Except, CoH fiction was with-in the scope of actually used equipment. CoH fictions were mostly presented in the abilities\capabilities of the authentic units.
Having fictional grenades or stylised fictional ability on the unit\commander is not the same as having completely fictional tank\unit.
It's splitting hairs at this point, but slapping a real name on a unit does not equal authenticity either. Of course concessions have to be made to gameplay, but authenticity (at least for me) means, that what I see in the game could have occurred that way. This doesn't mean that every unit is as realistic as possible, but at least the general "ranking" of units and their main features, strengths and weaknesses are represented, which CoH got roughly right in most cases. A Sherman will lose to a Tiger or Panther. LMGs work great on long ranges. Airplanes come in and strafe your units (concession to gameplay here are their 100m turn radius, attack pattern, accuracy etc, but calling in air support and strafing runs to take out positions is realistic), etc etc.
BUT: As in the example of the V1 rocket, it is not authentic at all. Those rockets have not been used that way, they have not interferred in ongoing battles and never had the accuracy to actually hit something smaller than a large town. The model of this weapon in CoH1 is completely fictional, just saying it were a "V1" rocket does not make it authentic, since neither its uses, nor strengths or weaknesses are conveyed in the slightest.
If the main criterium is "has this equipment been used in WW2?", you're not aiming at authenticity either. At this point, it would be fine to use a normal Churchill (hek, even a Sherman) and just slap Black Prince stats on top of it so it can defeat a Panther. I am sure most people would not be fine with that. |
|
Better, but still looks untidy to me.
So many floating and protruding elements, why? CoH2's UI occupies way too much of the screen, but at the very least it is thematic and clearly separates the screen into the battlefield and static elements.
CoH3's UI is not thematic at all and constantly mixes static elements with snippets of the moving background. E.g. near the minimap. I don't need these tiny spaces to the left and bottom, I won't pick up information through these anyway. This could at least be used to make the UI 'pretty' or but some better info there. |
2CP is a lot when it comes to the opening game against OKW. Sturm Pioneers and Volkgrenadiers who have access to the STG-44 at the start are quite dominant against the Soviets.
Current Soviets are already good enough to counter that (or endure it until they get their T7). The PPSh upgrade is supposed to give you an earlier power spike than you'd otherwise have. This can be timed as wanted. It could be the ability for a PPSh call in squad at the start or the current 2 CP upgrade or anything in between or later. All options are fine, but they all have to be tuned a bit differently. If e.g. 0 CP PPSh on Conscripts are the way to go, we talk about a different squad than what the 2 CP PPSh Conscript should be.
Also, isn't the StG44 upgrade also tied to an OKW truck being set up? But even if not, realistically, the first upgrade will be affordable around minute 4 because you don't have the muni for it. Afterwards, you generate enough muni for one upgrade roughly every 2 minutes. OKW won't have StGs for that long before you can upgrade PPSh.
The issue in my eyes is that they neither offer enough of an early spike nor a much different playstyle or options to forgo the strong 7 men upgrade. On current rather open maps, 7 men Conscripts are the better choice. And even on maps with more close range focus, there is a decent chance that 7 men Conscripts will do fine enough and you can pick a different commander, especially because PPSh Conscripts overlap with Shock Troops at this point. |
Well now it's definitely not worth it to be in 2CP it is, in the current situation it's only suitable as 0CP or as British Assault Section. I'm afraid it won't change anyway. Are patches planned at all? Or just wait for СoH3?
Not that I'd be any official, but there is nothing planned for CoH2 anymore. Would be highly strange behaviour to divert attention to the previous entry when the next iteration is coming out in 2 months (and obviously still needs a lot of work).
2CP timing is like ~6-7 minutes. Not hugely mistimed in my opinion. The timing of the upgrade also has nothing to do if they should be come almost an elite unit or not. Current Conscripts get their 7 men upgrade even later, this doesn't mean they should out-do all other infantry on the field including elites.
6-7 minutes is fairly normal for weapon upgrades to come unlock.
If there ever were a patch, there's two options: Either - as you suggested - remake them into a specialized call-in like squad or 0 CP upgrade, or keep the current timing and design with adjustments to make it really worth picking over the 7 men upgrade. |
|
The commander slot is screwed up. Hit the dirt was never worth the risk, especially not when your opponent has long range rifle grenades and bundles and your Conscript squad was never good in long range engagements in the first place. The bonuses this ability provides are fairly weak. I think balance team either did not have any better ideas or were not allowed to do more with the commander slot, so they just bundled two subpar abilities together into one, not really caring that there is no synergy and therefore not much increased value.
I liked the PPSh upgrade a couple of years ago, although it had its weaknesses. I think the reason why it is quite bad now is not really the upgrade itself or changes to Axis factions, but the map pool and Soviet changes. Speaking for 2v2 and 3v3, of the maps with short ranged engagements are gone. At the same time, Conscripts were very bad in the late game back then, so there was still an upgrade when getting them. Now the PPSh competes with the 7 men upgrade that Cons urgently needed for their late game. The lack of a real grenade also hurts the PPSh upgrade. |
|
I've pointed this out to you before, we require at least a minimum effort for opening posts in balance threads.
I'll lock this thread since there is no point to it this way. |
|
The only issue I have with CoH2's forward reinforcement system is, that forward retreat points exist. Those promote blobbing and careless movement because the cost of retreat gets diminished heavily. On top of that, not all factions have access to forward retreat/healing/reinforcement points and even the one's that have differ a lot in accessibility.
Ostheer did it best:
No forward retreat point, giving incentive to smart movement, disengagement when necessary and soft retreats. At the same time. Forward healing and reinforcement are available but either gated by fuel/micro (251) or static structures that are vulnerable to artillery (bunkers).
This way, Ostheer still gets punished if they are fully routed and can lose their forward structures, but you can gain significantly if you consistently manage to hold your line and prevent enemy reconnaissance.
On the point of tying reinforcement time to unit classes: CoH2 ties it to combat value, at least for the most part, and that's what makes the most sense. A e.g. Grenadier has higher combat value than a Conscript and due to the long range LMG also lower risk of dying. Losing one should be punished more than losing a Conscript.
There can be definitely some overlap with "unit classes" as Vipper suggested with the support weapons, but deciding on a unit per unit bases is still the smartest thing to do and also gives more room to differential faction design (e.g. Faction A relying more on team weapons and needs them more readily available than faction B etc). |
I wouldn't chose to say Elefant mass produced either.
You are simply wrong.
Elefant was the most successful mass produced TD in kill ratio with around 10:1 score.
Which one?
Point here is that Elafant had probably the best kill ratio (around 10) (for TDs that went beyond prototype).
The 12.8 cm Selbstfahrlafette auf VK3001(H) seems to have had a better kill ratio of above 11 but was only build as prototype and only 2 where ever build.
I am not sure why some people choose to argue semantics about mass production when the point was the actual great record Elefant achieved and not weather it was mass produced or not.
That's also not the point.
This part of the discussion originated from the question if and to which extend rare vehicles should be represented in the game as an extension of the whole discussion around the Black Prince. Since CoH allegedly aims to be authentic, the battles it shows and units within them must be authentic too. All of this was basically embedded if unicorn units should be in CoH3 because the weird designs obviously kick the door open for interesting mechanics and unit designs, or if CoH3 should rather stick to the most prevalent vehicles since it is not very believable that in the specific skirmish that you fight, a huge portion of very rare vehicles will take part and duel each other.
A prime example of this for me would actually be the Ostwind, I am amazed that no one mentioned it so far. The FlakpanzerIV was a late development as well. However, Relic not only decided to make it a stock option for Ostheer, but also chose the Ostwind, which was the least numerous of all Flakpanzers. They could have taken at least the Mobelwagen for that purpose. They didn't, and yet, no one seems to complain about it in this discussion. It slightly feels like people would just randomly pick what they care about and then press through all of it.
In my opinion: As long as a vehicle has been used in WW2, they can take it. "Rarer" vehicles should be bound to doctrines so that you don't see more of them in a single battle than have been built in the first place. But they can add a lot of different strategies to the game, because let's face it: If you strip away all the details that a CoH game cannot represent, many of the most produced tanks over the course of the war just fall into the same category with different flavors of "strong". |
...
You're taking things too literal. Editing also means adding info. You can even literally edit any page on wikipedia, and the review process there is often not competent, so a ton of none sense comes through regularly.
If it was "mass produced" or not is a matter of where you personally draw the line. Objectively, we can say that the project was scrapped early and the that those tanks would not have existed if the company had not overinvested into building chassis during development. Production numbers are far from other standard tanks and tank hunters.
I wouldn't call it mass produced. The Ferdinand was not planned from the beginning, they had those chassis lying around and had something to do with it. The Ferdinand was basically developed after the the base of the tank, it was not a straightforward decision and production process, which would usually be the case for anything you'd call mass produced. |
I personally could care less if it was never deployed as long as they had a prototype. My concern is the same as yours, once you let one random make believe unit in you let them all in and it is an easy way for relic to implement pay to win.
It does not necessarily have to be "pay to win", but it would just be vehicles that really only have been prototyped and then scrapped. For the Black Prince that was based on a heavily used tank, we can at least estimate how the performance maybe >could have been<. Still, it would be mostly made up, even if you have some performance data sheets. And to take the fully over the top example of the Maus tank prototype:
This thread is weird though as people want historically accurate but this game is not accurate in the slightest. Panthers should not be diving with their weak side armor, KV series should not be competing with late war tanks. Hell, right now the P4J is probably one of the best meds competing with the T3485 and E8. When it was first introduced it had horrible turret rotation to simulate german late war lack of resources. It was buffed since it sucked because balance. Similar situation with ISU152/IS2 stun mechanic, the gun wouldn't penetrate as often but the stun mechanic kept them in the fight allowing for support to come in and do their job. This game doesn't even attempt to simulate the upkeep of fielding heavy tanks, the closest was the Tiger ACE.
What people see as "acceptable" will depend on how much they are into history and therefore obviously cover a very wide range. As you said though, CoH was never accurate or realistic. Instead, it was more "authentic". At least most weapons follow somehow the behaviour you would expect, given some gamification and balance circumstances. Everyone has their personal shtick though, and that's what they will pay attention too. I find it tedious to argue about complete historical accuracy though. The tank/gun/whatever does not need to be modeled perfectly, even less it SHOULD be.
In the end what most people can agree on is that the CoH series claims to tell the story of historic events. And as such, it should stick to its time frame. Implementing units that have actually been used in WW2 and had at least some tactical significance is a decent guideline I guess.
Of course there can and should be some more crazy and fun stuff, but there is already enough to work with within the WW2 time frame.
Regarding the Black Prince, I find it baffling why Relic actually tries to push for it. Yes, it is somehow unique, but in the end investing resources into creating the Black Prince means not creating another model that could have been accurate and opened up its own strategies.
I can live with the Black Prince in the game. I don't have enough of a shtick to rage about it. And since it looks like a Churchill, I can mentally easily label it as one. But this doesn't mean it should be there, if only for the reason to prevent Relic from introducing stuff that stretches the "WW2" theme even further. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
