Profile of easierwithaturret

There's no way CoH2 will ever be achieve mainstream success as an eSport. Over two years past release the game is imo the best it's ever been but the buzz surrounding it is gone.

There is perhaps some scope for it to achieve niche success, although there are many factors counting against that as the OP mentioned.

RNG is a big subject of debate. I think such a feature can enhance the esports potential by creating variety and uncertainty. However when entire games are frequently decided by one or two moments of RNG it's too much. Often when two players of similar skill play each other, the game comes down to who had better luck rather than who played that little bit better.

Volks aren't that bad, there are only two issues that need to be addressed:

1. Right now Volks take forever to vet up without upgrades but get to vet 5 super fast with the panzershrek. Some adjustment needs to be made to reduce this effect. If volks get to max vet in line with other basic infantry it would help discourage blobbing because losing a squad with mid-high vet is more of a setback.

2. The panzershrek has a significant chance to kill infantry, sometimes even multiple models at once. Thus the squad doesn't lose much effectiveness against infantry, in fact it indirectly gains it when you take into account the vet preivously mentioned. There really isn't any thought that goes into purchasing the shrek, especially since with many doctrines OKW ends up floating munitions with nothing to spend it on.

It comes down to how people define 'realism' and think it should be represented in the game. It's easy to get misled into thinking CoH2 is a historically accurate game because of the good graphics, smooth animations and fluff text in-game. But what CoH2 is really about is immersion or 'soft' realism, i.e. the game feels real and is consistent within the rules set out in its own universe. In that sense the goal is to represent the strengths, weaknesses and operational styles of the factions and units in the game, rather than making sure the effective range of a K98 is mirrored exactly in-game.

So with that in mind players are willing to accept obvious inaccuracies (e.g. soldiers being blind beyond 50m or artillery fire arriving directly on target within seconds) as long as the game remains consistent with its own established rules. However, there comes a point when things are just too silly and obviously unrealistic, which is why things like blobbing and the old panzer blitz had a negative reaction from players.

Those who desire 'hard' realism, i.e. battles should play out similar to how they did historically and the performance of units should match what one could expect in real life. Usually these people only want realism when it suits them, e.g. they cry foul when their panther can't one shot shermans but have no problem with a platoon's worth of infantry charging into battle shoulder-to-shoulder and sweeping all opposition aside. In these cases there is a need to point out how asking for hard realism in one area of the game doesn't make sense given how many unrealistic aspects (sight/firing ranges, unit requisition mechanics etc.) currently exist.

There's also the uncanny valley effect, wherein the more realistic you try to make the game, the more players will notice those aspects of the game which are unrealistic. All the silly and poorly-written fluff text doesn't help either.

I agree that LMGs are a bit of an issue in that they don't have much in the way of drawbacks and lead to less interesting gameplay. I don't see why M1919s in particular are an issue though. They're doctrinal and expensive (compare the performance of one M1919 to an LMG42 or LMG34), and given how much USF relies on munitions you can't just spam them without consequence. OKW and Ostheer both have effective blob counters. So yes there are some problems with M1919s, but not more than LMGs on any other faction.

Another minor thing is that they make BARs pointless. Lowering the cost of the BAR would solve that, but would give riflemen a buff they don't need right now. The BAR could use a look at, possibly make some changes to give it a more offensive/assault role.

I don't mind the idea of a slight setup time for LMGs, maybe similar to DoW1 with heavy bolters etc. The unit can still move freely, they just need to wait in place a short time in order to fire.

the US and OKW both can get their light tank at around the same time they both get decent anti-tank capabilities themselves.

the light tank have 400 hp for a reason. It is to give them durability and longevity in the face of anti-tank.

Light tanks are strong enough to take a few hits from early game AT, but fragile enough that they take a high amount of micro to use. Yes, if you're facing a decent player your t2 AT options will struggle to finish off their light tank but they are sufficient to keep them at bay until heavier units can arrive to render that light tank worthless.

I still don't get your argument, what change are you proposing? That the 222 can counter units which are more expensive, arrive later, and have more impact on teching? That Ostheer t2 can hard-counter light tanks pointless and bring back the days of everyone stalling with low-tier units straight into late-game tanks and callins?