counter a faction only strength in that time of the game. On the other end the inaccessibility of OKW and USF weapon teams since they have such a high fuel teching requirement along with a long research time, this forces stale strategies since their only options is to spend on infantry.

3. AT guns that can fight non doctrinal assets - This is not really a problem in CoH2 except when fighting the King Tiger.

4. Indirect fire with smoke

5. Tank Destroyers that can engage heavier tank options reasonably well. - Again, looking at the King Tiger

6. Reliable additional income. - While OKW does have scavenge this minor periodic bonus could easly be replaced by opel blitz or cashes and have scavenge a doctrinal ability. Scavenge is generally unreliable for sustained resource income.

7. Forward Retreat points - Either all have or non. Additionally if reinforcing the field was a bit slower than back at base or prevented reinforcing while in combat. This would allow forward points to be readily sieged.


Commanders
I would not mind seeing commanders abilities completely interchanged able in order to customized in how the player would like it.

Units/abilities that allow reaction time
Sturmtiger/Demos and other instant wipe units/abilities are a bit of a problem. I would include off map arty as well. Not only they interfere with Howitzer teams they are also a point click nuke. They could be change to have more spread but deal suppression to make the more utility than making something dead. So arties like the light arty barrage of Ostheer comes very rapidly.


New Factions
Released one for each side to allow more versatility.







2 Jul 2017, 05:09 AM
#6
avatar of mycalliope

Posts: 721

More doesn't equal better
some of the things like snow,blizzard we all know the story off
but sometimes less could mean more,not being able to vault or destory environment easily like hedgerows in coh1 meant more tactical play in coh1 imo
base building yes please
units had more weight and very less disposable,maybe because the vet in coh1 mattered more unlike coh2 were you can get it easily
the dynamic of early to mid game was just amazing,largely due to rifle being what they do not a lick move like in coh2,the bunker medic meta,elite infantry being actually elite while having a proper counter too.
there were actually hard counmters in coh 1 unlike coh2..
The panzer elite faction
the commander system in coh1 > paywall coh 2
I think the more resource capture in maps made it more tactical
and the tank dynamics where axis armor actually was powerful and the weakness were very punishing.
THe main fucking thing there was no fucking explosive orgy atleast in 1v1
2 Jul 2017, 05:26 AM
#7
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jul 2017, 23:11 PMnigo
https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/244147/coh1-vs-coh2-feedback-wanted





Looks like they wanted some feedback for CoH3. :D


What you loved about COH1 that COH2 didn't quite deliver on

Powerful artillery with massive explosions on all sides. They worth worth getting back then compared to the tragedies we have now. Creeping Barrage was also far more useful in CoH1, due to additional rounds being added. Would have worked better with the British 25 Pounders at your base in CoH2 but was given to the underpowered Sexton instead.

FlaK 88 guns are also missed. They required less attention compared to the Pak 43 and fun to steal.

Pop Cap feels a little low at times. Would have been nice to have CoH1's max Pop Cap of 125 but with the need for captured points.

Tank upgrades like Mine Flails and Mine Plows are something I miss. Would love to see them return.

Forward Retreat Points were done better in CoH1 due to there being a separate button for retreating to one and it had a lengthy cooldown. That made it possible to break through defenses more easily than now.

I would have loved the newer factions to have had additional voiced lines depending on the weather. However, only Ostheer and Soviets have it. I really wanted to hear the Universal Carrier driver complain about the snow, like his CoH1 counterpart would have. "Well at least it isn't bloody snow!", he says as it rained. We need more immersion!

What could be improved on COH1 that COH2 did and did not deliver

Well CoH1 could use the Mines mechanic of CoH2. Having Mines getting laid the same way as Tank Traps was very inefficient as it required additional clicking to overcome when trying to spread them out, which I was glad was changed in CoH2.

I also liked how CoH2 Infantry, when garrisoned in Halftracks, fired out of them with 360 degree field of fire. I really dislike the limited firing cone of the CoH1 equivalents. Would have made the Kangaroo Carrier more useful as an infantry assault vehicle, disregarding the Button Up ability which should have been restricted anyway.

What you love about COH1 - Where did it excel (balance, commander design, campaign, etc.)

Should be covered by my comments above.

What you love about COH2 - its best features (campaign, faction design, TrueSight, commanders, etc.), whatever you feel they may be

Loitering Planes abilities are something I enjoy and gives you a reason to consider AA Units.

I also love Cold Tech since it stops the game from getting stale. In fact, I feel it needs expanded to have different effects in different weather. Fog, Sandstorms, Heavy Thunder Storms, Hail... I want to see more!

I will probably get hung for this but I think the British are far better done in CoH2 than in CoH1. You no longer had to babysit officers just to make your infantry go on outside their own territory. I also like their emplacements far more since the 17 Pounder in CoH2 can actually hit light armour, unlike the latest version of CoH1. They also make nice garrisons. That being said, they do need additional tuning to be less frustrating for their opponent while maintaining their usefulness. Like some weapons Brace can't protect from or a Minimum Range for the Mortar Pit.

If you could, what you would cut from COH2

The borderline extremist hate coming from the community to all things UKF. I was hoping that it would go away after CoH2's improved design but it might be worse now. Instead of suggesting constructive fixes, some people want them to just disappear and won't congratulate people on a victory, choosing instead to throw a lot of hate your way. Being one who'd rather get along with people in real life, this is something that I do not enjoy.

What would you want to carry forward from COH2

Truesight
Cold Tech
Mine Placement Mechanics
CoH2 Trenches (With Support Weapon compatibility)
Garrisonable Emplacements
Continued Soviet Union representation
Continued British Commonwealth representation
Strong AI
Commanders

Where possibly both COH1 or COH2 fell short - where in your opinion is the untapped potential?

As mentioned already, it lacks immersion at times. All armies should have their Audio lines updated when new things like weather, terrain and armies/units are introduced. It sucks that only the Soviets and Ostheer notice that it's snowing. Or when a unit struggles through mud but says nothing related to that situation. Not even something funny.

I would also like to see destructible environments be enhanced. Like Oil Drums on the field being explosive and causing splash damage when hit. Or collapsing buildings doing damages to units around them or causing blinding smoke.

I was hoping Theater of War mode would be expanded with the new factions that came after the Eastern Front. I even hoped this meant we would see a African Corps campaign out of this, but alas... There's always CoH3.

We'd also love to hear what your favorite way to play either game is. Do you play mainly team games, competitive 1v1, competitively or casually, comp stomps, modded games, etc.?

Since the UKF came out, I like playing more Expert AI matches with Normal or Hard AI Teammates. It provides a decent challenge and with blissful silence in the Chatbox and no waiting for people. Though it is nice to have a Human teammate every now and then for bigger maps. Will only play with good friends at this point but they have moved on, sadly.

That being said, I do enjoy watching tournaments between top players. It removes the pressure and exposes balance issues that might occur without getting emotionally charged.
2 Jul 2017, 06:49 AM
#8
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4300 | Subs: 2

Since I havent played both extensively, only CoH2... that said...

1. CoH1 resource point system is just better. it just is. it will also help bigger teamgames vastly just with this one little change.

2. not sure which capping system is better. maybe in between solution where the circle's radius is halved? CoH2 cap points take too much territory and makes sneaking around too hard imo.

3. CoH1 Doctrine system. I mean, you can still sell doctrine DLCs with CoH1 doctrine model.

4. bigger maps.


I play 2v2 up.
2 Jul 2017, 07:59 AM
#9
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2062 | Subs: 1

i will piss myself when they announce coh3
2 Jul 2017, 08:49 AM
#10
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 2

What do I like in CoH1 and what do I lack in CoH2? - an excellent campaign, I played in the CoH1 campaign five times, and she still makes me happy.

What do I dislike? This is the Design of the factions, look at the Soviets, the extremely unfortunate design of T1 and T2, the great influence of the calling units.

Skins of many Soviet infantry - bad, engineers, winter snipers, guardsmen, tank crew
2 Jul 2017, 09:06 AM
#12
avatar of |GB| The Hooligan486
Senior Referee Badge

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Off topic post invised,

CoH3 incoming? :hyper:
2 Jul 2017, 09:16 AM
#13
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 2

And yet, my biggest disappointment in CoH2 - the game (according to Quinn Duffy) was completely focused on the eastern front, and .... it's not.
2 Jul 2017, 09:31 AM
#14
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 2

i will piss myself when they announce coh3


I don't see the point of doing CoH3, the new material (factions, campaigns) can be done within of CoH2 - CoH2 has an excellent engine (graphics, mechanics). Old material (factions, commanders) can be rework at any time.
2 Jul 2017, 11:29 AM
#15
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066



I don't see the point of doing CoH3, the new material (factions, campaigns) can be done within of CoH2 - CoH2 has an excellent engine (graphics, mechanics). Old material (factions, commanders) can be rework at any time.


CoH2 engine is pure shit.
2 Jul 2017, 11:40 AM
#16
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Good feedback in that thread. Wouldn´t add anything to it.
2 Jul 2017, 11:48 AM
#17
avatar of devlish
Patrion 14

Posts: 246

Answer to all questions : Bring back CoH Online
2 Jul 2017, 14:15 PM
#18
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16696 | Subs: 12

I could write a book on this topic. But after the way Relic burned through its greatest community contributors without any consideration or remorse (like Tommy, 12azor, IpKai, etc.), why should I bother?
2 Jul 2017, 14:20 PM
#19
avatar of CROknight

Posts: 40

Coh2 had great stuffs like cold weather ( you had to build fire pits, and take care of ur units during a storm, i dont know why they removed it :huhsign:), the mud system was also good but when they introduced usfusfukfukfokwokw and FRP it became very difficult for sovietssovietsostheerostheer. The commanders, bullitins, skins are also unique. Stuff like jumping over fence etc.
COH2 bad things, for me sovietssovietsostheerostheer were in good balance, but the rest of the factions seemed like they where made in a rush maybe 1 or 2 weeks. They had nothing unique (maybe OKW veterancy, and USF crew jumping out of tanks). Some commanders are useless. OKW and USF without classic support weapons are forced to blob imo. Maps are just meh, like someone said 1 building captured can decide the all match for example City 17 .
COH1 well i didnt play it so much as coh2 (maybe 20 h) so i cant tell the good stuffs or bad ones.
2 Jul 2017, 14:24 PM
#20
avatar of mycalliope

Posts: 721

I could write a book on this topic. But after the way Relic burned through its greatest community contributors without any consideration or remorse (like Tommy, 12azor, IpKai, etc.), why should I bother?


i would by the book

but yeah after dow 3 and the abysmal support of coh2,i dont have much faith in coh 3
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
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

257 users are online: 1 member and 256 guests
SturmtigerCobra
24 posts in the last 24h
91 posts in the last week
843 posts in the last month
Registered members: 37778
Welcome our newest member, Strzalkowski
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM