I disagree with you! I'd say that the values are opposite. Come on, every game, be it pro level or low, its about getting your units in the middle to battle against the opponents units. The territory control is the thing that comes along...
true |
Well, firstly I can tell you this isn't Sega's business model (lel selling DLC, OP commanders in the past and now factions).
And this is a war game, of course you'll have images of units killing units. This forums is where the more competitive players/long term players are around so they have the understanding that this is at the end of the day a simulation and no one does irl so there aren't really any moral issues to it.
When you've realised we are probably the competitive community, everyone's looking out for efficiency, plays or just something stupid like you've described, due to the nature of RNG in the game. I'd say the game is 20-30% killing units 70-80% territory control.
i disagree with your 1st and 3rd paragraphs .
i agree with you on the 2nd paragraph . |
Get through it and keep going!
Ive read it and it is like reading WW2 101. Many things are good, some are inaccurate, some are poor. But start from that one and if you find a specific thing you want to explore further ask here or in the Library and you'll find alot of people who can point you in the right direction for further reading.
Doesn't have to be big things. If you read that book and want to know more about a specific units actions in more detail there is a book for that. Ask and you shall be enlightened.
Maybe you are looking for more general information about macro things like industrial output, well there are books for that too. Im sure someone here will be able to point you in the right direction 
yes , people should read more about the economic side of what happen before , during and after ww2 .
im reading one about it , i will put the title here later .
|
Yes the mechanisms are quite simple like in a FPS. There is no penalty in losing a territory apart from a cutoff and when you are losing a big unit, your upkeep is automatically restored. So the game isn't really strategic. Except from keeping the victory points, it is all about annihilating the enemy.
Coh1 had more interesting mechanisms around with the manpower and popcap linked to the territory your are controlling. mp territories didn't provide fuel or ammo so here again there was a other layer of mechanism.
Now you have to remember Quinn Duffy saying he didn't want anymore those mechanisms because it was not fun, would end some match really fast by just controlling your opponent cutoff.
Coh2 is really far for Coh1 in the strategic point of view, they really wanted to make the game more simple. And the way to do that was to reduce mp/upkeep/popcap mechanisms to the strict minimum. As a result, you have more of them, allowing to players to spam units that only require it.
very good insight . |
So to put it clear.
You would prefer if the game had 0/50 popcap and let's say 200mp/min.
So your army composition would be limited to a SINGLE Pio/Gren/MG/Mortar/Pak/Tank and one extra unit.
OR
You want the game as it is now with just less manpower income (200mp/min). This would only mean that direct combat is non efficient, indirect fire, turtling and sniper play would be kings as well as pure vehicle play (as they don't bleed mp).
yes to the the second part . |
To the OP, COH2 has lots of killing because the game is about war, not the developers trying to make money.
you are wrong . |
90% of the posts in this thread seem to be discussing whether coh2 could use a reduction in manpower or lower pop caps, which seems to be a separate issue from what you are discussing.
I suggest you reword your original post so people are less confused.
i cant reword the title . |
I'm legitimately confused by what the OP is trying to say.
I think he says that COH2 is too much like FPS games in that all you do is kill things, because killing things, big explosions, etc is a popular genre which makes money.
I'm not saying that I agree with that claim 100%, but what does any of this have to do with manpower??
nothing .
i just mentioned it when i was comparing the genres . |
You're confusing me; is your point about manpower that there is too much and therefore the game has lots of killing, or that because the game has lots of killing due to manpower excess it sells more units like shooters. yes just to this : " is your point about manpower that there is too much and therefore the game has lots of killing " |
I think you have to give a better description of it. I get that English isn't your first language and I can live with it.
Because atm, platformer games like Mario, Pokemon and Sonic fit in your description (And yes, those make a lot of money, even today).
+1
Seriouly tho, CoH2 could really do with a Karma system.
you are talking about console games , pal , im talking about pc market . |
Portugal
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
