|
good article. although comments on visual aspects seem way too subjective. for example, I never had a problem telling between penetrating and bouncing shots. or telling which critical is which for that matter in CoH2.
Good discussion and I guess only big things not discussed is:
1. whether CoH1 or CoH2 resource points are better for 1v1, CoH1 version will be better for 3v3+ or even 2v2
2. If they are not going to do pay2win / pay2play commanders again, as most think they should not, they better get cosmetic micro transaction right from the beginning. If I remember right, even DoW3 came out with no micro transaction although their whole bulletin system seemed to be designed around that. |
|
i am sure if anyone of us actually spend enough time and thought power to imagine how to make CoH style game in any setting, be it ww1, modern warfare, etc etc, we can figure things out so it'll be fun.
but that's game developer's job. so yea, ww1 setting would be cool for me, not sure how it will work. |
I disagree. The problems faced in 4v4/3v3 are often uniquely tied to that gamemode. Some examples:
1) JT/Elefant overperforming - many 4v4 have chokepoints and don't allow for actual flanking, there are also no indirect counters to these units (artillery which causes crits on them for example or an actual vulnerability for infantry attacks)
2) ForwardRetreatBase - this problem is almost exclusive to 3v3 and 4v4 and can also be handled as such
3) Ressource Inflation - How do you avoid ressource inflation? -> You don't give every team 3 damn safe territory points
4) Arty spam - again a problem of narrow maps (where you can't flank) and the lack/ineffectiveness(looking at you Panzerwerfer) of tools for counter-firing
yea but those same units do not cause problems in 1v1. without separating modes and balance separately, you cannot truly fix these problems in both modes |
|
Nope.
CoH2's competitiveness was designed around 1v1. The factions were not designed so that 3-4 people working together could form a complete, well-rounded army.
i.e. units like Katyusha where they are fine in 1v1 where getting one is a challenge and even stepping up only one game mode, units like that becomes extremely hard to balance.
The maps, yea they are bad, too.
In short, trying to fix 3v3+ in CoH2 or giving it more attention than just fixing blatant overpowered units/tactics would be a waste of resource.
Maybe for next game, if they focus more on 4v4. But then again, if Relic makes 4v4 their competitive focus, it will mean the game will be balanced around 4 men's army versus 4 men's army... then I do not know how they would balance smaller modes let alone 1v1. I am sure it is technically possible but it will be extremely hard without separating the modes both balance and design wise, which means they would get separate balance patches etc etc... Not sure Relic would commit that hard.
So even in CoH3, I think if they have to focus on one game mode, it would have to be 1v1... |
|
bring back montargis region |
|
Hello people,
I have 3440 x 1440 monitor (ultra wide).
My problem is that for some reason my coh2 does not give 3440 x 1440 60hz option in the graphics option tab. I only have 3440 x 1440 30hz option.
anyone know of a solution? |
|
i have ultrawide. same size and resolution.
works perfectly you see more. didnt have to do anything special or if i did, it was real easy so i forgot. |
I found that bug in automatch yesterday. I lost my engineers because of this.
its been a bug since at least release. i told the team once ago and i am pretty sure they are aware of this but couldnt fix it (yet?). |
|
looks good. thanks for keep working on these changes. |
|
there will be a thread in the official forum to post your replays but I do not know the URL yet so stay tuned. |
Canada
1
Relic Entertainment
