It's really funny and sad reading this, and seeing all the threads and talks, all the problems people have had for 20 years, still be the same problems every release. It's almost like somebody called this happening years ago, if only I could remember who it was.
I really feel bad for the people they hired from the community, that are now on the receiving end of this, it so incredibly disappointing. I mean, game dev for the last 10 years has been a mess, and no real games have released finished, but basic stuff is just not done. The same complaints, over and over. Relic has not listened to anyone that hasn't groveled at their feet ever, they are immune to any criticism, no matter how it is framed, because at the end of the day things are just not implemented, and if they are... its bugged, it breaks something else, it takes several years, ect;
I'm sure this will make it wildly successful and not bomb like every other attempt at an RTS made on console, or even capable of being on console. I'm sure, this time, it will be different. Right?
Like you all played this right? Super good, household title, right?
What is interesting about this is that they have a shader that finds and reacts to interactions from the environment and other units. Hopefully this alludes to more dynamic armor interactions instead of just rear, and front. If this was already confirmed, my bad, but this would be a really nice thing to see, and I feel like this alludes to it heavily.
"Quinn was not involved in CoH3 at all" - Aerafield
Do we have any confirmation Duffy is leaving Relic/Sega? It says he is switching roles in the picture. Sounds like a promotion within the org itself.
From what AE has stated, Quinn Duffy made Angoville so he is already at legendary status. He is also the only name I have ever heard mentioned from Relic about Coh/Coh2. So him leaving Relic would not be a good thing.
However, I badly recall a YouTube video where he was touting mortars in Coh as being a good thing. So maybe him leaving would not be so bad.
"I have been saying since I started playing vCoh that someone high up at Relic is a moron because of the horrible bugs/decisions I see in an otherwise amazing game. It looks to me like very obvious things were left in the game because people were afraid to point out the problem to their boss." - Rosbone
I believe they were also one of the sole reasons that Brits were designed the way they were in vcoh and coh2, but I could be wrong. I remember a lot of blame going there way though back in the day.
Usually the retreat path is obvious, but there are times when you are left scratching your head. Units take the shortest way back to base, it is simple enough, just tweak the pathing overall to be more consistent.
This, but felt I had to offer something in my post originally instead of just shooting down the suggestions.
I'd say, even if there is no place for retreats via waypoints, it would over-all have been much better, if the units chose path according to the closest friendly territory rather then closest possible way to the player base.
And if for some reason base sector is actually closer then the friendly sector, then squads should retreat just like in coh1\coh2.
In this case it would at least give players ability to understand where and how squads will retreat based on the map controll they have.
This is also a good suggestion. It could even be a hard, and a soft retreat. A soft retreat goes to the nearest friendly territory (would be good for nades), and a full retreat is back to base.
The problem isn't "pathing", in the way most people understand it. Its the precision map and proximity to objects that causes all the issues. This is why vehicles spin, and take odd routes. That and the way they navigate pathing with shift queuing as I've explained and show previously.
As Sib said, pathing in general is a problem, not retreat paths, and it is because of the way the engine handles collision and objects near one another, again as I demonstrated and showed literally years ago.
The above suggestion, especially number two, would impede the game and player choice more than solve anything. Especially since people would just sit on way points for retreats. The variety, though sometimes aggravating and annoying in retreats also causes a bit of unpredictability, rewarding players that react to that with kills or wipes.
And number one is already in the game if you pay attention to the minimap / enable the option. Since you are moving from the base sector it literally draws where your unit will move and the path they will take, this is also true for the retreat path. The only change to this pathing is areas opening up via crush or player built objects, such as barbed wire or sandbags.
So not really sure how either of this solutions solve the actual problem, and that is the precision map, pathing in general, and how units navigate within it.
EDIT: Since I didn't offer a solution.
You could have a player be able to set their own retreat way points that the unit would follow, much like shift clicking and the queuing of orders. Limit it to 1-3 markets that they would navigate to on retreat. Gives the player a bit more micro intensive freedom to make decisions and now you can retreat around things instead of through. Rewarding for the person retreating when it works, and rewarding for the opponent when they predict it and get a wipe on retreat.
This would be the simplest thing to implement, though doing it for large numbers of squads could be tedious and intrusive overall to the player experience. Though that is not for me how to decide how it should be implemented or what limitations should or should not be enforced, that is up to Relic. This would allow you to see the same pathing draw on the minimap as you see points, knowing where your unit is going to retreat and what path they will take, short of another player blocking you with sandbags/wire.
Edit 2:
Another way is from the main HQ you can set 3 retreat paths, like rally points. Then you can have a hotkey for each.
R+1 = 1 -> Base
R+2 = 2 -> Base
R+3 = 3 -> Base
R+4 = 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> Base
Or something similar. Then you can have quick retreats to sides, to base, or to the middle down then down a side to base, ect;.
Which would give more flexibility, couple that with the soft retreat that was suggested below, where you can soft retreat to friendly territory. There are a multitude of ways that would be interesting and offer a better dynamic than what is currently implemented.
0
United States
oziligath
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
