Readability; the ability to quickly understand exactly what is happening in-game.
We could have smoke rounds that flood an entire control sector with smoke that's higher than the building, but it would be completely unreadable. Similarly, we could have rail-gun arty with explosions the size of several buildings, with massive amounts of lingering smoke - again, completely unreadable.
The thing CoH2 did so well (compared to CoH1) was making the game much easier to understand. We have a nice list of all our units in the top right, with their status (in combat, suppressed, etc.), we have a cleaner mini-map (less random lines), a cleaner UI (less blank space)... this carries over to gameplay as well.
Giant explosions, clouds of smoke, massive craters - they all look good, but they're bad for gameplay. When arty hits, you need to be able to see if you're units are in the area of fire, how close they are, and even exactly where the shell hit (so you can guess the target area). CoH1's massive clouds prevented that. In addition, by having the sizes, colors, etc. change significantly between what were historically very similar shells, it allows the player to understand what is actually being fired at them; quite important since historically similarly performing units have such drastically different stats.
Contrary to popular belief, the goal of a competitive game's graphics ISN'T to look visually stunning; it's to provide all the information the player needs in a quick and effective manner.
Aside from the units list, I think a lot of people would completely disagree on the rest of those points. COH2 minimap tactical map and UI is a mess by comparison (I think we've all gotten used to it by now but its still meh). VCOH effects were less obtrusive. Yes the artillery might have a bigger dust could, but it settled out very quickly. In COH2 the explosion is smaller, but this brown dust cloud just lingers for several seconds which not only ruins the clarity but chokes down weaker PCs. The Ostwind and 20mm AC make this frag explosion effect that was not in the previous game. Tracers and vapor trails, the one visual effect that actually helps the player, was more distinct in COH1. I remember when the game was in beta people were complaining because there was no tracers (or they were extremely dim) and they were added in. If Relic made the game more "readable" in any way, it was purely on accident not intentional. |
|
Explosions are fucking weird in this game. On one hand you have artillery with the big visual effects and they really only damage people at very close proximity to the center of the blast. Then you have the Scott/Lieg/75mm with a tiny explosion sometimes one shotting an entire squad. Its like the visual effects in COH2 don't correspond very well with the actual damage radius from many explosions, not so much the case with vcoh. |
|
Its been a shit map for 3 years and only improved a little bit. You seriously think they are going to make it a great map at this point? COH2 is 6-12 months past peak support. Very unlikely there will be major improvements to the game at this point. |
|
2k dpi holy shit that must feel like playing operation |
In general, yes.
In details, RTS(real time strategy) and RTT(real time tactics) are not the same, but RTT is a sub genre of RTS.
In RTS you always have resource and base management, even if limited, you still need to accumulate resources and produce new units to achieve victory conditions.
In RTT, which battlefleet gothic and total war is there is no element of resource management, you have a set amount of units which you pre-define before the battle and it is all you get for the game, no resource management, no base management, no macro element, which is mandatory for true to genre RTS game.
So to sum up, RTT game is part of RTS ganre, but RTT games are NOT RTS games.
In RTS you focus on building right composition and accumulating resources for more units and using them correctly aka micro+macro.
In RTT you focus exclusively on battle tactics aka micro only and often in much more limited way then in proper RTS game.
Wrong. First of all RTS games are defined as a strategy game that progresses in real time rather than turns. That is all. The basebuilding and resource gathering mechanics are the norm, but not qualifiers. RTS games with base building and resource gathering (eg. CoH and Starcraft) are not RTT games because they have those features, but RTT games like Total War and Wargame are still RTS games minus typical but unrequired elements of the genre. Second, your very post contradicts itself. If group B is a subcategory of group A, by definition it is A. What you're saying is essentially "Mustangs are Fords, but they are not Fords" which is the most unintellectual thing I've seen on this site in a long time. |
Why is it weak?
Relic should fund their own damn tournaments. They definitely can afford the petty $2k in prizes with all the milking they've done for the past 3 years. Crowd funding should be for small indie studios or (like an Insurgency tournament) or community hosted events. Developers have incentives to host tournaments for the publicity, and if the community pays for it you're essentially paying for Relics advertisement.
I don´t like idea of crowd founded tournament with RELIC CHOSEN AND PAID casters (I love you stormless and tightrope btw). It is STUPID that WE FUND the tournament, but THEY CHOSE casters.
Another good reason. What if they selected casters you don't like, eg. Krebs  and how would you feel knowing that some of your money would be going towards paying them if you donated
|
|
So the developer is hosting a crowd funded tournament. LOL weak |
|
|
Keep repeating the same thing over and over and eventually you will be right. Maybe we should go search for how long ago the first "dead game" comment was posted.
Shouldn't all the people eager to predict doomsday be more supportive towards a game you all love playing even though it's not perfect?
The difference was that back then matchmaking populations would die down due to bugs or gamebreaking imbalances, and then eventually it would be fixed and new content made. Now we are to the point where most if not all the new content is already released. The only thing left for them to do is fix bugs. We might get max one more uninspiring faction just so they can check off a box, but now with DoW3 coming you won't be seeing anything super radical coming. Me and a bunch of other people I know that played both games pretty much agree COH2 wasn't extremely great but it does have the advantage of the novelty factor. You could come back to the game every so often and there would be a new faction or at least a new metagame to try unlike COH1 which has been stagnant since 2012. When COH2 reaches stagnation it will die faster than 1. |
I'm not trying to be a CoH1 elitist, I'm just saying, all these people whining that USF cannot compete with OST MG's without a mortar must simply just not be good players.
PS: https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561197985783392
+1
This isn't a "COH1 better" issue, its a these kids literally can't even flank issue |
United States
Insane Aimstrong
Relic Entertainment
