v1s were not used in a tactical capacity, infrared assault rifles weren’t used, and don’t get me started on units like the strum tiger.
V1s were used to attack ground targets. They're missiles. The Germans used them to attack Antwerp directly in the later stages of the war. I'm not sure how you're defining "Tactical capacity" precisely, and why you think that's somehow the same as something not actually being used in /any/ capacity.
Yes, they did use Infrared sights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zielger%C3%A4t_1229
The Sturmtiger was indeed used in combat. Please, do "get started", because I'm not sure if you've actually got any real argument there.
You’re fighting a losing argument
Please stop projecting.
I don’t care about the technical aspects of units, it still fits the time period so it doesn’t really matter to me, relic can add the panther 2 and is3 for all I care. You’re acting like t64s are being added to the game
It wasn't used during the time period in question. Ergo: It does not fit the time period. Your "argument" would also allow for the addition of the Centurion, which is similarly not a period-appropriate vehicle. |
The Black Prince was only a prototype - so what? The Brits have not nearly as much to offer as other factions in terms of different vehicles. Using the Black Prince is an elegant way to give them another attractive tool.
The ST and JT also were only build in very low numbers and both units were considered failed constructions. But both units were used in CoH2 and nobody cared. Relic should use every option to make the factions as interesting as possible, that's my opinion.
The Brits have plenty of potential vehicles they could be using, which were actually used by them during the war. You simply haven't done any research.
The Comet, Challenger (Though this is more a Tank Destroyer), Crusader variants, Cromwell (Which was in CoH2, but not CoH3 seemingly), Grant, among plenty of others. The Black Prince being implemented is in no way "Elegant".
The ST and JT were indeed only built and used in relatively low numbers (Though 18 superheavy assault guns is not an insignificant number, and 70-80 superheavy tank destroyers is similarly not at all insignificant.) The thing you seem to gloss over there is that both the ST and JT were in fact built and used in WWII, whereas the BP was not, in fact, used at all. |
Why do people consider gameplay consideration/quirks that exist for the sake of balance (V1 rocket strikes (which were dumb), Vampire HTs, Pilotless Goliaths, people being able to survive being hosed with an MG42, on-field healing that repairs any and all wounds perfectly, the exceedingly short range of all weapons in the game) as somehow comparable to implementing fantasy vehicles?
You're undermining your own arguments with this rather silly comparison. Units function somewhat unrealistically because it is necessary for the game to work, whereas you can get the same end result of a strong all-rounder tank without having to use fantasy designs (For the timeframe) like the BP, Panther 2, or IS3.
These are not even slightly similar points, and trying to pretend that they are is really grasping at straws. |
What if we gave different Churchill variants (or different tanks in general, instead of one skin / vehile class) different skins? Similar to Tiger ace.
Exceedingly unlikely, since Relic are almost certainly going to be selling vehicle camouflage again. It's also possible they might extend that system to infantry, either through camouflage patterns, or even uniform variations. |
Given that we already have the Churchill (and possibly variants like the Croc and AVRE) in CoH3, I really would think that the Comet would be a better choice to fill the exact same niche. I think you could likely slot the Comet in the place of the BP and not even have to change the statistics.
Multiple variants of the same tank causes a bit of redundancy... and can make it somewhat harder to note at a glance what unit you're looking at.
In a similar vein: I hope they replace the UKF Sherman with something else, since USF already have multiple Shermans. The Grant or Cromwell would be ideal... with the Grant having never featured in the games before as a bonus. |
I love it.
Grens - Standard inf, meat shield
Jäger - Ranged infantry
PGrens - Assault infantry
Stoßtrupp - Lategame Elite infantry
This is basically how it seemed to me... Though I was under the impression that Jaeger Lights had scoped G43s.
This turned out not to be the case. They're armed with unscoped G43s and allegedly they are supposed to have an MG15 upgrade (though this isnt in the game), so they seem to fit a vaguely similar role to the Stoßtrupp, just presumably being worse at it. |
That's weird to see so many stock infantry options for Wehrmacht, and honestly this is one of the cases where "less is more" truly applies.
I'm also surprised by JLI and Panzergrenadiers having 5 G43 or STG as opposed to 3 or 4, and Grenadiers being able to upgrade to squads with fewer models.
Logically speaking, Stoßtrupp would be in conflict with JLI/Panzergrens as role of late game infantry.
I hope this design can be discussed and reconsidered when the Wehrmacht is made avaiable for testing
I'm expecting that you'll choose one or two of those infantry options somehow, with the rest not being available for that particular game. |
The main reason I still think that the in game Wehrmacht is a mix of DAK and Wehrmacht assets is (other than 4 combat infantry squads for a single faction) the Marder 3 being there despite being logically the only tank destroyer option in the game files that could fit the DAK, while the Nashorn was only used in Italy and is not present in the current build
The game files don't /necessarily/ contain everything that will ultimately be in the game upon release, though... it is a year or more away, after all. |
CoH3 will come in "late 2022" but surely they will need a bunch of Maps on Launch .. right ?
Will we get access to Worldbuilder before the Launch? Could take some pressure of relic by giving the community the ability to build extra content on their own before the game appears
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) gib worldbuilder pls
I'd love that too, though they'd need to release some sort of "design guide" for mapping, I think. CoH3 seems as though it's rather different to CoH1/2, so we'd otherwise need a decent amount of hands-on experience before people would be able to start making maps that are well-designed in terms of how they play in this game. There are a bunch of new systems that will take some getting used to... verticality/height actually having an (allegedly) positive gameplay effect, rather than just fucking with things, for example.
But even if they don't do that: Please Lelic release the Worldbuilder sooner rather than later. I want to get to grips with the new version of the software so I can actually think about starting to design maps. |
Honestly, unless you make it cost 70-90% of the initial resource cost, being able to recrew enemy vehicles just swings the game too much for an RNG mechanic. Recrewing enemy vehicles on the spot and then have them perform regularly hardly makes sense logically/historically, it would take time to figure stuff out and get used to.
At worst, captured abandoned vehicles should also have significant combat penalties like -25% to -50% of everything (mobility, reload, accuracy, etc.). Again as a means to lessen the impact on a game.
But I'd rather just see recrewing removed in total. I think it would be better if abandoned vehicles simply couldn't be recrewed anymore but instead could be siphoned/salvaged by engineers for some extra resources (in CoH2 terms maybe 50 ammo and 30 fuel tops). Make the process take quite some time so the wreck has to be properly secured first. On the front lines this would still have the desired effect of creating a random and sudden extra objective to fight over and secure. If it happens behind your/enemy lines then you or the enemy are/is lucky, but a relatively small amount of resources isn't going to swing a game.
Unsurprisingly; I totally agree.
I like the idea of replacing the recrewing of abandoned vehicles with the ability to salvage resources from them specifically... Though I'd still want to tie the "salvageable" status to some specific type of death (Snares, probably) rather than that also being an RNG mechanic.
Dependent on how many resources you might get from the wreck, this might still be a little too swingy though, and still has the problem of too severely punishing aggressive play, and rewarding turtling, y'know?
Incidentally: Perhaps this is an NDA deal, but are you and the rest of the Balans Teem part of this "roundtable" thing for CoH3? If so, I hope things are looking promising!
EDIT: Why is my idea considered to be too much RNG by some? (serious question)
It isnt, people are referring to the current state of the Abandon mechanic. |