|
CoH3 ost new CoH2 sov confirmed! |
|
Its not elite infantry, not even close.
Its recon/wallmart sniper unit with ability kit enhancing just that. |
a bit off topic
Is the conscript upgrade to a 7 man squad better than a conscript 6 man squad with stolen lmg42? I m curious on the actual performance of the 7 man upgrade and if its worth it to upgrade.
i m split on the the conscript upgrade. it cost 50 mun + 18MP reinforce and cant pick up weapons.
and unlike the Osther and OKW upgrade which is a nobrainer upgrade, does it apply to conscript upgrade
If you can pick LMG42 with cons, you should, they will perform great with it.
Just avoid picking up PTRS or DP with them, it'll nerf them hard on the long run. |
I would not call for example A Bridge Too Far to cliché films, he described the events quite well, but a little with anguish and anti-war. But the film as a whole is pretty accurate.
Have you seen Enemy at the gates? |
CoH 1 was based on the cult films people love: Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, A Bridge Too Far. I don’t know what drove the development of CoX2 as a single-player campaign: bias, lack of competence, poor funding (due to the imminent bankruptcy of THQ). But devastating criticism scared away the creators and they decided to play neutral boring single-player campaigns: Ardennes Assailt and now. This is not why we love the Company of heroes a single player campaign, but for the emotions, for the plot, for the excellent cut scenes. There are some people who don't like the campaign from the screamish battles - it's boring.
It was the exact same Hollywood cliche war mythology and stereotypes. |
No, people didn't like the CoH2 solo company because it was a complete lousy Enemy at the Gate of cliche mythical nonsense. For clarity, I have already cited Mission: Mtsensk. When a bunch of recruits were desperately on the defensive in October when the ice withstood the tanks and blah blah blah. When in reality Mtsensk was defended by more than 6,000 paratroopers who were airlifted with guns, mortars and even eight light T-37A tanks successfully defended the highway before the arrival of tanks and jointly counterattacked, the best tanker of the Anti-Hitler Coalition took part in these battles, after these battles Guderian writes about the superiority of the T-34 over German tanks. But who needs it? It's boring, let's do boring missions and plot.
Meanwhile, people were in love in CoH1 campaign, because it was complete lousy Saving Private Rayan cliche mythical nonsense.
Whatever they will do in CoH3 campaign, it'll be fine, monke will throw poop and everyone else will just play and enjoy it. |
Why do you keep coming back to faction equality when we are arguing about a new game. What you seem to be saying is that all factions should be equal in this regard. Why does that make automatons a good change? Why not let all factions build with pios? Do you disagree with my explanation above about why letting pios build stuff is better in terms of gameplay depth?
My last paragraph of the post you quoted answers that, I could've worded it better, because I'm writing that all in CoH3 context "but they don't" part being most unclear, I support universal solution here, regardless if its "all faction have automatic building" or "all factions need to use engi".
I'm simply saying that, contrary to what we got in coh2, in coh3 all factions should have the same decision base in terms of teching pace, either all should be force to retreat specific unit or none, no mix-ups. |
It is only about the significance of the decision. This is the CoH3 forum. We're starting fresh, so the way factions are designed in CoH2 and that they are still not treated equally regarding teching does not matter for the discussion about CoH3. If you want it changed in CoH2, the CoH2 section is the way to go.
Therefore I fully embrace automatons from get go, that way allows alternative base building for potential new factions without infringing on balance or decision making of vanila faction, that feature solves a massive inequality CoH2 had and I'm glad it is present in CoH3.
I have never suggested for it to be in CoH2 and all my posts here use CoH2 as an example of why CoH3 implementation is spot on. |
Personally I'd rather see Comet then Black Prince, but if Relic thinks that it fits the faction, then be it.
When given a choice, I would always go for new units rather then old one.
Its bland enough already how everything US is always shermans and everything wehr is always P4-6, if other factions can be improved by variations, I'm all for it, CoH2 soviet campaign was pure fantasy and stereotypes and nothing was wrong there, nothing will be wrong here either. |
|
I'll just address 3, because that's most important here.
It is not about significance of the decision, its about the fact we have gross inequality in making that decision, only 2 out of 5 factions are forced to make actual tactical decision impacting their field presence and tech timings directly while remaining 3 just derp around without giving it a second thought.
I'd be equally fine if all potential factions had to make the choice, but they don't, hence it directly impacts balance of tech timing and costs by requirement or lack of it for presence of engineer for specific factions. |
1
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
