Profile of sluzbenik

Of course micro matters. It's just not as key for anything other than 1v1, and multi is what most people play.

However, I would like someone to sit down and go frame-by-frame through a COH1 tourney game and a COH2 tourney game, and do an analysis of why rifles could successfully fend off multiple MGs, volks and snipers in COH1 but not COH2. In my opinion, COH2 has many more specialized units that overall tends to make having the hard counter at the right place and time more important than good micro. It's not a super huge edge, but I think it IS noticeable in this game. I remember playing COH1 with guys who concentrated so hard on their micro they would float and float while maneuvering their squads like crazy, but still come out ahead. The game just played like that. You can't win just with superior micro in COH2, and whether that's good or bad is debatable.

Generally COH1 had more soft counters for one thing, but it would behoove someone to sit down and show Relic why COH1 generally played better, rewarded true skill more and was easier to balance (at least the original two factions.) As Inverse always points out, there was a lot more macro-strategy that doesn't exist in COH2.

Arguably the 4v4 maps are too small and the number of resource points are too few.

That's why it's referred to as casual mode. Lots of fighting very quickly over very few precious resource points, which usually results in a victory for the faction with the strongest late game (hi OKW!)

I would love to see serious 4v4 with much larger maps where serious team coordination and thinking ahead about territory control is necessary. Where team macro would really shine and micro would be the icing on the cake. The problem there is that then if maps were larger, flanks would be overrewarded. Once half a team got pushed off you would have major problems with VPs ticking down before a comeback could be achieved. Still, all factions have forward reinforce abilities - it might not be THAT bad. 1000 VPs would have to be the norm, games would be much, much longer...Probably an hour to achieve a decisive victory at a minimum.

Honestly, they should only take the stats of the top 50 players but given how small the player base is that's statistically questionable.

Above 250 - your understanding of the game is competent.
Above 50 - your CPM and multitasking are competent.

I used to play 1v1 - but I hit my skill cap due to age a long time ago. At a certain level there's no amount of clever play or surprises that will put your opponent off-balance enough to make up for slow retreats or generally low CPM/multitasking.

I want a skin that has little skeletons with helmets. Or cats and mice like Maus. Please?

"Chat color changed to better reflect average player multitasking capabilities. We found through testing that some players were able to read the chat and play at the same time, allowing them to bring counters onto the field quicker than their opponent. This new color should level the playing field."