I have already expressed my position, but I will repeat it especially for you: auto-replenishment and auto-building are elements of simplification that are needed for noobs - the player must also be able to correctly manage his base: strengthen troops in time and correctly, decide when to use engineers to build a base, choose prioritize either map control at the beginning, or support. Right now with the builder magic gnomes, there is no need for engineers at the start.
I see the strength of any CoH game in microing your units correctly. Why do you think that it is more fun/important to spend time on reinforcing than on proper micro such as movement orders, positioning and coordinated pushes? Time is a limited resource, games generally try to minimize tasks that are "not in the main focus".
The only point I can see is if you generally want more macro in CoH. If so, would you then want more macro based mechanics, such as the (mockingly) suggested refueling? This could also be expanded to other areas, such as removing auto healing etc.
You do realize these QOL changes were introduced into CoH3 based on top players feedback, CoH1 and 2 elite is playtasting CoH3 for years, so based just on that, your argument couldn't be any more irrelevant.
CoH was never macro game and never will be.
Play AoE or SC for macro.
What do top level players have to do with general game design? Understanding how to min-max on given mechanics does not give you the magical ability to design good games. Their opinion is not worth any more than any other player that at least makes an effort for an educated point.
We don't even know if they favor this change. The only thing that we can say is that Relic wants to implement it and that the complaints are not loud enough to make Relic change their mind.
Alright, I doubt that driving your tank back to base every 5 min to refuel would benefit the gameflow in any way. So no, I would not like that. However, I do like basic macro management in RTS games. That includes reeinforcement management and base buildings. Simplifying that already basic process hurts the game in my eyes. Let me ask you this: why not take this further and move units to a way point after being fully reeinforced? Or automatically search cover?
Btw, I was against adding the "manual reload" button in Coh2. I would have been fine to reset magazines after a short time when out of combat. That is tedious.
I can't follow your argument.
Your point initially was that good players should be able to differentiate themselves from bad ones by "how fast reinforcements and replenished squads get back on the field". Basically, keeping your army combat ready. But replenishing squads is not a tactical decision (with very few exceptions), it is just adding micro. Obviously bad players won't micro as well, but if your core differentiator is "high vs low micro", then the other examples should be fine too. If that's not your point, then please elaborate how reinforcing - apart from few times when you want to save MP to get another unit out quicker - has a tactical component, because I fail to see it.
Refueling would even have a tactical component: Deciding when your front will be more vulnerable and how mobile you keep your tanks in order to not needing to refuel as much.
I'd actually be for the idea of setting a movement point after reinforcement. We already have a similarly functioning mechanic: The gathering point after a unit has been build. It's the same thing: getting a unit that is combat ready to the front line without adding micro.
Not sure which mode you're talking about, but it sounds like JP4s would have been a good answer on most maps. They destroy both SU85s and T34s without problems. Stuka would likely help too, depending on how good your enemy micros the units. If they hit a Katyusha, it's gone.
If anything I think people have indirectly asked for slower tick rates.
One complaint for Coh2 is that the window for light vehicle play is too small. So in some game modes, they are never even considered. Stretching out the game a little would give them more room to be viable.
Maybe Relics thought was making the VPs faster would force you to decide on early power spike with lights over mediums later? If you are far ahead, close out the game with lights early? This would be fine for 1v1s, but bad for 4v4s. Especially since 1v1 players dont actually like to "play" the game. They want a fast chess match and once they think they have won, they get upset it is not over already. 4v4 players want a long slog with much death and carnage.
Maybe that is the answer, different VP times for each game mode: 1v1 (fast) to 4v4 (slow).
It is really hard to say what will happen in 4v4 since we have a new resource system. Maybe 4v4 will not a be myopic fuel charge every game, so, with faster ticks the VPs may become as important as fuel is in Coh2?
Not having to push fuel early would be great. It caused faction imbalances in start times.
EXAMPLE:
OKW would swarm a fuel almost a minute before some soviet builds get there. By then it is too late because the OST MG is setting up.
Having more lower value points could spread the fighting.
CoH2 could have also had proper LVs, but the way unit balance was handled (instant snare and 2-3 shots to kill) led to LVs barely being usable in the late game. They later got some secondary function such as recon, but using them in a fight once the first medium was out was always very very risky and not worth the micro.
Relic fixed this in CoH3. The vehicles just generally survive more hits. I think that's the biggest change to them.
Different tick rates across modes might work too, but I think it would be very odd and lead to a ton of balance and timing issues. If at all, the tick rate should be different to what you suggested. Large modes in CoH2 have more resources and you'll always reach end game units. There's no reason to make the game longer by increasing the VP tick rate. Small modes have less resources available, those games should be longer.
But resources should best be fixed via maps. CoH2's problem was, that all points provide both resources and a fixed amount of them, while you could never contest points in the back and rarely cutoffs. There's no real shortage of resources in large modes.
If CoH3 allows to place more, but each less valuable points and the map makers take more into consideration how those points can be contested despite having more units on the field (->larger maps?), how smaller vehicles can still play to their mobility advantage etc, we will probably see less differences between all modes, which in turn should make units easier to balance.
Marco also said that it can easily be changed back to 4 secinds with the way they coded it.
I'd honestly not understand how a professional game developer could code it in a way that they could not easily change it. Tick rates have been untied from the game speed for years now, no competent developer does that anymore
Obviously it's a hyperbole. Look at how people described CoH1 as a "ground breaking" game. For a game that old, it has a decent player base. But CoH2, despite all its fundamental flaws, has way more.
CoH3 is a decent game at the moment. It needs some fixes, but many of the problems are fixable in the months after release. The gameplay and design is already way better than CoH2, that's what the majority of players will agree on. Relic supported AoE4 very well and managed to double player numbers, currently even closing in on AoE2. I don't have real doubts that CoH3 will not beat CoH2 once the major issues are ironed out, which should be a couple of months after release.
But again, is it a bad thing?
I don't know about you, but I tend to lose concentration if game takes too long.
I won't exactly miss seeing 3 tigers/churchills/whateversuperunitlategame in a span of a single game from a single player.
Hell, shorter games do fix a problem of skipping mid game, rushing for late game armor and spamming it.
CoH3 is definitely mid-game oriented compared to 2.
Shitty tech and cost design is what made CoH2 late game devolve into artillery and heavy units, not tick rate. You can generate the same gameplay in CoH3 by just cutting tech costs and making lighter vehicles unviable in later stages, just like they are in CoH2. This has nothing to do with tick rate.
CoH3 seems to put more focus on lighter vehicles generally, which is a good thing. That's the reason why CoH3 looks more mid game oriented.
I've layed out a few points where and why shorter games could be problematic for CoH gameplay.
If you're happy to not see the late game content of the game, then maybe that content is just shittily designed.
And yes, I usually enjoy the longer games. The ones I fucked up majorly early on but did not give up because I knew I had the chance to recover, the ones I was on my last 50 VPs and drained the enemy by more than 400 etc etc. Those have all the backs and forths that I want from CoH. Shorter games won't have as much of this back and forth. I don't remember any particular game that was below 30 min or so, they are either standard games or stomps, so not interesting at all.
Fast tick rates might also be bad for larger modes. Players already leave early in CoH2 because one team mate screwed up. Now imagine if that screw up costs you even more VP and you have less chances to recover. Even more players will drop out even earlier, ruining the complete match.
I know you're trying to spin the usual ball of 'Rrlic has no plan and fucks up big time', but this one really comes back at yourself.
AoE2 is a mechanically almost flawless game that has become one, maybe even THE standard in classic RTS. AoE4 did not beat it, surely, but it's taking in a lot of players at the moment. Relic has shown that they are willing and able to support the game long term, and that they know how to improve it.
CoH2 is not flawless by any means, you'll find stupid things and imbalances all over the place and you don't even have to look long or hard for them. The presentation is exceptional, but the mechanics are not. 'Living up' to CoH2 overall is not as hard as living up to AoE2.
CoH2 managed to dethrone CoH1, despite people complaining about all the talents of CoH1 having left already. If Relic supports CoH3 as they have shown to support AoE4, CoH2 will be forgotten by the end of the year. Thanks for showing that so clearly.
Assuming you hold 2vps and opponent holds 1 with no one contesting anything, that's 25 minutes until win.
Not that far off from ~30 mins in CoH2.
It really only matters in most passive games and 3-0 stomps.
Assuming a 1 VP advantage, all games are a good 8 min shorter or, unsurprisingly, 25%.
There's no reason why the tick rate should matter only in stomps. It matters in all games, and all games will (from what we could see in the test) be shorter by roughly a quarter compared to CoH2